Search results

This study explores the evolving dynamics of participatory accountability within humanitarian contexts, where digitally connected crisis-affected populations demand better accountability from aid organisations, and as a result, shift traditional hierarchies and relationships between humanitarian agencies and beneficiaries.

This study employs a case study approach, focussing on the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), to investigate how participatory accountability manifests outside formal practices and re-emerges in social media spaces. The study analyses internal organisational challenges and explores the implications of digital platforms on humanitarian practices. The authors employ Chouliaraki and Georgiou's (2015, 2019, 2022) networks of mediation, particularly intermediation and transmediation, to understand how digital expressions translate to offline contexts and reshape meanings and actions.

The study reveals that social media platforms enable beneficiaries to demand participatory accountability beyond traditional practices, democratising humanitarian response and challenging power structures. These effects are multifaceted, introducing enhanced democratic and inclusive humanitarian aid as well as new vulnerabilities. Digital intermediaries and gatekeepers play pivotal roles in curating and disseminating crisis-affected voices, which, when transmediated, result in nuanced meanings and understandings. Positive effects include capturing the potential of digital networks for democratic aid, while negative effects give rise to moral responsibilities, necessitating proactive measures from the ICRC.

This study contributes to the literature by highlighting the impact of digital technology, particularly social media, on participatory accountability. It expands the understanding of the evolving landscape of accountability within the humanitarian sector and offers critical insights into the complexities and dual purposes of participatory accountability in contexts of resistance. Employing Chouliaraki and Georgiou's networks of mediation adds depth to the understanding of digital technology's role in shaping participatory practices and introduces the concept of transmediation as a bridge between digital expressions and tangible actions.

The objectives of this study are twofold: (1) to investigate whether the increase in FLFP enriches women's inclusive rights (economic, social, and political), (2) whether the effect of FLFP on inclusive rights is different across different economics (developed vs developing).

The study utilizes panel data encompassing 188 countries spanning the years 1981–2011. Discrete choice models, namely ordered probit and ordered logit, are employed, while also controlling for observable heterogeneity across countries, including factors such as inflation, income inequality, education, and human rights.

We find a positive association between FLFP and all aspects of women's rights (economic, social, and political). The results related to developed and underdeveloped countries are robust for women's political rights; however, the effect of FLFP on women's social and economic rights is insignificant for developing countries.

The need for continuous policy commitment to gender equality may be needed to bring about equality of inclusive rights (economic, social, and political rights) and to fulfill the sustainable development goals (SDGs). Therefore, the current study particularly adds value in existing research by investigating (empirically) the link between FLFP and different dimensions of women's inclusive rights.

For decades, conflict resolution (CR) educators working cross-culturally have struggled with a fundamental dilemma – whether to offer western, evidence-based approaches through a top-down (prescriptive) training process or to use a bottom-up (elicitive) strategy that builds on local cultural knowledge of effective in situ conflict management. This study aims to explore which conditions that prompted experienced CR instructors to use more prescriptive or elicitive approaches to such training in a foreign culture and the implications for training outcomes.

There are two parts to this study. First, the authors conducted a literature review to identify basic conditions that might be conducive to conducting prescriptive or elicitive cross-cultural CR training. The authors then tested the identified conditions in a survey with experienced CR instructors to identify different conditions that afforded prescriptive or elicitive approaches. Exploratory factor analysis and regression were used to assess which conditions determined whether a prescriptive or elicitive approach produced better outcomes.

In general, although prescriptive methods were found to be more efficient, elicitive methods produced more effective, culturally appropriate, sustainable and culturally sensitive training. Results revealed a variety of instructor, participant and contextual factors that influenced whether a prescriptive or elicitive approach was applied and found to be more suitable.

This study used empirical survey data with practicing experts to provide insight and guidance into when to use different approaches to CC-CR training effectively.

This paper introduces the special issue on Race and Accounting and Accountability. In so doing, it explores racism in its historical and contemporary forms, the role of accounting and accountability in enabling racism and racial discrimination and also efforts of redress and resistance.

We reflect on several critical themes to demonstrate the pervasive and insidious nature of racism and, review the literature on race and racism in accounting, focusing on studies that followed the seminal work by Annisette and Prasad (2017) who called for more research. We also review the six papers included in this special issue.

While many overt systems of racial domination experienced throughout history have subsided, racism is engrained in our everyday lives and in broader societal structures in more covert and nuanced forms. Yet, in accounting, as Annisette and Prasad noted, the focus has continued to be on the former. This special issue shifts this imbalance – five of the six papers focus on contemporary racism. Moreover, it demonstrates that although accounting technologies can and do facilitate racism and racist practices, accountability and counter accounts offer avenues for calling out and disrupting the powers and privileges that underlie racial discrimination and, resistance by un-silencing minority groups subjected to discrimination and injustice.

This introduction and the papers in the special issue offer rich empirical and theoretical contributions to accounting and accountability research on race and racial discrimination. We hope they inspire future race research to nurture progress towards a true post-racial society.