サステナビリティ報告におけるマテリアリティの学術的議論を読み解く：枠組みと今後の研究方向
Navigating the academic debate on materiality in sustainability reporting: framing and future research directions (原題)
Mariella Colantoni, Alessandro Lai, Riccardo Stacchezzini
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
2014〜2025年の査読論文81本を構造的文献レビューで分析し、サステナビリティ報告におけるマテリアリティ議論の変遷を整理。概念形成期、組織実装・開示・ステークホルダー関与期、概念的・規制的基盤を再考する再構築期の3段階を特定。インパクト・財務・二重マテリアリティ間の緊張が未解決であると指摘する。
English
A structured literature review of 81 peer-reviewed articles (2014-2025) maps the academic debate on materiality in sustainability reporting. It identifies three phases: emergence (conceptualisation), consolidation (implementation, disclosure, determinants), and a recent rethinking phase driven by regulatory foundations and tensions between impact, financial and double materiality. The debate remains open.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
SSBJ基準や有報・統合報告書におけるマテリアリティ特定は日本企業の開示実務の核心であり、二重マテリアリティをめぐる国際的議論の整理は、日本基準の設計や投資家対話の論点整理に直接資する。
In the global GX context
Materiality sits at the heart of the ISSB/CSRD divide — financial versus double materiality — and this review maps how that debate has evolved, offering global disclosure scholars and standard-setters a structured genealogy of the concept as regulatory convergence efforts continue.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:マテリアリティ研究の3段階の変遷と未解決の論点を体系的に把握できる。
🏢実務担当者:二重マテリアリティと財務マテリアリティの違いを踏まえ、自社のマテリアリティ特定プロセスの妥当性を再点検する材料になる。
🏛政策担当者:SSBJ・CSRD等の基準設計において、インパクト／財務／二重マテリアリティの緊張関係をどう調整するかの論点整理に有用。
📄 Abstract（原文）
Purpose This study aims to systematise and critically assess the academic debate on materiality in sustainability reporting, exploring its evolution, current areas of focus and proposing future research opportunities. Design/methodology/approach Drawing on a structured literature review (Massaro et al., 2016), the study analyses 81 peer-reviewed articles published between 2014 and 2025 in Academic Journal Guide 2024-ranked journals. The papers are classified according to an original analytical framework that helps unveil materiality perspectives, research topics and phases of the academic debate, as well as publication years, research outlets, geographical contexts, methods and theoretical backgrounds. Findings Research on materiality in sustainability reporting has expanded significantly over the past decade, with a sharp increase since 2022. The analysis shows shifting emphases in both research topics and materiality perspectives, enabling the identification of three phases of the academic debate: an initial emergence phase, centred on conceptualising materiality in non-financial reporting; a consolidation phase focused on organisational implementation, disclosure, stakeholder engagement, determinants and effects; and a recent phase of rethinking, marked by renewed attention to conceptual and regulatory foundations of materiality and tensions between impact, financial and double materiality perspectives. The debate remains far from closure. Originality/value This study introduces a time-informed interpretative framework that links materiality perspectives and research topics, offering a structured mapping of the evolution of the academic debate and identifying avenues for future research.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.1108/medar-01-2026-3626first seen 2026-10-07 05:07:27
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。