Organisational dynamics of environmental/sustainability reportinga case for structure and agency of collective actors

  1. Carmen Correa Ruiz 1
  1. 1 Universidad Pablo de Olavide
    info

    Universidad Pablo de Olavide

    Sevilla, España

    ROR https://ror.org/02z749649

Revista:
Revista española de financiación y contabilidad

ISSN: 0210-2412

Año de publicación: 2019

Volumen: 48

Número: 4

Páginas: 406-429

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.1080/02102412.2019.1632019 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR

Otras publicaciones en: Revista española de financiación y contabilidad

Resumen

Este trabajo explica una iniciativa de investigación sobre una empresa eléctrica española para analizar el proceso dinámico de estructuración llevado a cabo para desarrollar el informe medioambiental/de sostenibilidad como parte de un proyecto más amplio de gestión medioambiental/de sostenibilidad de la compañía. El estudio responde así a los recientes llamamientos que subrayan la necesidad de avanzar la teoría de la estructuración y de realizar investigaciones en contabilidad de carácter cualitativo, contextual e intervencionista. Para ello, se profundiza en las estructuras de legitimación, significación y dominación desarrolladas para responder a las presiones institucionales así como en la agencia de actores colectivos como el departamento de contabilidad o el departamento de gestión medioambiental/sostenibilidad.

€ Ver financiación

Información de financiación

The author would like to thank the reviewers, Carlos Larrinaga and Jesse Dillard for their helpful comments. I am also grateful for the financial support received from Ministry of Industry and Competitiveness, FEDER and Junta de Castilla y Le?n (ECO2015-65782-P and BU058P17) and Junta de Andaluc?a (SEJ-111).

Financiadores

    • SEJ-111
    • ECO2015-65782-P

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Adams, C., & Larrinaga. (2007). Introduction: Engaging with organisations in pursuit of improved sustainability accounting and performance. Accounting Auditing and Accountability Journal, 20(3), 333–355.
  • Adams, C. A., & McNicholas, P., (2007). Making a difference Sustainability reporting, accountability and organisational change. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 20(3), 382–402.
  • Adhikari, P., & Jayasinghe, K., (2017). “Agents-in-focus” and “Agents-in-context”: The strong structuration analysis of central government accounting practices and reforms in Nepal. Accounting Forum, 41(2), 96–115.
  • Ahrens, T., & Chapman, C. S., (2006). Doing qualitative field research in management accounting: Positioning data to contribute to theory. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 31(8), 819–841.
  • Alvesson, M., & Deetz, S., (2000). Doing critical management research. London: Sage.
  • Bebbington, J., (2007). Changing organisational attitudes and culture through sustainability accounting. In J., Unerman, J., Bebbington, & B., O’Dwyer (Eds.), Sustainability, accounting and accountability (pp. 226–242). London: Routledge.
  • Belal, A., & Owen, D. L., (2015). The rise and fall of stand-alone social reporting in a multinational subsidiary in Bangladesh: A case study. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 28(7), 1160–1192.
  • Buhr, N., (2002). A structuration view on the initiation of environmental reports. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 13(1), 17–38.
  • Busco, C., (2009). Giddens’ structuration theory and its implications for management accounting research. Journal of Management and Governance, 13, 249–260.
  • Coad, A., Jack, L., & Kholeif, A., (2016). Strong structuration theory in accounting research. Accounting. Auditing and Accountability Journal, 29(7), 1138–1144.
  • Coad, A. F., & Glyptis, L. G., (2014). Structuration: A position-practice perspective and an illustrative study. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 25(2), 142–161.
  • Conrad, L., (2005). A structuration analysis of accounting systems and systems of accountability in the privatised gas industry. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 16, 1–26.
  • Correa, C., & Larrinaga, C., (2015). Engagement research in social and environmental accounting. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 6(1), 5–28.
  • Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S., (2000). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In N. K., Denzin & Y. S., Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 1–34). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  • DeWalt, K. M., & DeWalt, B. R., (2010). Participant observation: A guide for fieldworkers. Blue Ridge Summit: AltaMira Press.
  • Dey, C., (2007). Social accounting at Traidcraft Plc: A strugle for the meaning of fair trade. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 20(3), 423–445.
  • Dillard, J. F., Rigsby, J. T., & Goodman, C., (2004). The making and remaking of organization context: Duality and the institutionalization process. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 17(4), 506–542.
  • DiMaggio, J., (1995). Comments on “what theory is not”. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 391–397.
  • DIMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W., (1991). The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality. In W. W., Powell & P. J., DiMaggio (Eds.), pp. 63-82, The new institutionalism in organisational analysis. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  • Englund, H., & Gerdin, J., (2014). Structuration theory in accounting research: Applications and applicability. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 25(2), 162–180.
  • Englund, H., Gerdin, J., & Burns, J., (2011). 25 Years of Giddens in accounting research: Achievements, limitations and the future. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 36(8), 494–513.
  • Feeney, O., & Pierce, B., (2016). Strong structuration theory and accounting information: An empirical study. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 29(7), 1152–1176.
  • Frostenson, M., & Helin, S., (2017). Ideas in conflict: A case study on tensions in the process of preparing sustainability reports. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 8(2), 166–190.
  • Gibassier, D., Rodrigue, M., & Arjaliès, D.-L., (2018). Integrated reporting is like God: No one has met Him, but everybody talks about Him: The power of myths in the adoption of management innovations. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 31(5), 1349–1380.
  • Giddens, A., (1979). Central problems in social theory: Action, structure and contradiction in social analysis. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
  • Giddens, A., (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
  • Gold, R. L., (1958). Roles in sociological field observations. Social Forces, 36(3), 217–223.
  • Gray, R. H., (2002). The social accounting project and accounting organizations and society: Privileging engagement, imaginings, new accountings and pragmatism over critique. Accounting Organizations and Society, 27(7), 687–708.
  • Hopwood, A. G., (1983). On trying to study accounting in the contexts in which it operates. Accounting, Organisations and Society, 8(2/3), 287–305.
  • Hopwood, A. G., (2009). Editorial: Reflections and projections–And many, many thanks. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34(8), 887–894.
  • Jack, L., & Kholeif, A., (2007). Introducing strong structuration theory for informing qualitative case studies in organization, management and accounting research. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: an International Journal, 2(3), 208–225.
  • Johnson, A., & Sackett, R., (1998). Direct systematic observation of behavior. In H., Russell Bernard (Ed.), Handbook of methods in cultural anthropology (pp. 301–332). Walnut Creek: AltaMira Press.
  • Jorgensen, D. L., (2015). Participant observation. In R. A., Scott & S. M., Kosslyn (Eds.), Emerging trends in the social and behavioral sciences: An interdisciplinary, searchable, and linkable resource (pp. 1–15). Wiley: New York.
  • Kaur, A., & Lodhia, S., (2018). Stakeholder engagement in sustainability accounting and reporting: A study of Australian local councils. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 31(1), 338–368.
  • Kawulich, B., (2005). Participant observation as a data collection method. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 6(2). doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/fqs-6.2.466
  • Larrinaga, C., Carrasco, F., Correa, C., Llena, F., & Moneva, J., (2002). Accountability and accounting regulation: The case of the Spanish environmental disclosure standard. The European Accounting Review, 11(4), 723–740.
  • Macintosh, N. B., & Scapens, R. W., (1990). Structuration theory in management accounting. Accounting Organizations and Society, 15(5), 455–477.
  • Massa, L., Farneti, F., & Scappini, B., (2015). Developing a sustainability report in a small to medium enterprise: Process and consequences. Meditari Accountancy Research, 23(1), 62–91.
  • Mitchell, M., Curtis, A., & Davidson, P., (2012). Can triple bottom line reporting become a cycle for “double loop” learning and radical change? Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 25(6), 1048–1068.
  • Moore, D. R. J., (2013). Sustainability, institutionalization and the duality of structure: Contradiction and unintended consequences in the political context of an Australian water business. Management Accounting Research, 24(4), 366–386.
  • Moore, D. R. J., & McPhail, K., (2016). Strong structuration and carbon accounting: A position practice perspective of policy development at the macro, industry and organizational levels. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 29(7), 1204–1233.
  • Parker, L. D., (2005). Social and environmental accountability research. A view from the commentary box. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 18(6), 842–860.
  • Parker, L. D., & Northcott, D., (2016). Qualitative generalizing in accounting research: Concepts and strategies. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 29(6), 1100–1131.
  • Pullman, M., & Dillard, J., (2010). Values based supply chain management and emergent organizational structures. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 30(7), 744–771.
  • Roberts, J., & Scapens, R. W., (1985). Accounting systems and systems of accountability: Understanding accounting practices in their organisational contexts. Accounting Organizations and Society, 10, 443–456.
  • Scapens, R. W., (1990). Researching management accounting practice: The role of case study methods. The British Accounting Review, 22(3), 259–281.
  • Schensul, S. L., Schensul, J. J., & LeCompte, M. D., (1999). Essential ethnographic methods: Observations, interviews, and questionnaires (Book 2 in Ethnographer’s Toolkit). Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.
  • Sewell, W. H., Jr. (1992). A theory of structure: Duality, agency, and transformation. American Journal of Sociology, 98(1), 1–29.
  • Stones, R., (2005). Structuration theory. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Stones, R., & Jack, L., (2016). The bridge between ontological concepts and empirical evidence: An interview with Rob Stones. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 29(7), 1145–1151.
  • Yin, R., (1989). Case study research: Design and methods. London: Sage.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet