The increasing research to determine the influence

The gap

Evidence profile

Sourced from the limitations and abstract and future work and future-work section and stated research gap of the source papers, classified as general, drawn from work published between 2022 and 2026, spanning 7 journals. Those papers have been cited 169 times in total.

Supporting evidence — 7 representative gaps

• A hybrid pythagorean fuzzy decision-making model for evaluating corporate environmental behavior through social responsibility dimensions (2026) · Scientific Reports · doi

  In this section, we will discuss the Limitations and future directions of this study The research has limitations even though this study is original and practical. The case study is based on hypothetical information and limited number of criteria and decisions that may not be representative of the reality of the actual corporate environmental practices. Its framework is also premised on the opinion of experts, which, despite being run on PFS, can result in subjectivity of the assessment process. The paper is also devoted to six aspects; practically the impacts of the supply chain or lifecycle analysis are the possible aspects and industry-dependent considerations that the supply chain of corporations can rely on. Such ARTICLE IN PRESSARTICLE IN PRESS ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT limitations mean that the given model is powerful, whereas the outcomes should be viewed as illustrative and not final. The study has following Future Directions. Future research can be continued in this work through several avenues. To assess the effectiveness of the framework, one can first refer to it in real case studies involving larger datasets and actual corporate performance measures. Second it is possible to add more criteria and sub-criteria to capture industry specifics of the environmental behavior e.g. carbon footprint, practices of a circular economy or biodiversity impact. Third, the model can be further extended with other more complex extensions of FS such as q-rung orthopair fuzzy sets (QROFS) [29]or spherical fuzzy sets (SFS) [30] in order to be more aspective of uncertainty. Finally, comparative studies can be considered in future research, taking advantage of the given framework to apply it to either industries or various countries, which would provide valuable data on international trends in corporate social responsibility and environmental friendliness.

  generallimitationsevidence 5/5
  Keywords: future limitations criteria corporate environmental framework directions case actual practices aspects supply chain possible industry
• The Influence of Market Competition, Company Size, and Corporate Governance on Environmental Management Accounting and Environmental Performance (2026) · Journal of Economics, Entrepreneurship, Management Business and Accounting · doi

  This study provides important insights into the relationships among market competition, company size, corporate governance, Environmental Management Accounting (EMA), and environmental performance within manufacturing and industrial companies in Indonesia. Nevertheless, several limitations should be acknowledged to provide a balanced interpretation of the findings and to identify opportunities for future research development. First, this study employed a cross-sectional research design in which data were collected at a single point in time. Consequently, the findings only reflect organizational conditions and managerial perceptions during the period of data collection and do not fully capture the dynamic nature of sustainability practices and environmental management over time. Future studies are therefore encouraged to apply longitudinal approaches to examine how changes in governance structures, competitive pressure, and environmental accounting practices influence environmental performance across different periods. Second, the study relied primarily on self-reported questionnaire data obtained from managers and accounting professionals. Although the respondents were selected based on their professional involvement in environmental management and sustainability practices, self-reported data may still contain subjective bias, social desirability bias, or perceptual inconsistency. Some respondents may provide responses that reflect organizational expectations rather than actual environmental practices implemented within their companies. Future research may strengthen empirical validity by combining survey data with secondary data sources such as sustainability reports, carbon emission disclosures, environmental ratings, or audited environmental performance indicators to provide more objective measurements. Third, this study focused exclusively on manufacturing and industrial companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange. While these sectors are highly relevant to environmental sustainability issues due to their significant ecological impacts, the findings may not be fully generalizable to other sectors such as service industries, financial institutions, small and medium enterprises, or public sector organizations. Organizational characteristics, sustainability priorities, and environmental pressures may differ substantially across industries and institutional settings. Future research is therefore recommended to expand the research context by involving different sectors, cross-country comparisons, or multinational corporate environments to improve external validity and broader theoretical generalization. Fourth, the present study examined Environmental Management Accounting as the primary mediating mechanism linking organizational factors and environmental performance. However, environmental performance is a multidimensional construct that may also be influenced by additional organizational and contextual variables not included in the current model. Factors such as green innovation, environmental leadership, organizational culture, digital sustainability transformation, stakeholder engagement, environmental strategy, and regulatory pressure may also play significant roles in shaping sustainability outcomes. Future studies are encouraged to incorporate these variables into more comprehensive conceptual frameworks to provide deeper understanding regarding the mechanisms underlying environmental performance improvement. Finally, this study primarily emphasized the direct and mediating relationships among the proposed variables using SEM-PLS analysis. Although this approach provided valuable predictive insights, it did not fully explore the potential moderating effects that may influence the strength or direction of the relationships among variables. Future research may therefore 180 Journal of Economics, Entrepreneurship, Management Business and Accounting investigate moderating variables such as organizational culture, environmental uncertainty, sustainability orientation, or institutional pressure to develop a more nuanced understanding of corporate environmental management practices. In addition, future studies may adopt mixed-methods approaches by integrating quantitative analysis with qualitative interviews or case studies to explore how Environmental Management Accounting is implemented operationally within organizations and how managerial actors interpret sustainability-related accounting information in strategic decision-making processes.

  generallimitationsevidence 5/5
  Keywords: environmental sustainability management accounting future organizational performance practices variables provide relationships among corporate within companies
• PFAS disclosure practices of Dutch listed companies: An exploratory study (2026) · Maandblad voor Accountancy en Bedrijfseconomie · doi

  Early sustainability reporting emerged largely as a voluntary practice, driven by stakeholder and institutional pressures, legitimacy concerns, and economic considerations (Hahn and Kühnen 2013). A substantial body of literature examines the determinants of voluntary sustainability reporting and finds that firm size, industry affiliation, visibility, and stakeholder scrutiny are among the most consistent predictors of disclosure (Hahn and Kühnen 2013; Dienes et al. 2016; Arkoh et al. 2024). Firms operating in environmentally sensitive industries are more likely to engage in sustainability reporting, reflecting higher exposure to environmental risks and reputational concerns (Velte 2023). However, prior research consistently documents important limitations of voluntary reporting. Disclosures tend to be selective, qualitative, and focused on positive aspects of corporate performance, while negative impacts and controversial issues are often omitted or downplayed (Hahn and Kühnen 2013; Dienes et al. 2016). This has raised concerns about symbolic reporting and greenwashing, particularly when firms face weak regulatory oversight or when reporting frameworks provide broad discretion (e.g., Luu et al. 2025; Mateo-Márquez et al. 2022). As a result, voluntary sustainability reporting often fails to provide comparable, decision-useful information to stakeholders (Christensen et al. 2021). 2.2. The shift toward mandatory sustainability reporting In response to the shortcomings of voluntary disclosure, regulators increasingly rely on mandatory sustainability reporting regimes. There is evidence that mandatory sustainability reporting can lead to improvements in environmental and social outcomes. For example, mandatory disclosure has been associated with reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, improved workplace safety, and increased investment in sustainable practices (Delmas et al. 2010; Bennear and Olmstead 2008; Chen et al. 2018; Downar et al. 2021). Related research also shows spillover effects along supply chains and across borders, suggesting that disclosure mandates can influence behavior beyond directly regulated firms (She 2022; Kim et al. 2025). In addition, mandatory sustainability reporting is found to be value relevant. Importantly, firms with stronger sustainability performance and more credible disclosures tend to benefit from mandatory regimes, whereas firms with poor performance or low transparency may face negative market reactions (Baboukardos 2017; Grewal et al. 2019; Jouvenot and Krueger 2019; Mittelbach- -Hörmanseder et al. 2021; Vishnu Nampoothiri et al. 2024). https://mab-online.nlOlga Ihl-Deviv’e, Thomas Thijssens: PFAS disclosure practices of Dutch listed companiesMaandblad voor Accountancy en Bedrijfseconomie 100(3): 101–116 103 2.3.

  generallimitationsevidence 5/5
  Keywords: reporting sustainability mandatory disclosure firms voluntary concerns hahn hnen performance stakeholder dienes disclosures tend negative
• Environmental sustainability orientation and corporate social responsibility influence on environmental performance of small and medium enterprises: The mediating effect of green capability (2022) · Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management · cited 169× · doi

  Abstract Despite the increasing research to determine the influence of environmental sustainability orientation (ESO) and corporate social responsibility (CSR) on environmental performance, our understanding is to see the mediating effect of green capability between ESO, CSR, and environmental performance is lacking.

  generalabstractevidence 5/5
  Keywords: environmental performance abstract despite increasing determine influence sustainability orientation corporate social responsibility understanding mediating effect
• A bibliometric study on sustainable business practices and firm performance in global research (2026) · Jurnal Akademi Akuntansi · doi

  Agenda _________ _ Jurnal Akademi Akuntansi, Vol. 9 No. 3, p. 506-530, 2026 525 sustainability research is becoming more concerned with the alignment between sustainability claims and actual performance. As argued by Delmas & Burbano (2011), greenwashing emerges when firms communicate environmental commitments without corresponding substantive improvements, creating an important theoretical tension between legitimacyseeking behavior and genuine sustainability transformation. The niche themes quadrant, including corporate sustainability and innovation, represents areas with strong conceptual development but weaker integration with the broader sustainability–performance framework. This indicates that future research should further operationalize these concepts by identifying specific mechanisms linking sustainability strategies with accounting-based and market-based outcomes. Similarly, the relatively limited presence of emerging themes does not indicate declining relevance of earlier sustainability concepts; rather, it reflects conceptual transformation. Broad CSR discussions are increasingly incorporated into more measurable constructs such as ESG performance, sustainability disclosure, environmental outcomes, and responsible innovation. Overall, RQ4 demonstrates that the SBP–performance literature has progressed from a responsibility-oriented paradigm toward a measurement- and capability-oriented paradigm. Mature themes such as CSR and firm performance provide the conceptual foundation, while green innovation and environmental performance represent the current engines of theoretical development. Meanwhile, ESG disclosure and sustainability reporting function as critical mechanisms connecting sustainability practices with external evaluation and financial value creation. Therefore, future research should move beyond direct sustainability– performance relationships and focus on mechanisms, credibility, institutional context, and measurement quality, particularly regarding how firms convert sustainability commitments into verifiable and economically valuable outcomes. DISCUSSION The findings demonstrate that the SBP–performance literature has undergone a significant intellectual transformation rather than merely an expansion of research topics. The field initially developed around CSR, corporate responsibility, and stakeholder-oriented perspectives, before moving toward financial performance, corporate governance, ESG disclosure, green innovation, and sustainability reporting. This transition reflects a shift from a normative view of sustainability as a corporate responsibility toward a strategic and measurement-oriented perspective that examines how sustainability generates economic value.

  generalfuture workevidence 5/5
  Keywords: sustainability performance corporate innovation oriented environmental transformation themes conceptual mechanisms outcomes disclosure responsibility toward measurement
• Understanding Environmental Governance in Emerging Markets: A Multi-Level Theory-Building Review of Institutions, Stakeholders, and Firm Capabilities (2026) · American Journal of Business Science Philosophy · doi

  Future research can build on the study's findings to develop more effective environmental governance policies. Further studies can explore the relationships between institutional and policy drivers and corporate sustainability in emerging markets. Research can investigate the impact of firm-level capabilities on environmental sustainability practices.

  generalfuture-work sectionevidence 5/5
  Keywords: future research build study findings develop effective environmental
• Determination of Environmntal Performance thourgh Environmental Management Accounting: Emperical Evidence from Manufacturing Companies in Indonesia (2026) · Journal of Economic Education and Entrepreneurship Studies · doi

  There is a need to examine the effects of market competition, company size, and corporate governance on environmental performance in manufacturing companies in Indonesia. There is a lack of empirical evidence on the mediating role of Environmental Management Accounting in explaining how organizational and environmental factors influence environmental performance.

  generalstated research gapevidence 5/5
  Keywords: there need examine effects market competition company size

Questions about this gap