Search results

Accounting’s definition of accountability should include attributes of socioenvironmental degradation manufactured by unsustainable technologies. Beck argues that emergent accounts should reflect the following primary characteristics of technological degradation: complexity, uncertainty, and diffused responsibility. Financial stewardship accounts and probabilistic assessments of risk, which are traditionally employed to allay the public’s fear of uncontrollable technological hazards, cannot reflect these characteristics because they are constructed to perpetuate the status quo by fabricating certainty and security. The process through which safety thresholds are constructed and contested represents the ultimate form of socialized accountability because these thresholds shape how much risk people consent to be exposed to. Beck’s socialized total accountability is suggested as a way forward: It has two dimensions, extended spatiotemporal responsibility and the psychology of decision-making. These dimensions are teased out from the following constructs of Beck’s Risk Society thesis: manufactured risks and hazards, organized irresponsibility, politics of risk, radical individualization and social learning. These dimensions are then used to critically evaluate the capacity of full cost accounting (FCA), and two emergent socialized risk accounts, to integrate the multiple attributes of sustainability. This critique should inform the journey of constructing more representative accounts of technological degradation.

This chapter aims to advance the debate on enterprise risk management (ERM) frameworks within different contexts. We discuss the economic, business and regulatory environments that set the framework for company risk management practices in Lithuania while contrasting ERM features at the company level. ERM practices are examined using two company cases – a private business company and a state-owned enterprise (SOE), and evidence is based on interviews with their management, as well as their documentation. The findings indicate the co-existence of a functional vs systematic approach to risk management. Moreover, evidence supports the notion of the shifting of risk management from a functional risk management approach to a systematic approach within risk portfolio management. We assume that risk management is a conceptualized subject of management and research, with a rather weak connection with enterprise goals and operations.

Most non-financial companies in Greece do not have an ERM function nor present one in their organizational charts. The enterprise risk management is still more theory than practice even for companies that have embraced it so far, and in general the enterprise risk management seems to be at its infancy in Greece with only some prominent and mature organizations showing the way forward. The aim of this study is to provide some reflections about risk disclosure in annual reports and accounting practices in Greece. Although companies in Greece do seem reluctant to apply ERM, during last years, non-financial information demonstrated to emerge within financial statements and annual reports, giving a broader perspective to risk.

Traditional or technical risk management practices have been observed in local governments since the early 1960s. These practices tended to focus on the management and control of insurable risks (fires, thefts, and liability suits), as well as responsibility for insurance purchasing, for occupational safety and health, security, and similar matters. Later, financial risk management became a rather distinct technical practice, among other technical additions.

Chapter Three focussed on developments since the late 1980s, notably a general trend of expansion and extension of risk management followed closely by a rapidly evolving view – both in academia and in practice – that risk management should take an organisation wide and integrated stance and that this integration would be demonstrably value adding. Recent legal, regulatory, and best practice initiatives have further accelerated the expansion of risk management. But while this expansive view, ultimately emerging as enterprise risk management (ERM), is well advanced in the private sector, it has not penetrated the public sector in any significant way. And, indeed when it has been applied, it has revealed several fundamental problems. As a result, the current state of risk management is somewhat less easily summarised than might be expected. Traditional (hereafter ‘technical’) practices remain uneven, though widespread; holistic ERM-like efforts are somewhat widely – but inconsistently – implemented in the private sector while in the public sector technical practices are seen, though to a lesser degree, and there have been very few ERM adoptions. Nevertheless, as sometimes happens, the presence of an idea (ERM) has been highly influential and sufficient to reorient thinking about risk management.

For discussion and clarity purposes, this chapter introduces the concept public organisation risk management (PORM). Clarity is important, but the concept PORM serves a second function here. It provides a label that allows actual technical practices to be linked to the ERM ideas that shape thinking about risk management in the public sector. Furthermore, this concept also allows for the inclusion of some even more recent developments (beyond ERM) that will lead to an alternative framing of risk management in the final chapters. PORM, therefore, ultimately involves an inclusion of past, present, and future thinking about risk management in public sector organisations.