Quality of digital reporting: risks, precautions, and government oversight mechanisms

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:Provides a conceptual framework and typology for digital reporting quality, with risk matrices that can be empirically tested.

🏢実務担当者:Offers insights on quality assurance mechanisms and risk mitigation (e.g., impression management, greenwashing) for corporate sustainability teams.

🏛政策担当者:Outlines regulatory architectures and oversight tools (SupTech, validation rules) applicable to digital disclosure regimes like CSRD and SSBJ.

The study examines how the rapid spread of structured digital reporting formats is transforming the quality, risks and supervision of financial and non-financial disclosures in capital markets and public governance systems. The objective is to develop an integrated conceptual and comparative framework for assessing the quality of digital reporting, distinguishing between technical, semantic and pragmatic dimensions and linking them to specific regulatory architectures and oversight tools. Methodologically, the research relies on doctrinal analysis of international standards and taxonomies for financial and sustainability reporting, comparative review of regulatory regimes in the European Union, the United States and selected emerging markets, and analytical generalisation based on typologies and risk matrices embedded in the text and tables. The main results show that digital financial reporting is converging on XBRL and Inline XBRL but remains heterogeneous with respect to tagging scope, validation rules and the institutionalisation of data quality committees, while digital non-financial reporting is being reshaped by CSRD and ESRS in the EU, the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Taxonomy at global level and the gradual digitalisation of voluntary ESG regimes. High quality digital presentation is identified as a double edged phenomenon that enables transparency and automated analytics yet simultaneously creates new channels for impression management, greenwashing, semantic opacity and information overload. The analysis further demonstrates that effective preventive measures combine prescriptive taxonomies, automated validation, SupTech based anomaly detection and robust digital operational resilience frameworks, while also highlighting proportionality challenges for smaller entities and less mature markets. Conclusions emphasise that the quality of digital reporting depends on the coherence of content standards, internal governance and supervisory architectures, and that fragmented or under enforced regimes can turn digital data into an amplifier of risk rather than a safeguard of transparency. Directions for further research include empirical testing of the proposed typologies and risk matrices, evaluation of the real-world impact of SupTech on enforcement outcomes, and investigation of digital literacy and behavioural aspects that shape how different user groups interpret high quality but complex digital reports.

• openaire https://doi.org/10.36690/pubadm-132-153first seen 2026-05-14 22:35:40