IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/seaccj/v42y2022i1-2p11-17.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

There Should be More Normative Research on How Social and Environmental Accounting Should be Done

Author

Listed:
  • Matthew Brander

Abstract

I suggest that the SEA research community has not engaged significantly with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change because our community generally does not offer normative policy-focused advice on how to account for climate change. This raises the question ‘Why not?’. It cannot be because there is no demand for normative accounting guidance, as examples of this need abound everywhere. And it cannot be because normativity is ‘not academic’ as other academic disciplines engage in normative research, notably the fields of economics and life cycle assessment. The SEA research community may be constrained by its social constructivist epistemology, its focus on explanatory theory which drives us towards explanatory rather than normative questions, and our training in social science research methods rather than direct engagement with how to do social and environmental accounting. Notwithstanding the challenges there is a pressing need for better accounting practice, and who better to develop methods for social and environmental accounting than the social and environmental accounting research community? Arguably, there should be more normative research on how social and environmental accounting should be done.

Suggested Citation

  • Matthew Brander, 2022. "There Should be More Normative Research on How Social and Environmental Accounting Should be Done," Social and Environmental Accountability Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(1-2), pages 11-17, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:seaccj:v:42:y:2022:i:1-2:p:11-17
    DOI: 10.1080/0969160X.2022.2066554
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/0969160X.2022.2066554
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/0969160X.2022.2066554?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:seaccj:v:42:y:2022:i:1-2:p:11-17. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/REAJ20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.