In defence of critical realism: a reply to Baxter and Chua and Andrew and Baker

Abstract

Purpose

This is a reply to the commentaries by Baxter and Chua (2020) and Andrew and Baker (2020) on a paper previously published in this journal.

Design/methodology/approach

This is a conceptual discussion that further clarifies the differences between critical realism (CR), actor–network theory (ANT) and traditional Marxist thought as a basis for critical accounting research.

Findings

The relative merits of CR as a basis for critical accounting research are further elucidated in the light of the criticisms raised in the commentaries. In particular, the discussion of its role as a counterweight to the legacy of empiricism that hampers the possibilities of advancing radical social critique and emancipation is further developed.

Research limitations/implications

The paper clarifies what CR can and cannot do for the critical accounting project and how it may be further developed as a vehicle for emancipation.

Originality/value

The paper extends the debate about what critical accounting research is and could be.

Citation

Modell, S. (2020), "In defence of critical realism: a reply to Baxter and Chua and Andrew and Baker", Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 666-674. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-12-2019-4291