Dennis van Liempd

Biodiversity reporting in Denmark

Purpose – This paper aims to suggest that companies have ethical reasons to report about biodiversity issues and to investigate whether companies act on these reasons by examining the extent of biodiversity reporting in Denmark. Design/methodology/approach – For the first purpose, desk research was conducted using consequentialist ethics, while for the second purpose, data were gathered from the 2009-2011 annual reports, CSR-type reports and homepages of 24 Danish large-cap companies. Findings – Philosophically, it is shown that biodiversity preservation and reporting is an ethical issue, even on the assumption that biodiversity does not possess intrinsic value. Empirically, it is shown that Danish companies score poorly overall, both quantitatively and qualitatively, with regards to reporting on biodiversity. Research limitations/implications – Even though the importance of biodiversity can be justified on different assumptions, biodiversity reporting is under-researched offering potential for future research on a globally important issue. Practical implications – Justifying the preservation of biodiversity from an instrumental viewpoint might convince accounting audiences that are sceptical of normative ethical argumentation based on intrinsic value. The relative lack of biodiversity reporting in Denmark shows the need for the State and accounting standard setters to address this issue together with business and other stakeholders. Originality/value – Few studies theorize on why there is a need for environmental reporting. Those that do are based on non-instrumental considerations. This paper gives philosophical arguments for biodiversity reporting normally outside the scope of accounting. It emphasizes how even those who deny that biodiversity has intrinsic value are morally obliged to account for biodiversity. The argument also provides novel reasons for why thinking about discount rates should be governed by pure preference considerations. Empirically, this is only the second paper examining biodiversity reporting and the first about the Danish context.

Implementation of SCM in inter‐organizational relationships: a symbolic perspective

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate supply chain management (SCM) as a management implement from a symbolic perspective on a dyadic level. So far, no research has investigated SCM from such a perspective, although SCM researchers implicitly have noted that it would be useful to have such a study in order to broaden the understanding of the SCM concept, as such a study allows for the use of alternative sociological theories.Design/methodology/approach – A single case study was chosen in order to investigate a focal firms use of SCM. A total of 27 hours of interviews and 15 hours of observations were carried out at the focal firm and with a number of the firms suppliers in order to investigate the subject.Findings – The paper found that the SCM concept impacts the relationship between buyer and supplier in different ways depending on two dimensions: SCM as tool vs symbol and arms length relationships vs strategic partnerships. Contrary to the mainstream idea of SCM as a tool for increas...

Vignettes in Critical Theory Investigations

Our main intention with this chapter is to describe how to investigate power relations in business from a critical-theoretical perspective through the use of vignettes. Power is a central, all-pervasive, but ‘essentially contested concept’ (Gallie in Proc Aristotelian Soc 56:167–198, 1955). The critical-theoretical paradigm provides particular insights for the study of power, because the way power is conceptualised is value-dependent, in that both its definition and use are tied to (usually implicit) value assumptions (Lukes in Power: a radical view. MacMillan Press, Basingstoke, 1974). Central to critical theory is making one’s value assumptions explicit as part of the research process. The choice of a particular value system tends to empower and enfranchise certain persons or groups (and disempower and disenfranchise others). To counteract these problems, critical theory is hermeneutic (i.e., trying to understand the socio-cultural world in which subjective meaning is located), emancipatory (i.e., changes individuals’ self-consciousness, thereby changing society as a whole) and dialectical (i.e., transcending dualities like subject—object and fact and value). A way of engaging and empowering research participants is through the use of vignettes. Using vignettes in this context provides particular value, because they can act as stimulus to engender thought and action in line with the normative directives of critical theory. And vignettes have a particular relevance in business research, where their highly normative participative nature can involve and empower business stakeholders. They are likely to be more effective than most other techniques (Alexander and Becker in Public Opin Q 42(1):93–104, 1978; Finch in Sociology 21(1):105–114, 1987). They potentially minimise the legal and ethical implications of observation studies (as also discussed in Marroun and Young in this volume). And they avoid potential Hawthorne effects in that vignettes identify knowledge, attitudes and opinions in any given situation and may not change the observed person’s attitudes or behaviour as structured questioning or observation does (Wilson and While in J Interprof Care 12(1):79–86, 1998). This chapter thus describes the use of vignettes as a means to accomplish both practical and critical-theoretical research goals. After a clarifying definition of vignettes, their different intentions and purposes are described in a critical-theoretical perspective. The use of vignettes is then described, as are related evaluation criteria. Turned into methodological procedures, the use of vignettes will be illustrated by three examples, showing how theory, documents and preceding empirical research can be used as vignettes—or turned into vignettes—in doing critical business research.

El valor razonable y la conexión perdida entre contabilidad y auditoría

We claim that the missing correspondence between accounting and auditing has come about because auditing’s basic philosophical assumptions has not been developed as much as its counterparts in the field of accounting. While fair value accounting represents a socially constructed reality, auditing still seems to be founded in the positivist tradition of evidence theory (e.g. Mautz & Sharaf, 1961; AAA, 1973; Flint, 1988). The remainder of the paper will analyze the missing correspondence between accounting and auditing, problem which has been raised in section one (status quaestionis). Firstly, the next section will shortly describe the methodology used for the analysis. Section three will give a brief overview of the historical change in the main accounting paradigm from reporting the truth to reporting in accordance with GAAP and the corresponding changes in the main auditing paradigm from ancient times until modern auditing in the nineteenth century, culminating in ASOBAC. In section four, the developments of the last decade or two are analyzed, more specifically the change in accounting’s focus from correspondence with criteria to the social construction of consensus, which can be seen in the change in accounting from the 1990s onwards to the fair value paradigm. It will be argued that auditing has not changed accordingly, and that this missing link between accounting and auditing’s ontological focus can cause problems for academics, standard-setters and practitioners. The paper will conclude with these implications and the need for future research.