A-CSEAR Conference 2018 Program

A-CSEAR Conference 2018 5–7 December Melbourne, Australia

monash.edu/business/a-csear-conference-2018

ABOUT CSEAR

The Centre for Social and Environmental Research (CSEAR) is an international membership-based network that aims to mobilise accounting scholarship to enable a more sustainable society.

CSEAR aims to be a world-recognized, global community of scholars who engage with students, activists, practitioners, policy makers and other interested groups in order to generate and disseminate knowledge on social and environmental accounting and accountability. Our mission is to encourage and facilitate high quality, relevant research, teaching and external engagement with practice and policy through developing knowledge, expertise, resources and a supportive network for mentoring and career development.

If you are not already a member of CSEAR we encourage you to join to take advantage of member benefits such as access to the SEA Journal, newsletters, research resources and bibliography, teaching and education resources and access to other members.

For more information, visit https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/ csear/.

A-CSEAR CONFERENCE 2018

4

5

6

8

13

16

41

42

Welcome

Organising Committee

Plenaries and Dinner Presentation

Dating an Accountant: How do you measure love?

Our Sponsors

Conference Program

Abstracts

Call for Papers

Acknowledgement of Country Monash Business School wish to acknowledge the people of the Kulin Nations, on whose land we gather. We pay our respects to their Elders, past and present.

A-CSEAR CONFERENCE 2018

WELCOME TO A-CSEAR CONFERENCE 2018

It is with great pleasure we gather today in this special place to continue our learning journey together towards more social and environmental sustainable ways of being.

We wish to acknowledge the people of the Kulin Nations as the traditional custodians of the land upon which we meet. We pay our respects to the Elders past, present and future and acknowledge their spiritual connection to country along with their deep understanding of sustainable learning through their power of storytelling.

Associate Professor Nick McGuigan

Dr Paul Thambar

We are delighted to welcome you all to the Australasian Centre for Social and Environmental Accounting Research (A-CSEAR) Conference and Emerging Scholars’ Colloquium 2018 held for the first time at Monash Business School.

A-CSEAR aims to mobilise accounting scholarship to enable a more sustainable society. The CSEAR community fosters strong mentoring and a supportive networking environment that makes a strong global and local impact. We are incredibly proud to be hosting this year’s conference at Monash Business School as it offers us an excellent opportunity to carry out our mission of encouraging and facilitating high quality, relevant research and engagement through continual knowledge development.

We hope this conference will provoke, challenge and prove insightful for us all.

This year’s theme, ‘EnVisioning Value’ seeks to explore contemporary accounting practices and concepts including measurement, accountability, transparency and governance, in order to reflect on present-day approaches to, and envision future possibilities for, value creation.

We aim to encourage a broad

4

and inclusive interpretation of ‘EnVisioning Value’ through the formal program and encourage further discussion and debate throughout the informal conference spaces.

A very special welcome to our three prominent plenary speakers, Professor Mervyn King SC, Chairman of the Integrated Reporting Committee of South Africa and Chairman Emeritus of the International Integrated Reporting Council, UK, Professor Judy Brown from Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand and dinner speaker 2017 Advance Global Australian Agriculture Award Winner and Co-Founder of the Blue Mountains Permaculture Institute (BMPI), Rosemary Morrow.

We would like to thank the organising committee, Gordon Boyce, Alessandro Ghio, Amrinder Khosa, Lachlan McDonald-Kerr, Carly Moulang, Aleksandra PopVasileva, Michaela Rankin, Edward Tello and Luisa Unda, for their tireless work and dedication to the conference organisation Also, a note of gratitude to our supportive sponsors: Monash Business School, CIMA and CPA Australia. We are grateful for the financial support they have provided the conference.

It is with great pleasure we greet you all here in Marvellous Melbourne and on behalf of the organising committee, we wish you a thought-provoking, stimulating and productive conference.

Associate Professor Nick McGuigan and Dr Paul Thambar Co-Conveners of A-CSEAR 2018 Conference

OUR SPONSORS

The sponsors of A-CSEAR Conference 2018 are the Chartered Institute of Management Accountants (CIMA) and CPA Australia.

Chartered Institute of Management Accountants CIMA is the world’s leading professional body of management accountants and also the world’s largest. Their aim is to help “individuals and businesses to succeed by harnessing the full power of management accounting.”

CIMA established in 2012 the Chartered Global Management Accountant (CGMA) designation together with the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). In 2017, CIMA and AICPA formed the Association of International Certified Professional Accountants and, together, they represent more than 650,000 members and students in management and public accounting.

To find out more about CIMA visit cimaglobal.com, where you can also learn more about the Chartered Global Management Accountant (CGMA) designation and the CIMA research program.

CPA Australia CPA Australia is one of the world’s largest accounting bodies with a global membership of more than 163,750 members (as at 31 December 2017) working in 125 countries and regions around the world. CPA’s vision is partnering with members to prepare for today and tomorrow in a globally connected world.

CPA Australia services to members include education, training, technical support and advocacy. Employees and members work together with local and international bodies to represent the views and concerns of the profession to governments, regulators, industries, academia and the general public.

To find out more about CPA Australia, go to cpaaustralia.com.au.

5

A-CSEAR CONFERENCE 2018

ORGANISING COMMITTEE

6

Associate Professor Nick McGuigan Co-Convenor

Dr Paul Thambar Co-Convenor

Dr Carly Moulang

Dr Alessandro Ghio

Dr Luisa Unda

Dr Aleksandra Pop-Vasileva

Professor Michaela Rankin

Associate Professor Gordon Boyce

Dr Edward Tello

Dr Lachlan McDonald-Kerr

Dr Amrinder Khosa

7

A-CSEAR CONFERENCE 2018

CONFERENCE PROGRAM – DAY 1 WEDNESDAY 5 DECEMBER 2018 1.30pm

Conference registration and arrival refreshments

2.30pm

Opening ceremony

Venue – The Pavilion

3.00pm

PLENARY SESSION 1

Venue – The Pavilion

Venue – Donald Cochrane Library

New challenges, opportunities and thinking in corporate governance Professor Mervyn King SC, Chairman of the Integrated Reporting Committee of South Africa and Chairman Emeritus of the International Integrated Reporting Council, UK. 4.30pm

SUSTAINABILITY IN EDUCATION PANEL DISCUSSION

Venue – The Pavilion

Professor Michaela Rankin, Monash University Professor Mervyn King SC, Chairman of the Integrated Reporting Committee of South Africa and Chairman Emeritus of the International Integrated Reporting Council, UK. Professor Carol Adams, Durham University David Robertson, Monash University Dr Djuke Veldhuis, Monash University

8

6.00pm

Welcome cocktail reception Sponsored by CPA Australia

7.30pm

Day concludes

Venue – The Pavilion Foyer

CONFERENCE PROGRAM – DAY 2 THURSDAY 6 DECEMBER 2018 8.30am

Conference registration and coffee

Venue – Donald Cochrane Library CONCURRENT SESSIONS

SESSION 1A Venue – H2.20 Diversity and Inclusion Chair: Lee Moerman, University of Wollongong

SESSION 1B Venue – H2.22 Sustainability Accounting Chair: Markus Milne, University of Canterbury

SESSION 1C Venue – H2.23 Ecological Sustainability and Reporting Chair: Carol Tilt, University of South Australia

9.00am

Accountability in an indigenous business enterprise Nacanieli Rika, University of the South Pacific Discussant: Karen Handley, University of Newcastle

Energy efficiency measures and public disclosure of major Australian cities James Guthrie, Macquarie University Discussant: Daniela Juric, Monash University

Characteristics of corporate social responsibility reporting and their relations to corporate social responsibility performance Zhongtian Li, Jing Jia and Ellie Chapple, Queensland University of Technology and University of Tasmania Discussant: Amanpreet Kaur, University of South Australia

9.30am

Queering accounting: Opening up and connecting professional services firms Nick McGuigan and Alessandro Ghio, Monash University Discussant: Stephen Soco, University of Technology Sydney

Perspectives on transparency: Interpretivism, language and pluralism Glen Lehman, University of South Australia Discussant: Thomas Kern, The Accountability Institute

Comparing alternative algal cultivation systems for biodiesel production by utilising an integrated model of sustainability Qiao Chia, Paul Brown, Leen Labeeuw, Christopher Bajada, Samir Ghannam, Hannah Pham, Anna Wright and Peter Ralph, University of Technology Sydney Discussant: Dianne McGrath, Charles Sturt University

10.00am

Employee perceptions of LGBTI diversity and inclusion programs within the Australian accounting profession Matthew Egan and Barbara Voss, University of Sydney and Canberra University Discussant: Dale Tweedie, Macquarie University

Engagement research in sustainability accounting and performance Carol Adams and Carlos Larrinaga, Durham Business School and Universidad de Burgos Discussant: Glen Lehman, University of South Australia

Accounting for biodiverse wildlife corridor plantations: Exploring the feasibility of the Natural inventory model Claire Horner and Neil Davidson, University of Tasmania, Greening Australia Discussant: Edward Tello, Monash University

10.30am

Morning tea

Venue – Donald Cochrane Library CONCURRENT SESSIONS

SESSION 2A Venue – H2.20 Public Interest Chair: Jane Andrew, University of Sydney

SESSION 2B Venue – H2.22 Future Reporting and Methods Chair: Alessandro Ghio, Monash University

SESSION 2C Venue – H2.23 Primary Industries Chair: Paul Thambar, Monash University

11.00am

Not at our table: Stakeholder exclusion and (ant)agonistic engagements Helen Tregidga, Markus Milne and Kate Kearins, Royal Holloway, University of Canterbury and AUT University Discussant: Sandra van der Laan, University of Sydney

Organisations’ perceptions of integrated reporting: A global study of integrated report preparers Mitali Arora-Panchal, Sumit Lodhia and Gerard Stone, University of South Australia Discussant: Stephanie Perkiss, University of Wollongong

Accounting control mechanisms in fair trade supply chains: A tool to ensure ‘fair price’?

Homaira Semeen, Queensland University of Technology Discussant: Umesh Sharma, University of Waikato

11.30am

Serving the public interest? A Habermasian framework for analysing professional associations’ discourse Dale Tweedie, Maria Dyball and David Wild, Macquarie University and University of Sydney Discussant: David R Moore, Victoria University

Accounting-in-talk: Exploring intersecting identities within an Australian manufacturer Max Baker, University of Sydney Discussant: Claire Horner, University of Tasmania

The role of environmental management accounting for the control of energy in an agricultural setting Stephen Soco, Paul Brown and Hannah Pham, University of Technology Sydney Discussant: Gordon Boyce, La Trobe University

12.00pm

Still desperately seeking volunteers: On the absence of social and environmental reporting in New Zealand Helen Wright, Markus Milne and Helen Tregidga, University of Canterbury and Royal Holloway Discussant: Sumit Lodhia, University of South Australia

The use of social media in sustainability reporting: A study of the top 50 ASX listed companies Amanpreet Kaur, Sumit Lodhia and Gerard Stone, University of South Australia Discussant: Alessandro Ghio, Monash University

Corporate and state economic interests chipping at environmental concerns: The case of a pulp mill Ahmad Sujan, Mary Kaidonis and Ciorstan Smark, Monash University and University of Wollongong Discussant: Charl de Villiers, University of Auckland

12.30pm

Lunch

Venue – Donald Cochrane Library

9

A-CSEAR CONFERENCE 2018

CONFERENCE PROGRAM – DAY 2 continued THURSDAY 6 DECEMBER 2018 CONCURRENT SESSIONS SESSION 3A Venue – H2.20 Visualisation Chair: Judy Brown, Victoria University of Wellington

SESSION 3B Accounting in China Chair: Sumit Lodhia, University of South Australia

1.30pm

Toward a methodology for analysing visual rhetoric in corporate reports Michelle Greenwood, Gavin Jack and Brad Haylock, Monash University and RMIT University Discussant: Markus Milne, University of Canterbury

Rethinking socialism in China: The ideological implications of adopting accrual accounting in Chinese government Eagle Zhang, The University of Sydney Discussant: Daniel Murphy, Charles Sturt University

Crowdsourcing corporate transparency through social accounting: Conceptualising the ‘spotlight account’ Stephanie Perkiss, Bonnie Dean and Belinda Gibbons, University of Wollongong Discussant: Debbie Wills, University of Tasmania

2.00pm

More than meet the eyes? Visual persuasion using sustainability related photographs Sabrina Chong, Mahmood Momin and Anil Narayan, AUT University Discussant: Yolande McNicoll, Monash University

The current status and deficiencies of China’s monitoring, reporting, and verification system for supporting its National Emission Trading Scheme Mei Zi Tan, Monash University Discussant: Wei Qian, University of South Australia

The enabling role of performance management systems in balancing the dynamic nature of NGO accountability Paul Thambar, Aldónio Ferreira and Prabanga Thoradeniya, Monash University Discussant: Jane Andrew, University of Sydney

2.30pm

Diving in the deep end: Visually exploring community views on corporate accountability Marcelle Holdaway, University of the Sunshine Coast Discussant: Lachlan McDonald-Kerr, La Trobe University

Political connection and environmental reporting quality: The case of China Wei Qian and Xuan Chen, University of South Australia and Shanghai Marine University Discussant: Hui Situ, RMIT University

The B Corp Movement – Case studies in Australia Giao Reynolds and Rhoda Abadia, Torrens University Australia Discussant: Paul Brown, University of Technology Sydney

3.00pm

Afternoon tea

Venue – H2.22

SESSION 3C Social Accounting Chair: Dianne McGrath, Charles Sturt University.

Venue – H2.23

Venue – Donald Cochrane Library CONCURRENT SESSIONS

SESSION 4A Agriculture and Primary Industries Chair: Stephanie Perkiss, University of Wollongong

Venue – H2.20

SESSION 4B Sustainability Reporting Chair: Aleksandra Pop-Vasileva, Monash University

Venue – H2.22

3.30pm

Land contamination reporting: A study of the local councils role on contaminated land issues in New Zealand Artika Sharma, Grant Samkin and Umesh Sharma, University of Waikato

Motivations and barriers for sustainability reporting in the developing world: Challenges and directions for the future Dinithi Dissanayake, Carol Tilt and Wei Qian, University of South Australia

3.50pm

Implementing natural capital credit risk assessment in agricultural lending Francisco Ascui and Theodor Cojoianu, University of Edinburgh and University College Dublin

Information systems and sustainability reporting through an accountability lens Geoff Frost and Ravi Seethamraju, University of Sydney

4.10pm

Audit quality: An analysis of audit partner cultural proximity to client executives Anh Pham, Hang Pham and Cameron Truong, Monash University

The role of institutional pressures in promoting the use and effectiveness of CSR practices Faruk Bhuiyan, Rahat Munir and Kevin Baird, Macquarie University

4.30pm

Day concludes

6.30pm

Conference dinner Sponsored by CIMA PLENARY SESSION 2 Not your usual appetiser! On the couch with permaculture designer and community builder Rosemary Morrow Rosemary Morrow & Thomas Kern, Co-Founder of the Blue Mountains Permaculture Institute (BMPI) & Co-Instigator of The Accountability Institute Hall of Fame Award Presentation Carol Tilt and Nick McGuigan

10.00pm

10

Dinner concludes

Venue – Ceres Environmental Park, Corner Roberts & Stewart Streets, Brunswick East

CONFERENCE PROGRAM – DAY 3 FRIDAY 7 DECEMBER 2018 8.30am

Conference registration and coffee

9.00am

PLENARY SESSION 3

Venue – Donald Cochrane Library Venue – The Pavilion

Accounting, democracy and the politics of valuation Professor Judy Brown, Victoria University of Wellington 10.30am

Morning tea

Venue – Donald Cochrane Library CONCURRENT SESSIONS

SESSION 5A Venue – H2.20 Accounting in an International Context Chair: Gordon Boyce, La Trobe University

SESSION 5B Extractive Industries Chair: Sandra van der Laan, University of Sydney

11.00am

Sustainability reporting in Sub-Saharan Africa: A preliminary investigation Carol Tilt, Wei Qian, Sanjaya Kuruppu and Dinithi Dissanayake, University of South Australia Discussant: Michaela Rankin, Monash University

Non financial disclosures of material sustainability information: Evidence from Australian listed companies in the materials sector Ashraf Al Mamun, Torrens University Australia Discussant: Amanpreet Kaur, University of South Australia

The usefulness of integrated reporting for investment decision making with public confidence as determinant factor Dwiwulan Dwiwulan and Elvia R. Shauki, Universitas Indonesia and University of South Australia Discussant: Christo Karuna, Monash University

11.30am

Does overseas qualifications/work experience of board members impact on corporate environmental disclosures?

Evidence from Vietnam Hang N.M Le, Brendan T. O’Connell and Maryam Safari, RMIT University Discussant: Carly Moulang, Monash University

Analysis of the corporate social responsibility of mining firms in Australia by case studies of Kagara and Newcrest Mining Limited Xinying Wang and Elvia Shauki, University College London and University of South Australia Discussant: Chris Adrian, Monash University

Investment decisions: the tradeoff between economic outcomes, environmental impact, and stakeholder pressures Venkateshwaran Narayanan, Kevin Baird and Richard Tay, RMIT University and Macquarie University Discussant: Paul Brown, University of Technology Sydney

12.00pm

Framing contests in materiality disclosures Jenni Puroila, Hannele Mäkelä and Johanna Kujala, Stockholm School of Economics and University of Tampere Discussant: Geoff Frost, University of Sydney

Ideology and carbon accounting: The case of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS) in 2009 David R Moore and Ken McPhail, Victoria University, The University of Manchester Discussant: Markus Milne, University of Canterbury

Venue – H2.22

SESSION 5C Risk Management Chair: Leanne Morrison, RMIT University

Venue – H2.23

11

A-CSEAR CONFERENCE 2018

CONFERENCE PROGRAM – DAY 3 continued FRIDAY 7 DECEMBER 2018 12.30pm

Lunch

Venue – Donald Cochrane Library CONCURRENT SESSIONS

SESSION 6A Venue – H2.20 Disclosure in Various Contexts Chair: David R. Moore, Victoria University

SESSION 6B Venue – H2.22 Accountability Chair: Venkateshwaran Narayanan, RMIT University

SESSION 6C Venue – H2.23 Gender Diversity and Fairy Tales Chair: Nick McGuigan, Monash University

1.30pm

Competing logics, performance management systems and social enterprises: Evidence from an Australian not-for-profit entity Paul Yap, Nava Subramaniam and Venkateshwaran Narayanan, Monash University and RMIT University Discussant: Max Baker, University of Sydney

The unintended consequences of funeral insurance: Burial clubs and friendly societies in 18th and 19th century England Lee Moerman and Sandra van der Laan, University of Wollongong and University of Sydney Discussant: Hannah Pham, University of Technology Sydney

Corporate social responsibility, board structure and gender diversity: Evidence from Australia Zhongtian Li and Suichen Xu, Queensland University of Technology Discussant: Nacanieli Rika, University of South Pacific

2.00pm

Impact of accountability mechanisms on the public sector environmental sustainability performance: A case study of Sri Lanka Keshara de Silva, Prem Yapa and Gillian Vesty, RMIT University Discussant: Paul Yap, Monash University

An investigation of accountability on the context of an Australian credit union Dianne McGrath and Daniel Murphy, Charles Sturt University Discussant: Geoff Frost, University of Sydney

A comparison of the profiles of new male and female directors: An Australian case study Karen Handley, Sue Wright and Anne RossSmith, University of Newcastle Discussant Zhongtian Li, Queensland University of Technology

2.30pm

‘Two wrongs make a right?’: Exploring the ethical calculus of earnings management around large labour dismissals Ionela Andreicovici, Nava Cohen, Silvia Ferramosca and Alessandro Ghio, Frankfurt School of Finance, New Jersey City University, University of Pisa and Monash University Discussant: Lee Moerman, University of Wollongong

Accountability performance reporting in charitable organisations – ACNC Act 2012 Debbie Wills, University of Tasmania Discussant: Edward Tello, Monash University

Corporate fairy tales Leanne Morrison, RMIT University Discussant: Lachlan McDonald-Kerr, La Trobe University

2.45pm

Conference Closings Co-Chairs Nick McGuigan and Paul Thambar

3.00pm

Closing drinks and art installation What happens between the spreadsheets, stays within the spreadsheets Join us for drinks, canapés and a premiere of the salacious ‘Dating an Accountant – How do you measure love?’ film. Follow conceptual performance artist Bek Conroy as she performs a dating marathon with Accountants to explore value, the complexity of accounting language and the contradictions and complications of measuring the emotional lives of humans.

4.30pm

12

Event concludes

Venue – The Pavilion

Venue – MUMA, Building F

PLENARY 1 SENIOR COUNSEL MERVYN KING Mervyn King is a Senior Counsel and former Judge of the Supreme Court of South Africa. He is Professor Extraordinaire at the University of South Africa on Corporate Citizenship, Honorary Professor at the Universities of Pretoria and Cape Town and a Visiting Professor at Rhodes.

He has an honorary Doctorate of Laws from the Universities of the Witwatersrand in South Africa and Leeds in the UK, is Chairman of the King Committee on Corporate Governance in South Africa, which produced King I, II, III and IV, and Chairman of the Good Law Foundation.

He is Chairman of the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) in London, Chairman Emeritus of the Global Reporting Initiative in Amsterdam and a member of the Private Sector Advisory Group to the World Bank on Corporate Governance. He chaired the United Nations Committee on Governance and Oversight and was President of the Advertising Standards Authority for 15 years and a member of the ICC Court of Arbitration in Paris for seven years. He is chairman of the African Integrated Reporting Council and chairman of the Integrated Reporting Committee of South Africa. He recently received the ICGN Lifetime Achievement Award for promoting quality corporate governance globally.

He is a fellow of the Royal Society of Arts and Commerce, honorary fellow of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of England and Wales; of the Institute of Internal Auditors of the UK; of the Chartered Institute of Management Accountants; of the Certified Public Accountants of Australia; of the Chartered Institute of Public Relations of the UK and a Chartered Director of South Africa.

He has been a chairman, director and chief executive of several companies listed on the London, Luxembourg and Johannesburg Stock Exchanges. He has consulted, advised and spoken on legal, business, advertising, sustainability and corporate governance issues in over 60 countries and has received many awards from international bodies around the world.

He is the author of four books on governance, sustainability and reporting, the latest being “The Chief Value Officer”. He sits as an arbitrator and mediator internationally.

SYNOPSIS OF PLENARY ADDRESS

New challenges, opportunities and thinking in corporate governance Unlimited liability organisations were financed by wealthy families. After the formation of the limited liability company, wealthy families still provided the equity capital and many of its members became directors. This was one of the reasons for the development of the primacy of the shareholder concept which was reinforced by the famous Ford Motor Company case in 1919 and the economist Milton Friedman in the 1970s. This led to a shareholder centric governance model which pertained right through the 20th century resulting in a century of unsustainable development.

By the end of the century only 20% of the market capitalization of great companies was represented by additives in a balance sheet according to financial reporting standards.

The remainder was made up of so-called intangible assets. It was appreciated by the International Federation of Accountants by 2008 that, although financial reporting was critical it was no longer sufficient in the changed world of the 20th century, being resource constrained, technologically advanced, with increasing population and for directors to discharge their duty of accountability. This resulted in the outcomes based approach of integrated reporting with the formation of the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) in 2010 and The Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations in 2015.

This led to an outcomes based approach to governance and a move away from the shareholder centric governance model to a company centric one. The error of corporate leaders in the 20th century was to focus on an increase in shareholder value. In the 21st century corporate leaders have to focus on the long term health of the company in order to have sustainable development. The 20th century has to be the century of sustainable development where companies have to carry on business as unusual.

13

A-CSEAR CONFERENCE 2018

PLENARY 2 PROFESSOR JUDY BROWN Judy Brown is a Professor of Accounting in the School of Accounting and Commercial Law at Victoria University of Wellington. She entered higher education as a mature student after working for more than ten years for a trade union, gaining her PhD in 1995.

Her research and policy-related work focuses on the study of accounting and accountability practices in politically contentious areas such as labour relations and sustainability. A key emphasis is on the use of accounting in enabling or constraining democratic participation in organizational and civil society contexts. She has a strong commitment to interdisciplinary research and supporting innovative PhD studies; and teaches in research methodology, social and environmental accounting, and financial reporting.

Over 2011-2015, she led a research project on Dialogic Accounting: The Challenge of Taking Multiple Perspectives Seriously funded by the Royal Society of New Zealand’s Marsden Fund.

Judy has published on accounting, pluralism, sustainability and democracy in journals such as Accounting, Organizations & Society, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Journal of Management Studies, Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis, International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, Ecological Economics and Business Strategy and the Environment, and co-authored two books and several contributions to edited volumes. Her work has been widely cited in and beyond accounting.

She is an Associate Editor for Critical Perspectives on Accounting and an Editorial Board member of several other journals, including the Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, Social and Environmental Accountability Journal, Issues in Social and Environmental Accounting, Advances in Public Interest Accounting and International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education.

14

SYNOPSIS OF PLENARY ADDRESS

Accounting, democracy and the politics of valuation In this presentation, Judy Brown will address the conference theme “EnVisioning Value” through an exploration of the politics of valuation. Treating “value” as a contested concept, she will reflect on the possibilities for developing dialogic accountings that aim to open up discussion and debate on politically contentious aspects of valuation and value creation/destruction.

DINNER PRESENTATION ROSEMARY MORROW A permaculturist since the 1980’s, Rosemary Morrow is based in the Blue Mountains (NSW) and is internationally renowned for her ecosystems design skills, ground breaking teaching techniques and her commitment to working with and for people who need it most. She tirelessly works around the globe to support humans in building sustainable and ethical livelihoods. Her work has taken her into communities dealing with utmost adversity, such as East Timor, Afghanistan, Cambodia, Albania, Solomon Islands, and Vietnam, to name a few.

Rosemary is the 2017 Advance Global Australian Agriculture Award Winner and Co-Founder of the Blue Mountains Permaculture Institute (BMPI).

Her current work and passions are centred on converting refugee camps into ecovillages and on developing holistic, permaculture based solutions and disaster planning for the adverse impacts of climate change, such as the failing snow melt from the Himalayas affecting farmers in countries like Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India, rising sea levels threatening communities in river deltas and coastal areas around the globe, and the increasing number of natural disasters like hurricanes, floods and droughts.

Rosemary Morrow is one of Australia’s formidable global thinkers.

SYNOPSIS OF DINNER PRESENTATION

Not your usual appetiser!

On the couch with permaculture designer and community builder Rosemary Morrow What could happen when you place an internationally renowned ecosystems strategist, ground breaking permaculture designer, informal education disruptor on the couch with a frustrated ex-banker, exaccountant turned numbers-questioner to discuss ‘EnVisioning’ Value? What insights could Rosemary and Thomas bring? Could their perspectives change over such a conversation? Could ours? What could we as accounting academics learn from such a conversation?

Join 2017 Advance Global Australian Agriculture Award Winner and Co-Founder of the Blue Mountains Permaculture Institute (BMPI) Rosemary Morrow and Co-Instigator of The Accountability Institute, Thomas Kern, for an intimate fire-side chat that explores value, measurement, accountability, transparency and governance in the global context. Learn how Rosemary’s value-based work has embraced thorough accountability, full transparency, effective measurement and good governance for people around the world who need it the most. Explore what accounting and accountability mean in a world of rising sea levels, intense natural disasters, food insecurity, water scarcity, war and mass migration. Gently question our own assumptions of accounting, accountability and organisation and ponder what role we play in rewriting accounting for a future world? Join Rosemary and Thomas in the CERES garden for some thought-provoking, pre-starter food for the soul.

15

A-CSEAR CONFERENCE 2018

ABSTRACTS DAY 2 SESSION 1A Diversity and Inclusion

DAY 2 SESSION 1A Diversity and Inclusion

Accountability in an indigenous business enterprise

Queering accounting: Opening up and connecting professional services firms

Nacanieli Rika, University of the South Pacific

Nick McGuigan and Alessandro Ghio, Monash University

This paper responds to Laughlin’s (2000) call for case studies on accountability in various cultural settings. It combines archival research, semistructured interviews and meeting observations to study a business enterprise that a Fijian province established as its commercial arm. Adopting accountability webs (Gelfand et al., 2004), it explicitly considers the cultural context of the enterprise thus avoiding the western bias inherent in agency theory. Accountability webs enable the accountability observed in the enterprise to be compared with what would be expected on the basis of previous studies documenting Fijian cultural values. The paper affirms the pervasive impact of cultural values on accountability and simultaneously highlights several intriguing nuances. Accountability is hierarchical as expected but also inverted in the sense that the chair successfully directs shareholder decisions. It is also more individualistic and loose than expected reflecting the dominance of the founding chairman who was paramount chief of the province. The paper highlights the role of reporting language and physical remoteness in marginalising shareholders.

It affirms how formal decision-making processes may be by-passed in companies controlled by family dynasties which exhibit a form of accountability that incorporates cultural values and intelligence.

PURPOSE This paper argues for the themes of opening and connecting to be embraced, adopted and practiced by professional service firms, those who work within them and the academic researchers actively engaged in investigating this field.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH This paper discusses the LGBTQI community within professional services firms based on the authors own personal knowledge, skills and experience of identifying as LGBTQI accounting academics and practitioners.

FINDINGS This study provides insights into the need for professional service firms to ensure breathing space for LGBTQI identifying accountants rather than a simple acceptance and assimilation of LGBTQI peoples within the consolidated heteronormative structures of the accounting profession. Starting from the recent societal and legislative changes coupled with the ongoing disruption of the business environment, this paper urges professional service firms and accounting researchers to open up and connect to a) cultural identification; b) theory; c) research ideas; d) research methodologies; e) research impact and dissemination.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE This study represents the beginning of a discussion around the lifeworlds of LGBTQI identifying accountants and how embracing these may be beneficial for the accounting profession. It provides a critical discussion of the current use of Queer Theory and it supports future studies around the notion of ‘intersectionality’. It also includes empirical evidence about connecting academic, professional and public communities around the topic of ‘Queering Accounting’.

16

ABSTRACTS DAY 2 SESSION 1A Diversity and Inclusion

DAY 2 SESSION 1B Sustainability Accounting

Employee perceptions of LGBTI diversity and inclusion programs within the Australian accounting profession

Energy efficiency measures and public disclosure of major Australian cities

Matthew Egan and Barbara Voss, University of Sydney and Canberra University

James Guthrie, Macquarie University

PURPOSE This study explores the lived experience of LGBTI diversity within the accounting profession in Australia.

We look at what is achieved through related initiatives, and the challenges and opportunities for further development.

PURPOSE Climate change poses a severe threat to this planet.

Cities are attempting to address climate change by undertaking a range of emissions reduction actions, in particular those focused on energy efficiency. The objective of this paper is to explore cities’ calculative practice and public disclosure around energy efficiency activities.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/RESEARCH Semi structured interviews have been undertaken with LGBTI and non-LGBTI staff within one of Australia’s ‘Big Four’ accounting firms through 2017 and 2018, interpreted through a particular form of interpretive discourse analysis.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH We select a sample of eight Australian capital cities and use documentary analysis to evaluate energy efficiency disclosure. A disclosure index is developed to explore the chosen cities’ calculative practice and the quality of their energy efficiency disclosure.

FINDINGS Our study demonstrates a significant positive shift in the lived experience for LGBTI staff within the accounting profession in recent years. Initiatives for LGBTI staff improve a sense of safety, visibility, and pride, leading in turn to greater productivity and less staff attrition. However, marginalised genders and cultures saw room for improvement with the current additive approach. Further progress might be achieved through a ‘meshing’ approach as suggested by Cronin and King (2010), which seeks to reduce disempowerment and marginalisation.

However, the complexity of intersectional diversity suggests a need for careful ongoing attention to power relations.

FINDINGS Cities are undertaking energy efficiency projects to save energy and cost and to reduce emissions.

However, cities have provided limited (quantified) information about the cost and the impact of their energy efficiency projects, making it difficult for stakeholders to evaluate their effectiveness.

RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS The study is limited to the perspectives of a small number of interviewees within one firm at a point in time. Further studies could seek to interview a broader number of individuals across other firms.

Quantitative studies might also seek to explore our conclusions about staff attrition across a broader population.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE The literature currently provides little insight into the lived experience of LGBTI diversity within the accounting profession. Our first study in the Australian context, undertaken at a key moment when ‘marriage equality’ was achieved, opens this field and presents a range of suggestions for further fruitful study.

RESEARCH IMPLICATION Our findings are important for policymakers and city officials responsible for developing and implementing policies and programs for energy and greenhouse gas emissions. Also, for stakeholders seeking to understand a city’s commitment and actions to reduce emissions and for managers responsible for measuring, reporting and mitigating emissions and energy consumptions from current and future activities.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE This disclosure study focuses on an initiative that plays a critical role in reducing GHG emissions, as well as cost reduction. Prior studies have primarily focused on social and environmental disclosure rather than what organisations are doing to overcome social and environmental challenges. This study has developed a disclosure index that allows us to explore the calculative practice and quality of disclosures. Moreover, sustainability accounting research to date has limited focus on cities yet they play a critical role in the development of global sustainability activities.

17

A-CSEAR CONFERENCE 2018

ABSTRACTS DAY 2 SESSION 1B Sustainability Accounting

DAY 2 SESSION 1B Sustainability Accounting

Perspectives on transparency: Interpretivism, language and pluralism

Engagement research in sustainability accounting and performance

Glen Lehman, University of South Australia

Carol Adams and Carlos Larrinaga, Durham Business School and Universidad de Burgos

This paper discusses the nature of accountability and transparency within accountability regimes in environmental and global contexts. Presently, neo-liberal political ideologies based on concepts of private, transferable property ownership, individual rights, and a notion that commercial and social relationships are universally reducible to a system of economic transactions, dominate Western political and social discourse. However, such ideologies fail to provide solutions to critical societal concerns.

This paper contributes to the dialogue regarding accountability by challenging neo-liberal political processes of accountability and transparency.

A specific focus is applied to considering how accountability can be developed in the public sphere. A case is made that neoliberal economic systems, integrated reporting, and business case reforms should be subject to further analysis and interpretation to determine whether the voices of marginalized groups, victims of corporate abuse, and the Other, are adequately considered. Global accountability should give these voices ample opportunities to be heard in respect of common endeavours.

The purpose of this paper is to review the development of engagement research in pursuit of improved sustainability accounting and performance and to identify issues in the further development of this field. In particular, we consider the implications of this research for practice, policy and theory following the publication of a special issue on the topic in 2007 in the Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal.

We performed a systematic review of the relevant literature in selected accounting journals for the eleven year period 2007 to 2017 inclusive.

We identified the methods, topics and theories addressed by researchers and the academic journals that are more likely to publish engagement research.

We found a significant increase in engagement work over the decade since publication of the special issue and a marked increase in the volume and complexity of data collected in studies. There is a marked difference in the openness of different journals to engagement research and the type of engagement research published across accounting journals. Contrary to the argument made by critics of engagement research we found that this field of research not only uses theory, but develops theory.

Through our examination of methods and theories used and topics considered we identify avenues for further research – and the journals likely to be receptive to it.

The study demonstrates that the collective body of engagement research aimed at improving sustainability accounting and performance has significant potential to inform practice and policy developments with the same aim.

The study examines an emerging approach in an emerging field of research with significant academic, practice and policy potential.

18

ABSTRACTS DAY 2 SESSION 1C Ecological Sustainability and Reporting

DAY 2 SESSION 1C Ecological Sustainability and Reporting

Characteristics of corporate social responsibility reporting and their relations to corporate social responsibility performance

Comparing alternative algal cultivation systems for biodiesel production by utilising an integrated model of sustainability

Zhongtian Li, Jing Jia and Ellie Chapple, Queensland University of Technology and University of Tasmania

Qiao Chia, Paul Brown, Leen Labeeuw, Christopher Bajada, Samir Ghannam, Hannah Pham, Anna Wright and Peter Ralph, University of Technology Sydney

This study investigates how different characteristics of corporate social responsibility reporting relate to corporate social responsibility performance.

Experience of CSR reporting, amount of information, amount of quantitative information, amount of information about environmental impact, tone of optimism, tone of certainty and tone of clarity – seven characteristics of CSR reporting – are included. Corporate social responsibility performance is provided by Thomson Reuters Asset4. The sample consists of 2, 076 firm-years between 2002 and 2016. The findings are as follows. A positive relationship between characteristics of reporting and performance is found. Firms with better performance release more information, more quantitative information and more environmentalimpact information and present in optimistic, certain and clear way. Panel Granger causality test finds no signal effect of language characteristics on performance. Unique sectoral environment and use of standalone corporate social responsibility reports can affect certain language characteristics.

Findings are stable in 15 years. Taken together, these results suggest that extant voluntary corporatesocial-responsibility status in Australia seems to not induce opportunistic behaviours in reporting, and encouragement on reporting improves CSR performance. Our study also informs regulatory policy on corporate social responsibility in Australia.

In this study we develop an integrated model named Environmental Sustainable Residual Value (ESRV) derived from environmental accounting, life cycle assessment (LCA) and ecological economics, to assess the sustainability of algal biodiesel production, focusing on the environmental degradation from CO2-eq pollution. Specifically, we model two alternative algal production systems – open raceway pond (ORP) and photo-bioreactor (PBR), and two alternative CO2 feedstock options – direct from the atmosphere and in a more concentrated form as flue gas. Our results indicate that using PBR production system and flue gas as a source of CO2 leads to the highest ESRV, due to lower capital costs enabling additional economic value, which is sufficient to offset the incremental environmental burden. The lowest CO2 emissions option also has the lowest ESRV (ORP with atmospheric CO2), which is driven by low yield of biomass. This study illustrates the value of integrated assessment models (incorporating economic and environmental value) to identify production systems that are more likely to lead to improved sustainability, and hence enable more targeted research and investment in these systems.

19

A-CSEAR CONFERENCE 2018

ABSTRACTS DAY 2 SESSION 1C Ecological Sustainability and Reporting

DAY 2 SESSION 2A Public Interest

Accounting for biodiverse wildlife corridor plantations: Exploring the feasibility of the Natural inventory model

Not at our table: Stakeholder exclusion and (ant)agonistic engagements

Claire Horner and Neil Davidson, University of Tasmania, Greening Australia This paper reports upon the first stage of testing the feasibility of the implementation of the Natural Inventory Model (NIM) in biodiverse wildlife corridor plantations in the Tasmanian midlands. The NIM provides a framework for accounting for, and reporting upon biodiversity (Jones, 1996; 2003).

The project involves collaboration with Greening Australia (Tasmania) (GAT). GAT is endeavouring to establish native wildlife corridors throughout the Tasmanian midlands, using science-based biodiverse plantations. The majority of the areas identified by GAT as essential for the establishment of these wildlife corridors are on privately owned land, primarily used for agricultural purposes. Therefore, there is a need for GAT to demonstrate their stewardship of the land ‘sacrificed’ by landholders for these plantations. This paper explores whether this may be done via the quantification and communication of improvements in biodiversity using the NIM. Results suggest that the existing NIM is impractical for use by an NGO with limited resources, and does not adequately assess the ecological value created by biodiverse wildlife corridor plantations.

Therefore, an adapted NIM incorporating sciencebased measurements is proposed.

20

Helen Tregidga, Markus Milne and Kate Kearins, Royal Holloway, University of Canterbury and AUT University This paper responds to growing calls for a pluralist approach to social and environmental accounting (SEA). It analyses engagement practices in a case study through the lens of agonistic democracy.

The case, a long-term environmental dispute over coal mining, involves multiple participants and multiple spaces of engagement. Data sources include a large archive of publicly available material (published reports, online media, blogs and print media) and interviews with participants representing multiple conflicting positions. Analysis focuses on three aspects: 1) the construction of the contested issue, 2) the construction of identities, and 3) the construction of spaces of engagement.

Findings indicate formal institutional spaces and practices of engagement are more in line with approaches to deliberative democracy - the search for, and prioritisation of consensus. Within such spaces and practices problems arise in relation to representativeness and influence. Engagements outside of formal institutional spaces appear driven by the perceived limits as to what can be achieved inside formal spaces, and are actively taken up by ‘illegitimate’ groups as a means of (re)claiming power.

These extra-institutional spaces, while permitting alternative perspectives and realising conflict, have limitations given existing ‘norms’ of ‘legitimate’ action. Drawing on theory of agonistic democracy, the paper considers how democracy is actualised within the mining dispute and the implications for SEA and the study of stakeholder engagement. A shift in focus from organisation-based analyses to issue-based analyses that seek to shed light on and understand conflict rather than shy away from it is called for.

ABSTRACTS DAY 2 SESSION 2A Public Interest

DAY 2 SESSION 2A Public Interest

Serving the public interest? A Habermasian framework for analysing professional associations’ discourse

Still desperately seeking volunteers: On the absence of social and environmental reporting in New Zealand

Dale Tweedie, Maria Dyball and David Wild, Macquarie University and University of Sydney

Helen Wright, Markus Milne and Helen Tregidga, University of Canterbury and Royal Holloway

This paper introduces a new framework to critically evaluate how professional accounting discourse legitimates and motivate members serving the public interest. An influential argument in prior critical research is that professional accounting associations use the public interest ideal solely as a strategic device or ‘smokescreen’ for their economic interests. However, prior research uses a restricted concept of what constitutes ‘strategic’ rationality, and reviews a limited range of sources.

In response, we draw on Habermas to develop a tripartite typology that classifies strategic discourse according to three interrelated dimensions: aim, ends, and motive. We then illustrate this typology by analysing how four professional associations either ‘frame’ or ‘legitimate’ public service in the ‘public-facing’ sources they provide online. Our analysis systematically distinguishes multiple ‘rationalities’ professional accounting associations use to articulate and motivate public service. These rationalities vary not only between associations and actors, but also within specific texts. We argue this framework’s capacity to differentiate the logic(s) professional accounting associations mobilise can reveal opportunities for both constructive and critical engagement in professional accounting discourse, to support norms – and ultimately praxis – that genuinely serves the public good.

PURPOSE This study aims to gain insights into why reporting has not flourished in New Zealand (NZ), despite its early start, and despite considerable efforts on the part of not only those few organisations that have reported, but also other business intermediaries dedicated to promoting sustainable business practices - including reporting.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH We map the sustainable business field and identify influential players. We undertake semi-structured interviews with two Chief Executives of NZ sustainable business intermediaries (SBIs) and with senior managers of eleven of their reporting and nonreporting members. We use neo-institutional theory (NIT) to frame and analyse our findings.

FINDINGS We find that reporting rationales identified in the literature and promoted by the business intermediaries both motivate and cause resistance to reporting. Reporting seems far from an inevitable outcome for organisations engaging with the sustainability field in NZ, and while the SBIs appear to facilitate weak isomorphic pressure, the absence of any coercive pressure from either them or other external forces such as the Government suggests social and environmental reporting seems set to remain a practice undertaken by few.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE This research is the first to engage with SBIs and a selection of their members in order to understand their influence on social and environmental reporting (SER) and in particular resistance to the practice through non-reporting. This paper adds to the nonreporting literature by focusing on the apparently failed role of business intermediaries specifically set up to promote sustainable business practices.

21

A-CSEAR CONFERENCE 2018

ABSTRACTS DAY 2 SESSION 2B Future Reporting and Methods

DAY 2 SESSION 2B Future Reporting and Methods

Organisations’ perceptions of integrated reporting: A global study of integrated report preparers

Accounting-in-talk: Exploring intersecting identities within an Australian manufacturer

Mitali Arora-Panchal, Sumit Lodhia and Gerard Stone, University of South Australia

Max Baker, University of Sydney

This is a global study that examines the perceptions of integrated reporting held by those who are involved in preparing them. While the accounting profession is well-suited to be involved in integrated reporting, there is a lack of understanding of how they perceive integrated reporting. Recent literature has found a lack of uniformity in the application and implementation of the framework owing limited understanding of how to prepare integrated reports.

The case study approach was used to understand organisations’ logics relating to integrated reporting.

Within this, data was collected using qualitative semi-structured interviews to gather information from participants. Institutional logics provided a framework to examine the perceptions of integrated reporting held by personnel who were involved in it. The key findings of the study suggested that integrated reporting was perceived as a flexible tool to communicate an organisations’ value creation story by including both financial and non-financial information. The respondents also believed that integrated reporting helped them in communicating an organisation’s performance information beyond merely disclosing financial information. Applying the institutional logics theory it was found that accountants and non-accountants perceived integrated reporting in a similar manner, highlighting that they approached integrated reporting through a common stewardship logic. Both accountants and non-accountants approached integrated reporting as something that they should do to provide better quality of performance information in an inter-connected way. This research adds to the literature on how integrated reporting is perceived by accountants and non-accountants.

While the need to present integrated performance information has transpired, the concept of integrated thinking had limited acknowledgement from both accountants and non-accountants, highlighting an area that needs more clarification and explanation within the integrated reporting framework. Applying the institutional logics concept indicated how professionals from different fields had similar logic created by being part of a common group, having shared identity.

22

PURPOSE This paper explores how accounting-in-talk produces and reproduces identities in relation to one another and in doing so utilises other discursive qualities such as metaphor and humour. It attempts to explore accounting’s function in language and, in particular, within organisational conversations.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH Conversation analysis and Laclau and Mouffe’s (1985) discourse theory are used in concert to detail the various ways in which individuals relate to each other in talk, in particular, how accounting numbers and performance assessment is used by individuals to reproduce their own identity in relation to others.

FINDINGS A conversation on management and site performance assessment within a large manufacturer was studied. The paper finds that the process of identity formation in relation to accounting numbers is not uniform or rational; rather it is multifaceted, involving the creative and rich use of metaphors and humour.

RESEARCH IMPLICATIONS The paper makes a case for both continuing and deepening the pursuit of conversation analysis and the study of accounting at the level of talk within research. This approach is particularly insightful in understanding how individuals relate to each other through accounting.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE There are a number of original aspects to the paper: the specific application of Laclau and Mouffe (1985) to conversation analysis, the use of conversation analysis to enrich knowledge of accounting and identity formation and the development of the idea that identity formation itself is a multifaceted interrelated phenomenon.

ABSTRACTS DAY 2 SESSION 2B Future Reporting and Methods

DAY 2 SESSION 2C Primary Industries

The use of social media in sustainability reporting: A study of the top 50 ASX listed companies

Accounting control mechanisms in fair trade supply chains: A tool to ensure ‘fair price’?

Amanpreet Kaur, Sumit Lodhia and Gerard Stone, University of South Australia

Homaira Semeen, Queensland University of Technology

This paper aims to examine the use of social media for sustainability reporting by Australia companies.

Qualitative content analysis was applied to examine social and environmental disclosures posted by Australian companies on three social media platforms – Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn, and to observe stakeholder interaction in relation to the social and environmental postings. The findings of this study indicate a limited use of social media by the top 50 ASX listed companies for sustainability reporting as only 46% of the companies used Facebook, Twitter and/or LinkedIn. Nevertheless, those companies who actively used social media were able to establish a dialogue with their stakeholders. Social issues such community support, employees, gender equality and diversity dominated the three social media platforms. The study also highlights social media preference differences between companies and their stakeholders. Twitter was the most preferred social media platform of companies, whereas stakeholders preferred engaging through Facebook. The study contributes to both academia and practice by highlighting the current and potential use of social media for communicating sustainability issues. This study provided an in-depth insights into the use of social media to transform sustainability reporting, an issue that has limited coverage in prior literature.

This study examines the use of accounting control mechanisms (ACMs) by the producer organisations in fair trade supply chains, with an aim to understand its impact on ensuring a fair price for producers and workers. Despite repeated incidents of worker exploitations in supply chain operations over the last few decades and consequent worldwide awareness of ensuring ethical practices through a range of ethical labels, such as fair trade, little is known as to how the ethical commitments of fair trade are operationalised at the production level and how accounting is implicated into such process. Linking Bourdieu’ theory of bending the rule in the field of local power with the theory of commensuration, this study uses a multiple case study approach to analyse ACMs in the context of fair trade.

Findings suggest (1) a critical role of social positions in structuring the managerial dispositions on determining fair price for producers and workers; and (2) how ACMs structured through such subjective dispositions further ratifies such dispositions by structuring it into an objective form. These findings provide new insights into the recursive relationship between ACMs and social position of executants, where dispositions play a key role in both structuring and structured manner. Such findings are useful for the academic, social activists and fair trade policy makers to comprehend and duly address social equality challenges in these supply chains.

23

A-CSEAR CONFERENCE 2018

ABSTRACTS DAY 2 SESSION 2C Primary Industries

DAY 2 SESSION 2C Primary Industries

The role of environmental management accounting for the control of energy in an agricultural setting

Corporate and state economic interests chipping at environmental concerns: The case of a pulp mill

Stephen Soco, Paul Brown and Hannah Pham, University of Technology Sydney The objective of this study is to explain the factors influencing the choice of environmental management accounting and control system (EMA&CS) practices in agriculture, with a primary focus on practices implicated in the control of on-farm energy. The role that accounting plays for the management and accountability of environmental impacts has been receiving increasing interest in recent years.

Despite this, theoretically informed explanations for the selection of EMA&CS practices in an agriculture setting have been scarce. Through an exploratory case study of the Australian Cotton industry we find that alignment with organizational objectives and priorities, costs associated with EMA&CS practices and the perceived irrelevance of information to be the most pertinent factors influencing the practice of EMA&CS. Notably, there are substantial differences within the setting, with the factors influencing diesel management differing substantially from nitrogen management. Further, the ability of growers to manage energy is largely driven by available technology. This study provides insights as to how energy is managed in agriculture and introduces a new theory informed framework, the Barriers framework into EMA&CS discourse.

24

Ahmad Sujan, Mary Kaidonis and Ciorstan Smark, Monash University and University of Wollongong The development versus conservation debate is not a new phenomenon for the Australian state Tasmania. Gunns Ltd reignited this debate in 2003 when it proposed to build a pulp mill. The pulp mill project was not only significant because of its potential to add value to Australia’s single biggest forestry export, woodchips, but also for its potential contribution to the Tasmanian economy, thereby having a deep social and political implication.

The mill also had probable adverse impact on the environment. The purpose of this research is to explore the role of such financial/ economic discourse in the assessment of this project and understand how such a discourse interacts with, influences and/or is influenced by other discourses in decisions that require consideration of both development and conservation.

The Gunns’ pulp mill assessment process was investigated in the context of a number of competing and complimentary public discourses.

Critical discourse analysis (CDA) (Fairclough, 1992) was chosen as a methodological vehicle for this study because of its capacity to analyse a complex discursive event and its key constituents/ dimensions. The CDA analysis was informed by the theory of legitimation using the combined insights of Turkel (1980a, 1980b, 1982) and Habermas (1975, 1986, 1987). The analysis revealed that a pro-development bias was legitimated by privileging financial/ economic discourse and was given a legal and institutional basis. It was argued that a legitimation crisis was imminent whether the project was approved or not. This crisis involved the dissolution of the assessment entity, resignation of leaders (including the premier of the state), withdrawal of the pulp mill proposal, drafting of new project-specific legislation, and ultimately the demise of the corporation, Gunns. It was concluded that despite past experiences of the state, there were still lessons to be learned; development vs. conservation was still a contested terrain.

ABSTRACTS DAY 2 SESSION 3A Visualisation

DAY 2 SESSION 3A Visualisation

Toward a methodology for analysing visual rhetoric in corporate reports

More than meet the eyes? Visual persuasion using sustainability related photographs

Michelle Greenwood, Gavin Jack and Brad Haylock, Monash University and RMIT University This paper presents a methodology that organizational scholars can use to analyse, explain and critically interpret the role of visual rhetoric in organizational communications. Corporations invest heavily in the visual design of organizational communications, including corporate reports, recognizing the distinctive role and benefits of visual imagery, as well as the rhetorical function of these documents. Current analytical approaches to visual rhetoric are either predominantly theoretical (with little structured guidance) or procedural (with little acknowledgment of important epistemic questions).

This leaves a need for a methodology that combines a clear theoretical framework with explicit guidance on how to analyse visual rhetoric. This paper bridges this analytic gap by offering a methodology that integrates a theoretical foundation of a priori analytical categories informed by selected writings of the French cultural theorist Roland Barthes with three abductively-derived phases (categorical analysis; content analysis; rhetorical analysis) for analysis of visual design of corporate reports. We apply this methodology in an examination of a Qantas Annual Review and articulate our contributions to the field of organizational research methods.

Sabrina Chong, Mahmood Momin and Anil Narayan, AUT University PURPOSE The aim of the paper is to build and suggest a framework for examining the nature and extent of visual persuasion of photographs in sustainability disclosures. Specifically, the paper determines the elements of visual persuasion in sustainability related photographs and measures the level of persuasion of these photographs.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH The paper analyses how sustainability related photographs are being presented by corporations in a visually persuasive manner. Aristotle’s (1984) persuasive appeals of ethos, pathos and logos and Peirce’s (1991) semiotic system of icon, index and symbol are drawn to build a visual persuasion framework to determine the elements of visual persuasion that present in sustainability related photographs. By extending the visual persuasion framework, a visual persuasion scoring is also constructed to measure the persuasion level of the photographs.

FINDINGS Aristotle’s ethos, pathos and logos can be applied effectively to visual persuasion by identifying the semiotic characteristics of icon, symbol and index signs categorisation of the photographs. These categorisations render the photographic images as credible, capable of emotion elicitation, and reasonable.

The visual persuasion scoring constructed and subsequently tested on its applicability shows that persuasion level of sustainability related photographs can be measured and determined when their content images are deconstructed using the semiotics of icon, symbol and index into persuasion elements of ethos, pathos and logos.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATION The study contributes to a greater understanding of the visual persuasion power of sustainability related photographs. By exposing companies’ visual persuasion strategy underlying the utilisation of photographs in sustainability reporting, the paper creates awareness amongst the stakeholders about the need to bring about changes to improve the quality of sustainability reporting.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE By proposing a method of systematic analysis of visual persuasion and persuasion scoring the paper provides a solution to methodical understanding of visual persuasion in sustainability reporting.

25

A-CSEAR CONFERENCE 2018

ABSTRACTS DAY 2 SESSION 3A Visualisation

DAY 2 SESSION 3B Accounting in China

Diving in the deep end: Visually exploring community views on corporate accountability

Rethinking socialism in China: The ideological implications of adopting accrual accounting in Chinese government

Marcelle Holdaway, University of the Sunshine Coast In responding to the dilemma of firms privileging shareholders over community stakeholders this study moves beyond ‘the business case’ to deepen, expand and explore multiple understandings of accountability from a community perspective.

Ultimately the aim is to contribute to addressing a firm’s accountability to community and to preferable social and environmental outcomes.

The theoretical framework applied is Causal Layered Analysis (CLA). This is a theory and methodology from within Critical Futures Studies that accesses deeper modes of understanding. Along with applying CLA to data collected in the field consisting of images and text, I adapted elements of the methodology Grounded Visual Pattern Analysis (GVPA) in identifying themes, and then patterns, emerging from the data. Further ways of viewing images were then briefly explored, other ways of seeing exposed, and questions posed.

Results suggest three dominant themes depicting corporate-community accountability: 1/ landscapes (shared, damaged and other ways of being viewed); 2/ hearing and being heard; seeing and being seen; and 3/ adopting the long view. A problem-revealing analysis of these themes resulted in the identification of various counter-framings to enrich possibilities.

The implications of the study are two-fold. Firstly, understandings of what is meant by accountability to community are challenged through more creative, imaginative forms of community engagement, when for example, conducting interviews and focus groups; and the potential to breathe more life into accountability research, practice and scholarship.

CLA, as applied in this study, has the potential to develop critical consciousness and may well assist in moving firms, and indeed civil society, closer to reaching preferable social and environmental outcomes.

Eagle Zhang, The University of Sydney PURPOSE This paper explores the ideological implications of China’s recent reform to develop an accrualbased whole-of-government financial reporting system. In doing so, this paper aims to provide an understanding of the major institutional forces that have enabled the reform and the ideological values that shape government financial reporting in China.

METHODOLOGY This paper analyses the intellectual debates articulated among leading accounting scholars in China. The data draws upon articles published in the top three Chinese accounting academic journals from 1997 to 2018. A literature-based thematic analysis is conducted to reveal general features of the academic discourse on government accounting reform. Drawing upon theories in Chinese political economy, this paper explains the conceptual patterning in the Chinese discourse that correspond to China’s unique socio-political scruples.

FINDINGS Echoing Western narratives of new public management, this paper reveals a close link between the major conceptual elements of government accounting developed by Chinese scholars and China’s unique ideological context of Socialism with Chinese characteristics. The ideology forms part of a unique social polity that corresponds to the dynamic one-party-rule governance system. It is a process that requires ongoing adaptation and revitalisation for the party to reconcile the inherent contradictions between the socialist ideas and capitalist economic production. In this context, the financial reporting system offers critical technological rationales that enhance the party’s governance capacity thereby allowing it to achieve the particular form of socialism with the ‘Chinese characteristics’.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE This paper is an attempt to use academic discourse to find a vantage point on the progress of Chinese government accounting reform. The findings and reflections on the interplay between accrual accounting and China’s broader institutional environments offer a basis to develop further insights into or critiques of the development of public sector accounting and its wider social positioning and effects.

26

ABSTRACTS DAY 2 SESSION 3B Accounting in China

DAY 2 SESSION 3B Accounting in China

The current status and deficiencies of China’s monitoring, reporting, and verification system for supporting its national emission trading scheme

Political connection and environmental reporting quality: The case of China

Mei Zi Tan, Monash University This article is not a typical study that examines the accounting of financial statements. Instead, it discusses a relatively contemporary subject matter – the accounting of greenhouse gas emissions.

Tackling climate change has been listed as one of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals.

In view of the growing importance of climate change issue, the author embraces the opportunity to extend the knowledge in the areas of monitoring, reporting, and verifying (MRV) of greenhouse gas emissions.

In particular, it chooses to focus on the MRV system in China, given that China has surpassed the United States to become the world’s largest carbon emitter.

In addition, China is the biggest consumer of coal – a highly polluting fossil fuel and a major source of carbon emissions. Fortunately, the country is in the process of implementing a national emission trading scheme (ETS) – an instrument which requires business entities to pay for their emissions. This article evaluates the current progress of China’s MRV system that supports its national ETS.

Wei Qian and Xuan Chen, University of South Australia and Shanghai Marine University Political connection is seen as instrumental, facilitating firms to obtain various preferential treatments and resources. Research has so far paid little attention to the influence of political connection on corporate environmental behaviour, despite anecdotal research suggesting its significant effects. This paper focuses on China, a country with increasing tensions between rapid economic development and heavy environmental pollution, complicated by a high percentage of political connection. A more important context against these is a significant regulatory change – the 18th Decree, taken place in 2013-14 to tackle corruption by substantially reducing the connection of public companies to the government. Using hand-collected environmental reporting and political connection data from 191 and 206 heavily polluting companies in 2012 and 2015 respectively, this study examines the effects of political connection on corporate environmental reporting quality before and after the regulatory change. Our results show that there is a significant improvement of environmental reporting quality and reduction of CEOs’ and senior management’s political connection from 2012 to 2015, while the change of Chairmen’s political connection is insignificant. Interestingly, the significant effect on environmental reporting is primarily from Chairmen’s political connection, with the existence of their political connection negatively influencing the quality of environmental disclosure in 2012 before the legislative change, and the strength of their political connection having a positive effect on environmental reporting quality in 2015 after the change. The findings may suggest that the regulatory change to reduce political connection is effective in reducing corruption such as politically connected firms being shielded from punishment for poor environmental reporting, as seen in the case of 2012. However, the positive effect in 2015 may imply an increase of government political intervention on environmental reporting, making political connection more important for strongly connected firms to strengthen their ties with the government for critical resources.

27

A-CSEAR CONFERENCE 2018

ABSTRACTS

28

DAY 2 SESSION 3C Social Accounting

DAY 2 SESSION 3C Social Accounting

Crowdsourcing corporate transparency through social accounting: Conceptualising the ‘spotlight account’

The enabling role of performance management systems in balancing the dynamic nature of NGO accountability

Stephanie Perkiss, Bonnie Dean and Belinda Gibbons, University of Wollongong

Paul Thambar, Aldonio Ferreira and Prabanga Thoradeiya, Monash University

This paper considers an alternative way of gathering and evaluating information on corporate social responsibility (CSR) and the actions taken towards sustainable development. Social accounting theory is currently limited in conceptualising counter accounts that sit outside the description of silent or shadow accounts. With the emergence of technological platforms that enable CSR information to be collectively located, new models of stakeholder engagement grow utilising the wisdom of the crowd for information collation and analyses. This paper outlines a crowdsourced platform, WikiRate, that aims to empower corporate transparency of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and to assist in multidimensional stakeholder decisionmaking. Empowerment theory is introduced as a way of understanding the WikiRate Consumer to Business (C2B) engagement model and more broadly the relationship with social accounting.

Through analysis and theoretical development, this research has implications for imagining and exploring new social accountings and social accountants that can lead to emancipatory change. ‘Spotlight accounting’ is introduced as a process that illuminates global organisational transparency and disclosure practices through centrally locating and recording CSR information to enable comparability, aggregation and other analysis, that is provided by independent stakeholders.

How and why does accountability relationships in a non-governmental organisation (NGO) shift and evolve? What is the role of accounting and management controls in these shifts in accountability? NGO accountability is an area of interest for accounting researchers but the focus has tended to be on studying static accountability relationships. Research has examined upward accountability to donors, funders and regulators, downward accountability to beneficiaries of the activities and services of NGOs, and the tensions between the both accountabilities. We report on a field study of a small Australian welfare-focused NGO that helps marginalised young people with crisis accommodation and educational support.

Pursuant to an external shock resulting from government-driven changes to services and funding, this NGO reviewed and shifted its accountability relationships from a predominant focus on downward accountability to a more holistic focus on upward, inward and downward accountability. In this process, accounting and management controls became more formalised and enabled this shift in accountabilities.

This process of shifting accountabilities was accompanied by events – some that preceded, some that followed – that threatened the very survival of the organisation, forcing the organisation to demonstrate high resilience, resoluteness, and focus and to rely on management controls to support the ongoing transformation. Our study contributes to and answers a call in the NGO accountability literature (Unerman & O’Dwyer, 2010) for more investigations of shifts in accountability relationships and the interplay with accounting and management controls that enable these shifts.

ABSTRACTS DAY 2 SESSION 3C Social Accounting

DAY 2 SESSION 4A Agriculture and Primary Industries

The B Corp movement – Case studies in Australia

Land contamination reporting: A study of the local council’s role on contaminated land issues in New Zealand

Giao Reynolds and Rhoda Abadia, Torrens University Australia B Corp is a relatively new form of for-profit companies that create value for shareholders and concurrently provide social and environmental benefits. B Corps are certified by B Lab, an independent non-profit organisation whose aim is to use business as a force for goodTM (B Lab, 2017). With over 2 500 companies from more than 50 countries that have been accredited with B Corp status by 30th June 2018 (B Lab, 2018b), these B Corps are expected to bring significant positive changes to the community and environment.

This paper aims to explore online tools used by the sample B Corps to communicate their B Lab certification and purpose-driven activities in five areas of the certification. These include governance, community, environment, customers, and workers.

The research sample involves seven B Corps in the Education and Training Sector in Australia.

Legitimacy Theory is used to explain the sample B Corps’ communication approach to legitimise their existence. Several implications are drawn on the B Corps’ communication of their legitimacy.

Artika Sharma, Grant Samkin and Umesh Sharma PURPOSE The purpose of this paper is to examine the contaminated land disclosures by local councils in New Zealand.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH A content analysis was done to examine the data gathered from the study. Five years annuals reports was examined (2009 – 2013) as well as the recent 2015 long term plan.

FINDINGS Results of the study suggests that not many councils are disclosing land contamination issues and there is a need for awareness. Most disclosures entail the local councils’ responsibility to provide maintenance and monitor the landfill sites.

RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS The research is limited as it is only an exploratory study with a sample of New Zealand local councils.

ORIGINALITY The research is significant as there has not been any study done on local council’s role in land contamination and the mechanism used to report issues on contaminated land.

29

A-CSEAR CONFERENCE 2018

ABSTRACTS

30

DAY 2 SESSION 4A Agriculture and Primary Industries

DAY 2 SESSION 4A Agriculture and Primary Industries

Implementing natural capital credit risk assessment in agricultural lending

Audit quality: An analysis of audit partner cultural proximity to client executives

Francisco Ascui and Theodor Cojoianu, University of Edinburgh and University College Dublin

Anh Pham, Hang Pham and Cameron Truong, Monash university

Agriculture has critical impacts and dependencies on natural capital, and agricultural lenders are therefore exposed to natural capital credit risk through their loans to farmers. Currently, however, lenders lack any consistent methodology for assessing natural capital credit risk in agriculture, and are challenged by the fact that the relevant risks vary considerably by agricultural sector and geography. This paper develops a natural capital credit risk assessment methodology based on a bottom-up review of the risks associated with natural capital impacts and dependencies for Australian beef cattle farming. It demonstrates that implementing natural capital credit risk assessment is feasible in agricultural lending, using a combination of quantitative and qualitative inputs. Implementation challenges include the complexity and interconnectedness of natural capital processes, data availability and cost, spatial data analytical capacity and the need for transformational change both within lending organisations and across the banking sector.

We find that cultural proximity between auditors and CFOs is associated with audit quality. We use recent mandated PCAOB disclosures of engagement audit partners to construct cultural proximity between engagement audit partners and client executives.

Building on an extensive literature on homophily in social connections, we hypothesize that when an engagement audit partner is culturally close to client executives, the accounting negotiation is more efficient, resulting in higher audit quality. Consistent with this prediction, we find that audited earnings are of higher quality when the engagement audit partner is culturally close to the CFO. We, however, do not find similar evidence when the engagement audit partner is culturally close to the CEO. Our findings are consistent across several alternative measures of audit quality and cultural proximity. These findings suggest that interpersonal factors from the auditor– client relationship are important for audit outcomes.

Our study supports the PCAOB’s position that mandatory disclosures of engagement audit partner identity are helpful in understanding audit quality.

ABSTRACTS DAY 2 SESSION 4B Sustainability Reporting

DAY 2 SESSION 4B Sustainability Reporting

Motivations and barriers for sustainability reporting in the developing world: Challenges and directions for the future

Information systems and sustainability reporting through an accountability lens

Dinithi Dissanayake, Carol Tilt and Wei Qian, University of South Australia

Sustainability reporting has advanced significantly over the last three decades. Current reporting is significantly influenced by global ‘standards’ such as the GRI. This study investigates the development of information systems to support the increased quantity of performance information required to meet increased reporting requirements. We find that the increased transparency of companies through these reports does not necessarily reflect the state of the supporting information systems. We observe that key accountabilities, such as regulation, can drive the development of information systems, however the external reporting in a number of organisations is not sufficient to drive significant enhancement of information systems.

The purpose of this paper is to identify the main motivations and barriers for sustainability reporting by the corporate sector in Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka is an important context to explore sustainability reporting behaviour due to its unique characteristics as a country that has emerged out of a long and bloody Civil war, as well as its recent elevation to middleincome country status. We consider the business case for sustainability as a possible conceptual framework to understand motivations and barriers for reporting. 15 semi-structured interviews were conducted with managers of large firms listed on the Colombo Stock Exchange. Results are discussed based on three main themes: 1) strategic position of business, 2) improved decision making and 3) performance improvement and innovation.

Barriers such as cost, lack of understanding and workload commitments impede these drivers for sustainability reporting. Implications of this study are that education and regulation may be important interventions to overcome these barriers in developing countries.

Geoff Frost and Ravi Seethamraju

31

A-CSEAR CONFERENCE 2018

ABSTRACTS

32

DAY 2 SESSION 4B Sustainability Reporting

DAY 3 SESSION 5A Accounting in an International Context

The role of institutional pressures in promoting the use and effectiveness of CSR practices

Sustainability reporting in SubSaharan Africa: A preliminary investigation

Faruk Bhuiyan, Rahat Munir and Kevin Baird, Macquarie University

Carol Tilt, Wei Qian, Sanjaya Kuruppu and Dinithi Dissanayake, University of South Australia

The study provides an insight into the use of CSR, and the role of institutional pressures (namely coercive, mimetic and normative) in promoting the use and effectiveness of such practices. The study uses a survey to develop a seven-dimensional model of CSR use and to empirically examine the associations between the three institutional pressures, CSR use, and competitive advantage.

There is evidence of a significant association between coercive, mimetic and normative pressures with different specific dimensions of CSR use. The findings further reveal that specific CSR dimensions are both positively and negatively associated with competitive advantage. The findings inform managers of the pressures to enhance their use of CSR and highlight the role of regulators (e.g., policy-makers, governments) in applying the pressures required to encourage CSR use. In line with the principles of greenwashing, it is implied that organisations mainly adopt CSR practices to enhance their legitimacy and/or elevate their public image. Such findings highlight the important role of government and/or policy makers in implementing specific rules and/or regulations which mandate both the requirement to disclose and the principles of CSR reporting.

Sustainability reporting has been studied extensively in developed countries but there is still only limited, albeit growing, research undertaken in developing countries. Given that the majority of the world’s population lives in lesser developed countries (LDCs), which experience their own social, political and environmental issues, it is surprising that only a small number of papers have so far examined sustainability reporting in these regions. There is a clear gap in the literature on sustainability reporting practices in Africa, particularly Sub-Saharan African countries, where social and environmental problems are significant. This paper investigates the state of sustainability reporting in Sub Saharan Africa, including by local and multi-national companies. It aims to reveal the level/frequency/breadth and depth of reporting, and to provide an overview of the state of reporting in the region, as well as more broadly.

This paper makes an important contribution to both our knowledge and understanding of sustainability reporting in this region, and the academic literature in the field.

ABSTRACTS DAY 3 SESSION 5A Accounting in an International Context

DAY 3 SESSION 5A Accounting in an International Context

Does overseas qualifications/ work experience of board members impact on corporate environmental disclosures? Evidence from Vietnam

Framing contests in materiality disclosures

Hang N.M Le, Brendan T. O’Connell and Maryam Safari, RMIT University As the impact of global climate change becomes more evident, companies globally are increasing their levels of environmental reporting. In emerging countries where a focus on fast economic development has often resulted in significant degradation of the enviroment, one would expect to see a rise in enviornmental reporting. Yet there is little-published research to date on corporate environmental disclosures (CED) within many developing countries. Moreover, public awareness of environmental impacts is relatively low in these countries. Studies of the factors that impact CED within these nations are vital to understanding what is going on within these countries so that ultimately we can see an increase in the level of transparency within these nations. Using a sample of 260 large Vietnamese listed companies over a four-year period (2013-2016), this study examines two potential board characteristics that may impact positively on CED practice: overseas qualifications and work experience of board members. Unlike these earlier studies, this study takes a more thorough approach using integrated reports, sustainability reports, company websites and stock market websites to gather data on CED and board characteristics. Our results indicate that CED levels overall were very low and that there was a significant positive relationship between board members’ earned international qualifications and work experience and the level of CED within their companies. This research adds to existing empirical research that examines the links between board characteristics and the extent of CED, and to studies into CED in emerging economies.

Jenni Puroila, Hannele Mäkelä and Johanna Kujala, Stockholm School of Economics and University of Tampere Materiality has become a central element in sustainability reporting to distinguish material information from insignificant, immaterial information.

However, no common and shared understanding exists about how something is defined as material in corporate sustainability. Dependent on its framing, the concept is used in various ways to serve diverse purposes. This study aims to examine how the language used in corporate materiality disclosures constructs different frames to understand materiality.

The findings of this research suggest the following four ways to frame materiality in current sustainability reporting discussions: (a) risk management, (b) business opportunity, (c) business-as-usual, and (d) social licence. Further, we explore how these frames interact with each other through framing contests, and what cosequences they have for corporate sustainability field by labelling certain issues as more material than others. By shedding light on these framings, this study maintains that the materiality concept is mostly used as a tool to create a particular image for corporate sustainability performance by empowering and giving prominence to specific objectives, ideologies and voices while silencing others. Reframing the materiality concept from societal perspective draws the attention to relevant economic, environmental, and social effects of company activities that can have wider effects beyond the financial performance.

33

A-CSEAR CONFERENCE 2018

ABSTRACTS DAY 3 SESSION 5B Extractive Industries

DAY 3 SESSION 5B Extractive Industries

Nonfinancial disclosures of material sustainability information: Evidence from Australian listed companies in the materials sector

Analysis of the corporate social responsibility of mining firms in Australia by case studies of Kagara and Newcrest Mining Limited

Ashraf Al Mamun, Torrens University Australia

Xinying Wang and Elvia Shauki, University College London and University of South Australia

The broad objective of this paper is to measure the extent of disclosure of nonfinancial material sustainability information by Australian companies in the materials sector based on the GRI G4 guidelines. The sample of 100 companies is analysed in aggregate and within three levels of market capitalization; small cap, medium cap and high cap to determine if there are disclosure differences associated with market capitalisation. Aggregate material sustainability disclosures and categories of disclosures (economical, environmental and social) are measured and analysed to determine if any category of disclosure is dominant or underrepresented.

GRI G4 guidelines on economic, environmental and social performance indicators are used based on 2014 and 2015 data to establish what constitutes nonfinancial material sustainability information by ASX listed Australian companies in the materials sector. Content analysis of annual reports and sustainability reports of the companies was conducted to measure the extent of sustainability disclosure among Australian listed companies in the materials sector.

The aggregate nonfinancial material sustainability disclosure is low for all companies in the materials sector. The findings show that a great degree of variation in sustainability disclosures exists among the listed Australian companies in the materials sector based on GRI G4 guidelines. The pattern of disclosure is similar for small cap and medium cap companies and they disclose less nonfinancial material sustainability information than large cap companies. It is evident that the sustainability score increased slightly in 2015 compared to 2014 for all companies and subgroup of companies based on market capitalisation in aggregate as well as in economic, environmental and social categories.

The new evidence from the study will add to the literature in a field that is increasingly gaining importance and may provide an insight for corporate leaders and other policymakers in Australia for decisions regarding persistent expansion of reporting requirements.

34

Some mining firms in Australia have incorporated CSR activities into business strategies, but some have not conformed to environmental regulations to protect the environment. Therefore, this project is to investigate whether mining firms in Australia have undertaken their CSR and implemented CSR activities through a comparative study of Kagara and Newcrest mining company. The objectives of this research included 1) to identify the influential factors on CSR activities, 2) to compare Kagara and Newcrest in how they implemented CSR activities.

Previous studies on CSR activities include debates over essential benefits and costs, Carroll’s pyramid of CSR activities, and cost-benefit-analysis. Qualitative research in the form of case studies was arrayed.

The cost-benefit analysis mode was leveraged to guide data collection and results were processed using content and descriptive analysis with critical different measurements and themes identified.

The results show that Newcrest is more proactive to incorporate CSR strategy with support from top management and little negative news about environmental activities, while Kagara is passive due to financial problems and lack of support from senior management. Through cost-benefit-analysis, it was found that Newcrest has direct costs related to CSR investment, while Kagara’s costs are more related to the negative influences of lacking CSR activities such as the penalty for violation of environmental laws.

Kagara had benefits limited to shareholders, but Newcrest’s CSR activities have enabled the company to build a better reputation and develop a favorable relationship with stakeholders. For future study, the researchers would make use of quantitative research to collect primary data from broader mining companies to understand how they make decisions about CSR activities. The focus of further study will be how the majority of mining companies implement CSR activities rather than specific case studied companies.

ABSTRACTS DAY 3 SESSION 5B Extractive Industries

DAY 3 SESSION 5C Risk Management

Ideology and carbon accounting: The case of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS) in 2009

The usefulness of integrated reporting for investment decision making with public confidence as determinant factor

David R. Moore and Ken McPhail, Victoria University, The University of Manchester PURPOSE The purpose of this paper is to utilise Thompson’s (1990) modes and associated strategies of ideology in order to examine how, and to what extent, did the submissions that were made to the 2009 Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS) exposure draft, and the capitals associated with their meaning and power, explain both the majority and dissenting committee responses to the CPRS exposure draft.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH A discourse analysis was undertaken of a selection of submissions that were made to the exposure draft of the CPRS. FINDINGS The majority parliamentary committee response, which supported the CPRS, was consistent with submissions that predominantly deployed the ideologies of legitimation and unification on the basis of the need to reduce emissions at least cost, provide business certainty and that it was in Australia’s national interest. The dissenting committee members response opposed the introduction of the CPRS on the basis that it was “flawed”, out of step with the actions of Australia’s trading competitors as well as its potential detrimental impact upon EITE industries, which was consistent with extracts from submissions from EITE industries which deployed the ideology of fragmentation. The Australian Greens minority report also opposed the CPRS on the basis that the emissions reduction targets were weak and that the level of EITE industry assistance was excessive, which was consistent with extracts from submissions from EITE industries which deployed the ideology of fragmentation.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE This paper illustrates how Thompson’s (1990) modes and associated strategies of ideology can be utilised in examining carbon accounting policy development in Australia

Dwiwulan Dwiwulan and Elvia R. Shauki, Universitas Indonesia and University of South Australia PURPOSE This study aims to determine the usefulness of fundamental concepts of Integrated Reporting <IR>, i.e. six capitals, content elements, and guiding principles, for investment decision making in Indonesia using public confidence as determinant and moderating factor.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH This research applies mixed-method by combining quantitative data and qualitative data at the stage of data collection and data analysis. Quantitative data were analyzed using Partial Least Square method to understand the relation between variables and Pearson Chi-Squared test to determine the difference of perception among demographic groups of investors. Qualitative data were analysed using content, constant comparative, and thematic analyses.

FINDINGS This study finds that an increase in public confidence has a positive and significant impact directly on investment decision making. But the increasing level of public confidence does not mediate the relationship between three fundamental concepts and investors’ decision making significantly.

Meanwhile, the three fundamental concepts of Integrated Reporting have no significant impact on investors’ decision making. This is because investors in Indonesia are still unfamiliar with Integrated Reporting and still looking for short-term returns.

In addition, the declining level of public confidence in Indonesia for the last four years made Integrated Reporting less relevant to be used as a basis for investors’ analysis. However, each concept of Integrated Reporting has its own value for investment decision making.

RESEARCH IMPLICATIONS This study is expected to provide feedback to Financial Services Authority regarding policy implications on the importance and urgency in preparing Integrated Reporting for the public listed companies resided in Indonesia.

35

A-CSEAR CONFERENCE 2018

ABSTRACTS

36

DAY 3 SESSION 5C Risk Management

DAY 3 SESSION 6A Disclosure in Various Contexts

Investment decisions: the tradeoff between economic outcomes, environmental impact, and stakeholder pressures

Competing logics, performance management systems and social enterprises: Evidence from an Australian not-for-profit entity

Venkateshwaran Narayanan, Kevin Baird and Richard Tay, RMIT University and Macquarie University

Paul Yap, Nava Subramanian and Venkateshwaran Narayanan, Monash University and RMIT University

We examine the trade-offs made by Australian managers between economic, environmental and social factors when making investment decisions.

The discrete choice experiment methodology is employed to measure the extent of this trade-off.

The paper contributes to the debate between the ‘critical accounting’ literature which views business decision-making as involving trade-off which favour financial outcomes, and, the ‘pragmatists’ who argue for the ‘win-win’ approach to corporate engagement with sustainability concerns. Our findings show strong support for the critical accounting literature’s viewpoint as our participants weighted financial returns above environmental impact and stakeholder pressure. The findings however, also point to some possibilities for change in decision-making behaviour which takes into account sustainability concerns.

We found that participants with higher levels of environmental consciousness and those who had environmental performance measures were more likely to prioritise environmental concerns over financial. The paper concludes with implications for practice, and for further research.

Social enterprises (SE) are commercially driven for social purposes, which potentially raise conflicting logics for management. Guided by institutional logics, the study addresses two research questions ‘How do SEs operating within a parent entity (PE) characterise and prioritise the different logics related to commercial and social goals?” and “How are SE managers’ perceptions of social and commercial logics related to their use of performance management system mechanisms?”. This paper presents findings from a case study of a not-for-profit with three SEs where the overarching social mission focuses on supporting and empowering youth-atrisk. An interpretative approach is undertaken based on interviews of eleven managers.

Our findings suggest that while the PE and its SEs share a core logic of the social mission, the focus of the PE’s executive team tends to be on entity-wide, standardised solutions, driven by accountability to regulatory and resource providers, with a view to achieving balance between the logics. Contrastingly, the SEs dealing with one-to-one relationships with the clients operationally, prefer flexible, and empathetic approaches to performance monitoring and assessment, and prioritise social goals over commercial ones. The narratives translating commercial metrics to social impact was an effective way to connect the social and commercial logics.

There was resistance towards individualised case management system evaluation processes where the link between commercial and social logics was not clear with perceived weaknesses in performance assessment timelines and authenticity. We suggest the use of additional theoretical frameworks, namely the concept of empathy (Wondra and Ellsworth, 2015) may better inform managerial approaches to PMS in SE situations. Empathy occurs when an observer appraises a target’s situation and appraises it similarly as the target, this has the potential to influence how the observer may better apply PMS in more considered, inclusive and effective ways (as opposed to a more emotion-laden, reactionary manner).

ABSTRACTS DAY 3 SESSION 6A Disclosure in Various Contexts

DAY 3 SESSION 6A Disclosure in Various Contexts

Impact of accountability mechanisms on the public sector environmental sustainability performance: A case study of Sri Lanka

â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Two wrongs make a right?â&#x20AC;&#x2122;: Exploring the ethical calculus of earnings management around large labour dismissals

Keshara de Silva, Prem Yapa and Gillian Vesty, RMIT University

Ionela Andreicovici, Nava Cohen, Silvia Ferramosca and Alessandro Ghio, Frankfurt School of Finance, New Jersey City University, University of Pisa and Monash University

South Asia is the fastest growing region in the world however, environmental degradation continues to be a significant challenge. Fast developing countries have become major environmental polluters with reduced water and air quality and imperilled biodiversity due to lack of clarity in environmental accountability of traditional economic developmental activities and infrastructure development projects.

Robust public sector accountability frameworks are paramount to achieve environmentally sustainable development. Research is increasingly focusing on environmental sustainability, however environmental sustainability research in developing country context is limited. This paper aims to fill this gap by clarifying the concept of environmental accountability of public sector entities in pursuing internationally funded development projects in Sri Lanka as a fast developing country in the south Asian region. This further analyses the roles and responsibilities of public sector agencies in relation to the environmental sustainability practices and the impact of international developmental funding agencies including donor agencies on public sector accountability. The analysis indicates that despite the existing environmental sustainability guidelines and principles set by international agencies, environmental degradation continued to be a significant challenge in the country and deficiencies in accountability structures have significantly affected the attainment of Sustainable Developmental Goals (SDGs).

The growing expectations to conform to social norms may trigger firms to engage in unethical behaviours to morally justify situations which jeopardize the social contract. Because LLDs are ethical questionable business decisions, this study examine whether firms legitimize LLDs by artificially reporting poor financial performance through earnings management. The morality of earnings management is questioned because it entails an unfair exercise of power to weaken other parties. Based on a sample of European listed firms over the period 1998-2015, we find that firms manage downwards their earnings in the year before LLDs. Further, using labour reforms as exogenous shocks to the political pressure, we show that earnings management before LLDs co-move with the direction of labour protections.

Firms have therefore higher incentives to manage their earnings around LLDs in the presence of high political pressure. Finally, we show that firms with higher social reputation are less likely to manage their earnings before LLDs. These results suggest that firms adopt less opportunistic financial reporting practices around ethical questionable business decisions, i.e., LLDs when the stake to maintain their social legitimacy and reputation are higher.

Overall, our results shed lights on the unintended consequences of the growing expectations on firms to conform to the societal moral reasoning.

37

A-CSEAR CONFERENCE 2018

ABSTRACTS DAY 3 SESSION 6B Accountability

DAY 3 SESSION 6B Accountability

The unintended consequences of funeral insurance: Burial clubs and friendly societies in 18th and 19th century England

An investigation of accountability on the context of an Australian credit union

Lee Moerman and Sandra van der Laan, University of Wollongong and University of Sydney This paper explores the unintended consequences of funeral insurance from its beginnings in burial clubs and friendly societies in 18th and 19th century England. In doing so, it highlights the historical and social significance of death and funerals that led to the development of financial practices and arrangements for funerals, most of which endure today.

Lessons from the unintended consequences of these early forms of funeral insurance have not been learned. Offering a financial product that distances the social practice of funerals from the financial arrangements that pay for them creates arbitrage opportunities for market participants and justification for the ongoing condemnation of the industry and calls for regulatory intervention.

38

Dianne McGrath and Daniel Murphy, Charles Sturt University This paper examines the nature of accountability and accountability processes in the Australian credit union sector through the lens of a corporate governance crisis at a regional Australian credit union. The crisis situation for the credit union calls into question the nature of accountability and the responsibility of the institution board and management to give an â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;accountâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; to their members (owners) through appropriate disclosure of matters relevant to the critical incident. The paper analyses the response of the credit union board and management to this corporate governance incident and particularly the ensuing entanglement of mechanistic and virtuous forms of accountability (Bovens, 2010). The analysis finds the response to member to be lacking and highlights the potential conflict between mechanistic accountability processes and normative virtuous accountability goals in an important sector of the Australian banking and financial services industry. The contribution to the accountability literature is timely given the regulatory and media scrutiny of the banking and financial services sector through the Royal Commission.

ABSTRACTS DAY 3 SESSION 6B Accountability

DAY 3 SESSION 6C Gender Diversity and Fairy tales

Accountability performance reporting in charitable organisations â&#x20AC;&#x201C; ACNC Act 2012

Corporate social responsibility, board structure and gender diversity: Evidence from Australia

Debbie Wills, University of Tasmania

Zhongtian Li and Suichen Xu, Queensland University of Technology

The aim of this paper is to provide a preliminary examination of accountability reporting before and after the introduction of the ACNC Act in Australia in 2012. The legislation was introduced to improve public trust and confidence in charities through increased accountability and transparency (ACNC, 2012). Accountability is a mechanism through which organisations report to authority and are responsible for their actions which is necessary for ongoing support and survival of charitable organisations.

This research provides a pilot study aiming to test whether the legislation did increase accountability as demonstrated through disclosures of two large Australian registered charitable organisations.

A content analysis of the annual reports of World Vision and Compassion Australia, before and after the introduction of the charities legislation was undertaken. The annual reports were examined for observations of 20 quantitative and qualitative performance based accountability measures that were developed based on an analysis of prior literature on charitable organisations.

This study aims to investigate the relation between corporate-social-responsibility performance and corporate governance, emphasizing board structure and gender diversity. We synthesize data from three databases, the SIRCA, Thomson Reuters Asset4 and Morningstar DatAnalysis. OLS, and fixed-effect panel regression and dynamic general method of moments are used for data analysis. This study examines a sample between 2002 and 2016. This study found that there is a positive relationship between corporate governance and corporate social responsibility performance. It arguably contributes to the literature by highlighting effects of board subordinates (corporate social responsibility committee and risk management committee) on performance and by extending scope of gender diversity from board level only to other levels (i.e. chairperson, CEO, management team and worker).

This paper provides a preliminary insight into the qualitative and quantitative accountability measures reported by charities before and after the introduction of the ACNC Act in December 2012. There were notable increases in the use of pictorial devices such as graphs and diagrams for both organisations across the two years, with a decrease in narratives.

This increased the visual clarity of the reports, suggesting that the organisations, which were already reporting under the Corporations Legislation, looked to other tools to signal their accountability with the introduction of the ACNC Act. This paper contributes to the literature on accountability and transparency and provides a preliminary measure of the effectiveness of the ACNC Act in meeting its goal of increasing accountability and transparency. This research is a pilot study though, undertaken to inform future examination of accountability reporting in charitable organisations.

39

A-CSEAR CONFERENCE 2018

ABSTRACTS DAY 3 SESSION 6C Gender Diversity and Fairy tales

DAY 3 SESSION 6C Gender Diversity and Fairy tales

A comparison of the profiles of new male and female directors: An Australian case study

Corporate fairy tales

Karen Handley, Sue Wright and Anne Ross-Smith, University of Newcastle PURPOSE The purpose of this paper is to examine the human capital of newly appointed female and male directors of ASX 200 companies over the period 2013-2014.

It responds to criticism and concern arising from a perceived shortage of suitable women to fill directors’ positions in order to satisfy pressure from ASX listing rules. This paper seeks to determine whether there are marked differences between the men and women emerging into directors’ positions for the first time.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH This paper uses lexical analysis on publicly available commentary about newly appointed board members. This analysis is performed independent of researcher bias using Leximancer. Interviews with corporate directors and hand-collected human capital descriptors are used to confirm the resultant themes.

FINDINGS The study finds that, although there are some anomalies in the human capital elements discussed in the publicly available data, there is much similarity between the women and men appointed to these positions. At the same time, we find that there is some novelty attached to female directors in the public discourse.

RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS This research contributes to the literature on gender diversity by examining whether board appointments are indeed gender biased. It is limited to one country only and uses a binary definition of gender.

Practical implications: The findings of this paper will be useful for recruitment activities in boards of directors.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE This paper describes the results of a methodologically novel approach using lexical analysis, confirmed by interview data. Unlike much women on corporate boards research which focuses on women only, our paper examines the media commentary about selection and appointment of both female and male directors who are newly appointed to boards.

40

Leanne Morrison, RMIT University This paper introduces a novel way to apply narrative theory to analyse corporate reports. By viewing corporate reporting through the lens of narrative theory, in particular the traditional fairy tale story structure, features such as character, storyline, narration and story structure make visible some of the ways corporate reporting shapes the perspective and sympathies of the reader.

The analysis provided in this paper has a threefold purpose – to unmask the narrative messaging which is being implicitly carried and reinforced through the corporate report; to contrast the corporate narrative with those sourced elsewhere, and thirdly; to bring attention to the importance of narrative and storytelling in corporate communications.

Analysing a single exemplar company’s environmental report through the lens of a fairy tale demonstrates some of the ways in which reader perspectives are shaped. It is found that the company has used character, storyline and narration to silence the voices of critics and highlight others, which frame the company as the ‘hero’ of the story.

A playful counter narrative provides a different version of the same series of events, from a contrasting perspective sourced from stakeholders both internal and external to the company. This counter narrative demonstrates the power of narrative and storytelling to reinforce particular perspectives.

This paper brings attention to the importance of narrative and storytelling in corporate communications. By doing so it points towards a new way of understanding corporate reports and how they contribute to the framing of wider understandings, particularly about the environment.

CLOSING DRINKS AND ART INSTALLATION Dating an Accountant: How do you measure love?

What happens between the spreadsheets stays within the spreadsheets

Video (66.30 mins) Filming and editing: Alex Sibbison Bek Conroy’s video installation, Dating an Accountant, documents a performative investigation of the uncertainties of accounting procedures and the necessity for love and courtship. How do you measure a good-looking conversation? What is the value of mess?

When can you count on it?

The work draws attention to the often tense and complex relationship between art-making and finance. This project was initiated by the artist Dr. Rebecca Conroy and Associate Professor Nick McGuigan. During April 2018, Bek Conroy was Monash Business School’s inaugural artist-in-resident, playfully investigating accounting and the everyday. The artist has invited six accountants to go on a ‘date’ with her for 30 minutes. The encounter was filmed and then edited into video that explores value, the complexity of accounting language and the contradictions and complications of measuring the emotional lives of humans.

Artist: Bek Conroy Rebecca Conroy is an interdisciplinary artist working across site, community engagement, and performative interventions with an artist-led philosophy. Her work is bound up in mimetic strategies and the playful occupation of non-art fields such as urban planning, economics, and housing, particularly where it concerns the behaviour of cities and the rise of the creative entrepreneur within finance capitalism. From 2011 – 2014 she was conductor of The Yurt Empire, a rogue housing project and encounter in the inner city of Sydney. She recently built a Bike-Book-Machine, and is currently devising plans for an alternative economy in the shape of A Very Beautiful Laundromat for 2018. In 2015 she spent 3 months going on a series of dates with economists in Europe and North America, for an audio piece called Dating an Economist commissioned by Radio National (2016). In November 2017 with Vitalstatistix (SA) she premiered her new work Iron Lady, a performance intervention—part espionage, part invisible labour, set in the finance district. #DatingAnAccountant #AccountableLoving

#CostEffectiveLove #FaithfulRepresentation

#ProfitableInterests

#SocialAccounting

41

CALL FOR PAPERS Social and Environmental Accountability Journal Call for Papers Special Issue: “SEA 2020 and beyond” Guest Editors: Matias Laine, University of Tampere, Finland Matt Scobie, University of Sheffield, UK Matthew Sorola, University of Limerick, Ireland Helen Tregidga, Royal Holloway, University of London, UK Deadline for submissions: 31/12/2018

This is a call for conversation. We are seeking contributions which consider what the future of social and environmental accountability (SEA) research and practice (and perhaps the future of SEAJ) might look like and what is needed to get us there. This special issue aims to (re)invigorate the dialogue, insightful commentary and (radical) critique that has brought this journal and the community which it serves to where it is today (see e.g. Lowe & Tinker, 1977; Harte & Owen, 1987; Maunders & Burritt, 1991; Milne, 1996; Tinker & Gray, 2003; Owen, 2008; Bebbington et al., 2017; Dillard & Vinnari, 2017). Looking at SEA 2020 and beyond, we aim to reflect not only on where we are now and where we are going, but perhaps more importantly, where we should go.

Emerging and early-career SEA scholars operate within a holistically different academic landscape than that of their predecessors (Laine, 2006). Social and environmental issues are now regularly featured in accounting journals (Gray & Laughlin, 2012), and their conceptual connection to business and accountability has been made (Parker, 2011). These advancements were made by early SEA scholars, many of whom are members of the SEAJ community, and although SEA researchers continue to face challenges – some old, some new – they do so from a more established institutional position. Recognition of these accomplishments is important, but we aim to move beyond them to capitalise on the opportunities they afford us. We believe now is the time to reflect and to explore new issues and find new spaces to develop alternative theories, knowledges and practices.

Many members of the SEAJ community are motivated by an urgent need to address catastrophic social, ecological and economic devastation, and this can be seen in the topics addressed within the journal. The catastrophic nature of these issues has also garnered support amongst wider society for SEA research, and while this has led to an increased acceptance of SEA research, it has also introduced new challenges. As SEA research is ‘normalised’, there is a very real risk that it will become ‘just another variable’ being added into mainstream research, a fashionable topic that attracts editors and facilitates publication, but does little to address the issues underpinning such topics.

Careful consideration must be given to the shifting motivations and interests accompaying this normalisation process, as there is a very real potential for them to erode the progress made thus far (see e.g. Tregidga et al., 2018).

Social and Environmental Accountability Journal – Call for Papers “SEA 2020 and beyond”

Motivated by both the opportunities and challenges that are facing SEA research, we open this call for papers. We recognise the insights, concerns and calls for action of those who have come before us, as well as a duty to think and act in new ways to guide us into the future. This special issue seeks to look to the future and build from the progress that the SEAJ community has already made in justifying the relevance of SEA research (Parker, 2011), becoming more broadly inclusive of a plurality of perspectives and seeking inclusive dialogue (Dillard & Brown, 2012), being cognisant of the motivations - or lack thereof - and direction of SEA research into the future (Correa & Laine, 2013), and recognising our influence within the economy so as to advance humanity (Bebbington & Campbell, 2015).

We welcome submissions across a range of areas and approaches that align with the aims of SEAJ. However, in line with the special issue theme, submissions must go beyond a review of the existing and include a consideration of the future. We would particularly welcome submissions that push beyond boundaries, unsettle assumptions, foster agonistically pluralist debate, seek to develop radical insights and perhaps even say ‘fuck you’ to those who stand in our way (Thomson, 2013). We especially encourage perspectives from, or which centre, voices currently underrepresented in the SEA literature. Possible areas for consideration include, but are not limited to: Theories and their praxis: • A reflection on the use and future potential of well-trodden theories in SEA (e.g. legitimacy theory, stakeholder theory, institutional theory, actor-network theory) • A reflection on the use and future potential of emerging and newly established theories (e.g. critical discourse analysis, dialogics, political democratic theories, pragmatic sociology, economic democracy, critical realism, pragmatism) • A reflection on the use and future potential of underutilized theoretical perspectives in SEA (post-colonialism, feminism and gender studies, geography, natural sciences) • A reflection on theories not yet considered within SEAJ in relation to their potential (e.g. anarchism, radical ecology, de-growth) Knowledges: • Reflections on the past and how that might inform the future • Reflections on the role of morality in accounting • Reflections on the differences between, and interconnectedness of, accounting and accountability • Questioning the current basis for SEA knowledge – why should anyone care about SEA research? How do we make SEA research relevant in the future?

Practices: • Explorations of the relationship between accounting and accountability into the future (blockchain - AIS, degrowth initiatives, decentralisation of power structures, shadow banking, social and environmental instability, challenges to democracy, post-capitalist landscape) • How accounting can be used to foster a progressive social agenda • Assessing organisational structures / Accounting and accountability that fosters cooperation and collaboration within (decentralised) organisations

Social and Environmental Accountability Journal – Call for Papers “SEA 2020 and beyond”

• • • • •

Development of dialogic (and polylogic) communicative spaces Championing alternative perspectives of accounting and accountability both inside the classroom, and in wider society.

Accounting and accountability that can facilitate cooperation, community and group decisionmaking.

Accounting(s) that facilitate the dilution of power asymmetries and the operation of nonhierarchical organisational structures.

New sites of research (private equity, student-debt, cannabis industry, shadow banking, payday lenders)

Methods/Actions: • Novel ideas towards external engagement (participatory budgeting, co-operatives, employee owned firms, podcasting, direct media-engagement) • Engagement with arts, activism and advocacy.

• Moving from disciplines to problems. (‘applied’ SEA) • The future of, and potential for, quantitative/qualitative approaches within SEA research Scholarship: • Reflections on engaged scholarship: How authors have or could engage in practices outside of publication which have (or could) lead to a more just social and environmental order.

• Enabling early-career researchers (paths to publication, spaces for dialogue and discussion, workshops, low-barrier methods of disseminating research ideas, fostering interdisciplinary) • Empowering the SEA research community (fostering discussion and debate) • Critical reflections on life as an early-career academic.

• Critical reflections on the future of SEA research.

• Analysis of scholarly communities as social movements rather than mere academic groups which research social movements. (sponsorship of movement facing workshops and forums, direct engagement with social and environmental organisations in association with SEAJ, alternative un-juried conferences and workshops) • Developing citizen ‘experts’ in SEA Submission Instructions and Dates: In keeping with the tradition of SEAJ, this special issue will accept the following types of submissions: empirical papers, review papers and essays, manuscripts reporting or proposing engagement, commentaries and polemics, reviews of an article or book. Guidelines for each of these submissions (including word limits and submission formatting) can be found under the ‘instructions for authors’ at www.tandfonline.com/reaj Authors interested in contributing to this Special Issue of SEAJ should follow the ‘Instructions for Authors’ at https://www.tandfonline.com/toc/REAJ20/current and submit their manuscripts to the SEAJ online submission system https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/reaj selecting this special issue no later than 31 December 2018.

The special issue is due to be published in early 2020.

Social and Environmental Accountability Journal – Call for Papers “SEA 2020 and beyond”

Authors are encouraged to contact the Guest Editors to discuss proposed contributions: Matias Laine, University of Tampere, Finland, (Matias.Laine@staff.uta.fi) Matt Scobie, University of Sheffield, UK, (mrscobie1@sheffield.ac.uk) Matthew Sorola, University of Limerick, Ireland, (Matthew.Sorola@ul.ie) Helen Tregidga, Royal Holloway, University of London, UK, (Helen.Tregidga@rhul.ac.uk) References: Bebbington, J., & Campbell, D. (2015). Economic democracy: exploring ramifications for social and environmental accountants. Social and Environmental Accountability Journal, 35(2), 77-85.

Bebbington, J., Russell, S., and Thomson, I. (2017). Accounting and sustainable development: reflections and propositions. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 48, 21-34.

Correa, C., & Laine, M. (2013). Struggling against like-minded conformity in order to enliven SEAR: A call for passion. Social and Environmental Accountability Journal, 33(3), 134-144.

Dillard, J. and Vinnari, E. (2017). A case study of critique: critical perspectives on critical accounting.

Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 43, 88-109.

Dillard, J., & Brown, J. (2012). Agonistic pluralism and imagining CSEAR into the future. Social and Environmental Accountability Journal, 32(1), 3-16.

Gray, R. and Laughlin, R. (2012). It was 20 years ago today: Sgt Pepper, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, green accounting and the Blue Meanies. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 25(2), 228-255.

Harte, G. and Owen, D. (1987). Fighting de-industrialization: the role of local government social audits.

Accounting, Organizations and Society, 12(2), 123-141.

Laine, M. (2006). Still the kiss-of-death? A personal reflection on encountering the mainstream paradigm as a PhD student. Social and Environmental Accounting Journal, 26(1), 6-9.

Lowe, E. and Tinker, A. (1977). Siting the accounting problematic: towards an intellectual emancipation of accounting. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 4(3), 263-276.

Maunders, K. and Burritt, R. (1991). Accounting and ecological crisis. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 4(3), 9-26.

Milne, M.J. (1996). On sustainability; the environment and management accounting. Management Accounting Research, 7(1), 135–161.

Owen, D. (2008). Chronicles of wasted time? A personal reflection on the current state of, and future prospects for, social and environmental accounting research. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 21(2), 240-267.

Parker, L. D. (2011). Building bridges to the future: Mapping the territory for developing social and environmental accountability. Social and Environmental Accountability Journal, 31(1), 7-24.

Thomson, I. (2013). Punk rock, festival fringes and football fanzines: A future for social and environmental accounting research? Social and Environmental Accountability Journal, 33(3), 145-148.

Tinker, T. and Gray, R. (2003). Beyond a critique of pure reason: from policy to politics to praxis in environmental and social research. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 16(5), 727– 761.

Tregidga, H., Milne, M. J. and Kearins, K. (2018). Ramping up resistance: corporate sustainable development and academic research. Business & Society, 57(2), 292-334.

Social and Environmental Accountability Journal – Call for Papers “SEA 2020 and beyond”

Social and Environmental Accountability Journal Call for Papers Special Issue: “Accounting and Conservation”

Guest Editor: Thomas Cuckston, Aston Business School, UK Deadline for Submissions: 30/11/2019

Building on a recent commentary (Cuckston 2018a), this special issue of Social and Environmental Accountability Journal on Accounting and Conservation aims to explore the role that accounting can play in enabling and organising the conservation of nature.

Research into accounting for biodiversity has rapidly emerged as a vibrant field of interdisciplinary research. Scholars in this area share a belief that accounting has a role to play in stemming the alarmingly high rate of planetary biodiversity loss (see Ceballos et al.

2015). There have, however, been divergent ideas about what this role can/should be.

Many studies focus on corporate reporting on biodiversity (e.g. Rimmel and Jonall 2013; van Liempd and Busch 2013; Atkins and Maroun 2018; Adler, Mansi, and Pandey 2018), but it is as yet unclear how this reporting can lead to biodiversity conservation. Other studies more directly engage with the practice of conservation, by examining conservation organisations (Samkin, Schneider, and Tappin 2014; Powell and Tilt 2017), market mechanisms that purport to incentivise conservation (Tregidga 2013; Cuckston 2013, 2018b; Sullivan and Hannis 2017; Elad 2014), ecosystems management (Cuckston 2017; Feger and Mermet 2017; Dey and Russell 2014; Lanka, Khadaroo, and Bohm 2017), and conservation strategies (Cuckston 2018c; Russell, Milne, and Dey 2017; Thomson 2014; Gray and Milne 2018; Christian 2014).

Conservation is an active process of organising the world in ways that are conducive to protection of wildlife (Hambler and Canney 2013; Jepson and Ladle 2010). Accounting can play a vital role in this organising (cf. Miller and Power 2013). Thus the challenge for accounting researchers is to explain this role: how is accounting, in its various forms, implicated in conservation activities? The principal aim of this special issue is to provide a space for addressing this challenge. Submissions are welcomed on any topic relating to the connection between accounting and conservation, using any methodological approach, from any theoretical/conceptual position. Submissions that seek to develop novel conceptualisations of the relation between accounting and conservation are particularly encouraged.

In line with SEAJ’s commitment to providing a forum for diverse forms of scholarly output, short pieces, commentaries, polemics, essays and reviews relevant to the special issue are welcome. Topics relevant to this special issue may include (but are certainly not restricted to): -

Accounting systems in conservation organisations and projects Performance measurement systems for conservation Social and Environmental Accountability Journal – Call for Papers “Accounting and Conservation”

-

Accounting in the management of ecological systems Use of market mechanisms and certifications in conservation Business engagement with conservation Ranking devices in conservation Role of biodiversity indicators in formulating/implementing conservation policies Accountability for conservation, including for social consequences of conservation Interactions between accounting and conservation strategies Accounting and competing visions for nature conservation

The closing date for submissions for this special issue is 30 November 2019. All papers will be peer-reviewed in line with SEAJ’s normal procedures. The guest editor welcomes early expressions of interest. All queries may be directed to Thomas Cuckston, t.j.cuckston@aston.ac.uk.

References Adler, R., M. Mansi, and R. Pandey. 2018. "Biodiversity and Threatened Species Reporting by the Top Fortune Global Companies." Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 31 (3):787-825.

Atkins, J., and W. Maroun. 2018. "Integrated Extinction Accounting and Accountability: Building an Ark." Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 31 (3):750-786.

Ceballos, G., P. Ehrlich, A. Barnosky, A. Garcia, R. Pringle, and T. Palmer. 2015. "Accelerated Modern Human-Induced Species Losses: Entering the Sixth Mass Extinction."

Science Advances 1 (5):e1400253.

Christian, J. 2014. "Accounting for Biodiversity - a Deep Ecology Perspective." In Accounting for Biodiversity, edited by M. Jones, 124-145. Oxford: Routledge.

Cuckston, T. 2013. "Bringing Tropical Forest Biodiversity Conservation into Financial Accounting Calculation." Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 26 (5):688714.

Cuckston, T. 2017. "Ecology-Centred Accounting for Biodiversity in the Production of a Blanket Bog." Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 30 (7):1537-1567.

Cuckston, T. 2018a. "Making Accounting for Biodiversity Research a Force for Conservation."

Social and Environmental Accountability Journal 38 (3). https://doi.org/10.1080/0969160X.2018.1516559.

Cuckston, T. 2018b. "Creating Financial Value for Tropical Forests by Disentangling People from Nature."

Accounting Forum.

In press. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accfor.2018.07.001.

Cuckston, T. 2018c. "Making Extinction Calculable." Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 31 (3):849-874.

Dey, C., and S. Russell. 2014. "Who Speaks for the River? Exploring Biodiversity Accounting Using an Arena Approach." In Accounting for Biodiversity, edited by M. Jones, 245266. Oxford: Routledge.

Elad, C. 2014. "Forest Certification and Biodiversity Accounting in the Congo Basin Countries."

In Accounting for Biodiversity, edited by M. Jones, 189-211. Oxford: Routledge.

Feger, C., and L. Mermet. 2017. "A Blueprint Towards Accounting for the Management of Ecosystems." Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 30 (7):1511-1536.

Gray, R., and M. Milne. 2018. "Perhaps the Dodo Should Have Accounted for Human Beings?

Accounts of Humanity and (Its) Extinction." Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 31 (3):826-848.

Hambler, C., and S. Canney. 2013. Conservation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Jepson, P., and R. Ladle. 2010. Conservation. Oxford: Oneworld Publications.

Social and Environmental Accountability Journal – Call for Papers “Accounting and Conservation”

Lanka, S., I. Khadaroo, and S. Bohm. 2017. "Agroecology Accounting: Biodiversity and Sustainable Livelihoods from the Margins." Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 30 (7):1592-1613.

Miller, P., and M. Power. 2013. "Accounting, Organizing, and Economizing: Connecting Accounting Research and Organization Theory." The Academy of Management Annals 7 (1):557-605.

Powell, L., and C. Tilt. 2017. "The Examination of Power and Politics in a Conservation Organisation." Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 30 (3):482-509.

Rimmel, G., and K. Jonall. 2013. "Biodiversity Reporting in Sweden: Corporate Disclosure and Preparers' Views." Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 26 (5):746-778.

Russell, S., M. Milne, and C. Dey. 2017. "Accounts of Nature and the Nature of Accounts: Critical Reflections on Environmental Accounting and Propositions for Ecologically Informed Accounting." Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 30 (7):14261458.

Samkin, G., A. Schneider, and D. Tappin. 2014. "Developing a Reporting and Evaluation Framework for Biodiversity." Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 27 (3):527-562.

Sullivan, S., and M. Hannis. 2017. "'Mathematics Maybe, but Not Money': On Balance Sheets, Numbers and Nature in Ecological Accounting."

Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 30 (7):1459-1480.

Thomson, I. 2014. "Biodiversity, International Conventions, Government Strategy and Indicators: The Case of the Uk." In Accounting for Biodiversity, edited by M. Jones.

Oxford: Routledge.

Tregidga, H. 2013. "Biodiversity Offsetting: Problematisation of an Emerging Governance Regime." Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 26 (5):806-832. van Liempd, D., and J. Busch. 2013. "Biodiversity Reporting in Denmark." Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal 26 (5):833-872.

Social and Environmental Accountability Journal – Call for Papers “Accounting and Conservation”

Accounting for Social Impact Special issue call for papers from Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management

Guest Editors Susan O’Leary, Susan.OLeary@rhul.ac.uk (Royal Holloway, University of London, UK) Helen Tregidga, Helen.Tregidga@rhul.ac.uk (Royal Holloway, University of London, UK) Cherrie Yang, cherrie.yang@aut.ac.nz (Auckland University of Technology, New Zealand)

Background Papers are invited for consideration for inclusion in a QRAM special issue on ‘Accounting for Social Impact’. Social impact is a significant and emergent theme in contemporary theory, practice and education. It is relevant for, and has been researched in, a number of diverse fields within the accounting literature resulting in a range of foci. For example, research within charities and non-governmental organisations has acknowledged that the demonstration of social impact is often implicated within accountability relationships with a variety of stakeholders such as funders and beneficiaries (Agyemang et al., 2017; O’Leary, 2016; Yang, Northcott & Sinclair, 2017). Other studies have sought to understand the consequences of accounting for performance and impact within internal organisational practice (Chenhall, Hall & Smith, 2013, 2014). A further stream of research from the social accounting literature has investigated external understandings of social impact and their broader societal consequences, often in terms of motivating social movements and anti-hegemonic practices (Denedo et al.

2017; Dey et al. 2011; Laine & Vinnari, 2017; Tregidga, 2017; Vinnari & Laine, 2017).

Research has also identified several conceptual and practical challenges of accounting for social outcomes and impact particularly when implicated in accountability exercises (Connolly & Hyndman, 2013; Ebrahim & Rangan, 2014; O’Dwyer & Unerman, 2007, 2008; Yang & Northcott, 2018). As such, research to date has come from diverse backgrounds and starting points yet is still limited and a focus on understanding the role of accounting in relation to social impact requires further investigation.

Our aim is to encourage work which investigates the role of accounting in understanding, measuring and reporting social impact. This can include studies from within an organisational setting, for example those within the not-for-profit, public or for-profit sectors. We also welcome studies beyond these institutional settings, including those that investigate external accounting practices (including, but not limited to counter-accounts) that seek to represent, evaluate and report (often negative) understandings of social impact by those most affected by particular societal circumstances. While such external accounting practices have tended to focus on the negative, we also note its potential for accounting for “positive” social impact, something that warrants further attention. We are particularly interested in papers which take a multi-sector approach in order to understand accounting for social impact and in an attempt to learn from different contexts where aspects of accounting for social impact have been investigated, or studies which consider how different strands of research can learn from one another (e.g. how can research from social accounting inform accounting for social impact within the charity sector and vice versa).

1

We welcome contributions that address (but are not limited to) the following topics: •

Understanding social impact. In particular, papers may address the following questions: how is accounting implicated in creating particular understandings of social impact, and aligning (or antagonising) diverse understandings of the concept? What is the role of accounting in generating or managing any conflicts that may arise? How do the diverse actors and different institutional settings understand the concept of social impact? What are the roles of accounting practices in these meaning making processes? What understandings of social impact do current accounting processes and practices privilege and with what consequences? Is accounting implicated in enabling collaboration between businesses, not-for-profits, governments, communities and others in relation to understanding social impact, and if so how?

•

Measuring social impact. In particular, papers may address the following questions: What influences the adoption and implementation of outcomes and/or impact measurement? What approaches are used in measuring outcomes and/or impact? What roles do service users or communities play in measuring social impact? What are the consequences of these measures for social projects and movements?

•

Reporting social impact. In particular, papers may address the following questions: How does regulation, and regulation changes, affect social impact performance and reporting in, or across, the various sectors? What are the consequences (intended and/or unintended) of reporting social impact? How does the use of technology affect the reporting of social impact?

This list is not exhaustive, but a key point is that papers should bring insight into the various aspects of social impact as they are relevant both to discrete sectors, and across sectors. While we have no wish to prescribe research methods and theories, given the journal outlet we are seeking those which take a qualitative research approach.

Deadlines • • •

• •

Deadline for submission of papers to QRAM: 1 February 2019 Publication of Special Issue: 2020 Manuscripts should be prepared and submitted in accordance with QRAM author guidelines and is subject to QRAM’s regular double-blind review process. All submissions must be made via QRAM’s online system Please specify that your submission is to the special issue on ‘‘Accounting for Social Impact’’ Enquiries and expressions of interest to any of the guest editors are welcomed.

References Agyemang, G., O’Dwyer, B., Unerman, J. & Awumbila, M. (2017). Seeking “conversations for accountability”: Mediating the impact of non-governmental organization (NGO) upward accountability processes. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 30(5), 982-1007.

Chenhall, R. H., Hall, M., & Smith, D. (2013). Performance measurement, modes of evaluation and the development of compromising accounts. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 38(4), 268-287.

Chenhall, R. H., Hall, M., & Smith, D. (2014). The expressive role of performance measurement systems: a field study of a mental health development project. Accounting, Organizations and Society. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2014.11.002 2

Connolly, C., & Hyndman, N. (2013). Towards charity accountability: narrowing the gap between provision and needs? Public Management Review, 15(7), 945-968.

Denedo, M., Thomson, I., & Yonekura, A. (2017). International advocacy NGOs, counter accounting, accountability and engagement. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 30(6), 1309-1343.

Dey, C., Russell, S., & Thomson, I. (2011). Exploring the potential of shadow accounts in problematizing institutional conduct. In S. P. Osborne & A. Ball (Eds.), Social accounting and public management: Accountability for the public good (pp. 64-75). New York: Routledge.

Ebrahim, A., & Rangan, V. K. (2014). What Impact? A Framwork for Measuring the Scale and Scope of Social Performance. California Management Review, 56(3), 118-141.

Laine, M., & Vinnari, E. (2017). The transformative potential of counter accounts: A case study of animal rights activism. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, in press.

O’Dwyer, B., & Unerman, J. (2007). From functional to social accountability: Transforming the accountability relationship between funders and non-governmental development organisations. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 20(3), 446–471.

O’Dwyer, B., & Unerman, J. (2008). The paradox of greater NGO accountability: A case study of Amnesty Ireland. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 33(7–8), 801–824.

O’Leary, S. (2016, in press). Grassroots accountability promises in rights-based approaches to development: The role of transformative monitoring and evaluation in NGOs. Accounting, Organizations and Society. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2016.06.002 Tregidga, H. (2017). “Speaking truth to power”: Analysing shadow reporting as a form of shadow accounting. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 30(3), 510-533.

Vinnari, E., & Laine, M. (2017). The moral mechanism of counter accounts: The case of industrial animal production. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 57, 1-17.

Yang, C., & Northcott, D. (2018). Unveiling the role of identity accountability in shaping charity outcome measurement practices. The British Accounting Review, 50(2), 214-226.

Yang, C., Northcott, D., & Sinclair, R. (2017). Understanding the accountability information needs of key charity funders. Public Money & Management, 37(3), 173-180.

3

We gratefully acknowledge the support of the Chartered Institute of Management Accountants (CIMA) and CPA Australia

A-CSEAR Conference 2018 monash.edu/business/a-csear-conference-2018