1771 IRMA. The results are organized across governance, social, and environmental dimensions in order to examine structural patterns of operational strength and normative alignment. Rather than reporting itemlevel results, the analysis focuses on structural configurations emerging at criterion level. 4.1 Governance The application of the dual-lens framework reveals that governance within IRMA is not homogeneous, but instead characterized by differentiated levels of strength across criteria (Table 2). Three areas emerge as particularly robust: Supply chain traceability, Due diligence processes, and Stakeholder Engagement. These domains exhibit a high proportion of explicitly codified requirements and demonstrate a well-developed governance architecture grounded in transparency, risk identification, and procedural oversight. By contrast, Management systems & Regulatory compliance, as well as certain structural Business practices, particularly mergers and acquisitions and divestment, appear comparatively weaker. While anticorruption and tax-related provisions are strongly articulated, strategic corporate decision-making processes are less systematically regulated, indicating selective depth within governance coverage. The dual-lens distinction between operational and normative requirements provides further insight into these patterns. Supply chain traceability stands out as the most consistent criterion from a structural point of view, as it shows relatively limited divergence between operational alignment and normative alignment. Where IRMA requires traceability, it integrates these provisions in a way that combines systembased controls with substantive expectations of transparency. In contrast, Local value added and Stakeholder engagement display a markedly higher asymmetry between operational and normative explicit requirements. In these areas, IRMA places strong emphasis on formalized processes, such as engagement planning, consultation mechanisms, and grievance procedures, yet less frequently codifies clearly defined minimum outcome thresholds. This suggests that, although participatory and local development mechanisms are institutionalized, the articulation of guaranteed substantive results remains less explicit. Management systems & Regulatory compliance provisions further reinforce this pattern. Governance requirements are strongly structured around management systems, continuous improvement, and regulatory compliance, but show more limited formalization of non-negotiable substantive obligations. Table 2: Governance assessment under the dual-lens framework (IRMA Case) Criterion Operational strength Normative Alignment Structural interpretation Supply chain traceability High High Balanced structural integration Local value added Moderate-High Low Process-oriented, outcome-light Business Practices Moderate Moderate Strong in anti-corruption, weak in strategic governance Management systems & Regulatory compliance Moderate Low System-based governance with limited substantive obligations Due diligence process High Moderate Procedural robustness with partial regulatory incorporation Institutional enablers Moderate Low Selective institutional support Stakeholder engagement Very High Moderate-Low Strong engagement systems; limited outcome guarantees
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM0Mzk2