Search results

The purpose of this study is to provide insights into how accounting and accountability systems can contribute to transforming metrics used thus far in research performance evaluation. New metrics are needed to increase research impact on the challenges addressed by science. In particular, we document and reflect on accounting transformations towards responsible research and innovation (RRI).

The study draws on the European H2020 MULTI-ACT research project that focuses on the development of a collective research impact framework in the area of health research. We document, analyse and report our engagement in this project, which also included research funders, patient organizations, health researchers, accounting practitioners and health care providers. Drawing on RRI, Mode 2 knowledge production and accounting performativity, we inquire into the potential of accounting technologies to foster knowledge production and increase research impact.

The study shows how the engagement of accounting with other disciplines enables the development of new and relevant forms of research impact assessment. We document how accounting can be mobilised for the development of new forms of research impact assessment (i.e. indicators that evaluate key accountability dimensions to promote RRI) and how it helps to overcome the difficulties that can emerge during this process. We also show how the design of multiple accountabilities’ indicators, although chronically partial, produced a generative interrogation and discussion about how to translate RRI to research assessment in a workable setting, and the pivotal role of certain circumstances (e.g. the presence of authoritative actors) that appear during the knowledge production process for creating these generative opportunities.

This study illustrates the key role of accounts in the generation of knowledge. It also shows the value of considering the stakes of all affected actors in devising fruitful accounting approaches. This collective perspective is timely in the accounting discipline and could foster the connection between academics and practice which is so far under-reported. This perspective should be useful for policymakers such as the European Union and managers in the design of new policies, initiatives and practices.

Discussing and devising appropriate research assessment frameworks is strategic for the maximization of the social impact of research results. Accounting has a key role to play in optimizing a sustainable return on investment in research.

How to assess research impact in a more balanced way is in an early stage of development. The study provides empirical and practical material to advance further work and develop its potential to broaden the conceptualization of accountability.

Addressing grand challenges requires an in-depth understanding of the social constructs, such as the gender discourse that shapes gender equality. Accounting, through annual reporting, contributes to constructing realities, thus impacting grand challenges. This paper explores how organizational reporting by a non-governmental organization (NGO) promotes particular ideologies about gender in a changing sociocultural context.

The paper uses a case study of an NGO that has long used annual reports to disseminate its perspectives on gender. Drawing on 1,251 pages of annual reports (in French, a gendered language), including 1,618 visuals, from 1995 to 2021, we use feminist and ideological perspectives to analyse the rhetorical strategies used.

The results show that the NGO’s annual reports include evolving perspectives on gender. In an earlier period, it emphasizes complementarity between men and women while assigning primary roles to men. More recently, while the organization continues to support traditional visions on gender representation, the reporting narratives and visuals strive towards greater inclusivity. The findings also suggest instances of ambiguity in how an organization can use narratives and visuals, prompting a discussion on the idea of rhetorical ambiguity in organizational reporting.

This study shows how organizational reporting longitudinally evolves regarding grand challenges, beyond financial and business matters. The paper identifies sites of gender ideology in both visuals and narratives of the reports.

The objective of this study is to provide insights into insiders' perspectives on environmental accounting disclosures, which is relatively under-investigated. Based on insights from key managers, we provide information on company decisions and practices related to the data disclosed in annual reports. More specifically, we explore how regulation guidance affects and shapes disclosure strategies.

Drawing on the normativity framework, our research design involves a multiple-case study focusing on eight French listed firms in sensitive industries. We primarily build our investigation on the analysis of annual reports. Semi-structured interviews with 20 key managers belonging to these same firms provide interpretative explanations of the disclosed (and un-disclosed) figures.

Our main findings show that the disclosure of environmental accounting information (EAI) is still in its infancy. Weak definitions and poor guidance in regulations explain the limitations in disclosure and induce interpretative strategies depending on the type of data to be disclosed in the companies' annual reports. We document that separate logics drive environmental expenditure and environmental liability disclosures in many respects.

This study should be useful for regulators because environmental accounting standards are currently subject to change and helpful for users because of the careful consideration of disclosures.

Our research is timely and adds to the growing body of research on regulation. We document how a common regulation may lead to interpretative strategies by different actors and networks of actors, thereby contributing to shaping EAI norms.

The objective of this chapter is to analyse the impact of France’s ‘Grenelle 2’ law of 2010, which applies to environmental accounting disclosures (EADs). More specifically, it seeks to observe whether the ‘Anglo-Saxon’ ‘comply or explain’ model, transposed into the French regulatory framework, influences the disclosure strategies of firms that are listed on a regulated market.

Drawing on the theoretical framework of legitimacy and the concept of normativity, an empirical study is conducted on a sample of 96 French firms listed on the SBF index between 2009 and 2014. The effect of regulation is assessed by a content analysis of EAD in annual reports, examining changes in disclosure practices and the contents of disclosures.

The main results show that explanations for the absence of EAD showed a significant increase after the introduction of the law. We also observe that the new rules had no effect on the number of firms making EADs, although the quality of the disclosures declined. Finally, the results also concern practices of non-disclosure without any accompanying explanation.

The limitations of this study relate to the choices underlying the classifications and observations made during the content analysis.

This study has social relevance in that it supplies information for assessing the transposition of European directives into French law.

This study extends research concerning environmental disclosures by examining a recent accounting object. It also continues the debate on normativity, with its analysis of disclosures subject to a changing regulatory framework.