CAPIC REVIEW

Journal of Accounting, Auditing and Business Management

ISSN 0718-4662

logo revista Capic Review
Vol. 23 (2025): CAPIC REVIEW
Investigation

Governance and double materiality: disclosure in sustainability reports of Chilean and Argentine companies

PDF (Español (España))
  • Enrique Valenzuela,
  • Evelyn Villarroel,
  • Carmen Verón,
  • Daniel Cipollone
Enrique Valenzuela
Universidad de Valparaíso
Bio
Evelyn Villarroel
Universidad Católica del Norte
Carmen Verón
Universidad Nacional de Rosario
Daniel Cipollone
Universidad Nacional de Rosario
DOI: https://doi.org/10.35928/cr.vol23.2025.264
Categories

Published 2026-03-05

Keywords

  • double materiality,
  • international standards,
  • corporate governance,
  • corporate sustainability

How to Cite

Valenzuela, E., Villarroel, E., Verón, C., & Cipollone, D. (2026). Governance and double materiality: disclosure in sustainability reports of Chilean and Argentine companies. CAPIC REVIEW, 23, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.35928/cr.vol23.2025.264

Copyright (c) 2025 Enrique Valenzuela Toro, Evelyn Villarroel Terrazas, Carmen Verón Medina, Daniel Cipollone Fucci

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Abstract

Organizations incorporate sustainability into their strategies by integrating Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) dimensions. Governance is an essential component of this integration, which employs a dual materiality approach that considers two complementary perspectives: financial and impact. In Latin America, particularly in Chile and Argentina, research on governance is scarce, and the dual materiality approach is still developing.
The different regulatory contexts in these countries—Chile with gradual mandatory requirements and Argentina with a voluntary scheme—present a unique opportunity to analyze how these regulatory frameworks affect governance by integrating double materiality.
A qualitative content analysis of 43 corporate reports from Chilean and Argentinian companies for 2023 and 2024 was conducted using ATLAS.ti. A deductive approach based on IFRS S1 and scientific literature was applied to define the matrix of analysis categories.
The results show that Chile more robustly integrates governance aspects with frameworks such as GRI, SASB, IFRS S1 and S2, and TCFD. Argentina, not subject to mandatory reporting, shows progress in governance in 2024, predominately applying the GRI standard with less integration of the SASB, IFRS S1, and S2 standards.
However, the application of double materiality in both countries and time periods lacks depth in disclosing impacts on financial position, cash flows, and financing.
Thus, although Chile’s regulatory requirements facilitate the adoption of international frameworks, the risk of only formal compliance persists. In Argentina, the voluntary scheme creates the appearance of legitimacy, but there is probable discretion in the disclosed information. In conclusion, the adoption of international frameworks in governance aims to improve transparency and the quality of sustainability information in emerging economies.

PDF (Español (España))

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Aguilar, D. J., Choque Castro, N. A., Gutiérrez Canaviri, N., Huarachi Huarachi, B., & Aguilar Quispe, B. M. (2025). ¿Dónde está América Latina? Gobierno Corporativo y Finanzas: Mapeo Bibliométrico Global en Scopus y Brecha Regional. Ciencia Latina Revista Científica Multidisciplinar, 9(6), 532-558. https://doi.org/10.37811/cl_rcm.v9i6.20875
  2. Bravo, F., Abad Navarro, M. C., & Reguera Alvarado, N. (2023). Doble materialidad y credibilidad de la información sobre sostenibilidad: Cuestiones clave y retos actuales. Revista de Contabilidad y Tributación. CEF, 163-198. https://doi.org/10.51302/rcyt.2023.18995
  3. Brown, N., & Deegan, C. (1998). The public disclosure of environmental performance information—A dual test of media agenda setting theory and legitimacy theory. Accounting and Business Research, 29(1), 21-41. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.1998.9729564
  4. 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
  5. Dragomir, V. D., Dumitru, M., Chersan, I. C., Gorgan, C., & Păunescu, M. (2025). Double Materiality Disclosure as an Emerging Practice: The Assessment Process, Impacts, Risks, and Opportunities. Accounting in Europe, 22(1), 103-140. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449480.2024.2339264
  6. Fiandrino, S., Tonelli, A., & Devalle, A. (2022). 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
  7. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach (1.a ed.). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139192675
  8. Jensen, C., & Meckling, H. (1976). THEORY OF THE FIRM: MANAGERIAL BEHAVIOR, AGENCY COSTS AND OWNERSHIP STRUCTURE.
  9. Kirby, C. (2023). Integración de los criterios ASG en los modelos de gestión y procesos de negocio. Boletín de Estudios Económicos, 77(233), 125-136. https://doi.org/10.18543/bee.2639
  10. Lu, J., & Wang, J. (2021). Corporate governance, law, culture, environmental performance and CSR disclosure: A global perspective. Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, 70, 101264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intfin.2020.101264
  11. Lungu, C., Caraiani, C., & Bojan, A. M. (2024). Double Materiality Approach and Sustainable Business Model Paradigm: A Three-Fold Analysis. European Conference on Management Leadership and Governance, 20(1), 316-324. https://doi.org/10.34190/ecmlg.20.1.2930
  12. Luque-Vílchez, M., Cordazzo, M., Rimmel, G., & Tilt, C. A. (2023). Key aspects of sustainability reporting quality and the future of GRI. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 14(4), 637-659. https://doi.org/10.1108/sampj-03-2023-0127
  13. Michelon, G., Pilonato, S., & Ricceri, F. (2015). CSR reporting practices and the quality of disclosure: An empirical analysis. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 33, 59-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2014.10.003
  14. Naciones Unidas. (1987, agosto 4). Informe de la Comision Mundial sobre el medio Ambiente y el Desarrollo.
  15. Nielsen, C. (2023). ESG Reporting and Metrics: From Double Materiality to Key Performance Indicators. Sustainability, 15(24), 16844. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152416844
  16. Oll, J., Spandel, T., Schiemann, F., & Akkermann, J. (2025). The concept of materiality in sustainability reporting: From essential contestation to research opportunities. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 16(2), 321-350. https://doi.org/10.1108/sampj032024-0296
  17. Padilla-Garrido, N., Aguado-Correa, F., Rabadán-Martín, I., López-Jiménez, J. M., De La VegaJiménez, J. J., & Peletier-Ribera, I. (2024). Materiality analysis in sustainability reporting: Insights from large Spanish companies. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 31(6), 5391-5412. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2866
  18. Quintero, L. T., Gaitán, S. C., & Saavedra, R. A. (2024). Corporate Governance and Sustainability in Latin America. RAN. Revistas Academia y Negocios, 10(2), 313-331. https://doi.org/10.29393/RAN10-20GCLS30020
  19. Ruan, L., & Liu, H. (2021). Environmental, Social, Governance Activities and Firm Performance: Evidence from China. Sustainability, 13(2), 767. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13020767
  20. Subasat, T., & Bellos, S. (2013). Governance and foreign direct investment in Latin America: A panel gravity model approach. Latin American Journal of Economics, 50(1), 107-131. https://doi.org/10.7764/LAJE.50.1.107
  21. Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches.
  22. Szalacha, P. (2024). Double materiality implementation and its impact on sustainability reporting: Findings from Polish early adopter reports. Zeszyty Teoretyczne Rachunkowości, 48(4), 133-154. https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0054.8692
  23. Vogt, M., & Weber, C. (2019). Current challenges to the concept of sustainability. Global Sustainability, 2, e4. https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2019.1

CHILEAN UNIVERSITIES

FOREIGN UNIVERSITIES

Code under GNU license: OJS PKP