Search results

New Space activities offer benefits for human progress and life beyond the Earth. However, there is a risk that the New Space Economy may develop according to an anthropocentric mindset favouring human progress and survival at the expense of all other species and the environment. This mindset raises concerns over the social and environmental impacts of space activities and the accountability of space actors. This research article explores the accountability of space actors by presenting a pluralistic accountability framework to understand, inspire and change accountability in the New Space Economy. This study also identifies future research opportunities.

This paper is a reflective and normative essay. The arguments are developed using contemporary multidisciplinary academic literature, publicly available evidence and examples. Further, the authors use Dillard and Vinnari's accountability framework to examine a pluralistic accountability system for space businesses.

The New Space Economy requires public and private entities to embrace hybrid and pluralistic accountability for their social and environmental impacts. A new way of seeing the relationship between human life, the Earth and celestial space is needed. Accounting language is used to mirror and mobilise broader forms of responsibility in those involved in space.

This paper responds to the AAAJ's special issue call for examining how accountability can be ensured in the New Space Age. The space activities businesses conduct, and the anthropocentric view inspiring their race toward space is concerning. Hence, the authors advocate the need for rethinking accountability between humans and nature. The paper contributes to fostering the debate on social and environmental accounting and the accountability of space actors in the New Space Economy. To this end, the authors use a pluralistic accountability framework to help understand how the New Space Economy can face the risks emanating from its anthropocentric mindset.

The paper explores the process of construction of the “accountable self”, particularly as this process engages with the spirituality of the self. This study examines the “space of accountability” within which the accountable self constructs itself as such and investigates how different accounts of the self are drawn upon in the making of this space, both defining and transcending it.

The paper relies upon archival material concerning accounting and accountability practices about the project for building the altar of St. Ignatius in the Church of Gesù, Rome, Italy (1691–1706). This study examines calculative and narrative accounts about the project from the perspective of the superintendent, who was the sole person accountable for the building works.

Whereas calculative accounts enabled the self to account for actions within the specific space of accountability of the project, narrative accounts opened up this space, providing for a testimony of actions and a gift of accountability towards future indefinite others. This process was prompted by the spirituality of the self and the narcissistic gratification of fulfilling this spirituality.

The paper adds to the literature on the accountable self and to theological perspectives into accountability. This study suggests exploring how different accounts of the self engage with each other through testimony, gift, narcissism and spirituality in the construction of the accountable self, providing for a “transcendent” space of accountability. This research also adds to studies on narrative accounts by showing that they are drawn upon alongside calculative accounts in the construction of the transcendent, accountable self.

During choir rehearsals, a conductor continuously holds choir members accountable for what they do and how they sing. Hence, members are held accountable through action. This allows a conductor to emphasize his/her expertise and underline his/her authority. Choir members typically respond in certain ways when this is done, for instance by commenting on the feedback they receive or by trying to improve their singing. The interplay between these accounts, how they develop over time, and what they (do not) accomplish in terms of human relatedness are the focus of this study. We use Bauman's (1993) conceptualization of social space to investigate these issues.

By providing reasons for their conduct and behaving in a certain way, a conductor and choir members, but also a choir's management, can alter their position in social space. Thereby, they solidify or change how they relate to other individuals in the choir. Bauman assumes that processes of social spacing require so-called “misunderstandings”. We examine seven misunderstandings that occurred in a particular rehearsal of a top-level amateur choir, analyzing their impact on human relatedness. Video analysis methods, interviews and photo-elicitation are the main research methods used.

We find both short-term and long-term effects of misunderstandings on human relatedness, and offer two extensions of Bauman's (1993) conception of social space. Firstly, we assert that there is a reflective side to processes of social spacing that needs to be taken into account when changes in human relatedness are discussed. Secondly, we find that the emotional impact of accountability on how individuals behave ought not to be underestimated, as this can have lasting effects on how people relate to one another.

This research makes two contributions to the extant literature. It is shown how accountability through action unfolds when people engage in leisurely activity, and how this affects the way they relate to one another – in sometimes unintentional and unpredictable ways. It also extends a well-known theoretical framework on social space that has seen little application in the accounting literature. This framework is adapted so that it may be used more fruitfully in future accounting studies.

The purpose of this paper is to describe and critically evaluate the systems of accounting and accountability for the Constituency Development Fund (CDF) in Kenya. It suggests a new framework of accounting and accountability that places the goals and aspirations expressed in public discourse at the centre of accountability.

The theoretical insights of Bourdieu and Foucault are mobilized so as to tease out the nature of power relations between the various fields associated with the CDF in Kenya. The study analyses newspaper commentaries as text for identifying the main themes associated with the management of the CDF in Kenya.

The paper finds that the CDF's systems of accounting and accountability are skewed towards the needs of centralized national planning and development, contrary to its expressed aim of bringing about citizens' participation in development.

Use of newspaper commentaries and reports does not necessarily represent the views of the majority of the people of Kenya.

A new framework is suggested which places the goals and aspirations of public discourse at the centre of accounting with the various capitals suggested by these goals and aspirations forming the dimensions on which the CDF can be accounted for. Novel forms of accounting and accountability are suggested which include presentation of CDF implementation and results at public forums where the managers of CDF can be interrogated on the basis of the goals and aspirations expressed in public discourse.

Study of the CDF systems of accounting and accountability is a unique contribution to accounting for development in developing countries.

This paper examines the accountability and governance mechanisms and the challenges in a multi-stakeholder partnership seeking to implement the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in a developing country (DC), namely Tanzania.

The paper draws on work on the shift from government to governance to meta-governance to examine the SDGs framework's governance regime. The data stems from documentation, focussed group discussions and face-to-face interviews with key stakeholders involved in the localisation of SDGs in Tanzania.

Despite the emphasis given by promoters of SDGs on the need for multi-stakeholder engagement, and network and market-based governance, Tanzania's hierarchical governance framed in national legislations dominated the localisation of the SDGs. The national-level meta-governance structures were somewhat dysfunctional, partly due to a lack of well-designed coordination mechanisms for collaborative engagement with key stakeholders. The limited involvement of different meta-governors, and particularly network and market-based governance arrangements, has had severe implications for achieving the SDGs in DCs in general and Tanzania, in particular.

The paper calls for a more explicit SDG policy and strategy, alongside strengthening institutional structures and related governance arrangements in Tanzania, to promote the realisation of the SDGs. For the SDGs framework to succeed, the authors suggest that, in addition to adopting SDG friendly policies, the Tanzanian government should devise plans for financial resources, strategies for empowering and engaging with key stakeholders and promote an integrative governance system that underpins accountability at the local level.

Focussing on Tanzania, the paper sheds light on how context in DCs, interactions between state and non-state actors, modes of governance and accountability mechanisms shape the localisation of SDGs and realising the SDGs' agenda. The implementation in Tanzania focussed on priorities in the development plan, thereby neglecting some important SDGs. This raises doubts about the possibility of meeting the SDGs by 2030. The localisation of SDGs remained within the top-down governance structure, as Tanzania's government failed to enact the policy and strategy for multi-stakeholder partnership consistent with the SDGs' principle of “leave no-one behind”. Consequently, meta-governors' efforts and ability to monitor and demand accountability from the government was constrained by the political context, the governance system and regulations enacted to side-line them.

The purpose of this paper is to examine whether Shell Nigeria’s Global Memorandum of Understanding (GMoU) promotes corporate-community accountability as a basis for fostering sustainable community development in the Niger Delta.

Shell Nigeria’s GMoU stand-alone reports were analysed through the lenses of accountability and transparency theoretical frameworks to explore the extent to which GMoU, as a corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiative, is dialogically embedded and practised. Meaning-oriented content analysis was deductively used to isolate pertinent themes and generate findings from the background theoretical literature.

The authors find that Shell discursively appropriates the meaning of accountability and transparency in a manner that allows it to maintain its social legitimacy and the asymmetric power relations between itself and host communities whilst restricting communities’ agency to hold it accountable. Shell does this by interpreting the notion of participation restrictively, selectively deploying the concept of transparency and accountability and subtly exerting excessive control over the GMoU. Thus, the GMoU’s potential to contribute to sustainable community development and positive corporate-community relation is unlikely tenable.

Accountability and transparency are core and critical to corporate-community relations and for achieving community development CSR objectives, but are often taken for granted or ignored in the CSR literature on the Niger Delta of Nigeria. This paper addresses this gap in the literature by using accountability and transparency lenses to unpick GMoU model and contribute to studies on CSR practices by oil multinational corporations (MNCs) in developing countries. Indeed, the use of these lenses to explore CSR process offers new insights as to why CSR practices have failed to contribute to sustainable community development despite increased community spending by oil MNCs.

The purpose of the paper is to describe and analyse the nature of accountability for human rights, as enacted by the Business & Human Rights Resource Centre (BHRRC), in this time of globalization and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

The authors focus on one case of alleged union-busting and unfair dismissal carried out under the cover of the COVID-19 pandemic. Tracing the action of that case, the authors show how the BHRRC provides a digital platform for dialogues of accountability. The authors use a Latourian theoretical perspective to guide the progress of the study’s analysis.

The authors find that the dialogues of accountability enacted on the BHRRC platform cannot be satisfactorily characterized in terms of an old politics of hegemony, counterhegemony and counter accounts. The authors find that the accountability enacted on the platform operates in three modes: in a political mode to support the formation of issues and publics and the embedding of norms; in an organizational mode to support the (re)organizing business corporations around scripts of respect for human rights; in a moral mode to keep scruples concerning means and ends and the pursuit of better outcomes, open.

The paper is novel, in that it engages with the part that accounting can play in politics conceived in Latourian terms; in its introduction, a notion of modes of accountability on the foundations of Latour’s exploration of modes of existence; in its challenge to the value of critical accounting conceived in terms of hegemony and counterhegemony.

This paper seeks to examine the milieu of reporting in two villages operating on Koro Island, Republic of Fiji Islands. It aims to analyse how both western‐narrow and traditional reporting offers rural villages extensive opportunities to discharge responsibilities of stewardship, accountability and accounts of the activities of farmers and stores in an agrarian setting, whether the activities are subsistence‐ or cash‐based.

Fieldwork was conducted in two villages of Koro Island, Nacamaki and Nabuna, to ascertain the milieu of reporting, and open‐ended interviews were conducted with villagers from both villages. The “view from the centre” is adopted here, rather than the “view from the periphery”.

The study shows that people of both Nacamaki and Nabuna villages have adapted their specific reporting styles according to the circumstances facing them. Despite being only 5 km apart, two sharply contrasting village reporting milieux emerge. One relies greatly on the use of both Traditional oral and Western‐narrow hand‐written reports to fulfil accounts of entities (co‐operative and individual farmers) operating in the village. The other prefers oral communication to any form of written communication to raise accounts of villagers' collectivist and independently charged, agrarian‐based activities.

The study raises three sets of policy issues that are central to the development of reporting in Eastern Fijian villages. Numerous resources are unnecessary in presenting a western‐narrow account of transactions when the accounts are supplemented by a traditional reporting mien. Western‐narrow reporting appears to be well received by co‐operative members and individually oriented farmers. In the absence of Western‐narrow reporting, Traditional reporting seems to serve the needs of both communally oriented and individualistically inclined villagers. The results of the study underlie both the complexity of village life in determining systems of reporting and the fragility of written reporting in Eastern Fijian outer island villages.

The study shows the way in which Eastern Fijian villages resolve subsistence and cash exchanges at the social level, taking into account local conventions, customs, laws, rituals and values.

The originality of the paper rests in considering villagers' own reporting through internal points of reference, providing space for interrelations between traditional Fijian values, the island landscape and the cultural geography.

This paper aims to explain why public sector performance reporting that emphasises external accountability may turn out differently from the official stated aims.

Using a comparative case method, two different accountability innovations are examined using framing and overflowing ideas.

The accountability reports became bureaucratic communications between the reporting and central agencies. The reports were transformed because the performance reporting produced a number of overflows and reduced the importance of broad audiences (e.g. citizens). These overflows resulted from the central agency reformers' preoccupation with cost cutting opportunities and the reporting agencies' presumption of the reformers' real purpose. In the resulting interactions, the accountability purpose ended up being mostly reduced to disclosure of traditional input and output measures and some insignificant stories designed to avoid public criticism of the accountability reform but also to hinder others in identifying objects for cost cutting.

To conduct international comparative research is logistically challenging, but provides the best chances of understanding the systemic aspects of accountability reforms that contribute to the reforms' observable and perplexing outcomes. Ideally, it would be interesting to study such reforms over their full lives; however, they may be longer than the researchers' careers.

Accountability purposes are disturbed by classical cost cutting thinking. Thus, despite many ostensibly good ideas of creating transparency for the public, other stronger forces may severely hinder such accountability developments. Concepts of framing and overflowing may be used to better understand the outcomes of accountability innovations; this can be extended beyond the public sector.

Provides useful information on why public sector performance reporting that emphasises external accountability may turn out differently from the official stated aims.

The paper aims to examine a citizen-centric model of governmental entrepreneurship that transforms public service management for the empowerment of marginalized women.

The study adopts a qualitative methodology to analyze the distinctive model of a rural livelihoods program in India. A fieldwork was conducted in four villages, a total of 250 women were interviewed using a semi-structured questionnaire and eight focus-group discussions were conducted. The data were analyzed using constant comparative analysis and discourse analysis. Finally, the findings were shared with women in the study area.

The analysis suggests that the adoption of distinct management for social welfare program results in social legitimacy and social value creation. JEEViKA illustrates that citizen-centric social entrepreneurship model is an outcome of internal and external governance mechanisms, strategy that thrusts on skills and capacity as investment, tools local women (community resource persons) as instruments and targets spatial saturation as an intervention creates political and economic participation, and that marketability promotes power over economic resources that enable freedom from servitude.

The model provides a direction to overcome multiple barriers to addressing poverty and marginalization.

Poor and government can leverage through the collaborative capacity to meet ever-evolving social needs by developing a state-society partnership in citizen-centric governmental entrepreneurship.

The policies to overcome large-scale marginalization can adopt citizen-centric model to create social legitimacy that furthers social value among the poor and marginalized rural women.

This study provides a model that illustrates government ability to transform marginalized poor as co-producers of development benefits.