مقاله انگلیسی رایگان در مورد چارچوبی برای تحقیقات حسابداری محیطی و اجتماعی – الزویر 2017

Abstract

This essay explores recent trends in social and environmental accounting research (SEAR). We offer a basic SEAR typology to examine the limitations and possibilities within the current discourse. SEAR has taken a corporate approach in liberal democratic social space. Our typology examines the opportunities for SEAR to interpret and create change in social practice.

Introduction

Accounting has traditionally been depicted as an essentially historical practice, but recent global dilemmas open social and environmental accounting research (SEAR) to issues of: 1) the increasing protectionism, dissatisfaction with political processes and possible tensions with globalisation in the post-Brexit and Trump era, 2) climate change policy, practice and reporting in a world marked by commodified news and duplicitious capitalism, and 3) the growing neo-liberalisation of NGOs and public sector institutions amidst the deepening refugee crisis and fracturing of nation-states (see, for example, Arnold and Sikka, 2001; Sikka and Lehman, 2015).

This essay is intended as a guide for those approaching the area for the first time to explore what SEAR is. Recent SEAR has taken a managerial turn which (arguably) does not fully explore the dilemmas that the natural environment poses for all citizens and nation-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 fundamentally reflect on itself, its theoretical 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) observation that “with the rise and rise of neoliberalism, those with the power and the money have systematically and very effectively ensured that they have more of both at the expense of wider society”. Through the literature, our aim is to determine how SEAR can contribute to improving our relationships with the natural environment. Our paper offers a tentative classification developed from four ideal types: procedural ethics, critical theory, postmodernism and interpretivism. In SEAR, these have metamorphosed into the business case, critical theory, radical theory and critical realism/interpretivism. Recent research, as outlined in Table 2, shows how these strands of thought no longer operate according to the grand narratives outlined below in Table 1.