Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

Big Data Integration in Auditing: Technological, Institutional, and Ethical Perspectives Dandi Aprila; Anda Dwiharyadi
Invoice : Jurnal Ilmu Akuntansi Vol. 8 No. 1 (2026): March 2026
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Makassar

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.26618/3nxvcp77

Abstract

The increasing adoption of Big Data technologies has significantly reshaped auditing practices; however, existing scholarship on Big Data auditing remains fragmented and lacks an integrated conceptual perspective. This study aims to systematically examine how Big Data influences audit practices and audit quality across technological, institutional, and epistemic dimensions. Using a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) based on the PRISMA protocol, this study synthesizes evidence from 30 peer-reviewed journal articles indexed in Scopus and Web of Science published between 2015 and 2025. The analysis identifies three dominant research clusters: (1) technological capability, reflecting the development of analytics-driven, continuous, and predictive auditing tools; (2) institutional readiness, highlighting regulatory gaps, organizational resistance, and skill asymmetry; and (3) epistemic transformation, concerning changes in professional judgment, algorithmic transparency, and accountability structures. The findings reveal a progressive datafication of auditing, characterized by a shift from traditional ex-post verification toward real-time and predictive assurance. Although Big Data improves audit efficiency, analytical scope, and risk detection capability, its implementation remains constrained by governance uncertainty and uneven organizational capabilities. To synthesize these insights, this study proposes the Big Data Auditing Framework (BDAF), which conceptualizes audit transformation as the dynamic interaction between Technological Infrastructure, Institutional Adaptation, and Epistemic Governance, moderated by Ethical and Regulatory Oversight. This framework contributes to the literature by offering an integrative perspective on how technological and institutional factors jointly shape the evolution of data-driven auditing and provides practical implications for regulators, educators, and audit firms in strengthening technological capacity, institutional preparedness, and ethical governance in digital audit environments.
Sustainability reporting and greenwashing: Implications for transparency and firm value: A systematic literature review Sevia Dian Saraswati; Ferry Irawan; Anda Dwiharyadi
Educoretax Vol 6 No 6 (2026)
Publisher : WIM Solusi Prima

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.54957/educoretax.v6i6.2240

Abstract

Sustainability reporting has evolved into a critical mechanism for communicating environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance and enhancing corporate transparency. However, the rapid expansion of sustainability disclosure practices has intensified concerns regarding greenwashing, where firms strategically misrepresent sustainability performance to create a favorable image. This study aims to systematically review and synthesize the literature on the interrelationship between sustainability reporting, greenwashing, transparency, and firm value. Using a systematic literature review approach, this study analyzes 62 peer-reviewed articles published between 2012 and 2025 from Scopus-indexed and high-quality scholarly sources. The findings reveal that sustainability reporting functions as a dual and context-dependent mechanism. On one hand, it reduces information asymmetry, improves disclosure quality, and enhances stakeholder decision-making, particularly in strong regulatory and governance environments. On the other hand, its inherent flexibility enables impression management, symbolic disclosure, and narrative manipulation, thereby facilitating greenwashing practices. The results further indicate that the impact of sustainability reporting on firm value is conditional upon disclosure credibility, where substantive and verifiable reporting contributes positively, while greenwashing leads to reputational damage, declining investor trust, and negative long-term valuation effects. The study also highlights the role of ESG rating divergence, weak standardization, and institutional heterogeneity in shaping disclosure credibility. This research contributes by integrating fragmented literature into a comprehensive framework and identifying greenwashing as a key moderating factor. Future research is encouraged to develop standardized greenwashing metrics and examine cross-country institutional differences.