Download Free PDF View PDF
"On 8 December 2013, the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) published the final version of their Integrated Reporting Framework (henceforth called the “Framework”). While the recent publication of the Framework seems to suggest that Integrated Reporting is a new practice, Eccles and Krzus (2010) mentioned that the first “integrated” report might have been from Novozymes in 2002. Nevertheless, the Framework has been touted as a major milestone in enhanced reporting practices. The Framework proposes a report that moves away from having a narrow focus on financial, social or environmental performance, towards one which emphasises value- creation, predominantly for the benefit of investors. The Framework appears to be an attempt to bridge financial accounting disclosures with concerns about the sustainability of the business model. The process of developing the framework involved various actors in the corporate disclosure environment, including preparers, professionals, investors, civil society, academics and regulators. With such a multi-stakeholder process comes the challenging task of consolidating different views. While there are no theories specific to integrated reporting, this essay will begin by borrowing theories from financial and sustainability reporting, to understand the rationale behind the support for integrated reporting thus far. This essay will also refer to literature on “accounting change” to illustrate the dynamics which helped shape integrated reporting as an emerging institution. This essay will then put forward two notions. Firstly, there is confusion surrounding integrated reporting, stemming from the divergence in views on the definition of integrated reporting, its users, and purpose. By comparing the Framework definition with interpretations in academic literature and the King Report on Corporate Governance in South Africa, this essay will distinguish between the classical “One Report” definition and the new “Framework” definition, and in doing so, highlight the inconsistencies within the institution of integrated reporting, which is causing confusion that has thus far been muted. Secondly, while the confusion surrounding integrated reporting can be traced back through its genealogy and constellation, it is also gaining legitimacy because of the accounting constellation within which it exists. In looking at the genealogy, we will be tracing the Framework to prior initiatives in value-based and sustainability reporting practices, including Value Added Statements, the PricewaterhouseCoopers ValueReportingTM initiative (Eccles, Herz, Keegan, & Phillips, 2001), the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Index and the Accounting for Sustainability (A4S) Connected Reporting Framework. These initiatives are part of the constellation that has moulded integrated reporting into an institution of its own. To conclude, this essay will also propose areas for further research in the area of integrated reporting."
Download Free PDF View PDF
