Search results

This integrative review was conducted to provide an overview of existing research on digital (in)equity and the digital divide in developed countries.

We searched academic and grey literature to identify relevant papers. From 8464 academic articles and 183 grey literature, after two levels of screening, 31 articles and 54 documents were selected, respectively. A thematic analysis was conducted following the steps suggested by Braun and Clarke and results were reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

The results showed that most articles and papers were either from Europe or North America. Studies used a range of research methods, including quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods. The results demonstrated four major dimensions of the digital divide among various vulnerable groups, including digital literacy, affordability, equity-deserving group-sensitive content and availability or access to infrastructure. Among vulnerable groups, low-income people were reported in the majority of the studies followed by older adults, racial and ethnic minorities, newcomers/new immigrants and refugees, Indigenous groups, people with disabilities and women. Most reported barriers included lack of access to the internet, digital skills, language barriers and internet costs.

To the best of our knowledge, there have been limited attempts to thoroughly review the literature to better understand the emerging dimensions of digital equity and the digital divide, identifying major vulnerable populations and their unique barriers and challenges. This review demonstrated that understanding intersectional characteristics (age, gender, disability, race, ethnicity, Indigenous identity and immigration status) and their interconnections is crucial for analyzing the dynamics of digital (in)equity and divide.

This study aims to contribute to the existing literature by presenting new knowledge about sustainable development goals’ (SDGs) reporting practices through integrated reporting (IR). This paper’s ultimate goal is to dig to light companies’ main approaches to incorporating SDG disclosures into IRs.

This study puts forward both deductive content analysis and an inductive thematic analysis on a sample of worldwide leading IR adopters to assess what SDGs they disclose and how they integrate SDGs into the reports. Meaningful narratives and graphical illustrations are selected, categorised and discussed from a symbolic/substantive legitimacy perspective.

The results of this study highlighted that although a fair number of leading IR adopters addressed SDG issues, their pathways to disclosure were not uniform. In some cases, SDGs inspired substantive changes to internal management and process, communicated through an integrated approach. However, there was a persistent trend of using SDGs as camouflage and symbolic tool to enhance company’s reputation and obtain a licence to operate.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this was the first study that performed a deductive/inductive thematic analysis to engender insight into the most meaningful patterns followed by leading IR reporters worldwide to disclose their contributions to SDGs and address their legitimacy.

This study aims to verify if information on sustainable development goal (SDG) measurements or achievements is included in nonfinancial reports, highlighting the most disclosed SDGs and the reasons behind their prioritization.

The collocation analysis and logDice measurement were performed on the 206 nonfinancial reports of Italian companies published in 2022.

Companies mainly disclose information on the SDGs they can easily influence through business activities (SDGs 8, 7 and 12) while focusing less on wicked problems, which are more challenging to measure and have less effect (SDGs 1, 2 and 16). The information in the reports is becoming more quantitative. It aims to measure companies’ impact on pursuing the SDGs, and a qualitative description of adopted corporate policies and actions complements it.

Results highlight the need to urge policymakers to create a unified SDG reporting framework. The systematization of the reporting structure would assist enterprises in preparing their reports and help stakeholders compare the results of different organizations. It would prompt companies to improve their internal control activities, consequently positively affecting corporate accountability and the pursuit of SDGs. Furthermore, more training would be needed to educate businesses on the role they can play in all 17 SDGs.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, the research is the first attempt to use natural language processing methods in SDG reporting studies. This allowed researchers to study the whole population available, neglecting the sampling process, not missing any data available and bringing insights nonexistent in research.