Current Trends within Social and Environmental Accounting Research: A Literature Review

Given the recent rise in the evolution and maturity of social and environmental accounting (SEA) research and scholarship, we provide a literature review of the current trends within this area in a concise and harmonized manner for a wider audience in academia and practice. More specifically, we visit the current state of scholarly work, which can be useful in facilitating future research questions and further development of SEA research associated with relations between corporate social performance (CSP), corporate social disclosure (CSD), and corporate financial performance (CFP). Our goal is to offer insights to the current state of SEA research that is informative to both novice and expert SEA scholars, with the hope to promote and stimulate further advancement of research in this particular area. Drawing knowledge from relevant disciplines such as accounting, management, finance, and economics, this article visits the current trends within SEA research in terms of definition, research topics, theoretical viewpoints, methodological approaches, as well as suggestions for future research.     

Making Sense of Social Practice: Theoretical Pluralism in Public Sector Accounting Research

Abstract: This paper explores the use of theory in public sector accounting research. The aim of this paper is to offer a critical review of the various approaches adopted and a way forward for researchers in this area. The paper also explores the debate between theoretical purity and theoretical pluralism. It presents an analysis of the different theoretical approaches used over the last sixteen years in public sector accounting research. While around a third of the papers did not adopt an explicit theoretical framework, nearly half of the papers did. The two most popular theoretical approaches were neo‐institutional and economic theory. Theoretical insights have been drawn from organisational and political theory while sociological approaches from Habermas, Foucault, Latour, Giddens and Bourdieu are all evident. In conclusion many of the papers blend theoretical insights from different authors in an attempt to better make sense of the complexity of public sector activity and support an argument for theoretical pluralism.     

Social and environmental accounting teaching in UK and Irish Universities: a research note on changes between 1993 and 1998.

This research note reports on a questionnaire–based survey of the teaching of social and environmental accounting (SEA) in undergraduate accounting degrees throughout the British Isles in 1998. The study is a replication and extension of Owen et al. 's (1994) survey in 1993 and analyses the significant changes from that study. The results suggest that environmental accounting is still the most prevalent SEA topic taught; and educators teach SEA because of the political prominence of SEA issues. Any absence of SEA teaching appears to be due to lack of time and space in crowded curricula. SEA appears not to be taught in some universities despite sustained interest in, and debate about, the development of environmental and social responsibility agendas throughout the 1990s. As the accounting literature speaks of the failure of teaching to reflect business and practitioner needs (AECC, 1990b), the paper posits that the lack of SEA teaching may be seen as an illustration of this failing.     

What's new about New accounts? Assessing change proposals for social and environmental accounting

This paper considers recent calls to rejuvenate social and environmental accounting, particularly Gray, Brennan, and Malpas (2014). They see the history of SEA as one of few successes and many failures, warranting radical change. Others consider change-potentials of SEA as under-recognised. SEA faces a conundrum: has it failed? If so, why? And what to do now? I find SEA has contributed to its own ills, and that change-potentials of accounting remain under-explored. I suggest tensions between SEA and accounting may be ameliorated by revisioning the relationship. Migration outside the orbit of accounting without doing so invites unintended consequences.     

Dialogic framing of accounting information systems in social and environmental accounting domains: Lessons from,and for,microfinance

The successful design, application and evaluation of accounting information systems (AIS) in social and environmental accounting (SEA) domains increasingly requires that stakeholder interests be addressed. Because various stakeholders have competing interests, new thinking about how these can be accommodated is needed. Brown (2009) proposes a dialogic framework following from agonistic democracy, which takes the position that when consensus is not possible, progress can be facilitated through ongoing commitment to accounting processes that represent and accommodate competing perspectives. Previous work in AIS (Blackburn et al., 2014; Dillard and Yuthas, 2013) builds on Brown's work to develop a theoretical perspective useful in the AIS-SEA context that takes pluralism seriously. We extend this line of research by exploring developments in the microfinance industry and illustrate how the agonistic accounting principles can be useful in considering AIS-SEA design, implementation and evaluation as well as the initiation of innovation and change in the industry. Microfinance provides an example of an antagonistic context where the social mission/values come into unambiguous conflict with the economic objectives of microfinance institutions. Agonistics suggests that such conflict, if acknowledged and facilitated, has the potential for fostering innovative responses and reducing the likelihood of one perspective dominating the others. Relating accomplishments in this field to the principles of dialogic accounting demonstrates how this perspective can be incorporated into the design and use of systems that address social and environmental objectives as well as economic ones. We explore both accomplishments and shortcomings in achievement of pluralistic systems in the microfinance domain.     

Tracking the numbers: Across accounting and finance,organizations and markets

This introductory essay reviews recent advances in the emergent field of social studies of finance (SSF) and, subsequently, sets out to illustrate how a closer engagement with SSF might benefit research interests in accounting and vice versa. Finally, it provides a sketch of how mutual engagements across the fields might be intensified in what is identified as an emerging accounting and finance track in the discourse of social science. The prospects of a broader field of research exploring the use of financial numbers across social settings, markets, organizations and cultures are projected, and the possibility of articulating a strong sociological programme of research is considered.     

‘We do good things,don’t we?’: ‘Blended Value Accounting’ in social entrepreneurship

This paper presents an exploratory analysis of the emergent reporting practices used by social entrepreneurs in terms of their institutional settings and strategic objectives. These reporting practices not only account for financial performance but also disclose more nuanced and contingent social and environmental impacts and outcomes. Furthermore, they act as symbolic objects expressing the market orientation of many socially entrepreneurial organizations in that they aim to provide more complete and transparent disclosure of a variety of performance impacts. Conceptually, this paper draws upon approaches developed within the sociology of accounting as institutional practice and uses three theoretical interpretations to conceptualize the function and effects of reporting, disclosure, and audit in social entrepreneurship: positivist; critical theorist; and interpretative. A discussion of five case studies leads to the development of a new theoretical construct – ‘Blended Value Accounting’ – that constitutes a spectrum of disclosure logics used by social entrepreneurs to access resources and realize organizational mission objectives with key stakeholders. Conclusions consider some further questions around socially entrepreneurial reporting practices and strategies and suggest some new lines of research going forward.     

Agonizing over engagement: SEA and the “death of environmentalism” debates

Social and environmental accounting (SEA) is currently going through a period of critical self-analysis. Fundamental questions are being raised about how SEA should be defined, who should be doing the defining, and if, how and whom it should engage. We attempt to enrich these debates by drawing on the political philosophy of agonistic pluralism and a set of debates about engagement within the environmental movement – “the death of environmentalism” debates. We set forth the “Death” debates and, in doing so, contextualize and theorize the contested nature of SEA engagement using agonistic pluralism. In contrast to consensually oriented approaches to SEA, the desired outcome is not necessarily resolution of ideological differences but to imagine, develop, and support democratic processes wherein these differences can be recognized and engaged. We construe the “Death” debates as illustrative of the contestable practical and political issues facing both SEA and progressive social movements generally, demonstrating the range of deliberations necessary in contemplating effective engagement programs. The SEA community, and civil society groups, can benefit from the more overtly political perspective provided by agonistic pluralism. By surfacing and engaging with various antagonisms in this wider civic sphere, SEA can more effectively respond to, and move beyond, traditional politically conservative, managerialist discourses.     

Accounting history and theorising about organisations

Historical accounting research has a substantial track record of using a variety of theoretical insights to better understand how and why accounting has contributed to, and been affected by, organisational change and development. The article outlines the emergence of a range of theories that have been employed by accounting historians, against the background of the development of accounting history as a significant disciplinary field within accounting research. From its investigation of accounting historians’ approaches to studying accounting as a central practice in organisational processes, it reveals how historical accounting studies have been informed by and contributed to theorisation of such organisational phenomena. The article concludes that theory is largely used to provide conceptual frameworks for historical narratives, with historical accounting research often focused on case studies of single organisations or organisational settings. However, theory has also been mobilised at more general levels, to provide meta-narratives of the rise of capitalism and the emergence of managerialism. Far from treating accounting as technical practice, accounting historians are revealed as conceiving accounting as social practice, impacting both human behaviour and organisational and social functioning and development. As social practice, accounting emerges deeply embedded and pervasive in organisations and societies.     

Beyond the ticket and the brand: imagining an accounting research future

This paper presents a reflective critique of the current university environment and the state of accounting research with a view to envisaging the latter’s forward trajectory, particularly in terms of emerging subject areas, theoretical perspectives and methodological traditions. It considers the contemporary fixation upon research performance indicators and warns of their associated impact on the role and orientation of academic researchers. The emergence of specialist interdisciplinary and qualitative research communities within the accounting discipline are presented as opportunities for the invigoration of the accounting project. Nonetheless, the pursuit of research esteem indicators is argued to risk disengaging researchers from policy and practice concerns. Future roles, responsibilities and intentions of scholars are visited in the light of these observations.     

Is accounting a global or a local discipline? evidence from major research journals

Accounting research is torn between two competing forces. On the one hand, a quest for general results and internationalization of financial markets calls for a global approach and international co-operation. On the other hand, domestic institutional settings call for research that deals with the relevant problems of the existing accounting systems. In this paper we address the issue of how global or local the accounting research community currently is through an analysis of empirical studies published by six leading English language accounting research journals from the U.S.A., Europe and Australia, during the period 1984–1993. Our findings indicate that accounting still is a rather local discipline by nature: both empirical evidence and authors are significantly clustered along country lines. We find that 77% of papers fall in a category where the origin of the researcher, data and the journal, is the same. Especially there is a close link between the origin of the researcher and that of the data. The interpretation of the empirical findings lead us to a view of competing research élites. A powerful and currently dominating U.S. academic élite is centred around The Accounting Review, the Journal of Accounting Research and the Journal of Accounting and Economics; and an emerging, mostly European élite around Accounting, Organizations and Society. The functioning of research élites produces competing quality criteria which are intertwined with methodological and cultural issues. The emerging “policentric oligarchy” of research élites helps to remove institutional barriers to the knowledge production process and offers legitimate outlets for a wider range of approaches.     

A review of Australian management accounting research: 1980–2009

This paper reviews 231 papers published by 10 leading management accounting journals between the years 1980 and 2009. The review is structured according to research topics, research settings, research theories, research method and primary data analysis technique. Based on the results of this review, the paper provides reflections on the evolution of Australian management accounting research over the last 30 years and discusses opportunities for future research.     

Governmentality in accounting and accountability: A case study of embedding sustainability in a supply chain

This paper examines how the introduction of sustainability accounting has been used by an organization as a means to seek to govern social, economic and environmental issues relating to suppliers. The concept of governmentality and four analytics of government are proposed as a means to examine systematic ways of exercising power and authority. This theoretical framework illuminates the specific rationales and practices of government that enable particular aspirations of reform – such as sustainability – to be constituted. The analysis is informed by the discussion of the implementation of sustainability-orientated regimes of practice in the context of a single supply chain within a major supermarket chain in the UK against the theoretical analytics of government. The paper provides novel empirical insights into how sustainability accounting shaped forms of power, rationales and practices in a supply chain. It explores the extent to which senior decision-takers frame and use sustainability accounting to foster disciplinary effects based ostensibly upon social and environmental goals. These are found in practice to be reformulated primarily according to an economic (rather than social or environmental) regime of practice.     

A dialogical framing of AIS–SEA design

Previous literature has proposed dialogical accounting as a means wherein accounting information systems can support competing, and potentially incompatible, information needs of various interested constituencies (Dillard and Yuthas, 2013). Here we extend that work by focusing on the design of social and environmental accounting (SEA) information systems that take pluralism seriously. We theorize the challenges of designing such systems wherein they are expected to address the needs of multiple users with different interests that may emerge from different economic, social, political and/or cultural perspectives, as they relate, for example, to sustainability reporting, ethical investment, participatory development studies and indigenous resource management. Using dialogic engagement, we attempt to move beyond traditional, and often highly constrained, conceptualizations of “stakeholder engagement” and propose a framework for undertaking systems design that can facilitate high quality and relevant SEA information systems that meet the needs of a wide range of actual and/or potential users. We provide an example of how the framework might be enacted using a framing methodology.     

New development: Managing and accounting for sustainable development across generations in public services—and call for papers

Social and environmental justice across generations is a fundamental attribute of sustainable development. In this article, which is also a call for papers for a future theme in Public Money & Management (PMM), we develop our case for further research on how governments and public service organizations seek to address sustainable development in their decision-making processes. We believe that accounting for social and environmental aspects is an underdeveloped area of research and practice that is worthy of further critical enquiry. We therefore call on researchers and practitioners to submit their research to a themed issue of PMM on managing and accounting for sustainable development in public services.     

Financial and external reporting research: the broadening corporate governance challenge

This study provides a critical examination of contemporary financial and external reporting research from a corporate governance perspective. Adopting Hines' social constructionist approach to financial reporting, the study investigates research into accounting publishing patterns, published reviews of major subject areas within financial and external reporting research, and interviews a sample of accounting professors in British universities. The findings reveal a strong North American economics and finance-based positivist influence, a largely uncritical acceptance of accounting's subservience to the demands of the market, a reluctance to engage major policy questions and broader reporting constituencies. These appear to be conditioned to a large degree by internal features and pressures within the academic research community. Evidence is presented for greater attention to major environmental shifts impacting accounting and communities globally, a reinvigoration of researchers' direct engagement with reporting constituents in the field, a revisiting of major accounting, business, social and environmental policy questions, and a preparedness to address today's major corporate governance concerns of communities and governments.     

EXAMINING THE PRACTICAL RELEVANCE OF PUBLIC SECTOR MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTING RESEARCH

Concerns exist that practical relevance is becoming devalued as accounting scholars respond to signals about what sort of research ‘counts’. We categorize public sector management accounting papers in six leading journals according to two criteria: the practical orientation of the research objective(s), and whether the conclusions communicate issues of practical relevance. The findings reveal that most of the papers are directed towards understanding or critiquing the use of management accounting techniques, while other practically oriented research objectives are largely absent. Although half of the papers identify practical research implications, few suggest guidelines for practice. Reflections are offered on the role of leading journals in shaping how practical relevance is valued in accounting research.     

Agency research in managerial accounting: A second look

This paper surveys the recent agency literature, emphasizing its managerial accounting implications. The paper first describes and compares three branches of the agency literature. Attention is paid to the assumptions, focus, contributions and criticisms of each branch. Empirical tests of implications of the agency model are reviewed. Recent theoretical agency papers with managerial accounting implications are then discussed. The last section of the paper discusses possible directions in future research which may increase the insights which the agency paradigm can bring to managerial accounting research.