Stakeholders’ Perspectives on the Role of Regulatory Reform in Integrated Reporting

Wendy Stubbs () and Colin Higgins ()
Additional contact information
Wendy Stubbs: Monash University
Colin Higgins: Deakin University

Journal of Business Ethics, 2018, vol. 147, issue 3, No 2, 489-508

Abstract: Abstract This paper reports on an exploratory study of the preferences of users of non-financial reporting for regulatory or voluntary approaches to integrated reporting (IR). While it is well known that companies prefer voluntary approaches to non-financial reporting, considerably less is known about the preferences of the users of non-financial information. IR is the latest development in attempts over 30 or more years to broaden organisational non-financial reporting and accountability to include the wider social and environmental impacts of business. It promises to provide a more cohesive and efficient approach to corporate reporting by bringing together financial information, operational data and sustainability information to focus only on material issues that impact an organisation’s ability to create value in the short, medium and long term. The study found more support for voluntary approaches to IR as the majority of participants thought that it was too early for regulatory reform. They suggested that IR will become the reporting norm over time if left to market forces as more and more companies adopt the IR practice. Over time IR will be perceived as a legitimate practice, where the actions of integrated reporters are seen as desirable, proper, or appropriate. While there is little appetite for regulatory reform, half of the investors support mandatory IR because, in their experience, voluntary sustainability reporting has not led to more substantive disclosures or increased the quality of reporting. There is also evidence that IR privileges financial value creation over stewardship, inhibiting IR from moving beyond a weak sustainability paradigm.

Keywords: Integrated reporting; Sustainability reporting; Voluntary reporting; Mandatory reporting; Reporting frameworks; Reporting standards (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (33)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10551-015-2954-0 Abstract (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:147:y:2018:i:3:d:10.1007_s10551-015-2954-0

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer. ... cs/journal/10551/PS2

DOI: 10.1007/s10551-015-2954-0

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Business Ethics is currently edited by Michelle Greenwood and R. Edward Freeman

More articles in Journal of Business Ethics from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().