版權(quán)說明:本文檔由用戶提供并上傳,收益歸屬內(nèi)容提供方,若內(nèi)容存在侵權(quán),請進行舉報或認領(lǐng)
文檔簡介
1、Contents lists available at ScienceDirectAccounting Forumjournal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/accforA framework for social and environmental accounting researchGlen Lehmana, Sanjaya Chinthana Kuruppub,?a School of C
2、ommerce, University of South Australia, Australia b School of Commerce, University of South Australia, AustraliaA R T I C L E I N F OKeywords:Social and Environmental AccountingInterpretationCritical TheoryPragmatismEval
3、uative FrameworkA B S T R A C TThis essay explores recent trends in social and environmental accounting research (SEAR). Weoffer a basic SEAR typology to examine the limitations and possibilities within the current dis-c
4、ourse. SEAR has taken a corporate approach in liberal democratic social space. Our typologyexamines the opportunities for SEAR to interpret and create change in social practice.1. IntroductionAccounting has traditionally
5、 been depicted as an essentially historical practice, but recent global dilemmas open social andenvironmental accounting research (SEAR) to issues of: 1) the increasing protectionism, dissatisfaction with political proce
6、sses andpossible tensions with globalisation in the post-Brexit and Trump era, 2) climate change policy, practice and reporting in a worldmarked by commodified news and duplicitious capitalism, and 3) the growing neo-lib
7、eralisation of NGOs and public sector in-stitutions amidst the deepening refugee crisis and fracturing of nation-states (see, for example, Arnold and Sikka, 2001; Sikka andLehman, 2015).This essay is intended as a guide
8、for those approaching the area for the first time to explore what SEAR is. Recent SEAR has takena managerial turn which (arguably) does not fully explore the dilemmas that the natural environment poses for all citizens a
9、ndnation-states. We agree with Professor Ray Chambers that what “accounting needs is its own Copernican Revolution” (Chambers,1999, p. 250–251). We believe SEAR must contribute solutions to these global dilemmas to funda
10、mentally reflect on itself, itstheoretical and philosophical foundations, and consider its purpose in creating meaningful (and positive) change.SEAR can contribute to these issues when it examines Gray’s (2016, p. 156) o
11、bservation that “with the rise and rise of neo-liberalism, those with the power and the money have systematically and very effectively ensured that they have more of both at theexpense of wider society”. Through the lite
12、rature, our aim is to determine how SEAR can contribute to improving our relationshipswith the natural environment. Our paper offers a tentative classification developed from four ideal types: procedural ethics, critical
13、theory, postmodernism and interpretivism. In SEAR, these have metamorphosed into the business case, critical theory, radical theoryand critical realism/interpretivism. Recent research, as outlined in Table 2, shows how t
14、hese strands of thought no longer operateaccording to the grand narratives outlined below in Table 1.Our new classification for SEAR is developed from an analysis of the theme, argument and purpose of some recent article
15、s inleading journals. Table 2 provides a fresh examination of trends in SEAR, illuminating the role that other strands of research mightplay. The Table reveals a fragmentation in the various approaches between critical,
16、interpretivist, radical and realist. We observe thatthe business case now dominates SEAR theory and practice. It relies on the existing social structures of liberal-democracies anddovetails with accounting research that
17、deals with positivism. This fragmentation reveals a problem for modern communitieshttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.accfor.2017.07.001Received 15 November 2016; Received in revised form 8 July 2017; Accepted 8 July 2017? Corre
18、sponding author.E-mail address: sanjaya.kuruppu@unisa.edu.au (S.C. Kuruppu).Accounting Forum 41 (2017) 139–146Available online 27 July 20170155-9982/ © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.MARKaccounting reports.
19、Thus, SEAR combined with interpretivism reveals the impacts of technologies such as accounting. Through inter-pretation, the accountant can open up particular phenomena, guiding SEAR research to provide different meaning
20、s and reveal (perhaps)hidden insights for change. Through this evaluative process, the interpretivist framework provides richer accounts, narratives, reports andstories about the relationship between humanity and nature.
21、 This evaluative reflection is guided by the desire to connect us to new sensesof ourselves and our relationship with nature. In large measure, interpretivism maintains that accounting not only masks exploitativerelation
22、s but closes our thinking to values outside of our current systems. For example, the political norm invoked by Milne and Gray,(2013) and Gray and Milne (in press) call for explanations and interpretations about actual in
23、teractions in, and with, the natural world. Inmany respects, this line of research is interpretivist/critical realist and can be used to enquire the role of SEAR.3. Recent themes in SEAR3.1. The business case: managerial
24、ism and SEARThe business case approach advocates for an unregulated role for corporations to guide SEAR. Proponents of the business caseclaim that environmental and social values are not incompatible with business logic.
25、 Business case researchers explore ways SEARaugment existing business operations (e.g. achieve greater efficiency and profitability simultaneously). Business case theorists en-courage a pragmatic engagement with business
26、 (managerialist perspectives) as a better strategy than relying on critical processes oftransformation in SEA (Burritt and Schaltegger, 2010). They claim to be able to create ‘win-win’ solutions where business objectives
27、can result in improved environmental outcomes.Typical of the business narrative in SEAR is the work of Baker and Schaltegger (2015a, 2015b) to whom ‘our environment, ourorganisations and our social relations exist becaus
28、e of the choices and meanings that we, as individuals and collectives, ascribe tothem over time’ (p. 270). As such, the value of nature emanates from human thoughts associated with mind-dependent re-presentations of exte
29、rnal phenomena. This approach to connection with nature occurs without critical reflection on the suppositionthat nature itself contains meaning and intrinsic value. Baker and Schaltegger (2015a, 2015b) argue that it is
30、pragmatic to shadowcorporate financial reporting through SEA (social and environmental accounting) reporting issues.2Implicit in much of the recent SEA reporting literature is the supposition that the existing framework
31、is a pragmatic justificationfor implementing these new reporting technologies (Gray, 2013). A rationale which sits more easily in the laps of practitionerswithout “rocking the boat” (see, for example, Thornton, 2013, p.
32、439). Again, this reflects the view that social and environmentalinformation in external reports will drive change. However, the focus remains on procedural performance, itself a reflection ofneoliberal ideological assum
33、ptions and viewpoints. This strand of the literature relies on assumptions of individualism and marketcompetition. Neoliberal assumptions of competition and voluntarism under-theorise the common bonds that hold societies
34、 together.Without a fully worked out holistic framework, the role of business will remain under-theorised. The sections that follow examinepolitical and social theorising which enable a greater appreciation of the connec
35、tions between nature and society.3.2. Evolutionary theoryBoth evolutionary and critical approaches to CSR exist within SEAR. Evolutionary approaches have taken the form of dialogicaccounts which aim to create social and
36、environmental change within the current social structures.3 Contrafatto, Thomson, and Monk(2015) and Thomson (2015) call for synergistic relationships between business and governmental institutions such as local councils
37、.These institutions possess the potential to inform the people in the public sphere to whom the natural environment is a significantsource of the self. Current research merely endorses liberal-democratic structures and d
38、o not consider the implications that languageand discourses have on communities (Arrington Arrington Lehman, 2013, 2017b). Theseare pressing issues given the rise of neoliberal conceptions about what is the role of bus
39、iness in community and society (see, forexample, Walker, 2016).Critical approaches to CSR establish a vision of what is now and should be; a salient feature of any change process. Our evo-lutionary approach is predicated
40、 on Thomson (2014) who advocates for Gray, Brennan, and Malpas's (2014) approch which “goesbeyond critique, presents a normative analysis of alternative ‘voyages of exploration’ for social accounting research and pro
41、vides avision of what social accounting should be” (p. 274). His vision includes “different scenarios where social accounting and ac-countability practices (appropriately reconstituted) could be effectively integrated in
42、to sustainable transformation programmes” (p.274). Guided by Thomson (2014), we believe that what differentiates critical approaches from evolutionary approaches is the desireto transform the social system which causes t
43、he environmental and social crises confronting modern communities. Evolutionistssearch to find break points in the system.In this vein, drawing on Wright's theoretical positioning, Gray et al. (2014) provide new evol
44、utionary insights. They propose anagenda for future social accounting and accountability research based on interstitial accounts which search for cracks in the socialfabric. In particular, interstitial accounts would off
45、er not only a critical perspective, but also an evolutionary SEAR focus whichconstructs a “responsible social accounting academic community aligned with the normative objective of sustainable transformation”2 Representat
46、ive of the business case literature are: George, Siti-Nabiha, Jalaludin, and Abdalla (2016), Montecchia, Giordano, and Grieco (2016). Morioka andCarvalho (2016a, 2016b), and Thijssens, Bollen, and Hassink (2016). 3 Persp
溫馨提示
- 1. 本站所有資源如無特殊說明,都需要本地電腦安裝OFFICE2007和PDF閱讀器。圖紙軟件為CAD,CAXA,PROE,UG,SolidWorks等.壓縮文件請下載最新的WinRAR軟件解壓。
- 2. 本站的文檔不包含任何第三方提供的附件圖紙等,如果需要附件,請聯(lián)系上傳者。文件的所有權(quán)益歸上傳用戶所有。
- 3. 本站RAR壓縮包中若帶圖紙,網(wǎng)頁內(nèi)容里面會有圖紙預(yù)覽,若沒有圖紙預(yù)覽就沒有圖紙。
- 4. 未經(jīng)權(quán)益所有人同意不得將文件中的內(nèi)容挪作商業(yè)或盈利用途。
- 5. 眾賞文庫僅提供信息存儲空間,僅對用戶上傳內(nèi)容的表現(xiàn)方式做保護處理,對用戶上傳分享的文檔內(nèi)容本身不做任何修改或編輯,并不能對任何下載內(nèi)容負責。
- 6. 下載文件中如有侵權(quán)或不適當內(nèi)容,請與我們聯(lián)系,我們立即糾正。
- 7. 本站不保證下載資源的準確性、安全性和完整性, 同時也不承擔用戶因使用這些下載資源對自己和他人造成任何形式的傷害或損失。
最新文檔
- [雙語翻譯]外文翻譯--社會和環(huán)境會計研究框架
- [雙語翻譯]外文翻譯--社會和環(huán)境會計研究框架中英全
- [雙語翻譯]外文翻譯--保持社會和環(huán)境會計研究的多樣性(英文)
- 2017年外文翻譯--社會和環(huán)境會計研究框架(英文).PDF
- 2017年外文翻譯--社會和環(huán)境會計研究框架
- [雙語翻譯]環(huán)境會計外文翻譯--羅馬尼亞環(huán)境會計展望(英文)
- [雙語翻譯]外文翻譯--保持社會和環(huán)境會計研究的多樣性
- [雙語翻譯]綠色會計外文翻譯--綠色會計從企業(yè)社會責任和環(huán)境披露角度反思(英文)
- 2017年外文翻譯--社會和環(huán)境會計研究框架.DOCX
- [雙語翻譯]外文翻譯--保持社會和環(huán)境會計研究的多樣性中英全
- [雙語翻譯]環(huán)境會計外文翻譯--羅馬尼亞環(huán)境會計展望
- [雙語翻譯]綠色會計外文翻譯--綠色會計從企業(yè)社會責任和環(huán)境披露角度反思
- [雙語翻譯]環(huán)境會計外文翻譯--羅馬尼亞環(huán)境會計展望中英全
- [雙語翻譯]綠色會計外文翻譯--綠色會計從企業(yè)社會責任和環(huán)境披露角度反思中英全
- [雙語翻譯]環(huán)境治理外文翻譯--政府間環(huán)境治理關(guān)系(英文)
- [雙語翻譯]環(huán)境治理外文翻譯--環(huán)境治理——從公共到私人?(英文)
- [雙語翻譯]鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)選舉外文翻譯(英文)
- [雙語翻譯]高層建筑外文翻譯(英文)
- 2015年外文翻譯--保持社會和環(huán)境會計研究的多樣性(英文).PDF
- [雙語翻譯]外文翻譯--創(chuàng)業(yè)融資和技術(shù)轉(zhuǎn)讓(英文)
評論
0/150
提交評論