Double Materiality Disclosure as an Emerging Practice: The Assessment Process, Impacts, Risks, and Opportunities

References

• Abhayawansa, S. (2022). Swimming against the tide: Back to single materiality for sustainability reporting. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 13(6), 1361–1385. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-07-2022-0378
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abhayawansa, S., & Adams, C. (2022). Towards a conceptual framework for non-financial reporting inclusive of pandemic and climate risk reporting. Meditari Accountancy Research, 30(3), 710–738. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-11-2020-1097
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adams, C. A., Alhamood, A., He, X., Tian, J., Wang, L., & Wang, Y. (2021). The double-materiality concept: application and issues, Project Report. Global Reporting Initiative. https://dro.dur.ac.uk/33139/1/33139.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Albu, C. N., Albu, N., & Alexander, A. (2014). When global accounting standards meet the local context—insights from an emerging economy. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 25(6), 489–510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2013.03.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Albu, N., Albu, C. N., Apostol, O., & Cho, C. H. (2021). The past is never dead: The role of imprints in shaping social and environmental reporting in a post-communist context. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 34(5), 1109–1136. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-08-2019-4131
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aluchna, M., Roszkowska-Menkes, M., & Kamiński, B. (2023). From talk to action: The effects of the non-financial reporting directive on ESG performance. Meditari Accountancy Research, 31(7), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-12-2021-1530
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ardiana, P. A. (2019). Stakeholder engagement in sustainability reporting: Evidence of reputation risk management in large Australian companies. Australian Accounting Review, 29(4), 726–747. https://doi.org/10.1111/auar.12293
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arian, A., & Sands, J. S. (2023). Corporate climate risk disclosure: Assessing materiality and stakeholder expectations for sustainable value creation. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 15(2), 457–481. Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-04-2023-0236.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Artene, A., Bunget, O.-C., Dumitrescu, A.-C., Domil, A.-E., & Bogdan, O. (2020). Non-financial information disclosures and environmental protection—evidence from Romania and Greece. Forests, 11(8), 814. https://doi.org/10.3390/f11080814
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aspers, P., & Corte, U. (2019). What is qualitative in qualitative research. Qualitative Sociology, 42(2), 139–160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11133-019-9413-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Banca Transilvania. (2023). Sustainability Report 2022. Available at https://www.bancatransilvania.ro/files/app/media/relatiiinvestitori/ir-presentations-roadshows/General%20Presentations/Sustainability-report-2022.pdf, accessed 04 April 2024.
   Google Scholar
• Beattie, V., McInnes, B., & Fearnley, S. (2004). A methodology for analysing and evaluating narratives in annual reports: A comprehensive descriptive profile and metrics for disclosure quality attributes. Accounting Forum, 28(3), 205–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accfor.2004.07.001
   Google Scholar
• Beattie, V., & Thomson, S. J. (2007). Lifting the lid on the use of content analysis to investigate intellectual capital disclosures. Accounting Forum, 31(2), 129–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accfor.2007.02.001
   Google Scholar
• Beleneși, M., Bogdan, V., & Popa, D. N. (2021). Disclosure dynamics and non-financial reporting analysis. The case of Romanian listed companies. Sustainability, 13(9), 4732. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13094732
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beske, F., Haustein, E., & Lorson, P. (2020). Materiality analysis in sustainability and integrated reports. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 11(1), 162–186. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-12-2018-0343
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blanco, C. C., Caro, F., & Corbett, C. J. (2020). Do carbon abatement opportunities become less profitable over time? A global firm-level perspective using CDP data. Energy Policy, 138, 111252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111252
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boissinot, J., Goulard, S., Salin, M., Svartzman, R., & Weber, P. F. (2022). Aligning financial and monetary policies with the concept of double materiality: Rationales, proposals and challenges. Retrieved January 30, 2023, from https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/115539/1/INSPIRE_Sustainable_Central_Banking_Toolbox_Policy_Briefing_Paper_5.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Bunget, O. C., Dumitrescu, A.-C., Burcă, V., & Bogdan, O. (2023). Sustainability of business models in case of BSE listed firms. Audit Financiar, 21(171), 562–577. https://doi.org/10.20869/AUDITF/2023/171/021
   Google Scholar
• Burritt, R. L., & Schaltegger, S. (2010). Sustainability accounting and reporting: fad or trend?. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 23(7), 829–846. http://doi.org/10.1108/09513571011080144
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BVB. (2022). Ghid privind raportarea ESG, Aprilie 2022. Bursa de Valori București. Retrieved February 29, 2024, from https://bvb.ro/info/Rapoarte/Ghiduri/Ghid_privind_raportarea_ESG.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Carmo, C., & Ribeiro, C. (2022). Mandatory non-financial information disclosure under European Directive 95/2014/EU: Evidence from Portuguese listed companies. Sustainability, 14(8), 4860. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14084860
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chung, J., & Cho, C. H. (2018). Current trends within social and environmental accounting research: A literature review. Accounting Perspectives, 17(2), 207–239. https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3838.12171
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarkson, P. M., Li, Y., Richardson, G. D., & Vasvari, F. P. (2008). Revisiting the relation between environmental performance and environmental disclosure: An empirical analysis. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 33(4-5), 303–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2007.05.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cojoianu, T., Murafa, C., Proșcanu, M., Strat, V. A., & Subasu, I. (2023). Romania’s roadmap to a greener financial system: An analysis of environmental, social and governance reporting on the Bucharest exchange trading index. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4440516
   Google Scholar
• Cooper, S., & Michelon, G. (2022). Conceptions of materiality in sustainability reporting frameworks: Commonalities, differences and possibilities. In A. Carol (Ed.), Handbook of accounting and sustainability (pp. 44–66). Edward Elgar Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Correa-Mejía, D. A., Correa-García, J. A., & García-Benau, M. A. (2024). Analysis of double materiality in early adopters. Are companies walking the talk? Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 15(2), 299–329. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-07-2023-0469
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cosma, S., Leopizzi, R., Nobile, L., & Schwizer, P. (2022). Revising the non-financial reporting directive and the role of board of directors: A lost opportunity? Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 23(1), 207–226. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAAR-04-2021-0102
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dagilienė, L., & Nedzinskienė, R. (2018). An institutional theory perspective on non-financial reporting. The developing Baltic context. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting, 16(4), 490–521. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFRA-06-2016-0054
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Cristofaro, T., & Gulluscio, C. (2023). In search of double materiality in non-financial reports: First empirical evidence. Sustainability, 15(2), 924. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15020924
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deegan, C. (2002). Introduction: The legitimising effect of social and environmental disclosures – a theoretical foundation. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 15(3), 282–311. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570210435852
   Google Scholar
• Delgado-Ceballos, J., Ortiz-De-Mandojana, N., Antolín-López, R., & Montiel, I. (2023). Connecting the sustainable development goals to firm-level sustainability and ESG factors: The need for double materiality. BRQ Business Research Quarterly, 26(1), 2–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/23409444221140919
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Villiers, C., & Dimes, R. (2023). Will the formation of the International Sustainability Standards Board result in the death of integrated reporting? Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, 19(2), 279–295. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAOC-05-2022-0084
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Villiers, C., La Torre, M., & Molinari, M. (2022). The global reporting initiative’s (GRI) past, present and future: Critical reflections and a research agenda on sustainability reporting (standard-setting). Pacific Accounting Review, 34(5), 728–747. https://doi.org/10.1108/PAR-02-2022-0034
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dey, I. (1993). Qualitative data analysis. A user-friendly guide for social scientists. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Dijkstra-Silva, S., Schaltegger, S., & Beske-Janssen, P. (2022). Understanding positive contributions to sustainability. A systematic review. Journal of Environmental Management, 320, 115802. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.115802
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. Economics Meets Sociology in Strategic Management, 17, 143–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-3322(00)17011-1
   Google Scholar
• Dinh, T., Husmann, A., & Melloni, G. (2023). Corporate sustainability reporting in Europe: A scoping review. Accounting in Europe, 20(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449480.2022.2149345
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dragomir, V. D., Dumitru, M., & Feleaga, L. (2022). The predictors of non-financial reporting quality in Romanian state-owned enterprises. Accounting in Europe, 19(1), 110–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449480.2021.2018474
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drisko, J., & Maschi, T. (2016). Content analysis. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190215491.001.0001
   Google Scholar
• Dumitru, M., Dyduch, J., Gușe, R.-G., & Krasodomska, J. (2017). Corporate reporting practices in Poland and Romania – an ex-ante study to the new non-financial reporting European directive. Accounting in Europe, 14(3), 279–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449480.2017.1378427
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edgley, C. (2014). A genealogy of accounting materiality. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 25(3), 255–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2013.06.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• EFRAG. (2023). Implementation guidance for the materiality assessment – Draft for discussion. European Financial Reporting Advisory Group. Accessed March 1, 2024, from https://www.efrag.org/Assets/Download?assetUrl=%2Fsites%2Fwebpublishing%2FMeeting%20Documents%2F2305101036110389%2F02-02%20Materiality%20Assessment%20Implementation%20guidance%20TEG%20231106%20clean.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Elliott, V. (2018). Thinking about the coding process in qualitative data analysis. Qualitative Report, 23(11), 2850–2861.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elo, S., Kääriäinen, M., Kanste, O., Pölkki, T., Utriainen, K., & Kyngäs, H. (2014). Qualitative content analysis: A focus on trustworthiness. SAGE Open, 4(1), 215824401452263. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014522633
   Google Scholar
• EUKI. (2021). 2020 Research Report. An analysis of the climate-related disclosures of 300 companies from Central, Eastern and Southern Europe pursuant to the EU non-financial reporting directive. European Climate Initiative. Retrieved December 23, 2023, from https://www.euki.de/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Research_Report_EUKI_2020-f0461cf90efa334f7ccdd9fac439c2c5029275c73a466be620860df9d6929439.pdf
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. (2019). Guidelines on reporting climate-related information. Retrieved January 27, 2023, from https://ec.europa.eu/finance/docs/policy/190618-climate-related-information-reporting-guidelines_en.pdf
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. (2021). 2021 report on gender equality in the EU, Publications Office, Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.283857887
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. (2023). Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/2772 of 31 July 2023 supplementing Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards sustainability reporting standards (Text with EEA relevance). Retrieved December 23, 2023, from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=OJ:L_202302772
   Google Scholar
• European Parliament. (2014). Directive 2014/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014 amending Directive 2013/34/EU as regards disclosure of non-financial and diversity information by certain large undertakings and groups. Retrieved January 27, 2023, from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:L:2014:330:FULL&from=EN
   Google Scholar
• European Parliament. (2022). Directive 2022/2464/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2022 amending Regulation (EU). No 537/2014, Directive 2004/109/EC, Directive 2006/43/EC and Directive 2013/34/EU, as regards corporate sustainability reporting. Retrieved January 27, 2023, from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32022L2464&from=EN
   Google Scholar
• European Parliament. (2023). Subcommittee on Human Rights. Retrieved December 20, 2023, from https://www.europarl.europa.eu/committees/en/droi/home/highlights
   Google Scholar
• Ferrero-Ferrero, I., León, R., & Muñoz-Torres, M. J. (2021). Sustainability materiality matrices in doubt: May prioritizations of aspects overestimate environmental performance? Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 64(3), 432–463. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2020.1766427
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiandrino, S., Gromis di Trana, M., Tonelli, A., & Lucchese, A. (2022b). The multi-faceted dimensions for the disclosure quality of non-financial information in revising directive 2014/95/EU. Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 23(1), 274–300. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAAR-04-2021-0118
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiandrino, S., Tonelli, A., & Devalle, A. (2022a). Sustainability materiality research: A systematic literature review of methods, theories and academic themes. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 19(5), 665–695. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRAM-07-2021-0141
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman.
   Google Scholar
• Garst, J., Maas, K., & Suijs, J. (2022). Materiality assessment is an art, not a science: Selecting ESG topics for sustainability reports. California Management Review, 65(1), 64–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/00081256221120692
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gourdel, R., Monasterolo, I., Dunz, N., Mazzocchetti, A., & Parisi, L. (2022). The double materiality of climate physical and transition risks in the euro area. Journal of Financial Stability, 71, 101233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfs.2024.101233
   Google Scholar
• Graneheim, U. H., Lindgren, B. M., & Lundman, B. (2017). Methodological challenges in qualitative content analysis: A discussion paper. Nurse Education Today, 56, 29–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2017.06.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gray, R., & Milne, M. (2002). Sustainability reporting: Who’s kidding whom? Chartered Accountants Journal of New Zealand, 81(6), 66–70.
   Google Scholar
• GRI. (2022). GRI 3: Material Topics 2021. Retrieved January 30, 2023, from https://www.globalreporting.org/how-to-use-the-gri-standards/gri-standards-english-language/
   Google Scholar
• Guşe, R. G., Almăşan, A., Circa, C., & Dumitru, M. (2016). The role of the stakeholders in the institutionalization of the CSR reporting in Romania. Journal of Accounting and Management Information Systems, 15(2), 304–340.
   Google Scholar
• Hahn, R., & Lülfs, R. (2014). Legitimizing negative aspects in GRI-oriented sustainability reporting: A qualitative analysis of corporate disclosure strategies. Journal of Business Ethics, 123(3), 401–420. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1801-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herbert, S., & Graham, M. (2022). Applying legitimacy theory to understand sustainability reporting behaviour within South African integrated reports. South African Journal of Accounting Research, 36(2), 147–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/10291954.2021.1918481
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hörisch, J., Schaltegger, S., & Freeman, E. R. (2020). Integrating stakeholder theory and sustainability accounting: A conceptual synthesis. Journal of Cleaner Production, 275, 124097. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124097
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hrasky, S. (2012). Carbon footprints and legitimation strategies: Symbolism or action? Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 25(1), 174–198. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513571211191798
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hummel, K., & Jobst, D. (2024). An overview of corporate sustainability reporting legislation in the European Union. Accounting in Europe, 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449480.2024.2312145
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IASB. (2010). IASB clarifies its definition of ‘material’. Retrieved January 30, 2023, from https://www.ifrs.org/news-and-events/2018/10/iasb-clarifies-its-definition-of-material/
   Google Scholar
• IASB. (2017). IFRS Practice Statement 2: Making Materiality Judgements. Retrieved January 31, 2023, from www.ifrs.org/premium/?redirectUrl=/content/dam/ifrs/publications/pdf-standards/english/2021/issued/partb/ifrs-practice-statement-2-making-materiality-judgements.pdf
   Google Scholar
• IFRS Foundation. (2018). Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting (revised). Retrieved January 31, 2023, from https://www.ifrs.org/content/dam/ifrs/publications/pdf-standards/english/2021/issued/part-a/conceptual-framework-for-financial-reporting.pdf
   Google Scholar
• IFRS Foundation. (2020). Consultation paper on sustainability reporting. The International Financial Reporting Standards Foundation. IFRS. Retrieved January 31, 2023, from www.ifrs.org/content/dam/ifrs/project/sustainability-reporting/consultation-paper-on-sustainability-reporting.pdf
   Google Scholar
• IIRC. (2021). The international integrated reporting framework, the international < IR > framework. Retrieved January 30, 2023, from https://integratedreporting.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/InternationalIntegratedReportingFramework.pdf
   Google Scholar
• ISSB. (2023). IFRS S1 General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information. Retrieved July 11, 2023, from https://www.ifrs.org/issued-standards/ifrs-sustainability-standards-navigator/ifrs-s1-general-requirements/#standard
   Google Scholar
• Jørgensen, S., Mjøs, A., & Pedersen, L. J. T. (2022). Sustainability reporting and approaches to materiality: Tensions and potential resolutions. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 13(2), 341–361. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-01-2021-0009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Korca, B., Costa, E., & Bouten, L. (2023). Disentangling the concept of comparability in sustainability reporting. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 14(4), 815–851. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-05-2022-0284
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• KPMG. (2022). Big shifts, small steps. Survey of Sustainability Reporting 2022. Retrieved July 26, 2023, from https://assets.kpmg.com/content/dam/kpmg/se/pdf/komm/2022/Global-Survey-of-Sustainability-Reporting-2022.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Krasodomska, J., & Zarzycka, E. (2021). Key performance indicators disclosure in the context of the EU directive: When does stakeholder pressure matter? Meditari Accountancy Research, 29(7), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-05-2020-0876
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krippendorff, K. (2018). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (4th ed.). Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Lacy, S., Watson, B. R., Riffe, D., & Lovejoy, J. (2015). Issues and best practices in content analysis. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 92(4), 791–811. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699015607338
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lakshan, A. M. I., Low, M., & de Villiers, C. (2022). Challenges of, and techniques for, materiality determination of non-financial information used by integrated report preparers. Meditari Accountancy Research, 30(3), 626–660. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-11-2020-1107
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• La Torre, M., Sabelfeld, S., Blomkvist, M., & Dumay, J. (2020). Rebuilding trust: Sustainability and non-financial reporting and the European Union regulation. Meditari Accountancy Research, 28(5), 701–725. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-06-2020-0914
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lehner, O. M., Nicholls, A., & Kapplmüller, S. B. (2022). Arenas of contestation: A Senian social justice perspective on the nature of materiality in impact measurement. Journal of Business Ethics, 179(4), 971–989. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-022-05158-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lenort, R., Wicher, P., & Zapletal, F. (2023). On influencing factors for sustainable development goal prioritisation in the automotive industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 387, 135718. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.135718
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, J., Wang, S., Xu, Y., & Cheng, L. (2024). Digital economy development and corporate bankruptcy risk: Based on the perspective of institutional isomorphism. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 60(4), 793–807. https://doi.org/10.1080/1540496X.2023.2247140
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manetti, G. (2011). The quality of stakeholder engagement in sustainability reporting: Empirical evidence and critical points. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 18(2), 110–122. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.255
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Masiero, E., Arkhipova, D., Massaro, M., & Bagnoli, C. (2020). Corporate accountability and stakeholder connectivity. A case study. Meditari Accountancy Research, 28(5), 803–831. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-03-2019-0463
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Melloni, G., Caglio, A., & Perego, P. (2017). Saying more with less? Disclosure conciseness, completeness and balance in integrated reports. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 36(3), 220–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2017.03.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menassa, E., & Brodhäcker, M. (2017). The type and quantity of corporate social disclosures of German ‘Universal’ banks. Journal of Management & Governance, 21(1), 119–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-015-9336-y
   Google Scholar
• Meng, X. H., Zeng, S. X., & Tam, C. M. (2013). From voluntarism to regulation: A study on ownership, economic performance and corporate environmental information disclosure in China. Journal of Business Ethics, 116(1), 217–232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1462-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michelon, G., Trojanowski, G., & Sealy, R. (2022). Narrative reporting: State of the art and future challenges. Accounting in Europe, 19(1), 7–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449480.2021.1900582
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mititean, P. (2023). Board attributes and social and environmental performance. Evidence from the energy sector. Journal of Accounting and Management Information Systems, 22(1), 130–146. https://doi.org/10.24818/jamis.2023.01007
   Google Scholar
• OECD. (2018). OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Business Conduct. Retrieved January 30, 2023, from http://mneguidelines.oecd.org/OECD-Due-Diligence-Guidance-for-Responsible-Business-Conduct.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Panfilo, S., & Krasodomska, J. (2022). Climate change risk disclosure in Europe: The role of cultural-cognitive, regulative, and normative factors. Accounting in Europe, 19(1), 226–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449480.2022.2026000
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patten, D. M. (2005). The accuracy of financial report projections of future environmental capital expenditures: A research note. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 30(5), 457–468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2004.06.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patten, D. M. (2020). Seeking legitimacy. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 11(6), 1009–1021. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-12-2018-0332
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Păun, A. P., Dura, C. C., Mihăilescu, S., Moraru, R. I., & Isac, C. A. (2020). OHS disclosures within non-financial reports: The Romanian case. Sustainability, 12(5), 1963. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12051963
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Primec, A., & Belak, J. (2022). Sustainable CSR: Legal and managerial demands of the new EU legislation (CSRD) for the future corporate governance practices. Sustainability, 14(24), 16648. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142416648
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Puroila, J., & Mäkelä, H. (2019). Matter of opinion: Exploring the socio-political nature of materiality disclosures in sustainability reporting. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability, Journal, 32(4), 1043–1072. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-11-2016-2788
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qian, W., & Schaltegger, S. (2017). Revisiting carbon disclosure and performance: Legitimacy and management views. The British Accounting Review, 49(4), 365–379. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2017.05.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Radu, O. M., Dragomir, V. D., & Hao, N. (2023). Company-level factors of non-financial reporting quality under a mandatory regime: A systematic review of empirical evidence in the European Union. Sustainability, 15(23), 16265. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152316265
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reimsbach, D., Schiemann, F., Hahn, R., & Schmiedchen, E. (2020). In the eyes of the beholder: Experimental evidence on the contested nature of materiality in sustainability reporting. Organization & Environment, 33(4), 624–651. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026619875436
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rowbottom, N. (2022). Orchestration and consolidation in corporate sustainability reporting. The legacy of the Corporate Reporting Dialogue. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print). https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-06-2021-5330
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruiz-Lozano, M., De Vicente-Lama, M., Tirado-Valencia, P., & Cordobés-Madueño, M. (2022). The disclosure of the materiality process in sustainability reporting by Spanish state-owned enterprises. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 35(2), 385–412. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-08-2018-3629
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Setia, N., Abhayawansa, S., Joshi, M., & Wasantha Pathiranage, N. (2024). Shifting perspectives: Unveiling the dual nature of sustainability materiality in integrated reports. Meditari Accountancy Research, Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-08-2023-2128
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Socoliuc, M., Grosu, V., Hlaciuc, E., & Stanciu, S. (2018). Analysis of social responsibility and reporting methods of Romanian companies in the countries of the European Union. Sustainability, 10(12), 4662. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10124662
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Solomon, J. F., Solomon, A., Norton, S. D., & Joseph, N. L. (2011). Private climate change reporting: An emerging discourse of risk and opportunity? Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 24(8), 1119–1148. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513571111184788
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stolowy, H., & Paugam, L. (2023). Sustainability reporting: Is convergence possible? Accounting in Europe, 20(2), 139–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449480.2023.2189016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stroehle, J. C., Soonawalla, K., & Metzner, M. (2022). Through the looking glass: Tying performance and materiality to corporate purpose. Journal of the British Academy, 10s5, 087–123. https://doi.org/10.5871/jba/010s5.087
   Google Scholar
• Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. The Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610. https://doi.org/10.2307/258788
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tiron-Tudor, A., Nistor, C. S., Ștefănescu, C. A., & Zanellato, G. (2019). Encompassing non-financial reporting in a coercive framework for enhancing social responsibility: Romanian listed companies’ case. Amfiteatru Economic, 21(52), 590–606. https://doi.org/10.24818/EA/2019/52/590
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torelli, R., Balluchi, F., & Furlotti, K. (2020). The materiality assessment and stakeholder engagement: A content analysis of sustainability reports. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(2), 470–484. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1813
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• UN. (2015). Transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development, resolution adopted by the general assembly on 25 September 2015. www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/generalassembly/docs/globalcompact/A_RES_70_1_E.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Vasile, V., Panait, M., Piciocchi, P., Ferii, M. A., & Palazzo, M. (2022). Performance management and sustainable development: An exploration of non-financial performance of companies with foreign capital in Romania. Italian Journal of Marketing, 371–400. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43039-022-00056-x
   Google Scholar
• World Economic Forum. (2023). The global risks report 2023. Retrieved December 7, 2023, from https://www.weforum.org/publications/global-risks-report-2023/
   Google Scholar
• Zharfpeykan, R. (2021). Representative account or greenwashing? Voluntary sustainability reports in Australia’s mining/metals and financial services industries. Business Strategy and the Environment, 30(4), 2209–2223. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2744
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zharfpeykan, R., & Akroyd, C. (2023). Evaluating the outcome effectiveness of the global reporting initiative transitions. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 14(6), 1101–1125. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-07-2022-0365
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar