What data sources should we use for a double materiality assessment?

There’s no single data source we’d recommend, because scoring methodologies and the resulting data are generated internally by each company. Public sources are useful early in the process, to understand your operating environment: media coverage, peer reports and press releases, publications from governments, regulators, NGOs, trade unions and policymakers, and sector research.

Why there’s no recommended source

Companies ask for a list, and the reason there isn’t one is structural. Your scoring methodology is yours. Your thresholds are yours. The data that comes out the other end is generated inside your business, which means no external provider holds it and no external provider can validate it for you.

That cuts both ways. Nobody can sell you a shortcut, and the work of building the evidence sits with you from the first week.

Where public sources earn their place

Early. Before you’re scoring anything, you’re trying to understand the environment your business operates in, and that’s the stage where outside material does its work.

Media coverage tells you what’s already visible about your sector and, occasionally, about you.

Peer companies’ reports and press releases show you what comparable businesses have identified and chosen to disclose.

Publications from governments, regulators, NGOs, trade unions and policymakers give you the direction of travel on regulation, and the topics advocacy groups are pushing hardest.

Sector research from consultants, industry experts or investment firms gives you the financial framing, which does most of its work on the financial materiality side.

Where they stop

Public sources describe your operating environment. Your own operational data is what tells you where your business sits inside it.

A sector report tells you water stress is a live issue for food and beverage companies. Whether your two highest-volume sites sit in water-stressed basins comes from your own site data, and that’s the answer that determines materiality.

The pattern we see

Clients who lean too hard on public sources end up with a longlist that reads like a sector summary. Every topic that shows up in the trade press makes it in, almost nothing gets ruled out, and the assessment describes an industry rather than a company.

Auditors notice, because the exclusions are where they look first and there aren’t any. A long list with no exclusions tells an auditor that no screening happened, whatever the methodology document says.

What to record

Whatever you use, log it. Under ESRS 2 you disclose the sources and inputs behind your assessment, so the reference list is a deliverable rather than working material.

Note what you consulted, when, and what it changed. A source that shifted a conclusion matters more to an auditor than a source that confirmed one you’d already reached.

Kōan has worked on materiality assessments for 9 years, with companies from listed multinationals to first-time reporters across Europe, Asia and the US. If you want a second pair of eyes on your methodology before your auditor finds the gaps, get in touch.

Simon Clow, Editorial Director, Kōan
Published 29 October 2026 · Last reviewed 10 October 2026

Simon Clow is Kōan’s editorial director. He began his career as an economic and financial journalist before moving into sustainability with the financial services sector, and co-founded Kōan.