Comparative Analysis between Companies that Adopt GRI Standards and Those that Follow only IFRS (ISSB) – Sustainability Report
This article compares companies that report their sustainability information in accordance with the GRI Standards (Global Reporting Initiative) with those that exclusively follow the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards (ISSB – IFRS S1 and S2). The study aims to understand the conceptual, methodological, and practical differences between these two reporting frameworks, with a focus on their impact on corporate transparency, governance, accountability, and decision-making. It is based on a review of literature, document analysis, and institutional sources to create an analytical framework that helps companies, auditors, regulators, and researchers understand and apply both systems. The analysis reveals that the GRI standards employ a dual materiality approach, considering both the company’s impacts on society and the environment, as well as how these factors influence financial performance. In contrast, the ISSB/IFRS, rooted in capital market principles, focuses mainly on financial materiality, targeting investors and capital providers. This difference is evident in their content requirements, governance structures, and the level of detail provided. The article also discusses the interoperability between GRI and ISSB, highlighting efforts to align and complement the standards, as well as addressing challenges to prevent report overlap and duplication. Additionally, the study examines issues related to assurance, comparability, and credibility of sustainability reports, suggesting that integrating both approaches can improve the consistency of corporate disclosures. It concludes that, despite their different objectives and target audiences, the convergence of GRI and ISSB marks a significant step toward more integrated, transparent, and responsible sustainability reporting that guides decision-making.