Search results

The purpose of this paper is to offer a retrospective and prospective analysis of the themes explored in the 2006 Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal special issue on non-governmental organisation (NGO) accountability.

The paper is a reflective review essay.

The paper outlines how a number of themes in the 2006 special issue addressing downward accountability, hierarchical accountability and management control have been subsequently developed in a selection of papers from the accounting literature. The development of these themes leads to several suggestions for future research in NGO accountability.

The paper offers a systematic, original perspective on recent developments in certain areas of the field of NGO accountability.

The paper studies how the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC) positioned itself in the process through which capacity building in developing countries was interpreted and enacted within the global development aid agenda from 1999 to 2016.

The paper is an in-depth case study drawing on a comprehensive analysis of publications, reports and archival materials.

The paper unveils how IFAC shaped the interpretation of capacity building and its associated practices in a manner aligned with its expansionary aims thereby transforming itself into a prominent actor within, what we term, the capacity building issue-based field. It unpacks the strategies pursued by IFAC as it mobilised economic, social and cultural resources in support of its global capacity building ambitions for the accountancy profession. It reveals how key interactions between actors in the international development exchange field and the professional exchange field of accounting underpinned IFAC’s infiltration of, and impact on the evolution of, the capacity building issue-based field. We show how IFAC increased its influence in this field despite initially operating on the periphery of the global development aid agenda.

The paper reveals how the global accountancy profession’s engagement with the capacity building activities of international development agencies became central to its commitment to serving the public interest. Our analysis suggests that deeper explorations of capacity building by the global accountancy profession in specific developing countries are required in order to determine whether these efforts have effectively catered to the needs of the citizens of those countries.

The work of professional accountancy organizations (PAOs) operating at the global level in the area of capacity building has been addressed in a fragmented fashion in prior research. This paper presents a unique analysis of developing alliances between the global accountancy profession and international aid agencies aimed at supporting the globalising efforts of IFAC within the realm of capacity building in international development aid. Theoretically, the paper advances prior work exploring the evolution of issue-based fields, in particular the role of inter-field relations in interstitial spaces within these processes.

The purpose of this paper is to ascertain how upward accountability processes can be enabling in, or constraining to, the effective deployment of development aid funding.

The paper derives its primary insights from in-depth interviews and focus groups with non-governmental organization (NGO) fieldworkers working and delivering development aid in Northern Ghana. It analyses inductively the perspectives of fieldworkers to explain their experiences of upward accountability.

The fieldworkers’ perception of upward accountability was mainly one of external control, in response to which they enacted a skilful form of compliance accountability. This perception of control failed to stifle their initiative and intrinsic commitment to beneficiaries. The fieldworkers craved “conversations for accountability”, in which they had a voice in the development of upward accountability metrics, thereby enabling them to fulfil their sense of felt responsibility to beneficiaries. While aspects of “conversations for accountability” were emerging in fieldworker-funder interactions, it was unclear to what extent funders were committed to further advancing them. Overall, the analysis unveils how felt responsibility mediates for, and partly diminishes, the perceived negative impacts on aid effectiveness of upward accountability processes informed by a focus on control.

The authors examine the potential of upward accountability processes using in-depth analyses of the actual experiences of those involved in delivering NGO services at the grassroots level. The authors contribute to emerging work in this vein by enriching the authors’ understanding of local constituencies’ experiences of accountability processes more generally, especially the impact these mechanisms have on NGO operational activities. The authors also unveil the mediating role fieldworkers’ “felt responsibility” to beneficiaries’ plays in moderating the perceived negative impacts on aid effectiveness of upward accountability processes.

This paper problematizes TCFD (Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures) reporting in a way that demonstrates areas where academic research can contribute towards realizing the transformative potential of this unique form of sustainability accounting in its early stages of development.

The paper proposes a number of research agendas for impactful interdisciplinary research into new forms of corporate reporting of sustainability risks, opportunities and dependencies.

There are several major challenges that both reporting corporations and investors need to address in realizing the potential of TCFD style risks, opportunities and dependencies reporting. Key among these is developing new practices of climate-related scenario analysis and reporting.

There is potential for many different academic research studies to provide solid evidence in helping improve the practical impact of TCFD style sustainability reporting. These impacts may assist in moving corporate policies and actions towards zero carbon.

This is the first agenda-setting paper that addresses the need for, and opportunities of, academic research into TCFD reporting and its potential to transform corporate accounting and reporting of sustainability.

The purpose of this paper is to set out key issues in the academic study of non‐governmental organisation (NGO) accountability, and to introduce papers appearing in this special issue on NGO accountability.

This is a discussion paper exploring key issues theoretically.

The paper finds that there are many aspects of NGO accountability which should be explored in greater depth in future studies. Several other issues have been examined in the papers in this special issue of Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal.

There is a possibility that the issues explored in this paper, and the other papers in this special issue, will lead to a considerable growth in academic studies in this area.

The paper is a contribution to the growing debate on NGO accountability.

The paper sets an agenda for research into NGO accountability.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a staged theoretical argument regarding whether non‐governmental organisations (NGOs) can be considered responsible and accountable for the direct and indirect consequences, on a wide range of stakeholders, flowing from their advocacy activities.

The paper is primarily theoretical and conceptual, developing a structured, conditional and staged model illustrated with empirical examples.

The paper finds depending upon the theoretical arguments accepted at each stage of the model, the advocacy activities of an NGO may be considered to cause a widespread and often unintended negative impact upon the lives of many stakeholders who are either close to, or remote from, the NGO. Also, that depending upon the theoretical position taken regarding the scope of accountability, all entities – including NGOs – may be regarded as responsible and accountable for the impacts which their activities directly and indirectly cause to a broad range of stakeholders.

The model is primarily theoretical, so it can benefit from empirical studies to assess its applicability in practice. It also has the scope to be applied in assessing the responsibility and accountability of a range of other entities for their advocacy – such as businesses, religious bodies, political parties, and academics.

The paper presents a ontribution to the growing debate on NGO accountability.

The paper uses the synthesis of various philosophical positions to develop a conditional, staged model which may be used to establish whether NGOs (and other organisations) can be regarded as having responsibilities and accountabilities for the direct and indirect impacts of their advocacy activities on a broad range of stakeholders.

This paper aims to advance understanding of the disciplinary decision‐making process underpinning the professional ethics machinery employed by professional accounting organisations, using elements of francophone organisational analysis to examine the influence of the key formal organisational components established by the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Ireland (ICAI) to administer its disciplinary decision‐making process up to December 1999.

The paper uses evidence gathered from a series of in‐depth interviews with members of the ICAI disciplinary and investigation committees.

Illuminates the internal tensions and conflicts permeating the disciplinary decision‐making process of the ICAI and the influence key organisational components have on resolving these conflicts through their encouragement of decision making driven by a preferred reasoning or logic of action.

The evidence presented questions the public interest proclamations of the ICAI with respect to its disciplinary procedures pre‐December 1999. It further exposes the tensions between profession protection and society protection motives in the disciplinary decision making of accounting bodies.

This paper represents a first attempt at getting inside the disciplinary decision‐making process of a professional accounting body to examine the process using the voices of process participants.

This study presents an in‐depth investigation of non‐governmental organisations' (NGO) perceptions of CSD (corporate social disclosure) in Ireland. It commences the process of addressing a lacuna in the CSD literature, whereby the perspectives of non‐managerial stakeholders have been largely ignored. In particular, it responds to O'Dwyer call for research to examine the nature and extent of stakeholder demand for CSD in Ireland in order to inform the future development of accountable Irish CSD practices.

Evidence is collected from in‐depth interviews with senior representatives of major Irish NGOs. The paper focuses on the nature of NGO demand for administrative reforms encompassing types of CSD and the prospects for supporting institutional reforms aimed at further empowering less powerful stakeholder groups.

A demand for the development of stand‐alone, mandated, externally verified CSD mechanisms predominates the perspectives. This is motivated by a desire to see stakeholder “rights” to information enforced given Irish companies' apparent resistance to engaging in complete and credible CSD. A number of perceived obstacles to the development of institutional mechanisms designed to support any desired CSD developments are exposed. These encompass: active corporate resistance to discursive dialogue, corporate resistance to voluntary information disclosure, a compliant political elite unwilling to confront the corporate sector on social and environmental issues, and a fragmented NGO community which has difficulty in raising public awareness about corporate social and environmental impacts. Evidence of antagonism between certain NGOs and elements within the Irish corporate sector is also illuminated.

The paper reflects on these perspectives and considers their implications for the development of accountable CSD mechanisms in Ireland.

Adds to the literature on CSD.

The purpose of this paper is to deepen and advance the understanding of the construction of accountability within the relationship between government funders and development non-governmental organisations (NGOs).

The paper presents a case study examining the process through which an influential Dutch development NGO, Oxfam Novib, constructed its own accountability while simultaneously seeking to influence shifts in government funder accountability requirements. It enrols a combination of comprehensive archival data on the Dutch government’s financing scheme for NGOs from 1965 to 2012 and in-depth interviews with Oxfam Novib managers and Dutch government officials. The co-evolution in accountability within Oxfam Novib and the government funding scheme is conceptualised using the notions of imposed, felt and adaptive accountability

The case unveils the dynamics through which accountability within a major government funding scheme for NGOs was co-constructed by Oxfam Novib and the Dutch government’s development aid department. In particular, it reveals how this process was influenced by an internal evolution in Oxfam Novib’s organisational approach to accountability and an institutional context characterised by consensus-based economic and social policy making. The case also unveils the process through which Oxfam Novib’s influence declined as more demanding, narrowly focused government accountability requirements emerged in a setting that was increasingly critical of NGOs.

The paper presents a rare example of a context where development NGOs have proactively sought and secured influence over the accountability demands of a key donor. It is unique in combining consideration of the internal evolution of accountability within an individual NGO (conceptualised as an evolution from felt to adaptive accountability) with a progression in the form of accountability required by governmental funders. The paper unveils the conditions under which NGO-preferred conceptions of accountability may gain (and lose) influence among key funders.

This paper interprets managerial perceptions of corporate social disclosure (CSD) presence and absence through the lens of organisational legitimacy theory. Evidence from in‐depth semi‐structured interviews with 29 senior managers in 27 Irish public limited companies is presented. It is one of the few studies to use interview‐based evidence in attempts to understand the motivations for CSD and responds to calls for more empirical work of this nature in the CSD literature. The paper extends and interrogates the use of legitimacy theory to infer motivations for CSD by presenting a narrative which contemplates conceptions of legitimacy as both a process and a state while endeavouring to understand the motives for CSD. In this manner, the paper furnishes a more complex, complete, and critical story of the motives for CSD. The perspectives suggest that while CSD may occasionally form part of a legitimacy process, ultimately this is misguided as it is widely perceived as being incapable of supporting the achievement of a legitimacy state. Consequently, for many managers, the continued practice of CSD is deemed somewhat perplexing. The paper reflects on the implications of these findings for future CSD research and practice.