INTEGRATED REPORTING: CHRONOLOGICAL LITERAURE REVIEW
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29038/2786-4618-2022-01-42-49Keywords:
: integrated reporting, non-financial reporting, sustainability reporting, literature review, bibliometric analysisAbstract
Integrated reporting is a relatively new category that has been actively studied over the last decade. The study of
publishing activity on integrated reporting allows to form general trends in the thematic focus of existing publications,
in particular, in their chronological presentation. The article reviews the scientific literature on integrated reporting
based on the analysis of the most cited publications from the Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar databases.
Analysis of the bibliometric landscape of publications on integrated reporting involves the study of publishing
activity in terms of the most cited authors and publications on selected topics, determining the chronological specifics
of publications on selected topics by keywords.
For this purpose, publications were sorted by Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar databases by keywords
“integrated reporting” with their use in publications in article titles, abstracts, and keywords. Through the in-built
bibliographic analysis tools of the Scopus and Web of Science databases, as well as the Publish or Perish software (for
the Google Scholar database), these publications were imported for further bibliometric analysis using VOSviewer.
Systematization of thematic orientation of publications on integrated reporting by keywords, in particular their
chronological analysis is implemented by clustering using VOSviewer software by building a bibliometric map of the
publication based on Scopus and Web of Science databases.
The results of the analysis show that integrated reporting is a relatively new scientific category that has been
actively studied for the last ten years. The chronological representation of the bibliometric landscape of publications in
recent years shows that the most relevant are studies in the field of integrated reporting, related to the study of its
quality; connection with the Sustainable Development Goals; formation of the value of the firm, etc.
References
Accounting. Т. 27. p. 23-28.
2. Barth M. E., Cahan S. F., Chen L., Venter E. R. (2017). The economic consequences associated with
integrated report quality: Capital market and real effects. Accounting, Organizations and Society. 2017. №62. р. 43-
64.
3. De Villiers C., Rinaldi L., Unerman J. (2014). Integrated Reporting: Insights, gaps and an agenda for future
research. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. p. 1042-1067
4. De Villiers C., Sharma U. A (2017). Critical reflection on the future of financial, intellectual capital,
sustainability and integrated reporting. Critical Perspectives on Accounting. 70. 101999.
5. De Villiers, C., Venter, E. & Hsiao, P. (2017). Integrated reporting: Background, measurement issues,
approaches and an agenda for future research, Accounting & Finance. 57(4). р. 937-959.
6. Dumay J. A critical reflection on the future of intellectual capital: from reporting to disclosure. Journal of
Intellectual capital. 2016. p.168-184
7. Dumay J. et al. (2016). Integrated reporting: A structured literature review. Accounting Forum. Т. 40. №. 3. p.
166-185.
8. Dumay J., La Torre M., Farneti F. Developing trust through stewardship: Implications for intellectual capital,
integrated reporting, and the EU Directive 2014/95/EU. Journal of Intellectual Capital. 2019.
9. Eccles R. G., Krzus M. P. (2010). One report: Integrated reporting for a sustainable strategy. John Wiley &
Sons
10. Emerson J. (2003). The blended value proposition: Integrating social and financial returns. California
management review. № 45(4). р. 35-51.
11. Flower J. (2015). The international integrated reporting council: a story of failure. Critical Perspectives on
Accounting. Т. 27. p. 1-17
12. Frias‐Aceituno J. V., Rodriguez‐Ariza L., Garcia‐Sanchez I. M. (2013). The role of the board in the
dissemination of integrated corporate social reporting. Corporate social responsibility and environmental management.
Т. 20. №. 4. p. 219-233.
13. Hahn R., Kühnen M. (2013). Determinants of sustainability reporting: a review of results, trends, theory, and
opportunities in an expanding field of research. Journal of cleaner production. Т. 59. p. 5-21.
14. Jensen J. C., Berg N. (2012). Determinants of traditional sustainability reporting versus integrated reporting.
An institutionalist approach. Business Strategy and the Environment. Т. 21. №. 5. p. 299-316.
15. Kittiya Y., Guthrie J. (2006). An extended performance reporting framework for social and environmental
accounting. Business Strategy and the Environment. № 15. р. 309-321.
16. Manes-Rossi F., Tiron-Tudor A., Nicolò G., Zanellato G. (2018). Ensuring more sustainable reporting in
Europe using non-financial disclosure—De facto and de jure evidence. Sustainability. 10(4). 1162.
17. Manes‐Rossi F., Nicolò G., Argento D. (2020). Non-financial reporting formats in public sector
organizations: a structured literature review. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management. p.
639-669.
18. Stubbs W., Higgins C. Integrated reporting and internal mechanisms of change. Accounting, auditing &
accountability journal. – 2014.
19. Vitolla F., Raimo N., Rubino M. (2019). Appreciations, criticisms, determinants, and effects of integrated
reporting: A systematic literature review. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. Т. 26. №.
2. p. 518-528
20. Vitolla F., Raimo N., Rubino M., Garzoni A. (2019). The impact of national culture on integrated reporting
quality. A stakeholder theory approach. Business Strategy and the Environment. № 28(8). р. 1558-1571.
21. Zhou S., Simnett R., & Green W. (2017). Does integrated reporting matter to the capital market? Abacus.
№ 53(1). р. 94-132.
This work is licensed under a 