































 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/11974 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

39 

From Divergence to Convergence: Mapping the Hybrid 
Evolution of Smart, POP, and Dialogic Accounting 
through Bibliometric and Semantic Lenses 
 
Federico Chmet*, Alessandra Curatolo 2, Federica Bassano3 

1University of Turin, Department of Management, Corso Unione Sovietica, 218 bis, Torino, Italia 
federico.chmet@unito.it 
*contact author 
ORCID   0000-0003-0091-784X 
 
2University of Turin, Department of Management, Corso Unione Sovietica, 218 bis, Torino, Italia 
alessandra.curatolo@unito.it 
ORCID  0009-0003-0737-8532 
 
3University of Turin, Department of Management, Corso Unione Sovietica, 218 bis, Torino, Italia 
federica.bassano@unito.it 
ORCID  0000-0001-7835-2821 

Received: 16/05/2025 

Accepted for publication: 18/08/2025 

Published: 27/08/2025 

Abstract
This study examines the academic development and interconnections among Smart Accounting, POP Accounting, and 
Dialogic Accounting from 2010 to 2025. Despite each paradigm embracing digitization, stakeholder engagement, and 
sustainability from different perspectives, the literature remains fragmented across separate research streams. The paper 
argues that a systematic, integrated perspective is required to trace conceptual overlaps and identify research gaps among 
these emerging approaches. To this end, a bibliometric and semantic analysis was conducted on 222 peer-reviewed articles 
with the support of Biblioshiny and Leximancer. The articles were selected using a Boolean search strategy targeting 
digital, participatory, and sustainability-oriented accounting models. The analysis centered on publication trends, co-
citation networks, keyword co-occurrence, thematic clusters, and semantic trajectories. The results illuminate a growing, 
yet theoretically and geographically uneven and fragmented, academic debate. 
Smart Accounting is driven by technological disruption, particularly through Artificial Intelligence (AI), blockchain, and 
cloud computing, which enable real-time automation and transparency. POP Accounting advances inclusive governance 
by integrating financial and ESG indicators through stakeholder-centric models. Dialogic Accounting emphasizes 
deliberative engagement but faces challenges in practical implementation. Although there is increasing conceptual 
overlap, mainly in applications within the public sector, significant gaps in theoretical convergence and geographic 
coverage persist, especially in emerging economies. Moreover, the decline in citation trends over the period suggests a 
thematic specialization and decentralization of scholarly attention. Ultimately, the research highlights the potential of 
hybrid accounting systems that integrate digital technologies, stakeholder engagement, and sustainability to support 
organizations in addressing the challenges of digital and sustainable transitions. 
 

 Keywords: Smart Accounting; POP Accounting; Dialogic Accounting; Digital Transformation in Accounting; 

Stakeholder Engagement; Bibliometric Analysis.

https://orcid.org/0009-0003-0737-8532
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7835-2821


 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/11974 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

40 

 

1. Introduction 

In recent years, accounting has progressively moved beyond the confines of purely economic calculations to incorporate 

technological developments, societal expectations, and ethical considerations (Bellucci et al., 2019; Bessieux-Ollier et 

al., 2023). This shift is particularly evident in the public sector, which has increasingly adopted reporting frameworks 

aimed at enhancing transparency and stakeholder engagement (Fusco & Ricci, 2019). Within this context, scholarly 

research has identified three distinct yet interconnected paradigms: Smart Accounting, POP Accounting, and Dialogic 

Accounting. Each represents a different degree of openness to digital transformation, stakeholder engagement, and 

sustainability-oriented reporting practices (Desplebin et al., 2021; Biancone et al., 2024; Bellucci et al., 2019). These 

paradigms respond to converging challenges, including the automation of information processes driven by Artificial 

Intelligence (AI), blockchain, and big data, alongside the growing societal demand for transparency, participation, and 

accountability. Despite growing academic interest, research in this area remains largely compartmentalized. Most studies 

focus on individual paradigms without exploring their theoretical and applied interconnections (Marrone & Hazelton, 

2019; Bessieux-Ollier et al., 2023). This fragmentation is evident in the difficulty of developing accounting tools that 

support sustainable and circular governance models (Aureli, Foschi & Paletta, 2023), as well as in the limited adoption 

of authentic dialogic practices across organizational contexts (Fusco & Ricci, 2019). Marrone and Hazelton (2019) argue 

that research on digital technologies in accounting often overlooks governance and accountability issues, while Fusco and 

Ricci (2019) highlight the misalignment between participatory goals and the tools used in the public sector. Similarly, 

Bellucci et al. (2019) and Bessieux-Ollier et al. (2023) emphasize the gap between dialogic intentions and their operational 

implementation. Alessi et al. (2024) and Abbas and Shahid (2024) further underline the lack of standardization in 

sustainability disclosure, which undermines the comparability and reliability of published information. 

 

A systemic and integrated approach is therefore required to examine the conceptual and applied convergences and 

tensions among these paradigms. This study adopts a bibliometric and semantic lens to map their evolution from 2010 to 

2025. It addresses the following research questions: 

RQ1. What is the evolution of the scholarly debate on Smart Accounting, POP Accounting, and Dialogic Accounting? 

RQ2. What relationships emerge among these paradigms in terms of keywords, thematic co-occurrences, and conceptual 

trajectories? 

RQ3. What gaps or underrepresented areas can be identified in the current literature, and how can future research be 

guided? 

 

The main objective of this research is to capture and visualize conceptual connections among the three paradigms, 

applying bibliometric (Biblioshiny) and semantic (Leximancer) techniques to a sample of 222 peer-reviewed articles. The 

study offers a threefold contribution. It provides a critical synthesis of existing research, proposes an integrated theoretical 

framework, and outlines future research directions that combine technological innovation, participatory engagement, and 

a focus on sustainability. The structure of the paper is as follows: Section 2 reviews the literature on the three paradigms; 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/11974 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

41 

Section 3 details the methodological design; Section 4 presents the findings of the bibliometric and semantic analyses; 

Section 5 discusses their implications; Section 6 summarizes the contributions; and Section 7 offers reflections and 

recommendations for future research. 

 

2. Literature Review 

In the “New Normal” era, accounting, traditionally seen as a purely analog discipline, is undergoing a profound 

transformation. The integration of Smart Accounting, POP Accounting, and Dialogic Accounting (Bellucci et al., 2019; 

Biancone et al., 2024) is redefining the role of financial information in promoting more digital, sustainable, and inclusive 

disclosure practices. At the core of this shift are three main forces: the incorporation of emerging technologies into audit 

processes, the rise of hybrid models combining financial and non-financial data, and the development of governance 

frameworks that promote stakeholder participation (Aureli, Foschi & Paletta, 2023; Biancone et al., 2024). Smart 

Accounting refers to the deployment of technologies such as artificial intelligence, blockchain, and cloud computing to 

automate repetitive processes, enhance transparency, and enable real-time auditability and disclosure (Awang et al., 2024; 

Desplebin et al., 2021). Blockchain facilitates secure and verifiable triple-entry accounting, while Artificial Intelligence 

(AI) contributes to anomaly detection, predictive analysis, and risk management, particularly when integrated with 

Robotic Process Automation (RPA) (Al Najjar et al., 2024). Nevertheless, the rapid digitization of the field raises critical 

ethical and regulatory challenges, including algorithmic opacity, data privacy, and the urgent need to develop digital skills 

within the profession (Fatzel et al., 2024; Aminu Abdullahi & Abubakar, 2024). Lehner et al. (2022) stress the necessity 

of embedding inclusive governance principles into the design of AI systems, advocating a shift in focus from technical 

performance to ethical accountability. This perspective aligns with calls from scholars to revise professional education 

by integrating AI literacy, data ethics, and cybersecurity into the curriculum (Marrone & Hazelton, 2019).  

POP Accounting bridges conventional economic logic with stakeholder-oriented governance, seeking to generate value 

that transcends shareholder interests (Biancone et al., 2024). Mavlutova et al. (2023) observe that digital innovation within 

the financial sector advances sustainability, particularly through greater accessibility, efficiency, and informational 

clarity. Advanced tools such as sentiment analysis enable dynamic assessments of public perception, while the 

incorporation of ESG indicators and adherence to frameworks like the EU taxonomy reinforce the credibility of 

environmental and social communication (Biancone et al., 2024). However, in the absence of globally harmonized 

sustainability standards and in light of persistent concerns about greenwashing, adoption remains uneven, especially 

across emerging economies with weaker regulatory infrastructures (Alessi et al., 2024; Abbas & Shahid, 2024). Dialogic 

Accounting advances a participatory vision of governance that fosters active engagement among institutions, enterprises, 

and civil society (Bessieux-Ollier et al., 2023). It underscores the democratization of financial communication and the 

integration of human and social capital into organizational decision-making. Yet, structural barriers such as institutional 

inertia, limited stakeholder literacy, and regulatory shortcomings continue to hinder its widespread uptake (Bellucci et 

al., 2019; Fusco & Ricci, 2019). Empirical research by Frías-Aceituno et al. (2013) demonstrates that board 

characteristics, including diversity and engagement, positively influence the dissemination of integrated disclosure 

practices, reinforcing Dialogic Accounting’s relevance to sustainability objectives. Participatory budgeting tools and 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/11974 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

42 

digital platforms have further expanded their applicability in both public and private contexts. Still, traditional accounting 

systems often fail to accommodate circular business models and long-term ecological goals, as highlighted by Aureli, 

Foschi and Paletta (2023). Although these paradigms have typically been examined in isolation, recent literature reveals 

growing conceptual convergence and opportunities for hybridization. Smart Accounting delivers the technological 

infrastructure necessary for automation and data-driven insight. POP Accounting reframes these outputs within 

stakeholder value systems, particularly via ESG-oriented interpretations. Dialogic Accounting introduces a deliberative 

and ethical dimension that supports democratic legitimacy and co-responsibility. Bibliometric studies by Zupic and Čater 

(2015) show how these paradigms are increasingly intersecting across academic discourse. Vo Van et al. (2024) further 

document that the adoption of cloud-based accounting systems by SMEs simultaneously enhances operational efficiency 

and sustainability engagement, illustrating the functional integration of technological and participatory objectives. 

 

3. Methodology 

This study constructed its corpus through a comprehensive search of Scopus, a database whose structured indexing 

ensures that each retrieved record is peer-reviewed and provides the full bibliographic metadata necessary for processing 

with the Bibliometrix package. The search was restricted to journal articles published in English that address Smart 

Accounting, POP Accounting, or Dialogic Accounting in relation to digital transformation, sustainability, or stakeholder 

engagement. Editorials, conference proceedings, and other forms of non-peer-reviewed grey literature were excluded, as 

they do not meet equivalent standards of editorial rigour. Articles lacking a clear and substantive connection to these 

paradigms were also removed. To ensure methodological transparency, explicit inclusion and exclusion criteria were 

defined, and a two-stage screening process was adopted. 

 In the first stage, publications were retrieved from journals indexed in Scopus. In the second, thematic alignment was 

evaluated through abstract screening and, where necessary, full-text analysis. The resulting dataset comprises peer-

reviewed journal articles published between 2010 and 2025 across the fields of Business, Management and Accounting, 

Social Sciences, and Economics. Eligibility criteria prioritized both the academic standing of the journal and the thematic 

relevance of each article to the paradigms under investigation. While peer review provides a foundational level of 

scholarly credibility, the screening process was further refined through qualitative assessments. These included the 

journal’s standing in established ranking systems, the citation profile of each article, and the degree of thematic coherence 

between the publication’s scope and the study’s research objectives. This comprehensive appraisal aimed to ensure that 

the final corpus represents not only credible but also influential scholarship, while remaining open to recent contributions 

from emerging outlets where thematic salience was demonstrable. The temporal scope, spanning 2010 to 2025, was 

chosen to encompass both foundational developments and contemporary advances in the field. The year 2010 marks a 

pivotal juncture, coinciding with the first recorded cryptocurrency transaction (Arias-Oliva et al., 2019), which laid the 

groundwork for subsequent innovations in Smart Accounting. Simultaneously, scholarly interest in sustainability, 

corporate social responsibility, and stakeholder engagement began to inform the evolution of POP and Dialogic 

Accounting (Bellucci et al., 2019). Abstracts were initially reviewed; full texts were analysed when required, and 

duplicate entries such as in-press and final versions were consolidated. The identification of relevant literature was guided 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/11974 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

43 

by a preliminary review of forty-five seminal sources, which supported the development of a comprehensive keyword 

set. An iterative refinement process was employed to construct the final search string, integrating synonyms and 

conceptually adjacent terms to ensure semantic breadth and terminological inclusivity (Bellucci et al., 2019; Bessieux-

Ollier et al., 2023). To reduce the risk of excluding pertinent studies due to lexical variability, the Boolean search string 

was formulated as follows:  

 

("Smart Accounting" OR "Digital Accounting" OR "AI-based Accounting" OR "Blockchain Accounting" OR "Automated 

Accounting" OR "Cloud Accounting" OR "Big Data in Accounting" OR "Digital Finance") AND ("Pop Accounting" OR 

"Public Accounting" OR "Sustainability Reporting" OR "Stakeholder Reporting" OR "Social Reporting") AND ("Dialogic 

Accounting" OR "Corporate Social Responsibility" OR "Participatory Accounting" OR "Social and Environmental 

Accounting" OR "Collaborative Accounting" OR "Stakeholder-Centric Accounting") AND ("relationship" OR 

"integration" OR "link" OR "connection" OR "intersection" OR "interaction" OR "overlap" OR "synergy").  

 

A total of 222 articles satisfied these criteria and were exported to the Biblioshiny interface of the Bibliometrix R package 

for analysis (Aria & Cuccurullo, 2017). This platform enabled a systematic examination of publication dynamics, citation 

structures, and thematic co-occurrence, allowing the study to map how Smart, POP, and Dialogic Accounting have 

intersected and, in some cases, diverged within scholarly discourse (Zupic & Čater, 2015). Several limitations must be 

acknowledged. Dependence on a single database may have led to the omission of relevant studies. The reliance on 

predefined keywords carries the inherent risk of excluding contributions that employ alternative formulations. 

Furthermore, the temporal constraint from 2010 to 2025, while methodologically justified, may exclude earlier works that 

remain theoretically or historically significant (Aureli, Foschi & Paletta, 2023; Alessi et al., 2024). 

 

 

4. Results of the bibliometric analysis 

The following dataset provides information on the correlation between Smart Accounting, POP Accounting, and Dialogic 

Accounting from 2010-2025. Data collected are mainly from articles written in English in the fields of Social Sciences, 

Economics, Econometrics, and Finance. 

 

4.1 Descriptive analysis of the literature 

Table 1 summarizes the key characteristics of the dataset analyzed. The corpus includes 222 articles published in 122 

distinct scientific sources, with a mean article age of 3.46 years. Over the 2010–2025 time frame, the average annual 

growth rate of publications is 11.33%, indicating the growing academic attention to Smart, POP, and Dialogic Accounting 

(Zupic & Čater, 2015). Each article received, on average, 27.47 citations, highlighting the significant scholarly impact of 

the selected works. The dataset also reflects strong engagement with broader academic discourse: a total of 19,764 

references were cited across the corpus, and an average of 2,798 keywords were extracted, underlining the thematic 

diversity and multidisciplinarity of the field (Vo Van et al., 2024). The collaboration index stands at 3.2, and only 19 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/11974 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

44 

articles were written by a single author, confirming the prevalence of co-authorship and the collaborative orientation of 

research in this domain (Aureli, Foschi & Paletta, 2023). Moreover, 29.73% of the articles involved international 

collaboration, reinforcing that this area is gaining traction across national borders (Biancone et al., 2024). As shown in 

Figure 1, the annual scientific production exhibits a clear upward trajectory, with robust growth in recent years. Between 

2013 and 2017, the publication rate remained relatively stable, with only modest fluctuations. However, starting in 2019, 

a sharp increase occurred, rising from eight publications in that year to ninety-nine in 2024. This acceleration suggests a 

growing scholarly interest in hybrid and interdisciplinary accounting paradigms, possibly driven by advances in AI, 

sustainability regulation, and stakeholder-driven governance (Desplebin et al., 2021; Abbas & Shahid, 2024). The 

quantitative evidence demonstrates the dynamism of this emerging field and its growing integration within the global 

academic community. The high collaboration index and international co-authorship rates further signal a maturing 

research landscape increasingly focused on cross-border and cross-disciplinary dialogue. 

 
Table 1. Main Information about data 
 

 
Source: Authors’ elaboration using the Bibliometrix R-package. This table summarizes the analyzed dataset, including 
the number of articles, sources, average citations, keywords used, and collaboration indicators. It highlights the strong 
international and interdisciplinary nature of the research field. 
 
 
 
 

Timespan 2010:2025
Sources (Journals, Books, etc) 122
Documents 222
Annual Growth Rate % 11.33
Document Average Age 3.46
Average citations per doc 27.47
References 19764
DOCUMENT CONTENTS
Keywords Plus (ID) 394
Author's Keywords (DE) 801
AUTHORS
Authors 644
Authors of single-authored docs 18
AUTHORS COLLABORATION
Single-authored docs 19
Co-Authors per Doc 3.2
International co-authorships % 29.73
DOCUMENT TYPES
article 222

MAIN INFORMATION ABOUT DATA



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/11974 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

45 

 
 
Figure 1. Annual scientific production 
 

 
Source: Authors’ elaboration using Bibliometrix. This figure shows the annual number of publications on Smart, POP, and Dialogic 
Accounting from 2010 to 2025. A significant increase in output is observed after 2019, indicating a growing interest in hybrid and 
sustainability-focused accounting models. 
 

4.2 Authors’ citation analysis 

The trend in the average number of citations per year for the 222 articles reached its peak in 2010, with an average of 

21.16 citations per article. From 2011 onward, a gradual yet steady decline has been observed, despite occasional 

fluctuations. The most significant drop occurs between 2024 and 2025, when the average fell to 1.41 citations per article. 

As shown in Figure 2, this pattern suggests an increase in publications over time accompanied by a deceleration in citation 

accumulation. This trend is indicative of a shift in academic focus toward new theoretical frameworks or a diversification 

of research themes that contributes to the decentralization of scholarly debate. It is also plausible that the expansion of 

open-access publishing and the rise of preprint platforms have altered traditional citation patterns. Aminu Abdullahi and 

Abubakar (2024) argue that while these platforms improve access and dissemination, they may also affect the timing and 

frequency of citations, especially for more recent publications. In sum, the data point to a research domain that is rapidly 

expanding but increasingly fragmented, both in terms of theoretical alignment and citation dynamics. 

 

 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/11974 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

46 

 

 

Figure 2. Average citations per Year 

 

 
Source: Authors’ elaboration using the Bibliometrix R-package. This chart illustrates the average number of citations 
per article per year. The trend peaks in 2010, then gradually declines, suggesting a fragmentation of scholarly attention 
and possible shifts in academic focus or citation practices. 
 

Table 2 illustrates that the ten most cited papers were published between 2010 and 2018. The most cited article (390 

citations) is by De Villiers (2014) in Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. The second most cited work is by 

Frías-Aceituno et al. (2013) in Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, which addresses 

corporate social responsibility and environmental management. This is followed by Prado-Lorenzo and García-Sánchez 

(2010), which discusses the ethical implications of business practices with an emphasis on sustainability. Other 

contributions include Fifka (2013) in Business Strategy and the Environment, which explores business strategies in 

relation to environmental issues, and Wang et al. (2018) in Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental 

Management, which examines corporate responsibility in evolving global markets. Gallego-Álvarez et al. (2015), in the 

Journal of Cleaner Production, provide insights into cleaner production practices, while Morhardt (2010), also in 

Business Strategy and the Environment, focuses on sustainable business strategies. In parallel, García-Sánchez et al. 

(2013) argue in the Journal of Cleaner Production for the role of environmental practices in improving corporate 

sustainability. Andrikopoulos and Kriklani (2013), in Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/11974 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

47 

analyze sustainability from a corporate governance perspective, while Pellegrino and Lodhia (2012), in the Journal of 

Cleaner Production, study innovative approaches to environmental management. 

The most frequently cited publications are the result of international collaborations. Such collaborations enhance the 

quality and robustness of research, introduce diverse perspectives, and foster more effective solutions to the challenges 

of accounting, sustainability, and corporate governance. Moreover, these partnerships increase the likelihood of adopting 

widely accepted international accounting and sustainability standards. 

 

Table 2. Most globally cited documents 
 

 
Source: Authors’ elaboration using the Bibliometrix R-package. This table lists the ten most cited papers in the dataset, 
showing citation counts, authors, and journal names. It demonstrates that the most influential contributions were 
published between 2010 and 2018, mainly through international collaboration. 
 
 
Figure 3 and Table 3 illustrate the geographical cooperation among the authors of the analyzed papers, highlighting the 

strongest international links in this field. The most substantial collaboration is between China and Australia, with three 

joint publications. Other notable partnerships involve China and Malaysia (2), as well as Egypt and Lebanon (2). 

Additional collaborations include Italy and the United Kingdom, Spain and Brazil, and Italy and Spain, each with two co-

authored papers. These joint efforts facilitate the exchange of knowledge to address shared challenges such as 

sustainability, corporate accountability, and the integration of technology into accounting processes. The collaborations 

between China, Australia, the UK, and Italy can be attributed to their leading role in deploying advanced technologies to 

enhance transparency and efficiency in accounting. By contrast, regions such as the Middle East and Latin America are 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/11974 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

48 

increasingly experimenting with participatory, public-oriented approaches that align with dialogic accounting, which 

emphasizes stakeholder engagement and inclusivity in financial reporting (Bellucci et al., 2019).  

The exchange of expertise between countries with advanced financial infrastructures and those adopting sustainability 

reporting models fosters the development of best practices to address contemporary accounting challenges. Moreover, by 

generating empirical evidence on the applicability of accounting standards across diverse economic contexts, cross-

national collaboration supports the policy-making process (Abbas & Shahid, 2024). Finally, international partnerships 

also play a crucial role in harmonizing ESG reporting standards, thereby promoting greater clarity and transparency in 

sustainability accounting (Alessi et al., 2024). 

 

Figure 3. Collaboration world map 

 

 

Source: Authors’ elaboration using the Bibliometrix R-package. This world map highlights international research 
collaborations. Strong connections are visible between countries like China and Australia, the UK and Italy, and Spain 
and Brazil, underscoring the global scope and cooperative nature of the field. 
 

 

 

 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/11974 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

49 

 

 
Table 3. Most important collaborations among international researchers 
  

 
Source: Authors’ elaboration using the Bibliometrix R-package. This table illustrates cross-country research 
partnerships, identifying the most active collaborations. It emphasizes the global nature of the debate, with notable 
cooperation between China, Australia, the UK, Italy, and Spain. 
 
 
4.3 Source Analysis 

This section provides a summary of the main sources and areas of interest of the international journals contributing to this 

topic. As shown in Table 4, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management is the leading journal with 

13 published articles, demonstrating its central role in the field. Sustainability (Switzerland) contains 12 contributions on 

sustainability, while Business Strategy and the Environment contains 9. Further journals of strong interest include the 

Journal of Cleaner Production (7 articles) and Meditari Accountancy Research and Research in International Business 

and Finance (6 articles each). Journals such as Administrative Sciences, Australian Accounting Review, and Cogent 

Business and Management have each published four papers addressing sustainability and corporate governance. This 

indicates a growing interest in the intersection of business strategy, sustainability, and corporate responsibility. Two main 

publication trends can be observed in Figure 4. Sustainability, corporate social responsibility, and Environmental 

management have seen a sharp increase in publications, from no articles in 2010 to 15 in 2024 and 2025. By contrast, 

journals such as Business Strategy and the Environment, Journal of Cleaner Production, and Meditari Accountancy 

Research exhibit a slower trajectory, with only modest growth in article numbers over the years. In conclusion, interest 

in sustainability and corporate responsibility is rising. 

 

 

 

From To Frequency 
CHINA AUSTRALIA 3 
CHINA UNITED KINGDOM 3 

MALAYSIA 
UNITED ARAB 
EMIRATES 3 

CHINA MALAYSIA 2 
EGYPT LEBANON 2 
ITALY POLAND 2 
ITALY UNITED KINGDOM 2 
JORDAN MALAYSIA 2 
MALAYSIA INDONESIA 2 
SPAIN BRAZIL 2 
SPAIN ITALY 2 
SPAIN SLOVAKIA 2 
SPAIN UNITED KINGDOM 2 
UNITED KINGDOM EGYPT 2 

 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/11974 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

50 

 

 
Table 4. Most relevant sources 
 

 
Source: Authors’ elaboration using the Bibliometrix R-package. This table shows the academic journals with the highest 
number of articles on Smart, POP, and Dialogic Accounting. It underlines the leading role of journals focused on 
sustainability, CSR, and environmental management. 
 
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/11974 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

51 

 

Figure 4. Source dynamics 

 

 
Source: Authors’ elaboration using the Bibliometrix R-package. This graph displays the evolution of article frequency by 
journal over time. Journals such as ‘Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management’ and 
‘Sustainability’ show strong growth, reflecting increasing attention to sustainability and CSR in accounting.   
 
 
4.4 Keyword Analysis 
 
In the following section, the study examines the most salient keywords and their co-occurrence across titles, abstracts, 

and author-provided keywords in the field. Figure 5 shows that the term “sustainability” has experienced the strongest 

growth. Although other terms were included in the search, this remains one of the most prominent, reflecting its increasing 

association with “corporate social responsibility,” “innovation,” and “strategy.” In particular, the keyword “sustainable 

development” has continued to grow steadily, especially since 2017. Keywords such as “stakeholders,” “decision 

making,” and “governance approach” have likewise increased in prominence, demonstrating the connections between 

sustainability and governance, finance, and environmental economics. Figure 6 illustrates the evolution of research topics 

according to their degree of development (extent of discussion) and centrality (relevance). The thematic map highlights 

a cluster of motor themes, including “sustainability,” “corporate strategy,” “industrial performance,” and “environmental 

protection,” indicating both maturity and centrality within the field. The “green economy” emerges as a basic theme,  



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/11974 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

52 

relevant but still undergoing deeper theoretical elaboration. “Corporate social responsibility,” “social impact,” and 

“artificial intelligence” reflect growing scholarly attention and considerable potential for future advancement. Notably, 

“sustainable development” and “innovation” occupy a transitional position, underscoring their dynamic and evolving role 

within the research landscape. 

 

Figure 5. Word Frequency over Time 

 

 
Source: Authors’ elaboration using the Bibliometrix R-package. This figure tracks the rising prominence of keywords 
across the dataset. Terms like “sustainability,” “stakeholders,” and “governance” have shown steady growth, signaling 
evolving research priorities and interdisciplinary integration. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/11974 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

53 

Figure 6. Thematic map 

 

 
 
Source: Authors’ elaboration using the Bibliometrix R-package. The thematic map plots clusters of topics based on their 
development (x-axis) and centrality (y-axis). Areas such as corporate strategy, AI, and sustainable development appear 
as emerging yet influential themes in accounting research. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/11974 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

54 

Figure 7. Topic dendrogram 

 
Source: Authors’ elaboration using the Bibliometrix R-package. This dendrogram groups research themes into five major 
clusters. Each cluster reflects a thematic area, ranging from sustainability and corporate governance to environmental 
impact and digital innovation. 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/11974 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

55 

Figure 7 groups keywords related to sustainability and corporate responsibility into five clusters. Cluster 1 concentrates 

on core sustainability issues, namely corporate social responsibility, corporate finance, and corporate governance. 

Cluster 2 gathers business-oriented concepts, including corporate strategy, the green economy, and industrial 

performance. Cluster 3 maps sector-specific themes, for instance, environmental protection and communication. Cluster 4 

highlights emerging topics, ranging from decentralized finance to digital technologies. Finally, Cluster 5 concentrates on 

environmental impact. 

 
4.5 Semantic Results and Thematic Interconnections with Leximancer  
 
The semantic analysis performed with Leximancer yields a map highlighting the three accounting paradigms that underpin 

the academic debate: Smart Accounting, POP Accounting, and Dialogic Accounting. The concepts of “technology,” 

“internet,” and “reporting” are strongly associated with Smart Accounting, which recognizes the use of digital tools to 

streamline transparent, automated, and verifiable real-time reporting and auditing processes (Awang et al., 2024; 

Desplebin et al., 2021), thereby supporting more robust systems. At the same time, Fatzel et al. (2024) emphasize 

persistent challenges related to standards, ethics, and gaps in digital competencies. In contrast, “performance,” 

“corporate,” “environmental,” and “disclosure” are linked to POP Accounting, which seeks to promote comprehensive 

reporting, measure environmental and social impact, and ensure accessible communication with citizens and stakeholders 

(Biancone et al., 2024). Here, the notion of performance extends beyond economic efficiency to include social, 

environmental, and participatory dimensions, consistent with stakeholder capitalism. The integration of digital 

instruments, such as sentiment analysis, enables participatory financial statements to evolve in more collaborative and 

interactive ways (Biancone et al., 2024; Abbas & Shahid, 2024). The domain of Dialogic Accounting emerges in the 

semantic cluster through concepts such as “social,” “management,” and “disclosure,” portraying accounting as a 

deliberative arena for diverse stakeholders. Bellucci et al. (2019) note that the effectiveness of Dialogic Accounting 

depends on the intensity and quality of stakeholder engagement, yet empirical findings suggest that such engagement is 

often declared rather than implemented. Bessieux-Ollier et al. (2023) underscore the shift from “accounting for people” 

to “accounting with people,” advocating an emancipatory form of accounting grounded in dialogical rather than purely 

representative logic. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/11974 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

56 

Figure 8. Thematic Clusters of Smart, Pop and Dialogic Accounting: A Conceptual Analysis with Leximancer 

 

 
 

Source: Authors’ elaboration using Leximancer. This figure visualizes the conceptual structure of the research field using 
multidimensional scaling (MDS). It highlights thematic groupings based on the co-occurrence of keywords, showing how 
core concepts like sustainability, stakeholder engagement, and digital technologies are positioned relative to each other 
in the academic debate. 
 
 
5. Discussion 
 
The bibliometric analysis of Smart Accounting, POP Accounting, and Dialogic Accounting provides a comprehensive 

view of the current scholarly landscape and the evolving nature of these interconnected paradigms. The findings reveal a 

growing interest in these models and a clear semantic and conceptual convergence among them. Keyword clustering 

shows that terms such as “sustainability,” “stakeholder engagement,” “AI,” and “transparency” frequently co-occur, 

indicating that once distinct paradigms are increasingly overlapping.  



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/11974 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

57 

This corroborates Biancone et al. (2024),who emphasize the integration of social, technological, and participatory 

elements in both theory and practice. Bibliometric evidence reinforces this interpretation, showing that the semantic 

evolution of key concepts reflects the progressive hybridization of paradigms. For example, terms historically linked to 

CSR and stakeholder dialogue now appear within clusters focused on AI, blockchain, and automation, suggesting that 

Smart, POP, and Dialogic Accounting are becoming interwoven. Co-citation analysis supports this trend, with 

foundational works on sustainability reporting and stakeholder theory cited alongside emerging literature on algorithmic 

auditing, digital finance, and automated control systems. This interdisciplinary pattern aligns with Bessieux-Ollier et al. 

(2023), who call for a dialogic, inclusive, and context-sensitive approach to accounting innovation. Nonetheless, several 

critical issues emerge. The selection of sources, based primarily on Scopus and Google Scholar, while ensuring broad 

coverage, may exclude significant studies not indexed in these databases. Aureli, Foschi and Paletta (2023) warn of the 

risks of overlooking niche but theoretically rich contributions, particularly in circular and participatory accounting 

domains. Another concern relates to the geographical distribution of contributions. Mapping international collaborations 

shows an intense concentration in high-income countries, particularly China, Australia, Italy, and the UK, while regions 

such as sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia remain markedly underrepresented. This supports Biancone et al. (2024), who 

observe that research on participatory accounting in emerging economies is still limited. Greater attention to these regions 

could foster the emergence of context-sensitive models more attuned to local socio-economic realities. Despite the steady 

increase in publication volume, the declining average number of citations per article since 2010 suggests fragmentation 

within the academic discourse. This may reflect the proliferation of open-access and preprint platforms, which reshape 

citation practices and accelerate the diffusion of highly specialized contributions (Aminu Abdullahi & Abubakar, 2024). 

While this dynamic indicates growth, it also risks theoretical disconnection and reduced cumulative knowledge. 

Therefore, although bibliometrics offers robust insights into structural trends, the field would benefit from greater 

methodological pluralism. As Bessieux-Ollier et al. (2023) argue, integrating interpretive and qualitative methods can 

capture the nuanced theoretical tensions that purely quantitative approaches may overlook. In particular, incorporating 

voices from underrepresented contexts would enhance the field’s inclusivity, maturity, and practical relevance. Without 

such integration, there is a tangible risk of overlooking emerging practice-based innovations that are essential for 

redefining accounting in response to digital transformation, sustainability challenges, and demands for stakeholder 

participation. 

 

6. Conclusion 
 
This paper presents a bibliometric analysis aimed at tracing the evolution, convergence, and research gaps in the academic 

debate on Smart Accounting, POP Accounting, and Dialogic Accounting from 2010 to 2025. The study examined the 

progression of these paradigms, highlighting their conceptual intersections and revealing critical areas that remain 

underexplored, particularly with respect to normative, ethical, and geographical inclusivity. In response to RQ1, the 

findings confirm a consistent and significant increase in academic output, especially from 2019 onward, reflecting a 

broader scholarly orientation toward digital innovation and sustainability. 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/11974 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

58 

Smart Accounting has gained momentum through the integration of technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI), 

blockchain, and automation in financial processes (Desplebin et al., 2021; Awang et al., 2024). POP Accounting has 

evolved in parallel with stakeholder capitalism, advancing inclusive and accessible reporting mechanisms (Biancone et 

al., 2024). Dialogic Accounting, grounded in participatory governance, continues to stress the ethical and democratic 

dimensions of financial communication (Bellucci et al., 2019; Bessieux-Ollier et al., 2023). With regard to RQ2, keyword 

co-occurrence and thematic clustering demonstrate an increasing conceptual convergence. Smart Accounting prioritizes 

transparency and operational efficiency; POP Accounting is oriented toward social value and stakeholder responsiveness; 

Dialogic Accounting introduces a deliberative logic that supports accountability and inclusive engagement. Advanced 

tools such as sentiment analysis (Biancone et al., 2024) and life cycle assessment (Aureli, Foschi & Paletta, 2023) 

illustrate how technological and participatory approaches are being jointly applied in public sector financial reporting. In 

addressing RQ3, the analysis identifies significant gaps in the literature. Although international collaborations are well 

developed among countries such as China, Australia, Italy, and the United Kingdom, contributions from regions such as 

sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia, and Latin America remain underrepresented. This geographical imbalance limits the 

inclusion of culturally embedded and institutionally diverse perspectives on accounting innovation. Research from these 

regions is closely linked to development objectives, legitimacy, and public accountability. Such contexts have the 

potential to generate context-sensitive and participatory models (Fusco & Ricci, 2019; Abbas & Shahid, 2024). Moreover, 

the ethical and regulatory implications of accounting innovation remain insufficiently addressed in the literature, despite 

their growing importance in digital and sustainability-oriented transformations. 

 

6.1 Theoretical and Practical Contributions 

Theoretically, this study supports the emergence of a hybrid paradigm that integrates the core principles of Smart, POP, 

and Dialogic Accounting. This convergence is not only technical but also ethical and institutional, reflecting a broader 

transformation of accounting from a neutral reporting instrument into a vehicle for social legitimacy and stakeholder 

empowerment. By combining automation with participatory logic and sustainability objectives, hybrid models provide a 

framework for resilient, transparent, and democratically accountable financial practices across both public and private 

sectors (Vo Van et al., 2024; Biancone et al., 2024). 

 

6.2 Limitations 

Despite its contributions, the study presents some methodological limitations. The 2010–2025 period was chosen to 

capture recent developments, but it may have omitted significant contributions published prior to 2010, particularly in 

social accounting and participatory reporting. This exclusion may constrain understanding of the historical roots of the 

phenomenon. For instance, Brown and Jones (2015) demonstrate that the theoretical foundations of dialogic accounting 

had already been developed in the early 2000s. Another limitation concerns the declining average number of citations per 

article over time.  

 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/11974 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

59 

This phenomenon may be associated with the fragmentation of academic debate and the expansion of open-access and 

preprint platforms, which have altered traditional citation dynamics (Aminu Abdullahi & Abubakar, 2024). 

 

7. Future Research Directions 

Multiple future research directions emerge from this study. First, scholars should complement bibliometric mapping with 

qualitative methodologies such as case studies, interviews, and ethnography to gain deeper insight into how Smart, POP, 

and Dialogic Accounting models are implemented in specific socio-political and organizational contexts (Bessieux-Ollier 

et al., 2023). Second, greater emphasis should be placed on geographical inclusivity. Research from emerging economies, 

particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia, and Latin America, remains underrepresented. Comparative studies across 

institutional settings could illuminate how diverse cultural, regulatory, and developmental conditions shape the evolution 

of hybrid accounting models (Alessi et al., 2024; Abbas & Shahid, 2024). Third, future investigations should examine 

how emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, blockchain, cloud computing, and machine learning can 

enhance stakeholder engagement, ESG reporting, and real-time accountability. These technologies create opportunities 

for designing integrated systems in which automation and participation operate in synergy. However, this integration 

must be informed by ethical frameworks that address privacy, algorithmic bias, accessibility, and the digital divide. 

Finally, future research should explicitly engage with the normative dimensions of accounting innovation. As accounting 

becomes increasingly data-driven and digitally mediated, it is essential to ask who benefits from such systems, whose 

voices are included, and what values they promote. A truly transformative accounting paradigm must integrate 

methodological plurality, technological innovation, and ethical reflection within a global and context-sensitive 

perspective. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/11974 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

60 

References 

Abbas, N., & Shahid, M. S. (2024). Mapping the impact of green finance on corporate sustainability: A bibliometric 

analysis. Audit and Accounting Review, 4(1), 101–130. https://doi.org/10.32350/aar.41.05 

Alessi, L., Cojoianu, T., Hoepner, A. G., & Michelon, G. (2024). Accounting for the EU green taxonomy: Exploring its 

concept, data, and analytics. Accounting Forum, 48(3), 365–373. https://doi.org/10.1080/01559982.2024.2369343 

Al Najjar, M., Mahboub, R., Nakhal, B., & Gaber Ghanem, M. (2024). Exploring the role of AI in improving VAT 

reporting quality: Experimental study in emerging markets. Journal of Risk & Financial Management, 

17(11), Article 477. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm17110477 

Aminu Abdullahi, A. A., & Abubakar, A. (2024). Bibliometric analysis of accounting literature on artificial intelligence 

adoption in organizational functions. FUDMA Journal of Accounting and Finance Research, 2(3), 153–171. 

https://doi.org/10.33003/fujafr-2024.v2i3.126.153-171 

Andrikopoulos, A., & Kriklani, N. (2013). Environmental disclosure and financial characteristics of the firm: The case of 

Denmark. Corporate Social Responsibility & Environmental Management, 20(1), 55–64. 

https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1281 

Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of 

Informetrics, 11(4), 959–975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007 

Arias-Oliva, M., Pelegrín-Borondo, J., & Matías-Clavero, G. (2019). Variables influencing cryptocurrency use: A 

technology acceptance model in Spain. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, Article 475. 

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00475 

Aureli, S., Foschi, E., & Paletta, A. (2023). Management accounting for a circular economy: Current limits and avenues 

for a dialogic approach. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. Advance online publication. 

https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-04-2022-5766 

Awang, Y., Nasir, N. E. M., Taib, A., Shuhidan, S. M., & Ifada, L. M. (2024). Digitalization of the accounting profession: 

A decade of bibliometric analysis. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 11(5), 103–120. 

https://doi.org/10.14738/assrj.115.16814 

Bellucci, M., Simoni, L., Acuti, D., & Manetti, G. (2019). Stakeholder engagement and dialogic accounting: Empirical 

evidence in sustainability reporting. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 32(5), 1467–1499. 

https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-09-2017-3158 

Bessieux-Ollier, C., Nègre, E., & Verdier, M.-A. (2023). Moving from accounting for people to accounting with people: 

A critical analysis of the literature and avenues for research. European Accounting Review, 32(5), 1247–1271. 

https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180.2022.2052922 

Biancone, P., Brescia, V., Chmet, F., & Lanzalonga, F. (2024). The evolution of integrated popular financial reporting: 

Toward a digital-driven collaborative approach using a sentiment-analysis tool. EuroMed Journal of Business. 

Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1108/EMJB-11-2023-0298 

https://doi.org/10.32350/aar.41.05
https://doi.org/10.1080/01559982.2024.2369343
https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm17110477
https://doi.org/10.33003/fujafr-2024.v2i3.126.153-171
https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1281
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00475
https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-04-2022-5766
https://doi.org/10.14738/assrj.115.16814
https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-09-2017-3158
https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180.2022.2052922
https://doi.org/10.1108/EMJB-11-2023-0298


 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/11974 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

61 

Biancone, P. P., Secinaro, S., Brescia, V., & Calandra, D. (2024). Which direction for stakeholder capitalism? Approaches 

and reporting towards POP accounting. Sustainable Development, 32(6), 6579–6594. 

https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.3052 

Brown, R., & Jones, M. (2015). Mapping and exploring the topography of contemporary financial accounting research. 

The British Accounting Review, 47(3), 237–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2014.08.006 

De Villiers, C., Rinaldi, L., & Unerman, J. (2014). Integrated reporting: Insights, gaps and an agenda for future research. 

Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 27(7), 1042–1067. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-06-2014-1736 

Desplebin, O., Lux, G., & Petit, N. (2021). To be or not to be: Blockchain and the future of accounting and auditing. 

Accounting Perspectives, 20(4), 743–769. https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3838.12265 

Fatzel, F. H. M., Abdullah, W. R. W., & Zamri, N. (2024). The impact of digital technologies on accounting research: A 

bibliometric analysis. In Proceedings of the Conference on Accounting and Business (ICAB 2024) (p. 459). 

[Conference paper]. 

Fifka, M. S. (2013). Corporate responsibility reporting and its determinants in comparative perspective: A review of the 

empirical literature and a meta-analysis. Business Strategy & the Environment, 22(1), 1–35. 

https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.729 

Frías-Aceituno, J. V., Rodriguez-Ariza, L., & García-Sanchez, I. M. (2013). The role of the board in the dissemination of 

integrated corporate social reporting. Corporate Social Responsibility & Environmental Management, 20(4), 219–

233. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1294 

Fusco, F., & Ricci, P. (2019). What is the stock of the situation? A bibliometric analysis on social and environmental 

accounting research in the public sector. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 32(1), 21–41. 

https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-05-2017-0134 

Gallego-Álvarez, I., Segura, L., & Martínez-Ferrero, J. (2015). Carbon emission reduction: The impact on the financial 

and operational performance of international companies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 103, 149–159. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.08.047 

García-Sánchez, I.-M., Frías-Aceituno, J.-V., & Rodríguez-Domínguez, L. (2013). Determinants of corporate social 

disclosure in Spanish local governments. Journal of Cleaner Production, 39, 60–72. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.08.037 

Lehner, O. M., Ittonen, K., Silvola, H., Ström, E., & Wührleitner, A. (2022). Artificial intelligence-based decision-making 

in accounting and auditing: Ethical challenges and normative thinking. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability 

Journal, 35(9), 109–135. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-09-2020-4934 

Marrone, M., & Hazelton, J. (2019). The disruptive and transformative potential of new technologies for accounting, 

accountants and accountability: A review of current literature and call for further research. Meditari Accountancy 

Research, 27(5), 677–694. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-06-2019-0508 

Mavlutova, I., Spilbergs, A., Verdenhofs, A., Natrins, A., Arefjevs, I., & Volkova, T. (2023). Digital transformation as a 

driver of the financial sector’s sustainable development: An impact on financial inclusion and operational 

efficiency. Sustainability, 15(1), Article 207. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010207 

https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.3052
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2014.08.006
https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-06-2014-1736
https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3838.12265
https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.729
https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1294
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-05-2017-0134
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.08.047
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.08.037
https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-09-2020-4934
https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-06-2019-0508
https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010207


 
 

 
European Journal of Social Impact and Circular Economy - ISSN: 2704-9906  
DOI: 10.13135/2704-9906/11974 Published by University of Turin http://www.ojs.unito.it/index.php/ejsice/index 
EJSICE content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License   

62 

Morhardt, J. E. (2010). Corporate social responsibility and sustainability reporting on the Internet. Business Strategy & 

the Environment, 19(7), 436–452. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.657 

Pellegrino, C., & Lodhia, S. (2012). Climate-change accounting and the Australian mining industry: Exploring the links 

between corporate disclosure and the generation of legitimacy. Journal of Cleaner Production, 36, 68–82. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.02.022 

Prado-Lorenzo, J.-M., & Garcia-Sanchez, I.-M. (2010). The role of the board of directors in disseminating relevant 

information on greenhouse gases. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(3), 391–424. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-

010-0515-0 

Vo Van, H., Abu Afifa, M., & Saleh, I. (2024). Accounting information systems and organizational performance in the 

cloud-computing era: Evidence from SMEs. Sustainability Accounting, Management & Policy Journal. Advance 

online publication. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-01-2024-0044 

Wang, Z., Hsieh, T.-S., & Sarkis, J. (2018). CSR performance and the readability of CSR reports: Too good to be true? 

Corporate Social Responsibility & Environmental Management, 25(1), 66–79. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1440 

Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 

18(3), 429–472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629 

 

 

 

 
 
 
 

 

 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 

https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.657
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.02.022
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0515-0
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0515-0
https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-01-2024-0044
https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1440
https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629

