Search results

The young man in the library folded up his list, turned away with a disgruntled look, and muttered something about there not being a single thing to read. I am not given to speaking to strangers, but his muttered remark was so obviously wrong that I could not let it pass. “Well”, he said, “perhaps it is an exaggeration, but there's nothing available in my line. None of the books I want ever seems to be in”.

The paper aims to report on a study for the European Commission that aimed to take a forward‐looking and broadly socio‐economic approach to the scope of future universal service in the light of technological and market developments.

The paper is based on a variety of primary and secondary research methods including desk research, literature review, expert interviews and workshop, scenario planning, needs and SWOT analysis.

The paper finds that the fundamental concept of universal service as a safety net for the disadvantaged remains valid as we look to the future. While the scope of universal service might evolve as the Information Society develops, the case for expansion of universal service across a diverse EU‐27, for instance to include broadband or mobile, is weak. The best way of achieving universal or near‐universal service is by ensuring a competitive European telecommunications market. Any remaining gaps in provision should be addressed by very targeted support for the disadvantaged and vulnerable.

The paper summarises a significant study intended to take a fresh look at universal service in the European Union.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the trend of integrated reporting (IR) practice following the introduction of an “apply or explain” IR requirement in South Africa. In particular, the authors examine whether the IR practice is ceremonial or substantive in the context of a soft regulatory environment.

By way of content analyses, the authors examine the extent and quality of IR practice using an IR checklist developed based on normative understanding of existing IR guidelines. The evidence is drawn from 246 integrated reports of large South African companies over a three-year period (2011-2013), following the introduction of IR requirement in South Africa.

The results show a significant increase in the extent and quality of IR practice. The findings also reveal significant improvements in individual IR categories such as connectivity of information, materiality determination process and reliability and completeness of the integrated reports. However, despite the increasing trend and evidence of both symbolic and substantive IR practice, the authors conclude that the current IR practice is largely ceremonial in nature, produced to acquire organisational legitimacy.

For academics, the authors argue that there is a need to move away from the “what” and “why” aspects of the IR agenda to “how” IR should work inside organisations. In particular, academics should engage with firms through interventionist research to help firms implement integrated thinking and substantive reporting practices. For organisations, the findings draw attention to specific aspects of IR that require improvement. For policymakers, the study provides evidence based on the developmental stage of IR practice and draws attention to certain areas that need clarification. In particular, the International Integrated Reporting Council and Integrated Reporting Committee of South Africa should provide detailed guidelines on connectivity of information, material issues and disclosure of multiple capitals and their trade-offs. Finally, for educators, in line with the ACCA’s embedment of IR in its accounting courses, there is a need to incorporate IR in the curriculum; in particular, the authors argue that the best way to advance IR is in a “ubiquitous” spread in accounting and management courses.

This study provides empirical account of IR practice over time in the context of a regulatory IR environment. The construction of an IR checklist developed based on normative understanding of local and international IR guidelines is another novel approach of this study.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the implications of IR reforms in South Africa on corporate disclosure practices of South African companies. In particular, the authors explore initial trends in corporate disclosures following the adoption of IR practice.

Drawing from Suchman’s (1995) framework of strategic and institutional legitimacy, the authors use content analysis to examine corporate disclosure practices. The authors conduct industry-specific analyses based on various industries to explore corporate disclosures practices across and within various industries in South Africa. The evidence is drawn from 246 integrated reports of large South African companies across six major industries over a three-year period (2011-2013), a period following the introduction of an “apply or explain” IR requirement in South Africa.

The results first show a significant increase in the overall amount of corporate disclosures following the adoption of IR practice. In particular, the authors find that intellectual capital and human capital disclosure categories have increased over time, with relational capital disclosures showing a decreasing trend. Second, the authors find that corporate disclosures are increasingly becoming institutionalised over time across and within industries following the adoption of IR practice. However, companies fail to provide meaningful disclosures on the interdependencies and trade-offs between the capitals, or components of a capital following the adoption of IR practice. Overall, the authors find that companies use specific disclosure strategies to respond to external pressures (strategic legitimacy), and that such disclosure strategies are increasingly becoming institutionalised across and within various industries (institutional legitimacy).

The theoretical implication of this study is that the strategic and institutional perspectives of legitimacy theory are complementary, rather than conflicting, and dovetail to explain corporate reporting practices. In terms of practical implications, the adoption of specific reporting frameworks such as the emerging IR framework is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, such reporting frameworks could potentially enhance comparability and consistency of organisational reports across and within industries. On the other hand, corporate reports could become a set of monotonous reports motivated by considerations other organisational accountability. Hence, to overcome the latter, this study emphasises the importance of specific accountability metrics and reporting guidelines, rather than the current generic IR guidelines, to enhance organisational reporting practices.

The paper’s longitudinal analysis of a large sample of integrated reports following the adoption of IR practice has the potential to inform growing academic research and ongoing policy initiatives for the emerging IR agenda.

The hoary old problem of fiction standards is still with us, it seems, and the question of whether or not to provide what is alternatively called “the ephemeral” and “the meretricious” continues to be mooted extensively at professional meetings. Meanwhile, most of us willingly supply at least a quota of romances, thrillers and westerns for those hordes of voracious readers who are so fiercely addicted to them. We adopt a policy of appeasement, and, within certain limitations, all is well. Romances, we may tell ourselves, are not all elongated versions of stories in pulp magazines. Thrillers have a high‐brow pedigree: even people with the intellectual attainments of Bertrand Russell revel in them. And westerns—

Mr. Carter dislikes grubby books. So do I. I regret very much that it is not yet possible for me to assert that my own libraries at Cambridge contain none. All our fiction stocks, for example, and the junior stocks at two branch libraries, could be in much better condition. We are steadily improving them but a lot still remains to be done. I believe that our experience is not unrepresentative. At present we spend five shillings per head of population on our library service.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the use of narratives in biodiversity reports as a mechanism to raise the awareness of biodiversity’s importance. By classifying biodiversity narratives into 14 categories of biodiversity values this paper investigates whether the explanations for biodiversity conservation used by UK local councils are line with shallow, intermediate or deep philosophies.

This study used content analysis to examine the disclosures on biodiversity’s importance in the biodiversity action plans published by UK local councils. The narratives were first identified and then allocated into 14 categories of biodiversity value. Then, they were ascribed to either shallow (resource conservation, human welfare ecology and preservationism), intermediate (environmental stewardship and moral extensionism) or deep philosophies.

UK local councils explained biodiversity’s importance mainly in terms of its instrumental value, in line with shallow philosophies such as human welfare ecology and resource conservation. UK local councils sought to raise awareness of biodiversity’ importance by highlighting values that are important for the stakeholders that are able to contribute towards biodiversity conservation such as landowners, residents, visitors, business and industries. The authors also found that local councils’ biodiversity strategies were strongly influenced by 2010, the International Year of Biodiversity.

This paper is one of the few accounting studies that engages with the literature on environmental ethics to investigate biodiversity. In line with stakeholder theory, it indicates that explanations on biodiversity’s importance based on anthropocentric philosophies are considered more effective in informing those stakeholders whose behaviour needs to be changed to improve biodiversity conservation.

Expanding upon the special issue entitled “The special issue: AAAJ and research innovation”, published in 2012, this introduction to the second special issue of the genre is concerned with selected thematic special issues of AAAJ appearing during the second decade of publication from 1998 to 2007. The paper explores research innovation by means of the thematic issues addressed from this decade.

This paper provides a background to this special issue and an outline of the articles included. The issue features seven retrospective/prospective articles written by the guest editors of special thematic issues published during 1998 to 2007, supplemented where appropriate by other co-authors or, in one instance, by a new author team.

The guest editors and other contributing authors sought to identify and discuss the progression of each field since the AAAJ special issue was published, and to assess the impacts of the special issues to this progression, and to propose future research developments in the designated fields.

This commentary on articles published is no substitute for carefully reading these contributions. The papers provide a comprehensive review of key developments in the literature until most recently and explore the opportunities for further innovative interdisciplinary accounting research.

This AAAJ special issue, and the earlier 2012 prototype, constitute a different approach to producing special issues, where the original special issues are revisited with a view to assessing research trends and impacts and to identifying research developments which are ripe for pursuing in each of these interdisciplinary accounting fields.

The purpose of this paper is to review and synthesise academic research in environmental accounting and demonstrate its shortcomings. It provokes scholars to rethink their conceptions of “accounts” and “nature”, and alongside others in this AAAJ special issue, provides the basis for an agenda for theoretical and empirical research that begins to “ecologise” accounting.

Utilising a wide range of thought from accounting, geography, sociology, political ecology, nature writing and social activism, the paper provides an analysis and critique of key themes associated with 40 years research in environmental accounting. It then considers how that broad base of work in social science, particularly pragmatic sociology (e.g. Latour, Boltanksi and Thévenot), could contribute to reimagining an ecologically informed accounting.

Environmental accounting research overwhelmingly focuses on economic entities and their inputs and outputs. Conceptually, an “information throughput” model dominates. There is little or no environment in environmental accounting, and certainly no ecology. The papers in this AAAJ special issue contribute to these themes, and alongside social science literature, indicate significant opportunities for research to begin to overcome them.

This paper outlines and encourages the advancement of ecological accounts and accountabilities drawing on conceptual resources across social sciences, arts and humanities. It identifies areas for research to develop its interdisciplinary potential to contribute to ecological sustainability and social justice.

How to “ecologise” accounting and conceptualise human and non-human entities has received little attention in accounting research. This paper and AAAJ special issue provides empirical, practical and theoretical material to advance further work.

The purpose of this paper is to document organizations' self descriptions of why they initiated sustainable development (SD) reporting and explore these explanations using an institutional theory framework.

Constructs organizational narratives from semi‐structured in‐depth interviews with reporting champions who participated in an SD reporting workshop series. The narratives are analysed using institutional theory to explore how regulatory, normative and cognitive institutions combine with organizational dynamics to influence SD reporting activity.

For these particular organizations, choosing to engage in reporting appears not to be a rational choice. Rather reporting is initiated because it has come to be an accepted part of pursuing a differentiation strategy, it offers some contribution to existing business challenges, and organizations value the rewards it offers. This rationale constitutes a cognitive mechanism within institutional theory.

The paper provides useful information on initiating sustainable development reporting based on organizations' self descriptions.