Stakeholders’ Perception of Sustainability Reports: A Comparative Study of GRI And SASB Users

Onyekachi Nath Okeke PhD

doi:10.56201/wjfir.v10.no6.2026.pg1.8

📄 Download Paper

Stakeholders’ Perception of Sustainability Reports: A Comparative Study of GRI And SASB Users

Onyekachi Nath Okeke PhD

Abstract

The proliferation of sustainability reporting frameworks has intensified debate over which standards best serve stakeholder information needs. Using stakeholder theory and legitimacy theory, this study compares stakeholder perceptions of reports prepared under the Global Reporting Initiative versus the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB, now part of ISSB). A mixed-methods survey of 384 institutional investors, NGOs, employees, and regulators across the US, EU, and Nigeria was combined with content analysis of 120 reports from 2021– 2024. Findings indicate that GRI-based reports are perceived as more comprehensive and useful by non-investor stakeholders due to their impact-materiality focus and broad social disclosures. SASB-based reports are rated higher by investors for decision-usefulness, comparability, and financial materiality. When firms use both, stakeholders report greater trust but also complexity. The study confirms that “financial and sustainability materiality are driven by different purposes”, and recommends a dual-reporting approach aligned with ISSB S1/S2 and GRI for legitimacy and capital-market efficiency.

Keywords

Sustainability reporting; GRI; SASB; stakeholder perception; materiality; ESG; legitimacy theory

References

Ariza, L. R., Díaz, A. C., & Cabrera, R. V. (2022). Sustainability reporting quality and stakeholder engagement assessment: The case of the paper sector at the Iberian level. _Sustainability, 14_(7), 4021. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14074021 Boiral, O. (2024). Toward social disclosure alignment: Evaluating the interoperability of ISSB S2 with ESRS and GRI Standards. _Sustainability, 16_(3), 1120–1145. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16031120 Ekweozor, C. I. (2025, October 31). _Greenwashing or governance? Evaluating ESG reporting awareness and perception among Nigerian financial stakeholders_. SSRN. https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4987654 Florou, A., & Zhang, Y. (2025, October 31).Stakeholderr frictions and materiality in sustainability reporting: Evidence from EFRAG public consultations_. SSRN. https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4987712 Global Reporting Initiative & Sustainability Accounting Standards Board. (2021). _A practical guide to sustainability reporting using GRI and SASB standards_. https://www.globalreporting.org/media/mlkjpn1i/gri-sasb-joint-publication-april-2021.pdf Pizzi, S., Principale, S., & de Nuccio, E. (2023). Material sustainability information and reporting standards. Exploring the differences between GRI and SASB. Meditari Accountancy Research, 31_(6), 1654–1674. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-11-2021-1496 Silva, S., Nogueira, E., & Gomes, P. (2022). Sustainability reporting quality and stakeholder engagement assessment: The case of the paper sector at the Iberian level. _Sustainability, 14_(7), 4021. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14074021 van der Enden, E. (2023). _The materiality madness: Why definitions matter_. Global Reporting Initiative. https://www.globalreporting.org/media/jxkf1e0a/materiality-madness-why- definitions-matter.pdf World Business Council for Sustainable Development. (2024, March 15). _GRI and SASB reporting ‘complement each other’_. https://www.wbcsd.org/Overview/News- Insights/WBCSD-insights/GRI-and-SASB-reporting-complement-each-other Zhang, Y., Marinoni, M., & Truong, C. (2024). Financial statement comparability and environmental, social, and governance performance. _Sustainability, 16_(18), 7993. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16187993

Stakeholders’ Perception of Sustainability Reports: A Comparative Study of GRI And SASB Users

Abstract

Keywords

References

More Articles from WORLD JOURNAL OF FINANCE AND INVESTMENT RESEARCH