Advertisement

Integrated Reporting, Integrated Thinking and Gaming Companies: Myths and Paradoxes

  • Maria-Gabriella BaldarelliEmail author
Chapter
Part of the CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance book series (CSEG)

Abstract

The chapter focuses its attention on “gambling” companies, which according to our point of view, is perhaps more difficult to speak about in terms of integrated thinking and integrated reporting if one endorses and develops such behaviour, that destabilises the development of the civil economy. In particular, the chapter will focus on the integrated tools of measurement and accountability that have a crucial function of legitimising companies in this sector in their own territory to move on from weak to strong sustainability in the dimension of eco-justice.

The chapter involves the myths and paradoxes that can be found in the accountability instruments in certain sectors, such as gambling. These reflections can be considered from the point of view of their relationship between integrated reporting and integrated thinking.

References

  1. Alford, H., Clark, M. A. C., Cortright, S. A., & Naughton, M. (Eds.). (2006). Rediscovering abundance interdisciplinary essays on wealth, income, and their distribution in the Catholic social tradition. Indiana: Notre Dame.Google Scholar
  2. Archel, P., Husillos, J., Larrinaga, C., & Spence, C. (2009). Social disclosure, legitimacy theory and the role of the state. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 22(8), 1284–1307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baldarelli, M. G. (2009). La responsabilità sociale nel terzo millennio: Prospettive economico-aziendali. In A. Matacena & M. Del Baldo (Eds.), Responsabilità sociale d’impresa e territorio. L’esperienza delle piccole e medie imprese marchigiane (pp. 62–98). Milano: Angeli.Google Scholar
  4. Baldarelli, M. G., & Del Baldo, M. (2017). New categories for responsible corporate governance starting from the “Unity in Multiplicity”. In M. Aluchna & S. O. Idowu (Eds.), Responsible corporate governance, CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance (pp. 131–149). Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bebbington, J. (2007). Accounting for sustainable development performance. Burlington: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  6. Bebbington, J., & Contrafatto, M. (2006). Sviluppo sostenibile: una rivisitazione della letteratura. In G. Rusconi & M. Dorigatti (Eds.), Impresa e responsabilità sociale, Collana: Persona, Imprese e Società 6 (pp. 206–235). Milano Angeli.Google Scholar
  7. Busco, C., Frigo, M. L., Riccaboni, A., & Quattrone, P. (Eds.). (2013). Integrated reporting: Concepts and cases that redefine corporate accountability. Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  8. Catturi, G. (2004). La determinazione del “valore creato” (Vol. II). CEDAM: Padova.Google Scholar
  9. Catturi, G. (Ed.). (2009). L’armonia della complessità dalla crescita allo sviluppo aziendale. Padova: CEDAM.Google Scholar
  10. Cefaloni, C. (2014). Vite in gioco. Oltre la slot economia. Roma: Città Nuova.Google Scholar
  11. Cooper, D. J., & Sherer, M. J. (1984). The value of corporate accounting reports: Arguments for a political economy of accounting. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 9(3–4), 207–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Darrell, W., & Schwartz, B. N. (1997). Environmental disclosures and public policy pressure. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 16(2), 125–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Del Baldo, M., & Nesheva-Kiosseva, N. (2017). Toward the future perspectives of business integrated measurement and communication. In M. G. Baldarelli, M. Del Baldo, & N. Nesheva-Kiosseva (Eds.), Environmental accounting and reporting: Theory and practice (pp. 91–161). Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dillard, J. (1991). Accounting as a critical social science. Accounting, Auditing, Accountability Journal, 4(1), 122–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Eccles, R. G., & Krzus, M. P. (2010). One report: Integrated reporting for a sustainable strategy. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  16. Gray, R., Bebbington, J., & Walters, D. (1993). Accounting for the environment. London: Chapman Publishing.Google Scholar
  17. Gray, R., Owen, D., & Adams, C. (1996). Accounting and accountability. London: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  18. Gray, R. U., Adams, C., & Owen, D. (2014). Accountability, social responsibility and sustainability: Accounting for society. Harlow: Pearson.Google Scholar
  19. Guthrie, J., & Parker, L. D. (1990). Corporate social disclosure practice: A comparative international analysis. Advances in Public Interest Accounting, 3, 159–175.Google Scholar
  20. Lai, A. (2004). Paradigmi interpretativi dell’impresa contemporanea. Teorie istituzionali e logiche contrattuali. Milano: Angeli.Google Scholar
  21. Lindblom, C. K. (1993). The implication of organizational legitimacy for corporate social performance and disclosure. Chapter presented at the Critical Perspective on Accounting Conference, New York.Google Scholar
  22. Matacena, A. (2017). The subject we are dealing with: MGA model of the enterprise (§ 1.1). In M. G. Baldarelli, M. Del Baldo, & N. Nesheva-Kiosseva (Eds.), Environmental accounting and reporting, theory and practice. Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  23. Mella, P. (2012). System thinking: Intelligence in action. Springer –Verlag Italia. (English translation from the original Italian edition “Guida al system thinking”, Il sole 24ore 2007).Google Scholar
  24. Mio, C. (Ed.). (2016). Integrated reporting, a new accounting disclosure. London: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  25. Naumes, W., & Naumes, M. J. (2006). The art and craft of case writing (2 nd ed.). London: M.E. Sharp.Google Scholar
  26. Pascal, B. (1901). The thoughts of Blaise Pascal (translated from the text of M. Auguste Molinier by C. Kegan Paul. London: George Bell and Sons).Google Scholar
  27. Paternostro, S. (2012). L’accountability nell’aziendal integrale. Prime riflessioni sulla valenza informativa del bilancio integrato Collana Quaderni di ricerca economico-aziendali: teoria e casi/5. Roma: Aracne.Google Scholar
  28. Patten, D. M. (1992). Intra-industry environmental disclosures in response to the Alaskan oil spill: A note on legitimacy theory. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17(5), 471–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. SISAL GROUP-Consolidated Financial statement 31/12/2016 (Italian language).Google Scholar
  30. SISAL Social Report. (2011).Google Scholar
  31. SISAL Sustainability Report. (2016).Google Scholar
  32. Sorci, C. (2006). Responsabilità e sviluppo integrale delle aziende, SIDREA, Appunti per un dibattito sulla cultura aziendale (pp. 85–94).Google Scholar
  33. Zadek, S. (2006). Responsible competitiveness reshaping global markets through responsible business practices. Corporate Governance., 6(4), 332–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of BolognaBolognaItaly

Personalised recommendations