Comparative Study of Integrated Reporting Disclosure with International Integrated Reporting Framework of Indian and Malaysian Companies

Abstract

This paper presents a systematic literature review of integrated reporting (IR) adoption and disclosure quality in India and Malaysia, with specific focus on alignment with the International Integrated Reporting Framework (IIRF) of the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC). Following the PRISMA framework, 98 peer-reviewed articles, regulatory documents, and empirical studies published between 2000 and 2025 were reviewed from Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and EBSCOhost. The review synthesizes evidence from 22 Indian studies and 21 Malaysian studies, alongside global adoption literature. Key findings reveal that while both countries have introduced regulatory nudges—India’s Business Responsibility and Sustainability Report (BRSR) mandate and Malaysia’s Malaysian Code on Corporate Governance (MCCG) 2017 “apply or explain” recommendation—actual IR disclosure quality remains suboptimal. Common deficiencies include weak connectivity of information, inadequate forward-looking (outlook) disclosure, and superficial coverage of intellectual and natural capitals. Adoption rates range from 4‑10% in pre‑BRSR India to 29‑37% in Malaysia post‑MCCG. Disclosure quality indices show Indian IRI scores of 83‑87% (but low connectivity) and Malaysian IRDI mean of 44.55%. Positive determinants include firm size, board size, ESG membership, and regulatory pressure; barriers include cost, lack of knowledge, and ambiguous guidance. The review identifies six research gaps, most notably the absence of direct cross-country comparative studies using a uniform IIRC-based disclosure index. A future empirical research agenda is proposed.