Search

Stewardship is a concept that has historically underpinned the practice of accounting, with a focus on the stewardship of financial resources. As times change, so too do the elements of organisational performance that might be subject to stewardship demands. Critically for this paper, a roadmap for organisational stewardship in the Anthropocene is developed. In brief, the Anthropocene is a term used to describe how human actions drive earth systems functioning, generating effects (for example) on the climate system as well as on the diversity of living creatures. Given these effects, an enlarged understanding of stewardship emerges that focuses on corporate purpose that takes account of wider than financial ambitions and effects as well as on governance processes that can support a broader perspective. The paper also highlights that achieving stewardship for ‘wicked problems’ that emerge from complex adaptive systems (with emergent elements and tipping points) might be best addressed by coalitions of organisations collaborating to achieve systems effects. Such an approach also suggests that accounting data gathering and tracing of organisational impact will require greater spatial capabilities than have previously been the case. Accounting for stewardship in the Anthropocene, therefore, represents a significant advance to current accounting practice.

PurposeThe aim of this paper is to provide an account of the period prior to the creation of the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI): a body that was critical to the institutionalization of sustainability reporting (SR). By examining this “pre-history,” we bring to light the actors, activities and ways of thinking that made SR more likely to be institutionalized once the GRI entrepreneurship came to the fore.Design/methodology/approachThe paper revisits a time period (the 1990s) that has yet to be formally written about in any depth and traces the early development of what became SR. This material is examined using a constructivist understanding of regulation.FindingsThe authors contend that a convergence of actors and structural conditions were pivotal to the development of SR. Specifically, this paper demonstrates that a combination of actors (such as epistemic communities, carriers, regulators and reporters) as well as the presence of certain conditions (such as the societal context, analogies with financial reporting, environmental reporting and reporting design issues) contributed to the development of SR which was consolidated (as well as extended) in 1999 with the advent of the GRI.Research limitations/implicationsThis paper theorizes (through a historical analysis) how SR is sustained by a network of institutional actors and conditions which can assist reflection on future SR development.Originality/valueThis paper brings together empirical material from a time that (sadly) is passing from living memory. The paper also extends the use of a conceptual frame that is starting to influence scholarship in accounting that seeks to understand how norms develop.

There is substantial and unexplored potential for scientists to engage with the private sector for a sustainable ocean. The importance of such cooperation is a frequent emphasis of international dialogues and statements, it is embedded within the Sustainable Development Goals, and has been championed by prominent business leaders and scientists. But an uncritical embrace of science-industry collaboration is unhelpful, and candid reflections on the benefits and pitfalls that marine scientists can expect from actively engaging with the private sector are rare. In this Perspective, we draw on our collective experiences working with ocean industries in different parts of the world to reflect on how this has influenced our work, the effects these collaborations have generated, and the barriers to overcome for such partnerships to become more common. In doing so, we hope to help empower a new generation of marine scientists to explore collaboration with industry as a way to develop and scale up solutions for ocean sustainability.

The biosphere crisis requires changes to existing business practices. We ask how corporations can become sustainability leaders, when constrained by multiple barriers to collaboration for biosphere stewardship. We describe how scientists motivated, inspired and engaged with ten of the world’s largest seafood companies, in a collaborative process aimed to enable science-based and systemic transformations (2015–2021). CEOs faced multiple industry crises in 2015 that incentivized novel approaches. New scientific insights, an invitation to collaborate, and a bold vision of transformative change towards ocean stewardship, created new opportunities and direction. Co-creation of solutions resulted in new knowledge and trust, a joint agenda for action, new capacities, international recognition, formalization of an organization, increased policy influence, time-bound goals, and convergence of corporate change. Independently funded scientists helped remove barriers to cooperation, provided means for reflection, and guided corporate strategies and actions toward ocean stewardship. By 2021, multiple individuals exercised leadership and the initiative had transitioned from preliminary and uncomfortable conversations, to a dynamic, operational organization, with capacity to perform global leadership in the seafood industry. Mobilizing transformational agency through learning, collaboration, and innovation represents a cultural evolution with potential to redirect and accelerate corporate action, to the benefit of business, people and the planet.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to interrogate the nature and relevance of debates around the existence of, and ramifications arising from, the Anthropocene for accounting scholarship. Design/methodology/approach The paper’s aim is achieved through an in-depth analysis of the Anthropocene, paying attention to cross-disciplinary contributions, interpretations and contestations. Possible points of connection between the Anthropocene and accounting scholarship are then proposed and illuminated through a case study drawn from the seafood sector. Findings This paper develops findings in two areas. First, possible pathways for further development of how accounting scholarship might evolve by the provocation that thinking about the Anthropocene is outlined. Second, and through engagement with the case study, the authors highlight that the concept of stewardship may re-emerge in discussions about accountability in the Anthropocene. Research limitations/implications The paper argues that accounting scholarship focused on social, environmental and sustainability concerns may be further developed by engagement with Anthropocene debates. Practical implications While accounting practice might have to change to deal with Anthropocene induced effects, this paper focuses on implications for accounting scholarship. Social implications Human well-being is likely to be impacted if environmental impacts accelerate. In addition, an Anthropocene framing alters the understanding of nature–human interactions and how this affects accounting thought. Originality/value This is the first paper in accounting to seek to establish connections between accounting, accountability and the Anthropocene.

This handbook is conceptualised as a “knowledge project” where a variety of perspectives and insights have been brought together around five sections. The first section draws together insights around the foundations of environmental accounting as well as the emergence of theoretical, methodological and governance themes, covering both academic scholarship and insights from the accounting profession. The second and third sections of the handbook consider how financial accounting/reporting and management accounting have incorporated environmental concerns. In the fourth section, the handbook moves to a regional analysis, presenting how environmental accounting has evolved in different ways in different places: these different trajectories of environmental accounting are often obscured by a narrow focus on “Western” contexts and concerns. The final section of the handbook takes elements of the natural environment, namely, greenhouse gases, water, biodiversity and non-human animals, and reflects on how accounting has/could/should respond(ed) to the particular challenges found in these domains. In this opening chapter of the handbook, we also touch on the relationship of environmental accounting with social justice concerns, the role of education in environmental accounting, as well as outline academic and practice partners in this academic project. Finally, and perhaps heroically, we offer suggestions for the future of the field.

This handbook showcases the broad spectrum of diverse approaches to environmental accounting which have developed during the last 30 years across the globe. The volume covers a range of physical issues such as water, carbon and biodiversity, as well as specific accounting matters such as management control, finance and audit. Moreover, seven chapters present environmental accounting issues that arise in the regions of Africa, Asia, Europe, MENA, North America, the Pacific and South America. The handbook also highlights future challenges in all the topic areas addressed as well as introducing new topics, such as links between environmental accounting and the circular economy, and the issues associated with animal rights. Edited by leading scholars in the area and with key contributions from across the discipline, and covering a diverse range of perspectives and locations, the volume is divided into five key parts: Part 1: Framing the issues Part 2: Financial accounting and reporting Part 3: Management accounting Part 4: Global and local perspectives Part 5: Thematic topics in environmental accounting This handbook will act as a significant publication in drawing together the history of the field and important reference points in its future development, and will serve as a vital resource for students and scholars of environmental accounting and environmental economics.

This paper emerges from an invitation to reflect upon the achievements of social and environmental accounting as well as to identify the challenges that lie ahead as the field continues its engagement with the goal of sustainable development. Three perspectives are developed in pursuit of that aim, namely: exploring the nature of the issues and mode of academic inquiry that is ‘fit for purpose’ given the demands of sustainable development; considering if a de-centring of accounting and the embrace of more holistic versions of accountability would be productive for future scholarship; and an exploration of how we might conceptualise ‘engagement’ with practice in this context (and what is meant by practice and practitioner). Taken together, this paper seeks to provide points of provocation and encouragement to social and environmental accountants, critical accounting scholars and to those seeking to understand sustainable development scholarship and action. Postprint

The primary responsibility for global climate change responsiveness is usually attributed to nation states. This is reflected in the United Nations’ processes aimed at enrolling governments in mitigation and adaptation programmes. Such an approach begs the question of how global climate change (GCC) responsiveness might proceed if a national government is hostile to the issue, as appears likely to be the case in the USA. This paper addresses this concern by documenting the percentage of the population of the USA who are ‘covered’ by at least one of six examples of GCC responsiveness at sub-federal – state and municipality – levels. Of the population of the USA, 25.8% lives in states where all of the state-level initiatives surveyed are in effect, whereas only 4.4% are not covered by any of the six. This coverage has increased as compared to earlier surveys (Lutsey, N., and D. Sperling. 2008. “America’s Bottom-Up Climate Change Mitigation Policy.” Energy Policy 36: 673–685. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2007.10.018). This finding suggests that there is more practical hope for GCC responsiveness than might be commonly appreciated and this also has ramifications for research in accounting. Postprint

This paper investigates fossil fuel reserves and resources disclosures and how they might change in response to global climate change agreements that seek to limit greenhouse gas emissions. On the one hand, it might be expected that fossil fuel firms will be less valuable if their reserves become ‘unburnable’. On the other hand, capital markets currently assign a positive value to fossil fuel reserves and resources. A conundrum, therefore, exists. Given that accounting disclosure rules underpin capital market valuation processes, this setting provides an opportunity to interrogate the functionality of accounting during a time of change. To achieve this goal, a multi-methods investigation has been undertaken; combining a survey of accounting disclosure rules for reserves, identification of accounting disclosures made by fuel firms in several country stock markets, and stock market participants’ views on the extent to which unburnable carbon exists. Using Miller and Power (2013) we identify when and how unburnable carbon could be recognized in corporate reporting. Publisher PDF

This article provides an introduction to a special section in this issue of the journal that focuses on aspects of economic democracy, defined by Schweickart (2012, 245) as ‘an economically viable,...

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to establish and advance the role of academic accounting in the pursuit of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which are regarded as the most salient point of departure for understanding and achieving environmental and human development ambitions up to (and no doubt beyond) the year 2030.Design/methodology/approachThis paper provides a synthesis of interdisciplinary perspectives on sustainable development and integration of this with the accounting for sustainability literature. In addition, potential accounting research contributions are proposed so as to support the development of new research avenues.FindingsExisting research in accounting that is relevant to individual SDGs serves as an initial link between them and the accounting discipline. At the same time, the SDGs focus highlights new sites for empirical work (including interdisciplinary investigations) as well as inviting innovation in accounting theoretical frameworks. Moreover, the SDGs provide a context for (re)invigorating accounting’s contribution to sustainable development debates.Originality/valueThis is the first paper to explore the roles academic accounting can play in furthering achievement of the SDGs through enhanced understanding, critiquing and advancing of accounting policy, practice and theorizing. It is also the first paper to propose a research agenda in this area.

This paper offers an account of how zero waste governance 'works' in Scotland. Zero waste has been widely adopted by governments as a policy goal; yet, the term remains equivocal. Using Scotland as a case study, this paper investigates how zero waste is understood and pursued as a policy goal within a national context and how socio-political factors shape zero waste governance. Providing the first academic study of waste governance in Scotland, the paper introduces key actors, initiatives and objectives from zero waste policy documents. Using conceptual insights from waste governance research, the paper identifies the importance of boundary organisations, networks, existing institutions, expertise, and stakeholder engagement in shaping the zero waste policy in Scotland. Through these concepts, the paper presents an account of how zero waste governance works in Scotland and offers potential themes to further zero waste governance research.

The objective of this paper is to explore the nature of disclosure on climate change in annual and standalone reports of organisations who took part in the UK Emissions Trading Scheme (UK ETS). This article uses content analysis to codify disclosure in order to compare disclosure in different media as well as the possible effect that membership in an emissions trading scheme may have had on reporting. The results suggest the UK ETS was associated with differences in disclosure. This study contributes to the literature by providing a longitudinal study in two disclosure media in the UK ETS context.

As the social and environmental impacts of human activity have become more evident, the role of sustainable development as an organising principle in a variety of policy contexts and over multiple scales has become central. There are, at least, two implications that emerge from this observation. First, morally infused problems that need to be addressed have become more intractable, requiring innovation in our modes of thinking. Second, new spaces have emerged where the academy might explore how knowledge is created, validated and translated (or not) alongside policy and practice settings. One outcome of these trends has been the emergence of a stream of work (sustainability science) which investigates how disciplines might develop knowledge that progresses sustainable development. The aim of this paper, in line with the focus of the special issue, is to explore what possibilities emerge for accounting in light of a sustainability science approach. To achieve this end the paper starts with an exploration of the frustrations expressed in the literature over the perceived lack of progress made by social and environmental accounting towards addressing sustainable development. The paper then introduces sustainability science with the aim of imagining how an accounting for sustainable development might emerge. The paper closes with two illustrations of how a sustainability science approach to accounting could develop.

Purpose– This paper seeks to create the context within which research into how higher education institutions (HEIs) might engage with the goal of sustainable development. In particular, the paper outlines the context in which papers in a special section on this topic might be understood as well as developing propositions for how a research focus might emerge in this area. The paper, therefore, seeks to contribute to discussions about whether, under which circumstances and how social accountability and engagement processes focusing on sustainable development might trigger, frame and/or promote change processes in HEIs. The papers that compose this special section are also introduced and future research avenues offered.Design/methodology/approach– Literature reviewFindings– Despite a dearth of literature in the area of HEI responsiveness to sustainable development (and leaving side education/learning and research for sustainable development), numerous points of intersection exist. Foremost among these is the role of HEIs as shapers of the values of society (and a place for debates about these values). In addition, HEIs are substantive organisations with sustainable development impacts. The paper suggests, however, that understanding HEIs and self-consciously seeking change in their activities has to seriously engage with the characterisation of these organisations as loosely coupled systems.Originality/value– The paper discusses the distinctive characteristics of HEIs and considers the higher education context as a challenging case to explore the capacity of social accountability and stakeholder engagement to foster change towards the goal of sustainable development.

This issue of SEAJ contains a special section (encompassing the first two papers) that is the outcome of the call for papers on the intersection of social/environmental/sustainability accounting/re...

In this paper we explore how carbon markets have entered the world of financial accounting. The advent of the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) in 2005 provided the opportunity for global climate change concerns to be translated from policy into something that could, and should, be recognised within financial accounting. That is, the EU ETS provided a mechanism whereby greenhouse gas emission allowances acquired a financial value, simultaneously creating an obligation (or liability) on certain European organisations when they emit greenhouse gases. Prima facie, this process created the need for financial accounts of companies covered by the EU ETS to reflect the new commodity of carbon. Disagreement amongst accountants about how to treat emission allowances has arisen, with the initial international accounting guidance issued in late 2004 subsequently being withdrawn, and not yet replaced. Taking this absence of guidance as a starting point, we undertake an empirical project (through a survey, consultation analysis, and interviews) to establish what financial reporting practices are being adopted by participants in the EU ETS, and the level of momentum for standardisation. We draw on sociological theories about accounting, measurement, and markets.Keywords: carbon markets, financial accounting, European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), standard setting, emission allowances

This chapter provides a description of, and reflection upon, the creation and life of the St Andrews Sustainability Institute as a way of exploring the potential for institutions of higher education to foster sustainable development. The Institute was established in 2007 and has been led by the author of this chapter in partnership with a wider group of sustainability academics within the University of St Andrews, as well as a cohort of non-academic employees—critically senior managers and members of the University’s estates function. This chapter contains the reflections of one individual and hence suffers, as all such attempts to understand recently history do, from too close a perspective. However, I hope that this narrative might uncover the complexity inherent in attempting to create capability and capacities to tackle sustainable development issues within a Scottish higher education institution.

This paper contributes to understandings of the production of normativity, i.e. the ways in which actors come to see rules as binding, in the context of corporate reporting regimes. Although the accounting literature recognises that a range of actors participate in the regulatory process, it continues to embrace dichotomous explanations of regulatory success based in the distinction between law and non-law, with law emanating from a binding system of rules, codified through state legislation and enforced by a coercive Westphalian state. Following this understanding there are calls for further regulation of reporting regimes in the literature. This paper demonstrates how a constructivist perspective can provide new insights to existing debates over regulation. More specifically, this theoretical perspective is applied to explore the production of normativity in two reporting regimes addressing environmental issues. One (the Spanish case study) was characterised by formal law enacted by the state which nonetheless lacked normativity. The other (the UK case study) was characterised by informal law induced by non-governmental organisations which appeared to acquire normativity. The problematisation of regulatory authority and legality offered by regime theory, constructivism and understandings of the processes by which norm cascades are generated reveals that, the internal legitimacy of the law is crucial in the construction of normativity and that while this was found in the UK case study, it was lacking in the Spanish case. These findings provide a more subtle set of considerations for understanding the role of regulation in reporting.

While all times feel special to those living in them, it seems fair to assert that these are exciting times for social and environmental accounting and accountability (hereafter SEA). Most academic...

Urban man-made assets have impacts not just on those who develop, build and operate them, but on people who may be quite remote from them. For example, the impact of a building on greenhouse gas emissions arising from fossil fuel use, pollution caused by travel to work patterns and employment opportunities provided by urban developments may be far removed from their immediate locality. There is a growing recognition of the need to internalize these external costs and benefits in accountancy frameworks, drawing on experiences in accounting for sustainable development. This desire, however, presents major challenges in identifying, evaluating and allocating the external environmental, social and economic costs and benefits of an urban environment. This paper reports on the development of an Urban Development Sustainability Assessment Model (UD-SAM) which allows decision makers to identify sustainability indicators (economic, environmental and social) and which may lead to more holistic evaluation of the sustainability impact of elements of the urban environment. The UD-SAM builds on a sustainability assessment model (SAM) developed originally in the oil industry. This paper describes how SAM has been tailored for the construction industry and urban sustainability assessment, and how a set of generic sustainable development indicators have been identified and validated by stakeholders.

Introduction to the special issueSustainable development (hereafter SD) could be argued to be the unifying theme/normative ideal that is being used to motivate and integrate social/environment/ethi...

PurposeThe 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.Design/methodology/approachConstructs 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.FindingsFor 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.Originality/valueThe paper provides useful information on initiating sustainable development reporting based on organizations' self descriptions.

(2008). Editorial: Accounting and Reporting for Sustainable Development in Public Service Organizations. Public Money & Management: Vol. 28, No. 6, pp. 323-326.

The impetus for this special debating forum arises from the concern about the impact of anthropogenic induced global climate change (GCC) and the assumption that GCC raises issues of significance with respect to the accountability of firms to stakeholders for financial and non-financial performance. Governments and supra-national bodies have sought to respond to GCC in a variety of ways, with the creation of markets in which carbon may be traded being just one manifestation. Carbon markets have the effect of putting a price on what was until very recently free and this change is likely to have financial consequences for firms in the longer term. In order to place the accounting implications of carbon markets in context, the paper provides a scientific and policy introduction to GCC. As regards accounting issues, the paper reviews the problems that are associated with the valuation of pollution allowances and their identification as assets (and the liabilities that arise if companies pollute beyond allowed...

PurposeThe aim of this paper is to respond to commentaries on Bebbington, Larrinaga‐Gonzales and Moneva, by Unerman and by Adams, published in Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 21 No. 3.Design/methodology/approachThe paper reviews and discusses the points suggested/contested by the commentary papers.FindingsThat given the current state of our understanding of corporate social responsibility reporting in stand alone (and other) formats, openness to a multitude of theoretical perspectives is appropriate. Further, that concepts of legitimacy and reputation can and should be distinguished from one another.Originality/valueThe authors put forward their views, beliefs and reservations.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to explore the proposition that corporate social responsibility reporting could be viewed as both an outcome of, and part of reputation risk management processes.Design/methodology/approachThe paper draws heavily on management research. In addition, an image restoration framework is introduced.FindingsThe concept of reputation risk management could assist in the understanding of corporate social responsibility reporting practice.Originality/valueThis paper explores the link between reputation risk management and existing theorising in social accounting.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to contribute to discussions about engagement in social and environmental accounting, drawing on dialogic theory and philosophy. A dialogic approach, building on existing critical inquiries, is introduced to derive principles to inform “on the ground” engagements. Applying dialogic thinking to social and environmental accounting encourages the development of dialogic forms of accountability, more authentic engagements and is more likely to contribute to sustainable social and environmental change.Design/methodology/approachContains a synthesis of literature from within and beyond social and environmental accounting to shed light on the issues addressed by the special issue.FindingsResearch engagements in social and environmental accounting need not be taken in a haphazard manner uninformed by theory. In particular, the “learning turn” in social sciences has generated a large body of theorizing (informed by concrete engagement activities) that can be used to shape, guide and support engagement.Practical implicationsThe principles developed can be used to inform future research design, with the aim of increasing the likelihood that such engagements will yield outcomes of “value” usually defined as emancipatory changes.Originality/valueThis paper develops a new (to accounting) theoretical perspective.

This short commentary responds in an appreciative but provocative manner to Craig Deegan and Sharon Solty's (2007) paper which itself seeks to explore the publishing patterns of Australasian social...

Within ecological economics there is recognition of the need for new approaches to decision-making to support sustainable development initiatives. There is an increasing acknowledgement of the limitations of cost–benefit analysis approaches as a measure of the (un)sustainability of organizational activities. These are viewed as particularly inappropriate within the participatory settings that sustainable development proponents seek to foster. They also fail to deal with the highly contested nature of sustainable development discourse in contemporary pluralist democracies. While advances have been made in the field of multi-criteria decision-making, there is still a relative dearth of versatile models that accommodate monetization in a way that recognizes the limits of calculative technologies. This article introduces readers to developments within the accounting discipline designed to support sustainable development decision-making and evaluation. In particular, it proposes sustainability assessment models as a viable alternative to cost–benefit analysis. Sustainability assessment models are based on an inter-disciplinary approach that recognizes the need for “accountings” that facilitate more participatory forms of decision-making and accountability. As such, they address many of the weaknesses in current approaches to cost–benefit analysis. The authors’ first experiences with sustainability assessment models were with BP and the United Kingdom oil and gas sector, where models were developed as a means of making previously external costs more central to organizational decision-making. Later work has included exploration of a range of decision-making situations in private and public sector organizations in both the United Kingdom and New Zealand. This has involved more explicit attention to plural values and issues of participation, dialogue and democracy.

The authors examine the extent to which the practices of social and environmental accounting, auditing, and reporting (SEAAR) provide opportunities for the identification, communication, and management of social and environmental risks. In introducing and exploring accounting practices, the theoretical allegiances of accounting are also outlined in order to situate accounting as a social science discipline which experiences similar debates to other areas of scholarship. The authors also extend discussion of risk governance and accounting by reference to the ‘new’ literature on risk from writers such as Adams, Beck, and Lash. It is suggested that the insights from these broader theorists on risk apply equally to conventional accounting and attempts via SEAAR to create an expanded governance framework. In particular, Beck identifies a number of critical aspects of risk governance that are also central to an understanding of accounting, including: the danger of seeking verifiable and neutral truth; the causal denial of harm; the contestation of expert and lay knowledge of risks; social construction of risk; and the radicalisation of rationality. Paraphrasing Beck, it is argued that accounting and accountants are incapable of managing the risks of industrialisation as they are implicated in the creation and multiplication of these risks, yet accounting and accountants, in particular those engaged in SEAAR, can play an essential role in identifying these risks. It is further argued that the contribution of SEAAR to risk governance will largely depend upon a radicalisation of accounting rationality in practice.

The authors sketch a framework within which the contributions to this theme issue can be understood. In particular, they discuss various frames of reference or ways of thinking that can be brought to bear on the challenges that arise in evaluating attempts to govern environmental risks. The discussion is divided into three sections. First, they discuss the factors that have led to the emergence of new ways of governing those corporate activities that are associated with the generation or management of environmental risks. Second, they problematise these new forms of governance, adopting the United Nation's Global Compact as an example, and drawing particularly on the insights derived from the contrasting perspectives associated with communicative and strategic action. As an alternative to both of these perspectives, they next focus on the Foucauldian concept of governmentality. The need for analyses to consider (a) the nature of the ways in which different risks are problematised, (b) the character of different governance regimes, (c) the significance of the organising ideals that guide the operation, and (d) the evolution of the multidimensional processes through which risks are governed, are highlighted. They conclude by suggesting that new ‘governmental technologies’ are unlikely to enable either ‘governance at a distance’, for instance, by creating opportunities for new forms of engagement and new spaces of accountability, or ‘governance of the self’, for example, by instilling values and developing technologies which allow corporations to govern their own activities more effectively.

PurposeThe purpose of this research is to seek to understand and explain the non‐governmental organisation (NGO) and its location in civil society in order to provide a basis for future research work. The paper aims to explore and develop understandings of accountability specifically in the context of the NGO and then extend these insights to the accountability of all organisations.Design/methodology/approachThe paper is framed within a theoretical conception of accountability and is primarily literature‐based. In addition secondary data relating to the issues of concern are collated and synthesised.FindingsThe research finds that the essence of accountability lies in the relationships between the organisation and the society and/or stakeholder groups of interest. The nature of this relationship allows us to infer much about the necessary formality and the channels of accountability. In turn, this casts a light upon taken‐for‐granted assumptions in the corporate accountability and reminds us that the essence and basis of success of the corporate world lies in its withdrawal from any form of human relationship and the consequential colonisation and oppression of civil society.Research limitations/implicationsThe principal implications relate to: our need to improve the analytical incisiveness of our applications of accountability theory; and the possibility of the accounting literature offering more developed insights to the NGO literature. The primary limitations lie in the paper in being: exploratory of a more developed understanding of accountability; and a novel excursion into the world of the NGO and civil society – neither of which feature greatly in the accounting literature.Practical implicationsThese lie in the current political struggles between civil society and capital over appropriate forms of accountability. Corporations continue to avoid allowing themselves to be held accountable whilst civil society organisations are often accountable in many different and informal ways. Ill‐considered calls from capital for more oppressive NGO accountability are typically, therefore, hypocritical and inappropriate.Originality/valueNGOs are introduced in a detailed and accessible way to the accounting literature. The concept of accountability is further developed by examination of relationships and channels in the context of the NGO and, through Rawls' notion of “closeness”, is further enriched.

There has been from time to time [see, for example, Adv. Public Interest Acc. 2 (1988) 71; Acc. Org. Society 16 (1991) 333; Acc. Educ. 3 (1994) 51; Acc. Aud. Accountability J. 8 (1995) 97; Crit. Perspect. Acc. 10 (1999) 833; Crit. Perspect. Acc. 12 (2001) 471] concern expressed about the state of accounting education and its potential link to the broader critical accounting project. This special issue revisits this theme focusing on the managerial undercurrent of accounting undergraduate education. This paper seeks to contribute to this debate by posing the suggestion/question that how one teaches is equally important as considering what you teach. In exploring the 'how' of teaching approaches, two educational theorists are drawn from Ivan Illich and Paulo Freire. In particular, we develop the idea that the 'hidden curriculum' [Deschooling Society, Calder and Boyars, London, 1971] of accounting education may be uncovered and problematized if one uses a dialogical approach to education [Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Pelican, London, 1996]. In seeking to expound our thesis, we draw from a number of teaching experiments which have explicitly sought to introduce more dialogical approaches to UK undergraduate accounting education.

We should fi rst congratulate you on making it to the closing book chapter. We trust that you have found much of interest in what you have read and are starting to see the outline of how the discipline of accounting has sought to engage with sustainable development debates and contribute to sustainable development. The connections between accounting and sustainable development are many but are also complex. It is not possible to summarize in a few short pages of this chapter all the themes that could be drawn from the various chapters of this book. Nor is such a task appropriate, because the chapters largely stand by themselves. What we wish to draw out, however, in this fi nal chapter is a sense of the most important implications that face accounting practitioners and researchers who seek to develop a form of accounting that is suffi ciently responsive to the demands of sustainable development.