International Journal of Finance & Managerial Accounting

International Journal of Finance & Managerial Accounting

Prioritizing Digital Sustainability Reporting Indicators in Platform-Based Companies: A Sequential Mixed-Methods Approach Using Fuzzy MCDM and fsQCA

Articles in Press

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
Alireza Eshghi 1
Ehsan rahmaninia 2
Malek Taj Maleki Oskouei 2
Ali Akbar Chaharmahali 3
1 Ph.D. student of Accounting, North Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Accounting, North Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
3 Assistant Professor, Department of Accounting, North Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
10.22034/ijfma.2026.79120.2361
Abstract
Digital sustainability reporting, integrating digital technologies into ESG disclosure processes, has emerged as a key mechanism to enhance data accuracy, comparability, and timeliness. However, prioritizing and weighting relevant ESG indicators remains a significant challenge, particularly for platform-based companies in emerging economies characterized by data-intensive models and regulatory uncertainty
Addressing this gap, this study employs a sequential mixed-methods approach to systematically prioritize digital sustainability reporting indicators for platform-based companies in Iran. The research integrates Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) techniques—including Fuzzy DEMATEL, Fuzzy Best-Worst Method (BWM), Fuzzy Analytic Network Process (ANP), and Fuzzy VIKOR—with fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA). Expert judgments from ten industry specialists were collected and analyzed.
Findings identify economic barriers, XBRL adoption, and digital accounting infrastructure as the most influential causal drivers and highest-weighted criteria. Fuzzy VIKOR results designate Strategy A—emphasizing phased digital infrastructure investment and standardization—as the optimal compromise solution. Furthermore, fsQCA reveals three equifinal pathways to successful implementation: a technological path, a governance-environmental path, and a hybrid practical path.The study contributes a robust, context-sensitive framework for prioritizing digital sustainability indicators. It offers actionable insights for managers and policymakers, highlighting the need to address economic and technological constraints while enabling flexible, multi-path implementation approaches tailored to platform-based business models in emerging digital economies
Keywords
Digital Sustainability Reporting
Platform-Based Companies
ESG Indicators
Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM)
  1. Alles, M. G., Dai, J., & Vasarhelyi, M. A. (2021). Reporting 4.0: Business reporting for the age of mass customization. Journal of Emerging Technologies in Accounting, 18(1), 1-15.
  2. Appiah‐Kubi, E., Dura, C. C., Niță, D., Drigă, I., Preda, A., & Baltador, L. A. (2024). The effect of digitalization on sustainability reporting: The role of sustainability competence, green knowledge integration, and stakeholder pressure. Business Strategy and the Environment.
  3. Ardito, L. (2023). The influence of firm digitalization on sustainable innovation performance and the moderating role of corporate sustainability practices: An empirical investigation. Business Strategy and the Environment, 32(8), 5252-5272.
  4. Ardito, L. (2023). The influence of firm digitalization on sustainable innovation performance and the moderating role of corporate sustainability practices: An empirical investigation. Business Strategy and the Environment, 32(8), 5252-5272.
  5. Atkins, J., Doni, F., Gasperini, A., Artuso, S., La Torre, I., & Sorrentino, L. (2023). Exploring the effectiveness of sustainability measurement: which ESG metrics will survive COVID-19? Journal of Business Ethics, 185(3), 629-646.
  6. Atkins, J., Doni, F., Gasperini, A., Artuso, S., La Torre, I., & Sorrentino, L. (2023). Exploring the effectiveness of sustainability measurement: which ESG metrics will survive COVID-19? Journal of Business Ethics, 185(3), 629-646.
  7. Benameur, K. B., Mostafa, M. M., Hassanein, A., Shariff, M. Z., & Al-Shattarat, W. (2024). Sustainability reporting scholarly research: a bibliometric review and a future research agenda. Management Review Quarterly, 74(2), 823-866.
  8. Chopra, S. S., Senadheera, S. S., Dissanayake, P. D., Withana, P. A., Chib, R., Rhee, J. H., & Ok, Y. S. (2024). Navigating the Challenges of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Reporting: The Path to Broader Sustainable Development. Sustainability, 16(2), 606.
  9. Chopra, S. S., Senadheera, S. S., Dissanayake, P. D., Withana, P. A., Chib, R., Rhee, J. H., & Ok, Y. S. (2024). Navigating the Challenges of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Reporting: The Path to Broader Sustainable Development. Sustainability, 16(2), 606.
  10. Del Giudice, M., Di Vaio, A., Hassan, R., & Palladino, R. (2022). Digitalization and new technologies for sustainable business models at the ship–port interface: A bibliometric analysis. Maritime Policy & Management, 49(3), 410-446.
  11. George, G., Merrill, R. K., & Schillebeeckx, S. J. (2021). Digital sustainability and entrepreneurship: How digital innovations are helping tackle climate change and sustainable development. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 45(5), 999-1027.
  12. George, G., Merrill, R. K., & Schillebeeckx, S. J. (2021). Digital sustainability and entrepreneurship: How digital innovations are helping tackle climate change and sustainable development. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 45(5), 999-1027.
  13. George, G., Merrill, R. K., & Schillebeeckx, S. J. (2021). Digital sustainability and entrepreneurship: How digital innovations are helping tackle climate change and sustainable development. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 45(5), 999-1027.
  14. Guandalini, I. (2022). Sustainability through digital transformation: A systematic literature review for research guidance. Journal of Business Research, 148, 456-471.
  15. Gupta, A., Sharma, U., & Gupta, S. K. (2021, December). The role of ESG in sustainable development: An analysis through the lens of machine learning. In 2021 IEEE International Humanitarian Technology Conference (IHTC) (pp. 1-5). IEEE.
  16. Haji, A. A., Coram, P., & Troshani, I. (2022). Consequences of CSR reporting regulations worldwide: a review and research agenda. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 36(1), 177-208.
  17. Hristov, I., & Searcy, C. (2025). Integrating sustainability with corporate governance: a framework to implement the corporate sustainability reporting directive through a balanced scorecard. Management Decision, 63(2), 443-467.
  18. Hu, B., Peng, N., & Zhu, G. (2024). Sustainable finance in natural resource extraction: Navigating green recovery pathways. Resources Policy, 96, 105197.
  19. Kazemi, A., Mehrani, S., & Homayoun, S. (2025). Risk in Sustainability Reporting: Designing a DEMATEL-Based Model for Enhanced Transparency and Accountability. Sustainability, 17(2), 549.
  20. Kwarto, F., Nurafiah, N., Suharman, H., & Dahlan, M. (2024). The potential bias for sustainability reporting of global upstream oil and gas companies: a systematic literature review of the evidence. Management Review Quarterly, 74(1), 35-64.
  21. Leitner-Hanetseder, S., & Lehner, O. M. (2022). AI-powered information and Big Data: current regulations and ways forward in IFRS reporting. Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 24(2), 282-298.
  22. Luo, L., & Tang, Q. (2023). The real effects of ESG reporting and GRI standards on carbon mitigation: International evidence. Business Strategy and the Environment, 32(6), 2985-3000.
  23. Maas, K., Schaltegger, S., & Crutzen, N. (2016). Integrating corporate sustainability assessment, management accounting, control, and reporting. Journal of cleaner production, 136, 237-248.
  24. Mol, A., van Schie, V., & Budding, T. (2025). Drivers of sustainability reporting by local governments over time: A structured literature review. Financial Accountability & Management, 41(1), 200-229.
  25. Mondal, S., Singh, S., & Gupta, H. (2023). Green entrepreneurship and digitalization enabling the circular economy through sustainable waste management-An exploratory study of emerging economy. Journal of Cleaner Production, 422, 138433.
  26. Moodaley, W., & Telukdarie, A. (2023). Greenwashing, sustainability reporting, and artificial intelligence: A systematic literature review. Sustainability, 15(2), 1481.
  27. Novicka, J., & Volkova, T. (2025). Regulation of Sustainability Reporting Requirements—Digitalisation Path. Sustainability, 17(1), 138.
  28. Pizzi, S., Mastroleo, G., Venturelli, A., & Caputo, F. (2024). The digitalization of sustainability reporting processes: A conceptual framework. Business Strategy and the Environment, 33(2), 1040-1050.
  29. Ryu, S., Koedijk, K. G., Chow, V., & Gao, X. (2024). Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) for Online Marketplaces. Electronic Markets, 34(1), 19.
  30. Setyaningsih, S., Widjojo, R., & Kelle, P. (2024). Challenges and opportunities in sustainability reporting: a focus on small and medium enterprises (SMEs). Cogent Business & Management, 11(1), 2298215.
  31. Sun, Y., Davey, H., Arunachalam, M., & Cao, Y. (2022). Towards a theoretical framework for the innovation in sustainability reporting: An integrated reporting perspective. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 10, 935899.
  32. Vărzaru, A. A. (2022). An empirical framework for assessment of the effects of digital technologies on sustainability accounting and reporting in the European Union. Electronics, 11(22), 3812.
  33. Yu, X. (2023). Integration of ESG in Financial Institutions: A Study on the Impact of Sustainability Reporting. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Growth Evaluation, 4(5), 468-472.
International Journal of Finance & Managerial Accounting

Articles in Press, Accepted Manuscript
Available Online from 16 June 2026