Democratising accounting and accountability: An exploration of social movement counter-accounting practices and engagement strategies

Abstract

While normative rationales for social and environmental accounting (SEA) are well established in the accounting literature, a number of academics argue that the focus on corporate “self-governance” of SEA practice and research has led to a dominant “business case” approach that significantly delimits what is accounted for, how it is accounted for, and on whose terms. Current voluntarist approaches to corporate-based social and environmental accounting (CSEA) practices are argued to be highly selective and largely designed to cast corporations in a favourable light, rather than seriously address social and environmental responsibility and performance. Against the backdrop of growing criticisms of CSEA, many researchers have called for the development of an effective accounting counterpoint. Accordingly, a number of critical accounting researchers have redirected their focus to social movement (SM) counter-accounting practices. Counter-accounts are broadly defined as all forms of reporting and information tools and practices employed by actors external to accountable organisations (e.g., corporations) and/or institutions to promote their causes; to counter powerful and hegemonic discourses; and, ultimately, to act as catalysts for social change and intervention. While SM actors are increasingly being acknowledged in the SEA literature for their role in promoting corporate accountability, very few studies have directly engaged with them in an attempt to understand their corporate social change processes, and how they themselves conceive of their counter-accounting practices and broader strategic engagement choices. This study seeks to address this gap through a series of interviews with SM actors, and SM and accounting academics.

This study’s research objectives and empirical analysis are informed by critical dialogic accounting (CDA). CDA theory seeks to investigate how accounting might be “democratised” by outlining a theoretical approach to SEA – informed by an agonistic model of democracy – that takes divergent sociopolitical perspectives seriously. It focuses on learning more about the perspectives of different citizens and stakeholder groups so as to enable them to develop accountings that accord with their own philosophical and political standpoints. Thus, this study seeks to contribute to the development of SEA by exploring how CDA might both learn from and contribute to SM corporate social change processes – specifically, their production of counter-accounts.