The Making of Oil-backed Indigenous Capitalism in Nigeria

There has been considerable growth in the past few years in the number and size of Nigerian companies providing services to the oil and gas industry. The capacity of these companies, enhanced by local content policy, will not only create economic development in the industry, but will also likely boost the development of Nigeria's manufacturing and service economies. While ‘Nigerian content’ faces many challenges in terms of implementation, it has made and will continue to make a significant impact on the economy of Nigeria and may also be making a significant impact on the political economy. Powerful interests have helped ensure that the Nigerian elite will be the primary beneficiaries of Nigerian content. Through interviews and case studies, this article argues that by embracing Nigerian content as a new strategy of accumulation, the elite are creating more capitalistic social relations of production in Nigeria.     

Generality of human behavior and economic philosophy

The theologian, Bruce Malina, argued in this journal (1997) that the Bible is not relevant to economics in the contemporary world. This paper contends the contrary. A body of economists and social theologians hold that a set of consistent socio-economic principles and ethics underlying the long history of the Biblical texts can be applied to the modern world, and are so intended to apply. An assumption of this group is that the Bible depicts the word of God interpreted and ultimately written down by people in their day and age. It is the socio-economic warrants in principle contained in this material that are relevant today. The argument here has two aspects. One questions Malina, concluding that he does not sustain his conclusions. The second aspect is to illustrate something of the methodology and conclusions of the economist/social theologian group that asserts the relevance of Biblical principle to contemporary society.     

Robots and us: towards an economics of the ‘Good Life’

(Expected) adverse effects of the ‘ICT Revolution’ on work and opportunities for individuals to use and develop their capacities give a new impetus to the debate on the societal implications of technology and raise questions regarding the ‘responsibility’ of research and innovation (RRI) and the possibility of achieving ‘inclusive and sustainable society’. However, missing in this debate is an examination of a possible conflict between the quest for ‘inclusive and sustainable society’ and conventional economic principles guiding capital allocation (including the funding of research and innovation). We propose that such conflict can be resolved by re-examining the nature and purpose of capital, and by recognising mainstream economics’ utilitarian foundations as an unduly restrictive subset of a wider Aristotelian understanding of choice.     

An environmentally enlightened accounting

Environmental stewardship must become a primary concern if management is to adequately fulfil its societal responsibilities. Management and accounting information systems must aggressively respond to these emerging requirements in order to support adequately the associated information needs as well as to design organizational systems that motivate and facilitate desired behavior. Our purpose here is to consider a framework useful for developing environmentally enlightening management and accounting information systems that take into account alternative environmental perspectives. The framework can be used to develop prototypes representing different levels of environmental enlightenment, and as such, can provide general guidance for moving collectives and organizations toward a more environmentally responsible posture. The framework is illustrated using an example from the salmon farming industry provided in [Geogakopoulous, G., & Thomson, I., 2004. Organic salmon farming: Risk perceptions, decision heuristics and the absence of environmental accounting. In Proceedings of the Asia Pacific Interdisciplinary Research in Accounting. Singapore, July 4–7, 2004, this paper has since been published in this edition of Accounting Forum].     

Ethical Audit Decisions: A Structuration Perspective

The public accounting profession has long relied on its reputation for integrity and veracity as justification for its professional status and monopoly privilege predicated on claims of acting in the public interest. If such status and privilege are to be justified and sustained, serious consideration of what constitutes ethical behavior, how such behavior is motivated as well as an explicit recognition of the rights and interests of affected parties constitutes an ethical imperative for the profession. Traditionally, work on ethics and auditing is quite narrow, failing to recognize the social context of individual actions, failing to identify the relevant constituencies of the profession, and failing to articulate processes through which the constituencies interests can be identified. Generally, the accounting literature has taken a cognitive perspective on ethical decision making which views the resolution of ethical dilemmas as primarily a function of the moral makeup of the actor responding within the context of the Code of Professional Conduct. The purpose of this paper is to broaden the theoretical base of ethical research, specifically within the area of professional accounting and more generally in the area of business. We propose the application of structuration theory in conjunction with stakeholder theory and a responsibility ethic. The application of stakeholder theory is a means for identifying affected constituencies. A responsibility ethic recognizes the situatedness of an individual within an ongoing professional community. Structuration theory provides a theoretical framework for articulating and investigating both the structures within which action is carried out as well as the interaction between the social structures and the actors. Taken together, the theories allow for an enhanced ability to define ethical behavior within a business context and to understand the contextual antecedents and consequences of ethical acts.     

The Role of Corporate Boards: A Roundtable Discussion of Where We're Going and Where We've Been

In this roundtable that took place at the 2016 Millstein Governance Forum at Columbia Law School, four directors of public companies discuss the changing role and responsibilities of corporate boards. In response to increasingly active investors who are looking to management and boards for more information and greater accountability, the four panelists describe the growing demands on boards for both competence and commitment to the job. Despite considerable improvements since the year 2000, and especially since the 2008 financial crisis, the clear consensus is that U.S. corporate directors must become more like owners of the corporation who “truly represent the long‐term interests of all of the shareholders.” But if activist investors appear to pose the most formidable new challenge for corporate directors—one that has the potential to lead to shortsighted managerial decision‐making—there has been another, less visible development that should be welcomed by wellrun companies that are investing in their future growth as well as meeting investors’ expectations for current performance. According to Raj Gupta, who serves on the boards of HewlettPackard, Delphi Automotive, Arconic, and the Vanguard Group,

相似文献   

Critical accounting and communicative action: On the limits of consensual deliberation

Richard Laughlin's work provides a framework for scholarly engagement that includes process (middle range thinking), a societal model of administration, and a means for reflexive and collective decision-making. The framework draws on Habermas’ theory of communicative action, which is underpinned by a deliberative, consensus-oriented conceptualization of democracy. Based on recent developments in political theory and related applied fields, we argue that deliberative democracy is only one of several democratic bases useful in understanding and/or improving accounting and accountability systems to better meet the needs of diverse contemporary societies. In particular, we contend that, in relying on Habermasian-style deliberative democracy, Laughlin's conceptualizations do not fully account for the dimensions of disagreement and difference in democratic interactions. Drawing on the work of agonistic political theorists and studies from the applied fields of communicative planning and critical policy analysis, we argue that deliberative democracy approaches based on ideal speech criteria and universalistic consensus need to be balanced with theorizations that recognize the reality and value of more open-ended and unfinalizable struggles among actors with different histories, cultures, and/or ideological orientations. While cognizant of the challenges involved in bridging deliberative-agonistic conceptualizations of democracy, such endeavors provide opportunities for (re)theorizations that offer promise for enriching critical accounting by, as we argue, reinforcing the critical/political in critical accounting. To this end, we consider possibilities of forging links between Laughlin's work and our own proposals for dialogic/polylogic accountings based on agonistic democracy in an effort to foster more enabling accounting praxis.