Planetary Boundaries and Corporate Reporting: The Role of the Conceptual Basis of the Corporation

Pub Date : 2020-02-27 DOI:10.1515/ael-2018-0037
J. Veldman, André Jansson
{"title":"Planetary Boundaries and Corporate Reporting: The Role of the Conceptual Basis of the Corporation","authors":"J. Veldman, André Jansson","doi":"10.1515/ael-2018-0037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract There is a broad call to integrate planetary boundaries and life-cycle based reporting into accounting theory and reporting standards. Although many practitioners back this call, including insurers, shareholders with a long-term orientation, and company law specialists who suggest that the inclusion of long-term stakeholder interests is necessary to counter both corporate and systemic risks, it remains unanswered. We argue that dominant assumptions about the status and architecture of corporations in corporate governance theory stand at the centre of this unanswered call in accounting theory and practice. As the status of the public corporation is interpreted as a nexus of contracts and its architecture as a restricted dyadic relation between ‘principals’ and ‘agents’, the object and audience for corporate reports are restricted to a very specific set of actors, interests and time-horizons. We argue that this conceptual setup unduly restricts notions of accountability and is connected to a specific notion of political economy. A broadening of reporting standards needs, therefore, to be accompanied by a critical assessment of the assumed object and audience of reporting in corporate governance theory.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/ael-2018-0037","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Abstract There is a broad call to integrate planetary boundaries and life-cycle based reporting into accounting theory and reporting standards. Although many practitioners back this call, including insurers, shareholders with a long-term orientation, and company law specialists who suggest that the inclusion of long-term stakeholder interests is necessary to counter both corporate and systemic risks, it remains unanswered. We argue that dominant assumptions about the status and architecture of corporations in corporate governance theory stand at the centre of this unanswered call in accounting theory and practice. As the status of the public corporation is interpreted as a nexus of contracts and its architecture as a restricted dyadic relation between ‘principals’ and ‘agents’, the object and audience for corporate reports are restricted to a very specific set of actors, interests and time-horizons. We argue that this conceptual setup unduly restricts notions of accountability and is connected to a specific notion of political economy. A broadening of reporting standards needs, therefore, to be accompanied by a critical assessment of the assumed object and audience of reporting in corporate governance theory.
分享
查看原文
行星边界与公司报告:公司概念基础的作用
有一个广泛的呼吁,将地球边界和基于生命周期的报告纳入会计理论和报告标准。尽管许多从业者支持这一呼吁,包括保险公司、以长期为导向的股东,以及公司法专家(他们认为,为了应对企业和系统风险,必须纳入长期利益相关者的利益),但这个问题仍未得到回答。我们认为,公司治理理论中关于公司地位和结构的主导假设是会计理论和实践中这一未回答的呼吁的核心。由于上市公司的地位被解释为合同的联系,其结构被解释为“委托人”和“代理人”之间的有限二元关系,公司报告的对象和受众被限制为一组非常具体的参与者、利益和时间范围。我们认为,这种概念设置过度限制了问责制的概念,并与政治经济学的特定概念联系在一起。因此,在扩大报告标准的同时,需要对公司治理理论中假定的报告对象和受众进行批判性评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信