Theoretical Insights on Integrated Reporting: Valuing the Financial, Social and Sustainability Disclosures

  • Mark Anthony CamilleriEmail author
Part of the CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance book series (CSEG)


Organisations are increasingly disclosing financial and non-financial performance as they are becoming more accountable and transparent to the providers of capital and other interested parties. Most of them are clearly specifying their environmental, social and governance (ESG) content, materiality and assurance mechanisms in their corporate disclosures. Very often, the organisations integrate financial, social and sustainability reporting. In this light, this chapter provides a critical review of key theoretical underpinnings that have anticipated the development of the corporations’ integrated disclosures. Afterwards, it describes the International Integrated Reporting Council’s <IR> Framework and its guiding principles. This contribution posits that there are potential tensions and challenges for those organisations who intend using the <IR> Framework. In conclusion, this chapter outlines future avenues as it identifies knowledge gaps in the realms of integrated reporting.


  1. ACCA. (2016). Insights into integrated reporting. Accessed April 19, 2017, from
  2. Adams, C. A., & Frost, G. R. (2008). Integrating sustainability reporting into management practices. Accounting Forum, 32(4), 288–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Adams, C. A., & Larrinaga-González, C. (2007). Engaging with organisations in pursuit of improved sustainability accounting and performance. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 20(3), 333–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Adams, S., & Simnett, R. (2011). Integrated reporting: An opportunity for Australia’s not-for-profit sector. Australian Accounting Review, 21(3), 292–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Adams, C. A., Potter, B., Singh, P. J., & York, J. (2016). Exploring the implications of integrated reporting for social investment (disclosures). British Accounting Review, 48(3), 283–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Aerts, W., & Cormier, D. (2009). Media legitimacy and corporate environmental communication. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34(1), 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Aluchna, M., & Idowu, S. O. (2017). Responsible corporate governance: An introduction. In Responsible corporate governance (pp. 1–7). Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Beck, C., Dumay, J., & Frost, G. (2015). In pursuit of a ‘single source of truth’: From threatened legitimacy to integrated reporting. Journal of Business Ethics, 141, 1–15.Google Scholar
  9. Beck, C., Dumay, J., & Frost, G. (2017). In pursuit of a ‘single source of truth’: From threatened legitimacy to integrated reporting. Journal of Business Ethics, 141(1), 191–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bhimani, A., & Langfield-Smith, K. (2007). Structure, formality and the importance of financial and non-financial information in strategy development and implementation. Management Accounting Research, 18(1), 3–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brammer, S., Jackson, G., & Matten, D. (2012). Corporate social responsibility and institutional theory: New perspectives on private governance. Socio-Economic Review, 10(1), 3–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brown, N., & Deegan, C. (1998). The public disclosure of environmental performance information—A dual test of media agenda setting theory and legitimacy theory. Accounting and Business Research, 29(1), 21–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brown, J., & Dillard, J. (2014). Integrated reporting: On the need for broadening out and opening up. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 27(7), 1120–1156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Burritt, R. L., & Schaltegger, S. (2010). Sustainability accounting and reporting: Fad or trend? Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 23(7), 829–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Camilleri, M. A. (2015a). Valuing stakeholder engagement and sustainability reporting. Corporate Reputation Review, 18(3), 210–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Camilleri, M. A. (2015b). Environmental, social and governance disclosures in Europe. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 6(2), 224–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Camilleri, M. A. (2017). Corporate sustainability, social responsibility and environmental management: An introduction to theory and practice with case studies. Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Camilleri, M. A. (2018). Theoretical insights on integrated reporting: The inclusion of non-financial capitals in corporate disclosures. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 23(4), 567–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Campbell, D., & Cornelia Beck, A. (2004). Answering allegations: The use of the corporate website for restorative ethical and social disclosure. Business Ethics: A European Review, 13(2–3), 100–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cheng, M., Green, W., Conradie, P., Konishi, N., & Romi, A. (2014). The international integrated reporting framework: Key issues and future research opportunities. Journal of International Financial Management & Accounting, 25(1), 90–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Churet, C., & Eccles, R. G. (2014). Integrated reporting, quality of management, and financial performance. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 26(1), 56–64.Google Scholar
  22. Crowther, D. (2016). A social critique of corporate reporting: Semiotics and web-based integrated reporting. Abington: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dacin, M. T. (1997). Isomorphism in context: The power and prescription of institutional norms. Academy of Management Journal, 40(1), 46–81.Google Scholar
  24. Dacin, M. T., Oliver, C., & Roy, J. P. (2007). The legitimacy of strategic alliances: An institutional perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 28(2), 169–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Davis, J. H., Schoorman, F. D., & Donaldson, L. (1997). Toward a stewardship theory of management. Academy of Management Review, 22(1), 20–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. de Villiers, C., Rinaldi, L., & Unerman, J. (2014). Integrated reporting: Insights, gaps and an agenda for future research. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 27(7), 1042–1067.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Deegan, C. (2002). Introduction: The legitimising effect of social and environmental disclosures–A theoretical foundation. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 15(3), 282–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Deegan, C. (2007). Organisational legitimacy as a motive for sustainability reporting. In J. Unerman, J. Bebbington, & B. O’Dwyer (Eds.), Sustainability accounting and accountability (pp. 127–149). London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Deephouse, D. L. (1996). Does isomorphism legitimate? Academy of Management Journal, 39(4), 1024–1039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (Eds.). (1991). The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (Vol. 17). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  31. Donaldson, L., & Davis, J. H. (1991). Stewardship theory or agency theory: CEO governance and shareholder returns. Australian Journal of Management, 16(1), 49–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Dumay, J., Bernardi, C., Guthrie, J., & Demartini, P. (2016). Integrated reporting: A structured literature review. Accounting Forum, 40(3), 166–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Eccles, R. G., & Krzus, M. P. (2010). One report: Integrated reporting for a sustainable strategy. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  34. Eccles, R. G., Serafeim, G., & Krzus, M. P. (2011). Market interest in nonfinancial information. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 23(4), 113–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Erlingsdóttir, G., & Lindberg, K. (2005). Isomorphism, isopraxism and isonymism-complementary or competing processes? (No. 2005/4). Accessed April 19, 2017, from
  37. Flower, J. (2015). The international integrated reporting council: A story of failure. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 27, 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Harding, T. (2012). How to establish a study association: Isomorphic pressures on new CSOs entering a neo-corporative adult education field in Sweden. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 23(1), 182–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hedberg, C. J., & Von Malmborg, F. (2003). The global reporting initiative and corporate sustainability reporting in Swedish companies. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 10(3), 153–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hopwood, A. G. (2009). Accounting and the environment. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34(3), 433–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Idowu, S. O., Capaldi, N., & Zu, L. (2013). Encyclopedia of corporate social responsibility. Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2012). What drives corporate social performance? The role of nation-level institutions. Journal of International Business Studies, 43(9), 834–864.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ioannou, I., & Serafeim, G. (2016). The consequences of mandatory corporate sustainability reporting: Evidence from four countries (Harvard Business School Research Working Paper No. 11-100). Accessed April 14, 2017, from
  44. IR. (2013). International IR Framework, international integrated reporting council. Accessed May 16, 2017, from
  45. IR. (2017). Integrated reporting. International integrated reporting council. Accessed May 19, 2017, from
  46. Lozano, R., & Huisingh, D. (2011). Inter-linking issues and dimensions in sustainability reporting. Journal of Cleaner Production, 19(2), 99–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Maniora, J. (2015). Is integrated reporting really the superior mechanism for the integration of ethics into the core business model? An empirical analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 140(4), 755–786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Meyer, J. W., Boli, J., Thomas, G. M., & Ramirez, F. O. (1997). World society and the nation-state. American Journal of Sociology, 103(1), 144–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Muth, M., & Donaldson, L. (1998). Stewardship theory and board structure: A contingency approach. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 6(1), 5–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Ness, K. E., & Mirza, A. M. (1991). Corporate social disclosure: A note on a test of agency theory. The British Accounting Review, 23(3), 211–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Neu, D., Warsame, H., & Pedwell, K. (1998). Managing public impressions: Environmental disclosures in annual reports. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 23, 265–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. O’Dwyer, B. (2003). Conceptions of corporate social responsibility: The nature of managerial capture. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 16(4), 523–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Parent, M. M., & Deephouse, D. L. (2007). A case study of stakeholder identification and prioritization by managers. Journal of Business Ethics, 75(1), 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Perego, P., Kennedy, S., & Whiteman, G. (2016). A lot of icing but little cake? Taking integrated reporting forward. Journal of Cleaner Production, 136, 53–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. PWC. (2015). What do 1,300 CEOs worldwide say about today’s business challenges and opportunities? Accessed March 11, 2017, from
  56. Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and organizations (Vol. 2). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  57. Simnett, R., & Huggins, A. L. (2015). Integrated reporting and assurance: Where can research add value? Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 6(1), 29–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Stacchezzini, R., Melloni, G., & Lai, A. (2016). Sustainability management and reporting: The role of integrated reporting for communicating corporate sustainability management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 136, 102–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Stubbs, W., & Higgins, C. (2014). Integrated reporting and internal mechanisms of change. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 27(7), 1068–1089.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of MaltaMsidaMalta

Personalised recommendations