Critical dialogical accountability: From accounting-based accountability to accountability-based accounting

Society is demanding that its institutions be accountable for more than economic performance. However, much research in the social and environmental accounting (SEA) literature suggests that an increased level of reporting has not prompted the anticipated increased levels of accountability. Accountability is limited by what is disclosed, and what is disclosed is limited by the extant accounting system (accounting-based accountability). Most current attempts at improving social and environmental accountability by increasing disclosure reflect, at best, incremental changes to the traditional accounting system, a system that has been explicitly designed to meet the needs of financial capital providers. Alternatively, we propose that accounting systems be designed to address specific requirements of alternative accountability systems (accountability-based accounting), and the accountability system requirements should reflect the salient evaluation criteria of the interested constituencies. We propose critical dialogic accountability as a way to conceptualize accountability systems in a pluralistic society characterized by multiple, and often conflicting, interests. We present a definition of accountability that illustrates its complexity, recognizes the salience of power for operative accountability relationships and can be applied both descriptively and normatively, providing a framework for assisting in the specification of the accountability systems and responsibility networks of various interest groups. We discuss some implications for both researchers and practitioners associated with SEA endeavors, concluding with a call for imagining box-breaking accountings that extend the conventional boundaries of the SEA field.