Corporate Reporting Practices Concerning Non-financial Aspects: A Possible Prolix?

  • Adriana Tiron-Tudor
  • Diana-Lavinia Martin
  • Teodora Viorica Farcas
Part of the CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance book series (CSEG)


The new trend in corporate reporting is the integrated reporting (<IR>), who integrates financial information with the information on the environment, society and governance (ESG) in a single report (Eccles et al. One report: Integrated reporting for a sustainable strategy. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, 2010). <IR> discloses information related to social, environmental, human and natural capitals, seemingly information disclosed also in sustainability reporting (<SR>). Therefore, an analysis of overlapping information into these two types of reports should clarify this. Thus, this chapter aims to answer to the following question:

How will the disclosures around social/environmental/human, social/natural capitals differ between (IIRC-type) integrated reports and (GRI-type) sustainability reports?

The design of this research is based on the specifics of social, environmental, human and natural capitals information contained by <IR> and <SR>. We developed a case study based on the Integrating reporting and Sustainability reporting of Generali Group. There are analyzed the main elements requested by the two reporting frameworks in order to see the overlaps.

Even though, a degree of prolix is identified by the coexistence of the two types of reports, there is still a need of <SR> along with the <IR>.


  1. Dragu, I., & Tiron-Tudor, A. (2013). New corporate reporting trends. Analysis on the evolution of integrated reporting. Annals of the University of Oradea, Economic Science Series, 22(1), 1221–1228.Google Scholar
  2. Eccles, R., Krzus, M. P., & Tapscott, D. (2010). One report: Integrated reporting for a sustainable strategy (1st ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  3. English, D. M., & Schooley, D. K. (2014). The evolution of sustainability reporting, accounting and auditing financial reporting. The CPA Journal, 26–35.Google Scholar
  4. Fărcaș, T. (2015a). The development of corporate reporting over time: From a traditional system to an integrated system. Revista Audit Financiar, 124(4), 106–113.Google Scholar
  5. Fărcaș, T. (2015b). Users’ needs: A premise for corporate reporting change, RePec, Doaj, EBSCO and CABELLS publishing services. The annals of the University of Oradea: Economic sciences (pp. 939–943).
  6. Fasan, M., Mio, C., & Pauluzzo, R. (2016). Internal application of IR principles: Generali’s internal integrated reporting. Journal of Cleaner Production, 139, 204–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hughen, L., Lulseged, A., & Upton, D. R. (2014). Improving stakeholder value through sustainability and integrated reporting. CPA Journal, 84(3), 57–61.Google Scholar
  8. Idowu, S. O., Dragu, I. M., Tiron-Tudor, A., & Fărcaș, T. V. (2016). From CSR and sustainability to integrated reporting. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 4(2), 134–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. James, M. L. (2015). Accounting majors’ perceptions of the advantages and disadvantages of sustainability and integrated reporting. Journal of Legal, Ethical & Regulatory Issues, 18(2), 107–123.Google Scholar
  10. Jastrzebska, E. (2016). Reporting of non-financial information as a stakeholder engagement method. Research Paper of Wroclaw University of Economics, Nr. 423 (pp. 61–78). ISSN 1899-3192, e-ISSN 2392-0041. Google Scholar
  11. Kolk, A. (2005). Sustainability reporting. VBA Journal, 21(3), 34–42.Google Scholar
  12. Kolk, A. (2010). Trajectories of sustainability reporting by MNCs. Journal of World Business, 45, 367–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Krippendorff, K. (2013). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (3rd ed.). California, CA: Sage ISBN 978-1-4129-8315-0.Google Scholar
  14. Lodhia, S. (2015). Exploring the transition to integrated reporting through a practice lens: An Australian customer owned bank perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 129, 585–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Morros, J. (2016). The integrated reporting: A presentation of the current state of art and aspects of integrated reporting that need further development. Intangible Capital, 12(1), 336–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Perrault Crawford, E., & Clark Williams, C. (2010). Should corporate social reporting be voluntary or mandatory? Evidence from the banking sector in France and the United States. Corporate Governance: The international journal of business in society, 10(4), 512–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sierra-Garcia, L., Zorio-Grima, A., & Garcia-Benau, M. A. (2015). Stakeholder engagement, corporate social responsibility and integrated reporting: An exploratory study. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 22, 286–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Sofian, I., & Dumitru, M. (2017). The compliance of the integrated reports issued by European financial companies with the international integrated reporting framework. Sustainability, 9, 1319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Stacchezzini, R., Melloni, G., & Lai, A. (2016). Sustainability management and reporting: The role of integrated reporting for communicating corporate sustainability. Journal of Cleaner Production, 136, 102–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Villiers, C., Rinaldi, L., & Unerman, J. (2014). Integrated reporting: Insights, gaps and agenda for future research. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 27(7), 1042–1067.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Weber, O., Diaz, M., & Schwegler, R. (2014). Corporate social responsibility of financial sector – Strengths, weaknesses and the impact on sustainable development. Sustainable Development, 22(5), 321–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adriana Tiron-Tudor
    • 1
  • Diana-Lavinia Martin
    • 1
  • Teodora Viorica Farcas
    • 1
  1. 1.Babes-Bolyai UniversityCluj NapocaRomania

Personalised recommendations