← 論文一覧に戻る

Materiality conflicts in dual suistanability-reporting regimes: indonesia’s transition from impact-based OJK rules to ISSB financial materiality

二重サステナビリティ報告制度におけるマテリアリティの衝突：インドネシアのインパクト重視OJK規則からISSB財務マテリアリティへの移行 (AI 翻訳)

Chandra Erick Manaek Pandapotan Lumban Gaol, Tarsisius Murwadji, Beniadi Setiawan

Lentera Negeri📚 査読済 / ジャーナル2026-07-08#開示インフラ経営インパクト: 調達リスク対象セクター: cross_sector
DOI: 10.29210/992520
原典: https://doi.org/10.29210/992520
📄 PDF

🤖 gxceed AI 要約

日本語

本研究は、インドネシアのOJK規則（POJK 51）とISSB基準（PSPK 1/2）の並存が生むマテリアリティの衝突を、社会法学とプロジェクト基盤法学を融合した手法で分析する。象徴的コンプライアンスやガバナンス・ウォッシングのリスクを指摘し、二重報告を調和させる4段階の紛争解決プロトコルと学術的コンプライアンス・マトリクスを提案する。新興市場における国際開示基準の受容と企業の適合戦略に実践的示唆を与える。

English

This study analyzes the materiality conflict arising from the coexistence of Indonesia's OJK rules (POJK 51) and ISSB standards (PSPK 1/2), using a socio-legal and project-based legal epistemology. It highlights risks of symbolic compliance and governance-washing, and proposes a four-step conflict-resolution protocol and an Academic Compliance Matrix to harmonize dual reporting. It offers practical insights for emerging markets adopting international disclosure standards and for corporate compliance strategies.

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters

日本のGX文脈において

日本ではSSBJ基準の適用が始まり、有報でのサステナビリティ開示が義務化される中、本論文の二重報告制度の衝突分析は、日本企業がSSBJと既存のESG開示（TCFD等）をどう整合させるかの示唆を与える。特に、マテリアリティの定義の違いがもたらす実務上の混乱と、その調和策は日本の開示実務にも応用可能。

In the global GX context

As ISSB standards are adopted globally, this paper addresses the friction between local impact-based reporting and global financial-materiality frameworks. It provides a blueprint for jurisdictions transitioning to ISSB, highlighting the risks of symbolic compliance and offering a practical matrix for reconciling dual regimes. This is relevant for global discussions on interoperability and the effectiveness of disclosure standards in emerging markets.

👥 読者別の含意

🔬研究者:Provides a novel socio-legal framework for analyzing dual reporting regimes and materiality conflicts, useful for scholars studying ISSB adoption in emerging markets.

🏢実務担当者:Offers a concrete compliance matrix and conflict-resolution protocol that corporate sustainability teams can adapt to manage dual reporting requirements.

🏛政策担当者:Highlights the need for clear guidance on reconciling local and international reporting standards, and the risks of governance-washing, informing regulatory design.

📄 Abstract（原文）

The contemporary architecture of corporate sustainability reporting is undergoing an unprecedented epistemological rupture, transitioning from a localized, impact-oriented paradigm under the Indonesian Financial Services Authority (OJK) toward a globally standardized, financial-materiality framework promulgated by the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB). This paradigm shift, culminating in the ratification of PSPK 1 and PSPK 2 effective January 1, 2027, precipitates a profound jurisprudential paradox regarding regulatory compliance and corporate fiduciary duties within emerging markets. Traditional orthodox normative legal research has systematically failed to decode the sociological frictions inherent in this dual-regime landscape, often falsely dichotomizing the frameworks as either mutually exclusive or seamlessly harmonized (Abhayawansa, 2022; Adams & Mueller, 2022). Eradicating these archaic theoretical lacunae, this research operationalizes a cutting-edge methodological fusion, integrating Socio-Legal Analysis with Project-Based Legal Epistemology. By dissecting the "asymmetrical incomplete overlap" between POJK No. 51/POJK.03/2017's mandatory economic, social, and environmental disclosure floor and the ISSB’s investor-centric financial-materiality overlay, this study confronts the realities of symbolic compliance and governance-washing within the extractive and corporate sectors (Correa-Mejía et al., 2024; Dragomir et al., 2025). As a tangible project-based output, this manuscript engineers a highly prescriptive, four-step conflict-resolution protocol materialized through a concrete Academic Compliance Matrix. This matrix structurally reconciles dual-tagging mechanisms, value-chain boundary delimitations, and board-level accountability escalations, thereby establishing an indisputable, interoperable legal blueprint for transnational corporate governance and integrated compliance sustainability.

🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース

🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。

gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。