




































INDIAN JOURNAL OF FINANCE AND BANKING 13(1) (2023), 1-11 

1 

 

                       FINANCE AND BANKING 

                                                                  IJFB VOL 13 NO 1 (2023) P-ISSN 2574-6081  E-ISSN 2574-609X 
                                                  

        Available online at https://www.cribfb.com 

                                                                                                                                           Journal homepage: https://www.cribfb.com/journal/index.php/ijfb 
                                                                                                                                                                                                   Published by CRIBFB, USA 

AN EMPIRICAL STUDY OF INTEGRATED REPORTING   

PRACTICES AS VOLUNTARY DISCLOSURES IN INDIAN 

ENERGY COMPANIES         
   

 Shivam Agnihotri (a)1   Pramod Kumar (b)     Kapil Harit (c)     Devdutta Bharti (d)   

 

(a) Assistant Professor & Research Scholar, Department of Commerce, Shaheed Bhagat Singh College, University of Delhi, Delhi, Dayalbagh Educational 

Institute, (Deemed University), Agra, India; E-mail: cashivamagnihotri@gmail.com 
(b) Professor & Head, Department of Accountancy and Law, Faculty of Commerce, Dayalbagh Educational Institute, (Deemed University), Agra, India; 
E-mail: pra19363@gmail.com 
(c) Assistant Professor, Department of Commerce, Shaheed Bhagat Singh College, University of Delhi, Delhi, India; E-mail: kapilharit2005@gmail.com 
(d) Assistant Professor, Department of Commerce, Ramanujan College, University of Delhi, Delhi, India; E-mail: devdutta26@gmail.com 
 

 
A R T I C L E I N F O 
 

 

Article History: 
 

Received: 18th October 2022 

Revised: 20th December 2022 

Accepted: 30th December 2022 
Published: 18th January 2023 

 
Keywords: 

 
Integrated Reporting, Voluntary Disclosures, 

Sustainability Reporting, Non-Financial Reporting, 

Corporate Reporting 

 
JEL Classification Codes: 

 

M41, M48, G38 

 

 

 

 
 
 

  

 
A B S T R A C T 

 
Integrated Reporting (IR) provides various stakeholders with a wide range of highly informative and 

analytical value. The literature on IR reflects a positive view towards adopting IR practices, and the 

Security Exchange Board of India (SEBI) suggested that the top 500 listed entities followed IR practices 

voluntarily in Feb 2017. Therefore this study examined the trend and disclosure of IR followed by select 

Indian energy companies in a comparative manner sector-wise and operational area-wise from 

Financial Year (FY) 2017-18 to 2021-22. The top four electricity and petroleum companies listed on the 

Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) based on market capitalization have been selected to examine IR 

practices. A checklist of 21 contents based on the IR framework is constructed to check the level of IR 
practices in select energy companies. Late adoption, lack of proper understanding of the IR framework, 

and common and different reporting trends were found in six select energy companies. These companies 

should have reported core values such as connectivity of information, conciseness and, reliability & 

completeness. IR practices of one company fully complied with the IR framework, and the IR practices 

of another company reflect a need for more connectivity of information only. Petroleum companies 

disclosed more readable IR practices in one place in the Integrated Annual Report (IAR) compared to 

electricity companies. Managerial and policy implications suggested at the end of this study should be 
adopted and enacted by organizations and regulatory authorities, respectively, for the soundness of IR 

practices from an Indian perspective.  

 
 

© 2023 by the authors. Licensee CRIBFB, USA. This article is an open-access article distributed 

under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license 
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).                           

 

INTRODUCTION 

Financial information is limited to quantitative and qualitative financial data, which is non-financial and provides detailed 

information about the organization's outlook. IR offers various stakeholders a wide range of highly informative and 

analytical value regarding how an organization creates value in the short, medium, and long run (Zenkina, 2018). 

International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) suggested an IR framework in December 2013 with detailed guidelines 

regarding how to prepare IR, its fundamental concepts, and what contents should be included in the IR disclosures of an 

organization. After the introduction of guidelines on IR, a growing number of companies started to follow some contents of 

IR in Indian and global scenarios (Morros, 2016; Romolini et al., 2017; Lohar & Soral, 2017; Pathiraja & Priyadarshanie, 

2019). The most adoption of IR is found in the European region's financial sector companies (Demirel & Erol, 2016). IR 

practices have been followed as a mark of compulsion in South Africa. The IR took the attention of academicians and 

corporates, and the rest of the world, except South Africa, adopted IR practices voluntarily in innovative ways (Hossain et 

al., 2016). Formal adoption of IR practices was only possible due to a lack of regulatory framework and guidelines 

(Serafeim, 2016). Various literature on IR reflects positive views towards adopting IR practices as its adoption influences 

                                                      
1Corresponding Author: ORCID ID: 0000-0003-4223-9960 
© 2023 by the authors. Hosting by CRIBFB. Peer review under responsibility of CRIBFB, USA.  

https://doi.org/10.46281/ijfb.v13i1.1899 

 
To cite this article: Agnihotri, S., Kumar, P., Harit, K., & Bharti, D. (2023). AN EMPIRICAL STUDY OF INTEGRATED REPORTING PRACTICES 

AS VOLUNTARY DISCLOSURES IN INDIAN ENERGY COMPANIES. Indian Journal of Finance and Banking, 13(1), 1-11. 

https://doi.org/10.46281/ijfb.v13i1.1899 

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4223-9960
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
https://doi.org/10.46281/ijfb.v13i1.1899
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0221-8500
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5853-1195
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7280-1961


Agnihotri et al., Indian Journal of Finance and Banking 13(1) (2023), 1-11 

 

2 

stakeholders' satisfaction level, the value of a firm, market performance, return on equity, leverage level, etc. (Nathuramka, 

2016; Velte, 2021; Buallay & Hawaj, 2020). SEBI, through its circular dated Feb 6, 2017, stated that in a recent scenario, 

an investor needs financial and non-financial information to contemplate his investment decision-making. Therefore, IR 

may be followed voluntarily by the top 500 Indian listed companies from FY 2017-18 (SEBI, 2017). Various stakeholders 

faced problems with conciseness and summarising the relevant information prior to the IR concept due to the presentation 

of non-financial information in an unorganized way, as every Annual Report (AR) of an organization has much information 

comprising 300 to 500 pages (Basu & Wats, 2015). It is pertinent to mention that SEBI followed the IR framework suggested 

by IIRC and did not provide any particular guidelines in the Indian scenario (SEBI, 2017). It is a matter of investigation 

whether the top 500 Indian listed companies followed IR practices or not, as SEBI stated to follow IR practices voluntarily. 

Companies operating in developing countries need to be faster to adopt IR practices due to a lack of resources, 

culture and leadership, demand of stakeholders, awareness, no regulatory requirement, and different nature and size of 

business (Bananuka et al., 2019). Only a few studies have been conducted to examine non-financial reporting and IR 

practices in the Indian scenario, and these few studies and data extracted as a primary source on IR from various Indian 

stakeholders indicated positive views towards IR practices (Chakrabarty, 2011) because they think that IR practices may be 

capable to bridging the reporting gap. SEBI has provided an opportunity to follow IR practices voluntarily listed entities 

(Bhutani & Tyagi, 2017). The IR disclosure practices level in Indian listed companies increased over a while without any 

formal requirement (Kumawat et al., 2020). However, most companies still need to provide information related to business 

models and strategies as per the IR framework (Ghosh, 2019). Kiran and Karunasri (2017) suggested improving the reporting 

on crucial issues of IR disclosures, such as materiality, capital, and outlook by Indian companies. 

It is concluded from a global perspective that energy sector companies must establish a link between business 

models, risks and opportunities, strategy, and performance. However, it provides more qualitative IR information than non-

energy sector companies  (Piesiewicz et al., 2021). The beforementioned arguments have developed the curiosity to examine 

the status of IR practices in Indian energy companies and compare them. Iona and Adriana (2014) Suggested that IR is an 

emerging phenomenon that is at its early stage, so there is a need to conduct empirical studies comparatively to develop a 

broader knowledge base for IR. Therefore, eight Indian energy companies, comprising four electricity generation companies 

and four petroleum companies, have been selected to conduct an empirical study of IR practices. These eight energy 

companies comprise four public and four private sector companies.  

 

The study is conducted with the following specific objectives. 

 To examine IR practices as voluntary disclosures in select Indian energy companies. 

 To make a comparative analysis of IR practices between select private and public sector energy companies.  

 To make a comparative analysis of IR practices between select electricity generation companies and petroleum 

companies.  
LITERATURE REVIEW 

The selected literature is subdivided into four parts, namely literature related to the need and theoretical foundation of IR, 

stakeholders' perception of IR, empirical studies of IR on energy companies, and empirical studies of IR on other than 

energy companies. 

Need and Theoretical Foundation of IR 

The IR surrounds by the legitimacy theory for stakeholder satisfaction (Ara & Harani, 2020). To establish a sound 

knowledge base for IR, the accounting syllabus should be more strategic, prospective, and broader instead of operational or 

transitional by incorporating more topics related to financial and non-financial information in a strategic manner, so by 

education and training accountants will be able to play a strategic role in twenty-first century's environment (Owen, 2013). 

The organization's top management should implement IR practices in its business strategies and care about the opportunity 

cost and Environmental, Social, and Governance issues associated with IR (Soriya & Rastogi, 2021). The IR practices 

should be promoted so they will not be influenced by political, cultural, and economic factors (Iona & Adriana, 2013). The 

regulators must take a step toward mandatory IR disclosures by introducing biodiversity-related guidelines as reporting part 

(Hassan et al., 2021), and government should also adopt IR in government-linked companies (Singh et al., 2019). (Garcia-

Sanchez et al., 2020) suggested disclosing the internal pandemic prevention and action strategy so that the pandemic would 

not adversely affect the organization's performance. 

Bal (2018) stated that there is a need for hours to work on IR, like a movement or mission, to comply with the best 

international reporting practices in the Indian scenario. She further stated that there is a need to develop audit and assurance 

practices for IR. There needs to be more methodological, accounting, and analytical support for preparing IR; therefore, it 

is necessary to make quality standards to meet modern reporting requirements (Akhmentshin et al., 2018). The lack of non-

financial information leads to difficulty for external analysts, and it also becomes complex to quantify the non-financial 

information for decision-making purposes. Therefore, IR with Enterprise Performance Management could be helpful by 

providing a comprehensive overview of risk and opportunities from an economic perspective and may be considered 

potential to make changes in Corporate Reporting (Basu & Wats, 2015). It is suggested (Nathuramka, 2016) that all types 

of business entities should adopt IR as a value creation tool, like South Africa, on an 'Apply or Explain' basis without waiting 

for any legal compliance regulation. He further suggested that IR provides an excellent opportunity for finance professionals 

to show themselves as value providers instead of compliance maker with appreciation and adoption of IR voluntarily in 

business entities. There is no doubt that IR is an essential step in corporate reporting which creates value for the organization, 

and the value creation process, as reflected in IR, is helpful to stakeholders for decision-making. However, the benefits of 



Agnihotri et al., Indian Journal of Finance and Banking 13(1) (2023), 1-11 

 

3 

IR are not limited to stakeholders; instead also beneficial to the organization for better resource allocation, good governance, 

and creating brand value (Bhutani & Tyagi, 2017). Camilleri (2019) stated that the scope of IR is not limited to a summary 

of financial, social, and sustainability-related information; instead, it constitutes the overall picture of a company's 

performance. The implementation of IR and improvement in audit quality (Internal audit as well as external/statutory audit) 

move simultaneously in the same direction. Besides this, the reliance level of the firm on IR also enhanced the audit quality 

(Nashar, 2016). 

Stakeholders' Perception  

f IR, 93.9% of accounting educators agree that IR has a significant difference in opportunities and benefits compared to its 

challenges and disadvantages (Elizabeth et al., 2021). Investors and analysts accepted the relevance of non-financial 

reporting in Germany and stated that IR ultimately transform into financial impact and they also want to know more about 

strategies, business model, and market trend (Tilley & Kirchhoff, 2020). 73% of stakeholders suggested that IR should be 

prepared voluntarily, and 23% of respondents desired mandatory IR practices in Turkey. They further suggested enhancing 

the awareness of IR among various stakeholders, especially institutional investors, because institutional investors are the 

primary users of reports for investment decision-making purposes (Aras et al., 2019). A high level of interest and low level 

of awareness regarding IR was found among all respondents (Adhariani & Villiers, 2018), and they suggested that preparers 

of corporate reports can see the benefits of IR but hesitate to implement it. 

Abhishek et al. (2020) concluded that IR positively impacts the Indian perspective. Among all respondents, 

accountants and auditors have more awareness about IR than academicians, as their awareness level is 85.92% and 74.64%, 

respectively. Ashok (2019) concluded that challenges are faced by regulatory authorities, companies, and XBRL software 

developers in promoting IR through XBRL. 90% of respondents agreed that IR would improve boards' understanding of 

value creation and help to develop a better relationship with external stakeholders. 83% of respondents believed that IR will 

help to understand the risk and opportunities, and 87% of respondents believed that IR is a tool to integrate financial reports 

with non-financial reports (Bombay Chamber of Commerce, 2018). 

Empirical Studies of IR in Power Sector Companies 

Piesiewicz et al. (2021) revealed that energy sector companies provide more qualitative IR disclosures than non-energy 

sector companies. The major problem of IR practices is establishing a link between business models and strategies, risks, 

opportunities, and performance. Yildirim et al. (2017) examined the IR practices of energy companies in Turkey. They 

suggested that as there is no audit mechanism for IR in Europe and the United States, regulators should establish regulations 

for the audit of IR, and auditors should also conduct an audit of non-financial information available in IR. They further 

concluded that IR helps transform society; therefore, business entities must follow IR practices. 

Empirical Studies of IR in Other than Power Sector Companies 

Songini et al. (2021) examined the relationship between IR quality and Board of Directors (BOD) composition. They 

revealed that low IR quality is found where more females are part of BOD, and high IR quality is found where more educated 

persons are part of BOD. It is suggested that diversity in BOD, instead of the diversity of BOD, requires improving the 

quality of IR. Roman et al. (2019) stated that companies with higher revenue presented more balanced IR, and younger 

companies presented their reports in an optimistic tone. It is shocking but pertinent to mention that companies in countries 

with high transparency tendencies provided low readable IR. It is further stated that IFRS adopter and non-environmental 

area-based companies provide less readable IR. The financial performance and risk decreased after the introduction of IR, 

and institutional investors' shareholding and Environmental, Social, and Governance scores in select entities increased after 

the introduction of IR (Conway, 2019). The companies report their capital in increase, decrease, and transformative form 

over a while and follow IR practices just for showcase purposes. It is concluded that IR practices are followed in an 

unimproved manner (Ahmed & Hossain, 2016). Zuniga et al. (2020) concluded that IR provides quality information to the 

capital market, and the quality of IR practices is associated with market liquidity. 

Kumawat et al. (2020) revealed that the level of IR disclosures in the top 50 listed companies in India increased 

and companies provided more information as compared to previous ARs. Due to voluntary adoption and no mandatory 

requirement, only 19 companies out of 50 adopted IR practices as per the IR framework. Dave (2019) found deficient 

reporting on social and relational capital and concluded that IR is at its earlier stage; therefore not able to create value 

initially but has the efficiency to reflect the company's business and potential to its stakeholders. Barin and Ansari (2016) 

found a discrepancy in IR disclosures of select Indian petroleum companies due to no mandatory requirement of IR. They 

established no relationship between IR disclosures and Return on Assets and Return on Equity. They suggested that although 

the IR disclosure practices in India are voluntary, the government should promote IR practices which leads to the best way 

of conveying information to stakeholders. 

 

MATERIAL AND METHODS 

Sample Size and Selection Criteria 
A total of eight Indian energy companies, out of which four electricity generation and four petroleum companies listed in 

BSE based on free-float market capitalization as of 15th Sept 2022, have been selected for study purposes. The selected 

companies comprised four public-sector and four private-sector energy companies. Two of the four public sector companies 

are electricity generation and two are petroleum companies. The same is true of four private companies: electricity 

generation and petroleum companies. The researcher took only eight companies as a sample for study purposes because an 



Agnihotri et al., Indian Journal of Finance and Banking 13(1) (2023), 1-11 

 

4 

in-depth investigation is required to examine the IR status in Indian energy companies. The selected companies and their 

selection criteria may be understood in table 1.  

Table 1. Select Energy Companies 

 
S.No Name of Company Market Cap. (Crores) Sector Ownership 

1. National Thermal Power Corporation 
(NTPC) 

1,59,995 Electricity Public 

2. Power Grid Corporation Ltd (PGCL) 1,48,263 Electricity Public 

3. Adani Transmission Ltd 

 (Adani Trans) 

3,38,708 Electricity Private 

4. Adani Green Energy Ltd  

(Adani Green) 

3,22,113 Electricity Private 

5. Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd 

(ONGC) 

1,60,524 Petroleum Public 

6. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd (IOCL) 93,694 Petroleum Public 

7. Reliance Industries Ltd (Reliance) 16,04,217 Petroleum Private 

8. Adani Total Gas Ltd 
(Adani Gas) 

3,36,932 Petroleum Private 

Source: Author’s compilation based on selection criteria 

Data Collection & Research Method  

The period of five FYs, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020-21, and 2021-22 have been considered for study purposes. As 

suggested by IIRC, SEBI circulars on IR and IR framework have been collected from respective organizations' websites. 

The ARs or IARs of select Indian energy companies have been collected from the respective company's website. Content 

disclosure index by using a checklist is followed to check the adoption level of IR in select Indian energy companies as it is 

recommended by (Iona & Adriana, 2014; Romolini et al., 2017), and the same was adopted by (Kaya & Utku, 2020; Sofian 

& Dumitru, 2019; Bal & Bal, 2019; Ghosh, 2019; Dave, 2019; Kiran & Karunasri, 2017; Mauro et al., 2020; Cooray et al., 

2020; Hassan et al., 2019; Nistor et al., 2019; Pathiraja & Priyadarshinie, 2019; Nakib & Dey, 2018; Toit et al., 2017).  

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 
After understanding the IR framework and examination of ARs of select Energy companies from FY 2017-18 to 2021-22, 

() is assigned; when a company adopted IR practices but did not disclose particular content of IR, () is assigned, when 

the company adopted IR practices and disclosed particular content of IR and (—) is assigned when a company did not adopt 

IR practices. A checklist of 21 contents based on the IR framework has been developed to check the IR adoption level in 

select energy companies. 

IR Disclosure Practices of Public Sector Electricity Companies 

NTPC did not adopt IR practices in FY 2017-18 and 2018-19. NTPC presented most IR disclosures under the sustainability 

reporting heading of IAR in FY 2019-20. As per table 2, NTPC reported 17 contents out of 21, which is 81%, from FY 

2019-20 to 2021-22 by introducing subheadings such as stakeholders and materiality assessment, risk management, value 

creation model, disclosure on six capitals, and independent assurance on sustainability disclosures. Out of 17 contents, 

NTPC reported some contents of IR, such as stakeholders' relationship and organization overview, etc., at different places 

of IAR. NTPC disclosed six capitals as required by the IR framework in a detailed and understandable manner and also 

disclosed the business model in such a way, which reflects about value creation process to various stakeholders. NTPC did 

not improve the IR practices from its first adoption in FY 2019-20 to 2021-22, as it scored 17 in all FYs.  

PGCL started to follow IR practices as and when suggested by SEBI in FY 2017-18 and consistently followed 

them till FY 2021-22. As per table 2, PGCL reported 11 contents out of 21, which is 52% in FY 2017-18, 2018-19, and 

2019-20, 12 contents in FY 2020-21, and 13 contents in FY 2021-22. PGCL followed IR practices for formality purposes 

in FY 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20 because PGCL added two pages in AR by the name of IR and showed six capitals in 

quantitative figures, and balanced five contents found at different places of AR in an unorganized way. PGCL improved its 

IR practices in FY 2020-21 by providing outlook information and in FY 2021-22 by providing detailed information related 

to value creation for various stakeholders. However, till FY 2021-22, PGCL kept the name of AR the same as IAR. Key 

disclosures like materiality, business model, and risks and opportunities are the most important core content of the IR 

framework but did not disclose by PGCL. 

Table 2. IR Practices of Public Sector Electricity Generation Companies 

 
S. No. Content Elements of IR NTPC Ltd PGC Ltd 

FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 

1 Stakeholders Relationship — —         

2 Materiality Assessment — —         

3 Risk and Opportunities — —         

4 Connectivity of Information — —         

5 Value Creation — —         

6 Financial Capital — —         



Agnihotri et al., Indian Journal of Finance and Banking 13(1) (2023), 1-11 

 

5 

7 Manufacturing Capital — —         

8 Natural Capital — —         

9 Human Capital — —         

10 Social and Relationship Capital — —         

11 Intellectual Capital — —         

12 Organizational Overview — —         

13 Governance — —         

14 Business Model — —         

15 Basis of Preparation and 

Presentation 
— —         

16 Strategy and Resource Allocation — —         

17 Performance — —         

18 Outlook  — —         

19 Conciseness — —         

20 Reliability and Completeness — —         

21 Consistency and Comparability — —         

Total (21) — — 16 16 16 11 11 11 12 13 

Percentage (%) — — 76% 76% 76% 52% 52% 52% 57% 62% 

Source: Authors’ compilation based on Annual Reports or Integrated Annual Reports of respective companies. 

IR Disclosure Practices of Private Sector Electricity Companies 

Adani Trans started to follow IR practices in FY 2018-19 and changed the name of AR to IAR. As per table 3, Adani Trans 

scored 86% by reporting 18 contents out of 21, consistently in all FYs from 2018-19 to 2021-22. It disclosed how six capitals 

create value for various stakeholders according to the IR framework in a detailed and understandable manner. However, 

connectivity of information, conciseness and, reliability & completeness are core values of the IR framework, which did not 

disclose by Adani Trans. 

Adani Green started to follow IR practices in FY 2019-20 and changed the name of AR to IAR. As per table 3, 

Adani Green also scored 86% by reporting 18 contents out of a total of 21, consistently in all FYs from 2019-20 to 2021-

22, and disclosed how six capitals create value for various stakeholders according to IR framework in a detailed and 

understandable manner. Same as Adani Trans, Adani Green did not disclose the connectivity of information, conciseness 

and, reliability & completeness. It is pertinent to mention that both companies, Adani Trans and Adani Green, are 

subsidiaries of the Adani group and work in the electricity sector. However, Adani Trans adopted IR practices in FY 2018-

19, and Adani Green adopted IR practices in FY 2019-20.  

Table 3. IR Practices of Private Sector Electricity Generation Companies 

 
S. No. Content Elements of IR Adani Tans Ltd Adani Green Ltd 

FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 

1 Stakeholders Relationship —     — —    

2 Materiality Assessment —     — —    

3 Risk and Opportunities —     — —    

4 Connectivity of Information —     — —    

5 Value Creation —     — —    

6 Financial Capital —     — —    

7 Manufacturing Capital —     — —    

8 Natural Capital —     — —    

9 Human Capital —     — —    

10 Social and Relationship Capital —     — —    

11 Intellectual Capital —     — —    

12 Organizational Overview —     — —    

13 Governance —     — —    

14 Business Model —     — —    

15 Basis of Preparation and Presentation —     — —    

16 Strategy and Resource Allocation —     — —    

17 Performance —     — —    

18 Outlook  —     — —    

19 Conciseness —     — —    

20 Reliability and Completeness —     — —    

21 Consistency and Comparability —     — —    

Total — 18 18 18 18 — — 18 18 18 

Percentage (%) — 86% 86% 86% 86% — — 86% 86% 86% 

Source: Authors’ compilation based on Annual Reports or Integrated Annual Reports of respective companies. 

IR Disclosure Practices of Public Sector Petroleum Companies 

ONGC started to follow IR practices in FY 2021-22 and changed the name of AR to IAR. As per table 4, ONGC scored 

90% by reporting 19 contents out of 21 as per the IR framework. ONGC created a different section in its IAR called 'About 

IR' and presented IR Disclosures in one place concisely. ONGC addressed important disclosures such as information 

connectivity, reliability, completeness, conciseness, etc. However, ONGC should have disclosed two important contents: 

business model and outlook. Because IIRC, in its IR framework, suggested that IR may be presented as a separate report 

and ONGC presented a separate section on IR in its IAR, stakeholders may need help understandably accessing IR. 

IOCL started to follow IR practices initially as and when suggested by SEBI from FY 2017-18 and changed the 

name of its AR to IAR. As per table 4, IOCL scored 100% by reporting all 21 contents per the IR framework. The content 



Agnihotri et al., Indian Journal of Finance and Banking 13(1) (2023), 1-11 

 

6 

element of IR was disclosed by IOCL initially at the beginning of IAR in all selected FYs in a detailed and understandable 

manner. IOCL disclosed six capitals two times in IAR, initially in brief and later in a very detailed manner in all selected 

FYs from 2017-18 to 2021-22. IOCL devoted approx. 60 to 65 pages in every selected FY for disclosing the IR contents, 

therefore reporting on the value creation process and connectivity of information, etc., found appropriate as expected by the 

IR framework. 

Table 4. IR Practices of Public Sector Petroleum Companies 

S. No. Content Elements of IR ONGC Ltd IOCL Ltd 

FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 

1 Stakeholders Relationship — — — —       

2 Materiality Assessment — — — —       

3 Risk and Opportunities — — — —       

4 Connectivity of Information — — — —       

5 Value Creation — — — —       

6 Financial Capital — — — —       

7 Manufacturing Capital — — — —       

8 Natural Capital — — — —       

9 Human Capital — — — —       

10 Social and Relationship Capital — — — —       

11 Intellectual Capital — — — —       

12 Organizational Overview — — — —       

13 Governance — — — —       

14 Business Model — — — —       

15 Basis of Preparation and 
Presentation 

— — — —       

16 Strategy and Resource Allocation — — — —       

17 Performance — — — —       

18 Outlook  — — — —       

19 Conciseness — — — —       

20 Reliability and Completeness — — — —       

21 Consistency and Comparability — — — —       

Total — — — — 19 21 21 21 21 21 

Percentage (%) — — — — 90% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 

Source: Authors’ compilation based on Annual Reports or Integrated Annual Reports of respective companies. 

IR Disclosure Practices of Private Sector Petroleum Companies  

Reliance started to follow IR practices initially as and when suggested by SEBI from FY 2017-18 and changed the name of 

AR to IAR. As per table 5, Reliance scored 95% by reporting 20 contents out of 21 as per the IR framework in all selected 

FYs from 2017-18 to 2021-22. A lack of connectivity of information is found because Reliance disclosed six capitals at one 

place and other contents at different places in IAR. However, Reliance disclosed value creation to stakeholders, 

organizational overview and governance, etc., in a detailed and understandable manner. 

Adani Gas started to follow IR practices from FY 2020-21 and changed the name of AR to IAR. As per Table 5, 

Adani Gas scored 81% in Both FYs 2020-21 and 2021-22 by reporting 17 contents out of 21 as per the IR framework. IAR 

of Adani Gas found a need for conciseness, reliability, completeness, and information connectivity. However, it is good to 

see that in both FYs, Adani Gas presented major IR contents in a separate section, namely 'Our Integrated Value Creation 

Report' of its IAR. This separate section in both FYs includes value creation, risk management, strategic priorities, 

commitments, governance, and Corporate Social Responsibility.  

Table 5. IR Practices of Private Sector Petroleum Companies 

S. 

No. 

Content Elements of IR Reliance Ltd Adani Gas Ltd 

FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY2

2 

1 Stakeholders Relationship      — — —   

2 Materiality Assessment      — — —   

3 Risk and Opportunities      — — —   

4 Connectivity of Information      — — —   

5 Value Creation      — — —   

6 Financial Capital      — — —   

7 Manufacturing Capital      — — —   

8 Natural Capital      — — —   

9 Human Capital      — — —   

10 Social and Relationship Capital      — — —   

11 Intellectual Capital      — — —   

12 Organizational Overview      — — —   

13 Governance      — — —   

14 Business Model      — — —   

15 Basis of Preparation and Presentation      — — —   

16 Strategy and Resource Allocation      — — —   



Agnihotri et al., Indian Journal of Finance and Banking 13(1) (2023), 1-11 

 

7 

17 Performance      — — —   

18 Outlook       — — —   

19 Conciseness      — — —   

20 Reliability and Completeness      — — —   

21 Consistency and Comparability      — — —   

Total 20 20 20 20 20 — — — 17 17 

Percentage (%) 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% — — — 81% 81% 

Source: Authors’ compilation based on Annual Reports or integrated Annual Reports of respective companies 

Comparative Analysis of IR Disclosure Practices 

Comparative Analysis between Public and Private Sector Energy Companies 

As per table 6, IOCL is the only public sector company among all energy companies, whose IR practices fully complied 

according to the IR framework. Two public sectors and one private sector energy company started to follow IR practices in 

FY 2017-18. Two from the public and three from the private sector followed IR practices in FY 2018-19 and 2019-20, 

respectively. Three companies from the public sector and all four select companies from the private sector followed IR 

practices in FY 2020-21. All eight select energy companies followed IR practices in FY 2021-22. Lack of connectivity of 

information found in all energy companies except IOCL.  

Table 6. IR Disclosures of Energy Companies based on Ownership 

Financial Year Public Sector Companies  Private Sector Companies 

NTPC PGCL ONGC IOCL Adani Trans Adani Green Reliance Adani Gas 

2021-22 16 13 19 21 18 18 20 17 

2020-21 16 12 — 21 18 18 20 17 

2019-20 16 11 — 21 18 18 20 — 

2018-19 — 11 — 21 18 — 20 — 

2017-18 — 11 — 21 — — 20 — 

Source: Authors' Compilation based on tables 2, 3, 4, and 5 of this research paper 

 

Different levels of IR adoption and disclosures are found in Adani trans, Adani Green, and Adani Gas, even though 

all three are subsidiaries of the Adani group. All select energy companies disclosed six capitals of the IR framework in one 

place. All other contents of IR except six capitals are disclosed by all select companies according to their convenience, like 

under separate sections in IAR or at different places of IAR. As earlier concluded (Havlova, 2015), low reporting trends 

were found in public sector companies compared to private sector companies. This study also concludes that private-sector 

energy companies report more than public-sector companies, except for IOCL. However, high quick adoption of IR is found 

in public sector companies.   

 

Comparative Analysis between Electricity and Petroleum Companies 

IOCL is the only Petroleum Company among all select energy companies whose IR practices comply with the IR framework. 

Two petroleum companies and one electricity company adopted IR in FY 2017-18. Two petroleum companies and two 

electricity companies followed IR practices in FY 2018-19. All electricity companies followed IR practices from FY 2019-

20 to 2021-22; two followed IR practices in FY 2019-20, three in FY 2020-21, and all followed IR practices in FY 2021-

22. Petroleum companies presented more quality disclosures of IR as compared to electricity companies.  

Table 7. IR Disclosures of Electricity and Petroleum Companies 

 

Financial Year 

Electricity Companies  Petroleum Companies 

NTPC PGCL Adani Trans Adani Green ONGC IOCL Reliance Adani Gas 

2021-22 16 13 18 18 19 21 20 17 

2020-21 16 12 18 18 — 21 20 17 

2019-20 16 11 18 18 — 21 20 — 

2018-19 — 11 18 — — 21 20 — 

2017-18 — 11 — — — 21 20 — 

Source: Authors' Compilation based on tables 2, 3, 4, and 5 of this research paper 

 

The Content elements such as connectivity of information, conciseness, reliability, and & completeness are the 

core values of the IR framework, which did not reflect in the IR practices of electricity companies. As stated earlier, the IR 

practices of one petroleum company, IOCL, fully complied with the IR framework, and connectivity of information is the 

main requirement that is only reflected in other petroleum companies except for IOCL. Petroleum companies disclosed 

more contents of IR in one place in a separate section of IAR; however, many IR contents were disclosed at a different place 

in IAR by almost all electricity companies. In conclusion, more reporting trends are found in petroleum companies compared 

to electricity companies. 

 

CONCLUSIONS 
All public and private sector companies should have adopted IR practices as and when suggested by SEBI on a voluntary 

basis. Out of the total of eight companies, three adopted IR in FY 2017-18, one other company adopted IR in FY 2018-19, 



Agnihotri et al., Indian Journal of Finance and Banking 13(1) (2023), 1-11 

 

8 

two more companies adopted IR in FY 2019-20, one more company adopted IR in FY 2020-21, and all eight select energy 

companies followed IR practices in FY 2021-22. Connectivity of information, conciseness, and reliability & completeness 

are core values of the IR framework. These values were not reflected in the IR practices of almost all energy companies 

except IOCL. Different reporting trends are found in all select energy companies due to IR as a voluntary practice. One 

public sector petroleum company IOCL disclosed IR according to the IR framework at one place of IAR, another side one 

public sector electricity company, PGCL followed IR practices throughout the select period just for formality purposes by 

introducing two/three pages in its AR and also did not change the name of its AR by IAR. All the key content elements of 

the IR framework did not follow by select Indian energy companies except IOCL, which reflects the lack of proper 

understanding of the spirit of the IR framework. The low level of adoption and different level of reporting trends across all 

select energy companies except IOCL sector-wise as well functional area-wise found in Indian perspective due to the non-

availability of proper guidelines and regulations on IR, and the same was concluded by (Serafeim, 2016; Bananuka et al., 

2019). As earlier concluded by (Garcia-Sanchez et al., 2020), companies should disclose internal pandemic prevention and 

action strategy for Covid 19, etc., so that the pandemic would not adversely affect the organization's performance. This 

internal pandemic prevention and action strategy could be part of risk and opportunities, strategy and resource allocation, 

and business model contents of IR. However, energy companies did not disclose it as part of IR in FY 2020-21 and 2021-

22, when the entire world faced Covid 19 pandemic.  

Managerial and Policy Implications 

As we know that IR practices are followed in India voluntarily, therefore it should be followed as a mark of compulsion; if 

it is not possible to issue mandatory guidelines on IR, then it should become mandatory for public sector companies, as 

already suggested by (Bananuka et al., 2019) because, in these companies, the public are substantially interested. Although 

SEBI, in its circular, stated that the top five hundred companies might follow IR practices as suggested by IIRC, but did not 

suggest any clear-cut guidelines in the Indian scenario that companies should follow; therefore, the SEBI should prepare 

detailed and clear guidelines on IR in Indian perspective. As far as the electricity sector is concerned, Central Electricity 

Authority, an organization constituted by Electricity Supply Act 1948 and superseded by Electricity Act 2003, should make 

and advise a policy for IR disclosures that electricity companies should follow in India voluntarily or as a mark of 

compulsion as per preparedness of electricity companies. The provisions or guidance notes related to an audit of IR practices 

and non-financial information in IR should be introduced by professional bodies like The Institute of Chartered Accountants 

of India etc., to conduct an audit of IR practices as already suggested by (Oprisor, 2015; Yildirim et al., 2017; Goicoechea 

et al., 2019). To effectively implement and monitor IR practices in companies, separate personnel should be recruited by 

companies who are solely responsible for IR practices in companies. Various types of workshops and seminars etc. should 

be conducted to spread awareness regarding IR practices (Adhariani & Villiers, 2018).  

Future Scope of Study 
This study is conducted on select energy companies. As IR is a new phenomenon, it is huge scope to examine the IR practices 

of other sector companies and compare them on the basis of ownership and cross-sector comparative analysis. To make a 

sound knowledge base for IR, Comparative analysis can also be done between companies operating in developing and 

developed countries. There is scope to obtain a perception of various stakeholders regarding IR and to make suggestions 

and specific guidelines for IR practices in the Indian scenario based on the perception obtained from various stakeholders. 

 

 
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, S.A., and P.K.; Methodology, S.A., and P.K.; Investigation, S.A., K.H., and D.B.; Supervision, P.K.; Data 

Curation, S.A., and D.B.; Visualization, S.A., K.H.; Validation, S.A., and P.K.; Software, K.H., and D.B.; Resources, S.A., and P.K.; Writing- Original 
Draft Preparation, S.A., D.B., and K.H.; Writing- Review & Editing, P.K., and S.A.; Project Administration, P.K.; Funding Acquisition, K.H., and D.B.; 

Formal Analysis, S.A., and K.H. 
Institutional Review Board Statement: Ethical review and approval were waived for this study because the research does not deal with vulnerable groups 

or sensitive issues. 

Funding: The authors received no direct funding for this research. 
Acknowledgments: Not applicable. 

Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study. 

Data Availability Statement: The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available 
due to restrictions. 

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. 

 

REFERENCES 

Abhishek, N., Acharya, P., Divyashree, M. S., & Ashok, M. L. (2020). Integrated Reporting As A New Dimension of 

Corporate Reporting: An Indian Perspective. Journal of Commerce and Accounting Research, 9(3), 63–73. 

Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=3653083 

Adhariani, D., & Villiers, C. D. (2018). Integrated Reporting: Perspectives of Corporate Report Preparers and Other 

Stakeholders. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 10(1), 126-156. 

https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-02-2018-0043 

Ahmed H. A., & Hossain, D. M. (2016). Exploring the Implications of Integrated Reporting on Organisational Reporting 

Practice: Evidence from Highly Regarded Integrated Reporters. Qualitative Research in Accounting & 

Management, 13(4), 415-444. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRAM-07-2015-0065 



Agnihotri et al., Indian Journal of Finance and Banking 13(1) (2023), 1-11 

 

9 

Akhmentshin, E. M., Prodanova, N. A., Shevchenko, S. S., Ratnikova, I. P., & Gazizyanova, Y. Y. (2018). Current Issues 

of Corporate Integrated Reporting Development in Russia. European Research Studies Journal, XXI(3), pp. 142–

153.  

Ara, M., & Harani, D. R. (2020). Integrated Reporting Insight: Why Organization Voluntarily Report? International Journal 

of Scientific & Technology Research, 9(1), 3055-3066. Retrieved from http://www.ijstr.org/final-

print/jan2020/Integrated-Reporting-Insight-Why-Organisation-Voluntarily-Reports.pdf  

Aras, G., Caliskan, A. O., Esen, E., & Furtuna, O. K. (2019). Integrated Reporting inTurkey: Current Situation, 

Stakeholders' Perception and Expectations. Istanbul: ACCA, CFGS, KPMG. Retrieved from 

https://www.accaglobal.com/gb/en/technical-activities/technical-resources-search/2019/february/ir-turkey-

report.html 

Ashok, M. L., & Abhishek, N. (2019). Role of XBRL in Promoting The Integrated Reporting in Indian Scenario. Indian 

Journal of Accounting, 51(1), 25–33. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=3411024 

Bal, R. K., & Bal, T. (2019). A Study on Corporate Integrated Reporting. Indian Accounting Review, 23(1), 1-14. Retrieved 

from https://www.iaarf.in/pdf_files/Abstract-June-2019.pdf 

Bal, T. (2018). Integrated Reporting: Literature Review and Its Practices in India and Abroad. Srusti Management Review, 

XII(II), pp. 48–54. Retrieved from 

http://www.srustimanagementreview.ac.in/paperfile/1224910169_6.%20Integrated%20Reporting%20Literature

%20Review%20and.pdf 

Bananuka, J., Tumwebaze, Z., & Orobia, L. (2019). The Adoption of Integrated Reporting: A Developing Counties 

Perspective. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting, 17(1), 2-23. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFRA-09-2017-

0089 

Barin, A., & Ansari, A. A. (2016). Integrated Reporting Practices in Select Petroleum Companies- An Analysis. EPRA 

International Journal of Economic and Business Review, 4(12), 129-134. Retrieved from 

https://eprapublishing.com//admin/admin/public/uploads/856pm20.Arshi%20Barin%20&%20Dr.%20A.A.Ansari

.pdf 

Basu, P. C., & Watts, S. (2015). Management Tools That Make Corporate Reporting Key Part of Business Activity. The 

Management Accountant, pp. 22–26. Retrieved from https://icmai.in/upload/Institute/Journal/May-2015.pdf 

Bhutani, A., & Tyagi, V. (2017). Integrated Reporting: Bridging the reporting GAAP. The Chartered Accountant, pp. 799–

803. Retrieved from https://www.icai.org/new_category.html?archive=1&c_id=259 

Buallay, A., Hawaj, A. A., & Hamdan, A. (2020). Integrated Reporting and Performance: A Cross-Country Comparison of 

GCC Islamic and Conventional Banks. Journal of Islamic Marketing. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIMA-08-2017-0084 

Camilleri, M. A. (2019). Theoretical Insights on Integrated Reporting: Valuing The Financial, Social and Sustainability 

Disclosures. In I. S., & M. D. Baldo, Integrated Reporting. CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance (pp. 61-76). 

Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01719-4_3 

Chakrabarty, K. C. (2011). Non-Financial Reporting- What, Why and How- Indian Perspective. Non-Financial Reporting 

and Risk Management for Financial Institutions in India (pp. 1-14). Mumbai: Reserve Bank of India. Retrieved 

from https://www.rbi.org.in/scripts/BS_SpeechesView.aspx?Id=570 

Conway, E. (2019). Quantitative Impacts of Mandatory Integrated Reporting. Journal of Financial Reporting and 

Accounting, 17(4), 604–634. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFRA-08-2018-0066 

Cooray, T., Senaratne, S., Gunarathne, A. N., Herath, R., & Samudrage, D. (2020). Does Integrated Reporting Enhance the 

Value Relevance of Information? Evidence from Sri Lanka. Sustainability, pp. 2–25. 

https://doi.org/10.3390/su12198183 

Dave, A. I. (2019). Integrated Reporting Practices of Selected Listed Indian Companies. International Journal of Current 

Advanced Research, 8(5), 18651–18657. Retrieved from http://www.journalijcar.org/sites/default/files/issue-

files/9174-A-2019.pdf 

Demirel, B., & Erol, I. (2016). Investigation of Integrated Reporting as a New Approach of Corporate Reporting. 

International Journal of Business and Social Research, 6(10), 32-44. Retrieved from 

https://thejournalofbusiness.org/index.php/site/article/view/1002/634 

Dragu, I.-M., & Adriana, T.-T. (2013). The Integrated Reporting Initiative from an Institutional Perspective: Emergent 

factors. Procedia Social and Behavioral Science, 92, 275-279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.08.672 

El-Deeb, M. S. (2019). The Impact of Integrated Reporting on Firm Value and Performance: Evidence from Egypt. 

Alexandria Journal of Accounting Research, 3(2). Retrieved from 

https://aljalexu.journals.ekb.eg/article_56831_89dec7452dbbcfaa459a32ca552d7a08.pdf 

Elizabeth, S. D., Trisnawati, E., & Indrajati, M. F. (2021). The Accounting Educators' Perception of Integrated Reporting. 

Advances in Economics, Business, and Management Research. 174, pp. 24–29. France: Atlantis Press. 

https://dx.doi.org/10.2991/aebmr.k.210507.004 

Garcia-Sanchez, I.-M., Raimo, N., Marrone, A., & Vitolla, F. (2020). How Does Integrated Reporting Change in Light of 

COVID-19? A Revisiting of Content of Integrated Reports. Sustainability, 12, 1-12. 

https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187605 

Ghosh, S. (2019). Integrated Reporting In India: Research Findings and Insights. In S. O. Idowu, & M. D. Baldo, Integrated 

Reporting, CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance (pp. 365–383). Switzerland: Springer Nature. Retrieved from 

https://www.springerprofessional.de/en/integrated-reporting-in-india-research-findings-and-insights/16376356 



Agnihotri et al., Indian Journal of Finance and Banking 13(1) (2023), 1-11 

 

10 

Goicoechea, E., Gomez-Bezares, F., & Ugarte, j. V. (2019). Integrated Reporting Assurance: Perception of Auditors and 

Users in Spain. Sustainability, pp. 11, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11030713 

Hassan, A., Adhikariparajul, M., Fletcher, M., & Elamer, A. (2019). Integrated Reporting in UK Higher Education 

Institutions. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 10(5), 844-876. 

https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-03-2018-0093 

Hassan, A., Elamer, A. A., Lodh, S., Roberts, L., & Nandy, M. (2021). The Future of Non-Financial Business Reporting: 

Learning from the COVID-19 Pandemic. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 1-10. 

https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2145 

Havlova, K. (2015). What Integrated Reporting Changed: The Case Study of Early Adopters. Procedia Economics and 

Finance, pp. 34, 231–237. Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(15)01624-X. 

Hossain, D. M., Salat, A., & Al-Amin. (2016). Integrated Reporting: An Emerging Trend in Corporate Reporting. The 

Bangladesh Accountant, 105-110. Retrieved from http://www.icab.org.bd/webNewsEventNoticeCir/view/13839 

IIRC. (2013, December). The International <IR> Framework. London: International Integrated Reporting Council. 

Retrieved from https://integratedreporting.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/13-12-08-THE-INTERNATIONAL-

IR-FRAMEWORK-2-1.pdf 

Iona, D., & Adriana, T.-T. (2014). Research Agenda on Integrated Reporting: New Emergent Theory and Perspectives. 

Procedia Economics and Finance, 15, 221-227. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(14)00488-2 

Kaya, Y., & Utku, M. (2020). Integrated Reporting and Its Application in the Turkish Banking Sector. Interdisciplinary 

Public Finance, Business and Economics Studies, III, 285-296. https://doi.org/10.3726/b17540 

Kiran, V. U., & Karunasri, M. V. (`2017). Integrated Reporting Practices in Top 30 BSE Companies. The Management 

Accountant, 19-28. Retrieved from https://icmai.in/upload/Institute/Journal/MA_Sep_2017.pdf 

Kumawat, E., Lodha, S., & Soral, G. (2020). Value Relevance of Integrated Reporting: A Study of Nifty 50 Companies. 

Indian Journal of Accounting, 52(1). Retrieved from https://indianaccounting.org/img/journals/IJA-Jun-2020.pdf 

Lohar, B. K., & Soral, G. (2017). Integrated Reporting in India: A case study of BSE 100 constituents. Amity Business 

Review, 18(2), 62-76. Retrieved from https://www.amity.edu/abs/abr/pdf/Vol%2018%20No.2/6%20.pdf 

Mauro, S. G., Ciquini, L., Simonini, E., & Tenucci, A. (2020). Moving from Social and Sustainability Reporting to 

Integrated Reporting: Exploring the Potential of Italian Public Funded Universities’ Reports. Sustainability, 12, 2-

19. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12083172 

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. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/ic.700 

Nakib, M., & Dey, K. P. (2018). The Journey Towards Integrated Reporting in Bangladesh. Asian Economic and Financial 

Review, 8(7), 894-913. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=3307932 

Nashar, T. A. (2016). The Probable effect of Integrated Reporting on Audit Quality. Journal of Governance and Regulation, 

5(2), 50–56. https://doi.org/10.22495/jgr_v5_i2_p6 

Nathuramka, S. (2016). Integrated Reporting- Accountant Redefining the Role of Management. The Management 

Accountant, 49-54. Retrieved from https://icmai.in/upload/Institute/Journal/Nov-2016.pdf 

Nistor, C. S., Stefanescu, C. A., Oprisor, T., & Crisan, A. R. (2019). Approaching Public Sector Transparency Through an 

Integrated Reporting Benchmark. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting, 17(2), 249-270. 

https://doi.org/10.1108/JFRA-06-2017-0048 

Oprisor, T. (2015). Auditing Integrated Reports: Are the Solution to This Puzzle? Procedia Economics and Finance. 25, 

pp. 87–95. Romania: Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(15)00716-9 

Owen, G. (2013). Integrated Reporting: A Review of Developments and their Implications for the Accounting Curriculum. 

Accounting Education, Taylor & Francis Journal, 22(4), 340–356. https://doi.org/10.1080/09639284.2013.817798 

Pathiraja, P. D., & Priyadarshanie, W. N. (2019). Integrated Reporting Disclosures: An Empirical Analysis. Marketing, 

Accounting & Finance. Badulla Sri Lanka: Uva Wellassa University. Retrieved from 

http://erepo.lib.uwu.ac.lk/bitstream/handle/123456789/627/428.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y 

Piesiewicz, M., Ciechan-Kujawa, M., & Kufel, P. (2021). Difference in Disclosure of Integrated Reporting at Energy and 

Non-Energy Companies. Energies, 14, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14051253 

Raju, K. K. (2015). Communicating value to the Stakeholders: A Case Study of TATA Steel Company Ltd. The 

Management Accountant, 35–35. Retrieved from https://icmai.in/upload/Institute/Journal/May-2015.pdf 

Roman, A.-G., Mocanu, M., & Hoinaru, R. (2019). Disclosure Style and Its determinants in Integrated Reports. 

Sustainability, 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11071960 

Romolini, A., Fissi, S., & Gori, E. (2017). Exploring Integrated Reporting Research: Results and Perspectives. International 

Journal of Accounting and Financial Reporting, 7(1), 32-47. https://doi.org/10.5296/ijafr.v7i1.10630 

SEBI. (2017). Integrated Reporting by Listed Entities. Mumbai: Security Exchange Board of India. Retrieved from 

https://www.sebi.gov.in/sebi_data/attachdocs/1486375066836.pdf 

Serafeim, G. (2016). Integrated Reporting- External Reporting & Disclosure Management. Montvale: Institute of 

Management Accountants. Retrieved from https://www.imanet.org/-

/media/0830fcd907cd41a7bd760b8900fe7b94.ashx 

Singh, J., Sadiq, M., & Kaur, K. (2019). Integrated Reporting: Challenges, Benefits and the Research Agenda. International 

Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 7(8), 1-12. Retrieved from 

https://www.ijicc.net/images/vol7iss8/7801_Singh_2019_E_R.pdf 



Agnihotri et al., Indian Journal of Finance and Banking 13(1) (2023), 1-11 

 

11 

Sofian, I., & Dumitru, M. (2019). The Compliance of The Integrated Reports issued by European Financial Companies with 

International Integrated Reporting Framework. Sustainability, 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9081319 

Songini, L., Pistoni, A., Tettamanzi, P., Fratini, f., & Minutiello, V. (2021). Integrated Reporting Quality and BoD 

Characteristics: An Empirical Analysis. Journal of Management and Governance. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-

021-09568-8 

Soriya, S., & Rastogi, P. (2021). A Systematic Literature Review on Integrated Reporting from 2011 to 2020. Journal of 

Financial Reporting and Accounting. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFRA-09-2020-0266 

Tilley, C., & Kirchhoff, K. (2020). Closing the Gap: The Role of Integrated Reporting in Communicating a Company's 

Value Creation to Investors. London: International Integrated Reporting Council. Retrieved from 

https://integratedreporting.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/20201127_IIRC_Kirchhoff_Investor_Reseach_CLEAN.pdf 

Toit, E. d., Zyl, R. v., & Schutte, G. (2017). Integrated Reporting by South African Companies: A Case Study. Meditari 

Accounting Research, 25(4), 654-674. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-03-2016-0052 

Velte, P. (2021). Archival Research on Integrated Reporting: A Systematic Review of main Drivers and the Impact of 

Integrated Reporting on Firm Value. Journal of Management and Governance. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-

021-09582-w 

Yildirim, G., Kocamis, T. U., & Turuduoglu, F. O. (2017). Integrated Reporting: A Template for Energy Companies. In 

Auditing and Corporate Reporting-Today and Tomorrow (pp. 14-31). Intech Open Science. Retrieved from 

https://cdn.intechopen.com/pdfs/55449.pdf 

Zenkina, I. V. (2018). Global Promotion of Integrated Reporting by Enhancing its Informative and        Analytical Value 

for Stakeholders. European Research Studies Journal, XXI(Special Issue 2), 518-530. 

Zuniga, F., Pincheira, R., Walker, J., & Turner, M. (2020). The effect of Integrated Reporting Quality on Market Liquidity 

and Analyst Forecast Error. Accounting Research Journal, 33(4/5), 635-650. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ARJ-07-

2019-0145 

 

Publisher’s Note: CRIBFB stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. 

 

 

© 2023 by the authors. Licensee CRIBFB, USA. This article is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons 

Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). 
 

Indian Journal of Finance and Banking (P-ISSN 2574-6081 E-ISSN 2574-609X) by CRIBFB is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 

International License. 
 

 

 
 

 

 
 

 

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

