Digitalization and Accountability: Pros and Cons of Sustainability Reporting with Digital Technologies

Journal title MANAGEMENT CONTROL
Author/s Chiara Xhindole, Lara Tarquinio
Publishing Year 2026 Issue 2026/1
Language English Pages 26 P. 117-142 File size 124 KB
DOI 10.3280/MACO2026-001006
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

Nowadays, digitalization is significantly impacting various sectors, including sustainability accounting and reporting. Several studies have highlighted the benefits of using digital technologies for sustainability reporting purposes, such as artificial intelligence, blockchain technology, cloud computing, and the Internet of Things (IoT). Furthermore, the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) underlines the need for companies to use the European Single Electronic Format (ESEF) for their reports to ensure that sustainability information is digitally accessible. While the integration of digitalization and accounting presents numerous benefits, it also comes with certain risks. Therefore, this study conducts a single case study under the lens of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), evaluating the pros and cons of using digital technologies for sustainability reporting. An action research approach has been adopted, integrated with questionnaires and interviews with software users and developers. The findings show that using software for sustainability reporting provides several advantages, including legal compliance, enhanced transparency and accountability, and improved data accuracy. However, the risk of standardized and non-customizable reports has to be considered, along with the potential greenwashing. This study contributes to the literature on digital tools in sustainability reporting and offers insights for policymakers seeking to promote investment in software solutions that can effectively support companies in their reporting processes.

Keywords: Digitalization, Software, Sustainability reporting, Case study, Technology Acceptance Model

  1. Abhayawansa, S., Adams, C., Busulwa, R., and Shying, M. (2025), The Digital Transformation of Sustainability Reporting: How Digital Technologies are Reshaping Sustainability Accounting, Data, and Disclosure, Taylor & Francis.
  2. Adams, C. A., and McNicholas, P. (2007), Making a difference: Sustainability reporting, accountability and organizational change, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 20(3), 382-402, DOI: 10.1108/09513570710748553
  3. Anarbaeva, A., and Garst, J. (2025), Accounting for downstream value chain: examining the accountability for social impact of digitalization, Meditari Accountancy Research, 33(2), 681-707, DOI: 10.1108/MEDAR-02-2024-2387
  4. Bakarich, K. M., Castonguay, J. J., and O’Brien, P. E. (2020), The use of blockchains to enhance sustainability reporting and assurance, Accounting Perspectives, 19(4), 389-412, DOI: 10.1111/1911-3838.12241
  5. Battaglia, M., Bianchi, L., Frey, M., and Passetti, E. (2015), Sustainability reporting and corporate identity: Action research evidence in an Italian retailing cooperative, Business Ethics: A European Review, 24(1), 52-72,
  6. Bellini, F., and Mancini, D. (2024), Sostenibilità e digitalizzazione nel futuro dei CFO, ANDAF MAGAZINE, 21(2), 8-11.
  7. Bini, L., Bellucci, M. (2019), Integrated Sustainability Reporting: Linking Environmental and Social Information to Value Creation Processes, Springer International Publishing.
  8. Bradbury, H. (Ed.) (2015), The Sage Handbook of Action Research, SAGE Publications, Los Angeles.
  9. Brydon-Miller, M., Greenwood, D., and Maguire, P. (2003), Why action research?, Action research, 1(1), 9-28, DOI: 10.1177/14767503030011002
  10. Carroll, A. B. (1991), The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders, Business horizons, 4(4), 39-48, DOI: 10.1016/0007-6813(91)90005-G
  11. Davis, F.D. (1989), Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease Of Use, And User Acceptance of Information Technology, MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340, DOI: 10.2307/249008
  12. Davis, F.D. (1986), A Technology Acceptance Model for Empirically Testing New End-user information Systems: Theory and Results. Doctoral Dissertation, MIT Sloan School of Management, Cambridge, MA.
  13. De Silva, P., Gunarathne, N., and Kumar, S. (2025), Exploring the impact of digital knowledge, integration and performance on sustainable accounting, reporting and assurance, Meditari Accountancy Research, 33(2), 497-552, DOI: 10.1108/MEDAR-02-2024-2383
  14. de Villiers, C., Dimes, R., and Molinari, M. (2024), How will AI text generation and processing impact sustainability reporting? Critical analysis, a conceptual framework and avenues for future research, Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 15(1), 96-118, DOI: 10.1108/SAMPJ-02-2023-0097
  15. Del Baldo, M. (2017), The implementation of integrating reporting in SMEs: Insights from a pioneering experience in Italy, Meditari Accountancy Research, 25(4), 505-532, DOI: 10.1108/MEDAR-11-2016-0094
  16. Del Baldo, M., and Baldarelli, M. G. (2017), Renewing and improving the business model toward sustainability in theory and practice, International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, 2, 1-13,
  17. Dumay, J. C. (2010), A critical reflective discourse of an interventionist research project. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 7(1), 46-70, DOI: 10.1108/11766091011034271
  18. Dumay, J., and Baard, V. (2017), An introduction to interventionist research in accounting, in The Routledge companion to qualitative accounting research methods (pp. 265-283). Routledge.
  19. Dutot, V. (2015), Factors influencing near field communication (NFC) adoption: An extended TAM approach, The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 26(1), 45-57,
  20. Eden, C., and Huxham, C. (1996), Action research for management research, British Journal of management, 7(1), 75-86,
  21. Esposito, P., Antonucci, G., Palozzi, G., and Fijalkowska, J. (2025). Cognitive systems for improving decision-making in the workplace: an explorative study within the waste management field, Management Decision, 63(10), 3408-3430, DOI: 10.1108/MD-08-2023-1320
  22. European Commission (EC) (2022), Directive (EU) 2022/2464 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2022 amending Regulation (EU) No 537/2014, Directive 2004/109/EC, Directive 2006/43/EC and Directive 2013/34/EU, as regards corporate sustainability reporting, Official Journal of the European Union, 16/12/2022, L 322/15.
  23. FRC (2019), Artificial Intelligence and Corporate Reporting. How does it measure up?”, London, -- https://www.frc.org.uk/library/digital-reporting/artificial-intelligence-and-corporate-reporting/ (last accessed: July 2025).
  24. Gilmore, T., Krantz J., and Ramirez R. (1986), Action based modes of inquiry and the host-researcher relationship, Consultation: An International Journal, 5(3), 160-176.
  25. Gray, R. (2000), Current Developments and Trends in Social and Environmental Auditing, Reporting and Attestation: A Review and Comment, International Journal of Auditing, 4(3), 247-268. DOI: 10.1111/1099-1123.00316
  26. Gray, R., Owen, D. and Adams, C. (1996),Accounting and Accountability: Changes and Challenges in Corporate Social and Environmental Reporting, Prentice Hall.
  27. Gupta, S., Motlagh, M., and Rhyner, J. (2020), The digitalization sustainability matrix: A participatory research tool for investigating digitainability, Sustainability, 12(21), 9283,
  28. Hoque, Z. (2018), Methodological Issues in Accounting Research, Spiramus Press Ltd.
  29. Jönsson, S. and Lukka, K. (2005), Doing Interventionist Research in Management Accounting (No. 6), University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg Research Institute GRI.
  30. Novicka, J., and Volkova, T. (2025), Regulation of Sustainability Reporting Requirements-Digitalisation Path, Sustainability, 17(1), 138,
  31. Khan, S., and Gupta, S. (2025), Boosting the efficacy of green accounting for better firm performance: artificial intelligence and accounting quality as moderators, Meditari Accountancy Research, 33(2), 472-496, DOI: 10.1108/MEDAR-02-2024-2379
  32. KPMG (2024a), AI in financial reporting and audit: Navigating the new era. Financial reporting leaders’ AI expectations for their companies and external auditors, -- available: https://assets.kpmg.com/content/dam/kpmgsites/xx/pdf/2024/04/ai-in-financial-reporting-and-audit-web.pdf.coredownload.inline.pdf (last accessed: July 2025).
  33. KPMG (2024b), The move to mandatory reporting. Survey of Sustainability Reporting 2024, -- available: https://assets.kpmg.com/content/dam/kpmgsites/xx/pdf/2024/11/the-move-to-mandatory-reporting-web-copy.pdf.coredownload.inline.pdf (last accessed: July 2025).
  34. KPMG (2025), AI for the Chief Sustainability Officer, -- available: https://kpmg.com/kpmg-us/content/dam/kpmg/pdf/2025/ai-for-the-chief-sustainability-officer-kpmg-sustainability.pdf (last accessed: July 2025).
  35. La Torre, M. (2025), Standard Internazionali per la Rendicontazione di Sostenibilità, Roma: Aracne.
  36. La Torre, M., Valentinetti, D., Dumay, J. And Rea, M. A. (2018), Improving corporate disclosure through XBRL: An evidence-based taxonomy structure for integrated reporting, Journal of Intellectual Capital, 19(2), 338-366, DOI: 10.1108/JIC-03-2016-0030
  37. Lardo, A., Corsi, K., Varma, A., and Mancini, D. (2022), Exploring blockchain in the accounting domain: a bibliometric analysis, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 35(9), 204-233, DOI: 10.1108/AAAJ-10-2020-4995
  38. Lodhia, S., Farooq, M. B., Sharma, U., and Zaman, R. (2025), Digital technologies and sustainability accounting, reporting and assurance: framework and research opportunities, Meditari Accountancy Research, 33(2), 417-441, DOI: 10.1108/MEDAR-01-2025-2796
  39. Lombardi, R., and Secundo, G. (2021), The digital transformation of corporate reporting – a systematic literature review and avenues for future research, Meditari Accountancy Research, 29(5), 1179-1208, DOI: 10.1108/MEDAR-04-2020-0870
  40. Ma, Q., and Liu, L. (2004), The technology acceptance model: A meta-analysis of empirical findings, Journal of Organizational and End User Computing (JOEUC), 16(1), 59-72,
  41. Mancini, D., Lavorato, D., and Piedepalumbo, P. (2023), Il contributo di Management Control alla ricerca su tecnologie digitali e sostenibilità, Management Control, 2, DOI: 10.3280/MACO2023-002001
  42. Muller Prado, V., de Oliveira Junqueira, G, Steibel F., Bottino C., Netto M., and Rizzo, L, (2024), Sustainability reporting in the digital age: Overcoming challenges for SMEs and EMDEs.
  43. Mustafa, F., Smolarski, J., and Elamer, A. A. (2025), The Convergence of Artificial Intelligence and Sustainability Reporting: A Systematic Review of Applications, Challenges and Future Directions, Business Strategy and the Environment, 1-24,
  44. Narayanan, V., and Adams, C. A. (2017), Transformative change towards sustainability: the interaction between organisational discourses and organisational practices, Accounting and Business Research, 47(3), 344-368, DOI: 10.1080/00014788.2016.1257930
  45. Naveed, K., Farooq, M. B., Zahir-Ul-Hassan, M. K., and Rauf, F. (2025), AI adoption, ESG disclosure quality and sustainability committee heterogeneity: evidence from Chinese companies, Meditari Accountancy Research, 33(2), 708-732, DOI: 10.1108/MEDAR-02-2024-2374
  46. Neves, C., Oliveira, T., Cruz-Jesus, F. and Venkatesh, V. (2025), Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology for sustainable technologies context, International Journal of Information Management, 80, 102838,
  47. O’Brien, R. (2001), An overview of the methodological approach of action research, in R. Richardson (Ed.), Theory and Practice of Action Research.
  48. O’Leary, D. E. (2023), Digitization, digitalization, and digital transformation in accounting, electronic commerce, and supply chains, Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, 30(2), 101-110,
  49. Petcu, M. A., Sobolevschi-David, M. I., and Curea, S. C. (2024), Integrating digital technologies in sustainability accounting and reporting: Perceptions of professional cloud computing users, Electronics, 13(14), 2684,
  50. Pizzi, S., Mastroleo, G., Venturelli, A., and Caputo, F. (2024), The digitalization of sustainability reporting processes: A conceptual framework, Business Strategy and the Environment, 33(2), 1040-1050,
  51. Qu, S. Q., and Dumay, J. (2011), The qualitative research interview, Qualitative research in accounting & management, 8(3), 238-264, DOI: 10.1108/11766091111162070
  52. Rubino, M., Mastrorocco, I., and Gerbasi, E. (2026), Digital Technologies and Sustainability Reporting in the European Context: A Theoretical Framework, Changing Dimensions in Economic Development: Theories and Empirics, 37, DOI: 10.1108/978-1-83708-384-820261004
  53. Seele, P. (2016), Digitally unified reporting: how XBRL-based real-time transparency helps in combining integrated sustainability reporting and performance control, Journal of Cleaner Production, 136, 65-77,
  54. Sridharan, V. G. (2021), Methodological Insights Theory development in qualitative management control: revisiting the roles of triangulation and generalization, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 34(2), 451-479, DOI: 10.1108/AAAJ-09-2019-4177
  55. Valentinetti, D., and Rea, M. A. (2013), Critical reflection on XBRL: A £customizable standard” for financial reporting?, International Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting, 3(2), 110,
  56. Valentinetti, D., and Rea, M. A. (2025), Factors influencing the digitalization of sustainability accounting, reporting and disclosure: a systematic literature review, Meditari Accountancy Research, 33(2), 633-680, DOI: 10.1108/MEDAR-02-2024-2385
  57. Yin, R. K. (2003), Case Study Research. Design and Methods (III ed.), Sage Publications.
  58. Zahle, J. (2025), Bias and debiasing strategies in qualitative data collection, Philosophy of Science, 92(3), 606-623,

Chiara Xhindole, Lara Tarquinio, Digitalization and Accountability: Pros and Cons of Sustainability Reporting with Digital Technologies in "MANAGEMENT CONTROL" 1/2026, pp 117-142, DOI: 10.3280/MACO2026-001006