Article review of “Implementing sustainability: What role do knowledge management and management accounting play?”

Article review of “Implementing sustainability: What role do knowledge management and management accounting play?”

 

How to present this article in Harvard reference format?

Broccardo, L., Giordino, D., Yaqub, M.Z. & Alshibani, S.M., 2025. Implementing sustainability: What role do knowledge management and management accounting play? Agenda for environmentally friendly businesses. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 32(1), pp.383–403. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2936 [Accessed 20 September 2026].

 

What are the key research issues the article wants to address?

The article highlights several key research issues aimed at advancing understanding in the intersection of knowledge management (KM), management accounting and control (MAC) systems, and sustainability implementation. These research issues and associated gaps are summarized in Table 3 (Page 14) and include:

1.    Environmental Management Accounting (EMA):

• Need to explore how latest information and knowledge management technologies enhance companies' environmental performance evaluation.
• Questions include how information technologies affect KM and EMA, the effects on management control systems, influence of green dynamic capabilities, and the impact of tacit knowledge on EMA performance evaluation.

2.    Knowledge Hiding:

• Need to understand how knowledge hiding affects management control and sustainability performance.
• Research questions focus on the effects of knowledge hiding, risks related to managerial knowledge hiding, prevention strategies, and the role of top management support in MAC and environmental KM.

3.    Environmental Performance:

• Need to investigate the extent to which norms, legislation, and institutional pressures promote KM and sustainability management control systems.
• Queries include the role of governmental standards as catalysts for sustainability performance, balance between sustainability valuation and other performance measures, and how KM supports compliance with institutional demands.

4.    Environmental Knowledge Sharing:

• Need to comprehend factors influencing knowledge sharing in environmental management control systems and employees' attitudes toward knowledge sharing.
• Research questions inquire about systems and tools promoting knowledge sharing, effects of internal and external knowledge sharing, and factors influencing employees' willingness and attitudes toward sharing environmental knowledge.

These research gaps and questions form an agenda for future research to better integrate KM and MAC practices in fostering sustainability within organizations.

 

Describe two main theories employed in this article.

The article primarily engages with two main theoretical perspectives to explore the interplay between knowledge management (KM), management accounting and control (MAC) systems, and sustainability implementation:

1.    Knowledge Management Theory: KM is understood as the processes involving the acquisition, assimilation, transformation, utilization, and creation of organizational knowledge assets. The article describes KM from both normative and conceptual viewpoints, emphasizing its role as a critical resource for organizational performance in the face of dynamic changes such as environmental challenges. KM theory supports the idea that effective creation, processing, and management of knowledge are vital for firms to address sustainability and environmental issues, align with regulatory demands, and gain competitive advantage. KM is seen as the foundation for fostering organizational learning, knowledge sharing, and innovation necessary for implementing sustainable strategies.

2.    Management Accounting and Control (MAC) Theory: MAC systems focus on providing relevant information to support managerial decision-making and align employee behaviors with organizational goals. Within the sustainability context, MAC theory explains how accounting and control systems integrate environmental and social factors into strategic planning, performance measurement, and reporting. MAC facilitates environmental management accounting (EMA) by offering the necessary information and knowledge to evaluate environmental and social performance, monitor progress, and embed sustainability into corporate strategies. This theory underlines the role of management accountants in cost accounting, budgeting, reporting, and controlling sustainability initiatives to advance a company’s ecological and social performance.

Together, these theories frame the article's conceptual framework, illustrating how KM and MAC systems interact to support sustainable business practices by enabling knowledge flow and informed decision-making concerning environmental and social sustainability.

 

 

Highlight 2 main primary findings reported in this article.

  Two main primary findings reported in the article are:

1.    Increasing Research Interest and Multidisciplinary Nature: The systematic literature review revealed a growing trend in research intersecting knowledge management (KM), management accounting and control (MAC), and sustainability, particularly gaining traction after 2019. The reviewed literature is multidisciplinary, involving various journals and fields, but notably lacks publications in accounting-focused journals, suggesting a research gap and opportunity for future studies in accounting-centric venues. Geographically, the majority of research is concentrated in the United States and China, indicating a need to explore other regions such as Europe and emerging economies.

2.    Role of MAC and KM in Enhancing Sustainability Practices: The findings highlight that MAC systems play a key role in managing knowledge for sustainability by developing key performance indicators (KPIs) that align with societal expectations and integrate sustainability into business strategies and decision-making processes. Transparency, accountability, and performance assessment supported by MAC systems foster collaboration and knowledge sharing, which enhance sustainable practices across organizations. Additionally, KM systems facilitate communication, data exchange, and the management of sustainability-related knowledge, particularly within sustainable supply chain management. These systems help identify inefficiencies, promote best practices, and improve operational efficiency, thereby reinforcing the integration of sustainability into organizational processes.

 

Describe 3 main claims of the article in terms of Toulmin's model of argument.

Applying Toulmin's model of argument (which includes Claim, Data, Warrant, Backing, Qualifier, and Rebuttal), three main claims of the article can be described as follows:

1.    Claim 1: There is a critical need to develop better conceptual theoretical frameworks that systematically integrate knowledge management (KM), management accounting and control (MAC), and sustainability to address environmental and social challenges.

• Data/Evidence: The article identifies gaps in the literature, noting the fragmentation and lack of systematization in studies combining KM, MAC, and sustainability, supported by citations of prior calls for frameworks (Battaglia et al., 2016; Chopra et al., 2021; Martins et al., 2019).
• Warrant: Without comprehensive frameworks, organizations and scholars cannot adequately understand or leverage the interplay between KM and MAC to promote sustainability objectives.
• Backing: The systematic literature review (SLR) conducted in the article itself supports this claim, by mapping and analyzing existing studies and uncovering these conceptual gaps.

2.    Claim 2: Management accounting and control (MAC) systems, combined with knowledge management (KM), play an essential role in promoting and supporting organizations’ environmental and social sustainability performance.

• Data/Evidence: Empirical and conceptual studies show that MAC systems facilitate the creation of sustainability-related KPIs and promote transparency and accountability, while KM enables communication and sharing of sustainability knowledge across organizational units, enhancing operational and environmental performance.
• Warrant: Effective use of MAC and KM leads to better monitoring, reporting, and decision-making processes that incorporate sustainability concerns.
• Backing: The literature reviewed (including studies on sustainable supply chain management and university sustainability practices) supports the link between MAC/KM integration and improved sustainability outcomes.

3.    Claim 3: There is a promising research agenda for future studies focusing on the intersection of KM, MAC, and sustainability, which requires diverse methodological approaches and wider geographic representation.

• Data/Evidence: The review finds that most existing research adopts quantitative methods and is geographically concentrated, especially in the United States and China, limiting generalizability and depth. Further, emerging research questions highlight areas such as knowledge hiding, climate perception, internal/external environmental management accounting systems, and stakeholder influence.
• Warrant: Expanding methodological diversity and geographic scope will provide richer insights and address existing limitations in the literature.
• Backing: The systematic analysis documented in the SLR, along with proposed research questions, underpins this claim and aligns with calls for more qualitative and mixed methods research in sustainability-related accounting and knowledge management fields.

 

Describe 2 main research limitations of the study.

Two main research limitations of the study, as described in the article, are:

1.    Data Source Limitation: The study relies exclusively on data obtained from specific online databases—Scopus, Web of Science (WoS), and Google Scholar—for conducting the systematic literature review (SLR). As a result, relevant articles indexed in other databases or platforms were omitted, potentially limiting the comprehensiveness of the literature sample and the generalizability of findings.

2.    Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria Constraints: The research focuses solely on peer-reviewed journal articles written in English and excludes other scholarly outputs such as book chapters, conference proceedings, essays, and reports. This selective approach, while ensuring quality and rigor, excludes possibly valuable empirical findings and theoretical insights presented in other formats, thereby constraining the scope and richness of the review.