What happened
Double materiality is being repositioned as an ongoing management input, rather than a periodic exercise completed for disclosure, Nick Sanscartier, Vice President of Partnerships & Strategy at Novisto, told Sustainable Brands.
Sanscartier said businesses can use the assessment to identify sustainability issues that may affect the company, its most significant impacts, and the matters that should feed into risk and strategic decisions. He said this use case extends beyond compliance with the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), whose coverage has been narrowed through the Omnibus revisions.
Under a continuous model, companies would revise their assessment when circumstances change. Examples include entering new markets, acquisitions or divestments, supply-chain changes and changes to operational activities. Regulatory developments, technology and scientific evidence may also warrant updates.
Why it matters
For companies with European reporting obligations, the approach could connect sustainability reporting more directly to internal decision-making. For businesses outside CSRD’s scope, Sanscartier said double materiality can still offer a structure for sustainability planning, risk management and strategy.
The process would need broader ownership if its findings are used beyond reporting. Sustainability functions may coordinate the work, but finance and operations teams would also need to assess issues that could affect business performance or operations.
Sanscartier argued that data-led methods can reduce reliance on broad workshops and interviews. In his description, an assessment can combine company data with external research, regulation, media coverage and sector datasets. Stakeholder input would then be targeted at areas where those sources and stakeholder views differ.
Background
Sanscartier contrasted this model with consultant-led reviews, which he described as costly, lengthy and fixed at a particular moment. He also distinguished it from documentation tools that record internal decisions without supplying an analytical method, and from standalone engines that are not connected to a company’s underlying sustainability data.
He said practitioners should retain control over the final assessment. A tool can provide documented recommendations and their underlying rationale, while teams can adjust outcomes where stakeholder evidence or strategic judgement supports a different conclusion.
Companies do not need complete data before starting, he said. They can begin with estimates and refine the assessment as their information improves over successive reporting cycles.
