Search results

The purpose of this study is to examine the Nigerian Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative’s (NEITI) ineffectiveness in delivering public accountability to Nigerian citizens. Although this failure is recognised in prior literature, the authors contend that NEITI’s role is obscured by one-sided links to external factors.

The conceptual framework presented in this study is built around Dillard and Vinnari’s (2019) distinction between different accountability systems and Brown and Dillard’s (2020) complimentary insights on the technologies of hubris and humility. The analytical framework draws from Grant and Keohane’s (2005) modes of accountability, which the authors use to articulate conflicting accountability demands (to-whom and for-what) of NEITI’s operating relationships. Combined, the authors analyse official documents, media, reports and interview responses from members of NEITI’s National Stakeholders Working Group.

This study surfaces a variety of intersecting interests across NEITI’s operational relationships. Some of these interests are mutually beneficial like that of Donors and the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative. Others run counter to each other, such as NEITI’s relationship to the Presidency which illustrates a key source of NEITI’s ineffectiveness. In discussing these interests, the authors articulate their connection to NEITI’s design as an accountability system and its embedded limitations.

The authors provide incremental understanding of prior insight regarding NEITI’s ineffectiveness by drawing attention to its fundamental design as an accountability system and its failure to deliver public accountability. To illuminate these failures, the authors also map NEITI’s competing accountability demands – the nexus of accountability – to demonstrate the complex socio-political reality within which NEITI is expected to operate. The authors posit that NEITI’s ineffectiveness has as much to do with NEITI itself, as it does with external factors like the quality of information disclosed and the unique Nigerian context.

The primary objective of this paper is to explore how space organizations can incorporate children and imagination in their accountability-based accounting and decision-making processes.

This study centers on stakeholder engagement with children, specifically examining the drawing competition associated with the CHaracterising ExOPlanet Satellite (CHEOPS) space exploration mission. We employ a multidimensional research design consisting of both an interpretive approach to the 2,748 space-related drawings submitted by children across Europe to the CHEOPS drawing competition in 2015 and a content analysis of 46 media releases published by ESA and the University of Bern, the key partners of the CHEOPS mission.

Our analysis of the children’s drawings and the CHEOPS media releases indicates that the related organizations account for some of the children’s visions and imaginations, but shortcomings exist in addressing the ethical and space environmental concerns related to space exploration. We explore implications for the space accounting agenda by applying the critical dialogic accountability framework proposed by Dillard and Vinnari (2019), which allows for a discussion on an outline for action by incorporating intergenerational equity (Thomson et al., 2018) and moral imagination (Werhane, 1999).

This study offers a novel exploration of a largely overlooked yet crucial stakeholder group: children. By focusing on their unique perspectives and imaginative capabilities, the paper brings forth the voices of those who will inherit the future of space exploration. Employing children’s drawings as a medium of symbolic communication, this research study offers fresh insights into their perceptions, particularly relevant to space accounting. This innovative approach not only enriches the literature on stakeholder engagement and accountability but also provides space organizations with valuable guidance on fostering inclusivity and ensuring that the interests of future generations are considered in decision-making processes.

This study explores the integration of corporate reporting by Mitsubishi, a large Japanese company, using a culturally sensitive narrative that combines and reconciles Japanese and Western corporate values in one story.

We use an analytical framework drawing on insights borrowed from narratology and the notion of wrapping – the traditional art of packaging as communication.

We find that Mitsubishi is a survivor company that uses different corporate reporting frameworks during its reporting journey to construct a bespoke narrative of its value creation and cultural values. It emplots narratives to convey a story presenting the impression that Mitsubishi is a Japanese corporation but is compatible with Western neo-liberal ideology, making bad news palatable to its stakeholders and instilling confidence in the future.

Wrapping is a culturally sensitive form of impression management used in the integration of corporate reporting. Therefore, rather than assuming that companies blatantly manipulate their image in corporate reports, we suggest that future research should focus on how narratives are constructed and made sense of, situating them in the context of local culture and traditions.

The findings should interest scholars, report preparers, policymakers, and the IFRS, considering the recent release of the IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards designed to reduce the so-called alphabet soup of corporate reporting. By following Mitsubishi’s journey, we learn how and why the notion of integrated reporting was adopted and integrated with other reporting frameworks to create narratives that together convey a story of a global corporation compliant with Western neoliberal ideology. It highlights how Mitsubishi used integrated reporting to tell its story rather than as a rigid reporting framework, and the same fate may apply to the new IFRS Sustainability Reporting Standards that now include integrated reporting.

The study offers a new perspective on corporate reporting, showing how the local societal discourses of cultural heritage and modernity can shape the journey of the integration of corporate reporting over time.

This study investigates the implementation of a sustainable circular business model from an accounting perspective. Its goal is to understand if and how decision- makers use management accounting systems, and what changes are needed if these systems are to support the transition toward a circular economy.

Dialogic accounting theory frames the case study of six companies that built a value network to develop and implement an innovative packaging solution consistent with circular economy principles. Content analysis was utilised to investigate the accounting tools used.

The findings indicate that circular solutions generate new organisational configurations based on value networks. Interestingly, managers’ decision-making process largely bypassed the accounting function; they relied on informal accounting and life cycle analysis, which stimulated a multi-stakeholder dialogue in a life cycle perspective.

The research provides theoretical and practical insights into the capability of management accounting systems to support companies seeking circular solutions.

The authors offer implications for accounting practice, chief financial officers (CFOs) and accounting educators, suggesting that a dialogic approach may support value retention of resources, materials and products, as required by the circular economy.

The research contributes to the debate about the role of accounting in sustainability, specifically the need for connecting for resource efficiency at the corporate level with the rationalisation of resource use within planetary boundaries.

The study contributes to the limited research into the role of management accounting in a company’s transition to circular business models. Dialogic accounting theory frames exploration of how accounting may evolve to help businesses become accountable to all stakeholders, including the environment.