Search results

This study aims to fill the gaps in mandated reports with social accounts to provide more inclusive accountability during a crisis using the illustrative example of Anglicare’s Newmarch House during a deadly COVID-19 outbreak.

This study uses a close-reading method to analyse Anglicare’s annual review, reports, board meeting minutes and Royal Commission into Aged Care submissions. Informed by Foucault’s concept of biopolitics, the study collocates alternate “social accounts” in the form of investigative journalism, newspaper articles and media commentary on the events that transpired at Newmarch House to unveil a more nuanced and human-centric rendering of the ramifications of a public health/aged care crisis.

COVID-19 exacerbated pre-existing issues within the aged care sector, exemplified by Newmarch House. The privileging of financial concerns and lack of care, leadership and accountability contributed to residents’ physical, emotional and psychological distress. The biopolitical policy pursued by powerful actors let die vulnerable individuals while simultaneously making live more productive citizens and “the economy”.

Organisations express their accountability by using financial information provided by accounting, even during circumstances with more prevailing humanistic concerns. A transformational shift in how we define, view and teach accounting is required to recognise accounting as a social and moral practice that should instead prioritise human dignity and care for the betterment of our world.

This paper contributes to the limited literature on aged care, extending particularly into the impact of COVID-19 while contributing to the literature concerned with crisis accountability. To the best of the author’s knowledge, this paper is also the first to examine a form of biopolitics centred on making live something other than persons – the economy.

This paper draws on the concepts of biopolitics and neoliberal governmentality to provide a sociological analysis of the strategic turn in management accounting.

This conceptual and review paper addresses four interrelated questions: How can the early history of management accounting be revisited from a biopolitical angle? How has strategising been linked to the neoliberal evolution of capitalism? How has this neoliberal connection transformed management accounting into its new form of strategising? What are the implications of this transformation for future research and pedagogical practices in management accounting?

Management accounting is strategised in four interrelated directions: by absorbing the jurisdictional and veridictional roles of the market into the calculative practices of management accounting; by transforming management accounting's centripetal hierarchical order of calculations to a centrifugal order the neoliberal governmentality demanded; by re-calculating the point of production as a site in which labour now takes the form of entrepreneurs of the self, performing not only material but also immaterial elements of managerial labour; and by rescoping management accounting to address issues the “fourth or the global age of security” brought, including the social and the environmental ones.

The research expands the existing frames of reference for exploring contemporary calculative practices in neoliberal governmentality.

Strategic turn in management accounting implicates in issues of security, governance and ethics and offers “new opportunities” for expanding management accounting's relevance beyond economic enterprises to various civil society and political constituencies.

This paper makes a theoretical contribution to management accounting's contemporary developments by demonstrating how it moves into biopolitical circulation.

Purpose – Using Foucault's concepts of biopolitics and governmentality along with sociological constructions of risk, this chapter asks, “What definitions and procedures have states used in their legislation about FAS to justify state intervention? What are the social and policy implications?”

Methodology/approach – Qualitative content analysis of state legislation enacted into law.

Findings – Against a backdrop of child abuse which justifies intervention, states use different techniques of biopolitics to secure governance over pregnant women and their developing fetuses, including (a) a social history of prenatal alcohol consumption; (b) a diagnosis of FAS in the child; and/or (c) a visible or measurable physiological characteristic of the newborn/child associated with FAS.

Social implications – This chapter extends the analysis of alcohol consumption by pregnant women to a policy level and examines central questions about the government's role in the biopolitical framing of prenatal alcohol use and the differential assignment of risk and responsibility.

Originality/value of chapter – This chapter contributes to work on maternal–fetal conflict, risk, and governmentality in women's reproductive health.

This chapter argues that neoliberal governmentality in immunization relocates the Turkish state's position regarding vaccine and immunization policies. Neoliberalism is often discussed in the context of privatization, performance, and effectiveness separately. However, more attention should be paid to the set of strategies that are employed in public policy processes to manage populations in terms of immunization, while intertwining power with knowledge. Following Foucault's concept of governmentality and taking it further within the context of biopolitics, this chapter focuses on different knowledge practices regarding vaccine and immunization policies in Turkey. In doing so, this case study applies a post-structural analysis to examine vaccine production, vaccine know-how, and immunization policies inscribed in policy documents as a form of knowledge practice. The analysis sheds light on the reflexive transformation of the concept of biopolitics, which is moving from state-oriented knowledge practices toward a neoliberal governmentality of immunization.

The pandemic entering our lives globally challenges us to think about questions related to the cities and new forms of social life as the cities are never seen last any longer without a crisis. There have been various debates among philosophers on this issue. Some philosophers reject the new administration policies by claiming that the ‘physical distance’ required for health has been used for power under the name of ‘social distance’ with the custody of the street and point out that these policies have created new forms of control, among economically, politically, and socially. Some others are more hopeful and believe that the crisis can build a new economic and social life; it can be an opportunity to find a new starting point; especially from being confined in the pandemic process. The author will refer to Agamben’s thoughts to understand how the state of exception turned into a rule and how it affects street politics. In this context, COVID-19 is seen as a ‘state of exception’ that normalises all the dominative practices, strengthens sovereignty by designing the social/economical life like a camp. In the pandemic process, people were accustomed to isolation by the administrations under the name of social distance, just like in a camp life. At this point, Agamben’s analysis should be understood in relation to a biopolitical paradigm and can be expanded to reflect on street economy, street politics, and the life of cities.