Author
Listed:
- Jill Atkins
- Karen McBride
Abstract
Purpose - This paper extends the nature and relevance of exploring the historical roots of social and environmental accounting by investigating an account that recorded and made visible pollution in 17th century London. John Evelyn'sFumifugium(1661) is characterised as an external social account that bears resemblance to contemporary external accounting particularly given its problematising intentionality. Design/methodology/approach - An interpretive content analysis of the text draws out the themes and features of social accounting. Emancipatory accounting theory is the theoretical lens through which Evelyn's social account is interpreted, applying a microhistory research approach. We interpretFumifugiumas a social account with reference to the context of the reporting accountant. Findings - In this early example of a stakeholder “giving an account” rather than an “account rendered” by an entity, Evelyn problematises industrial pollution and its impacts with the stated intention of changing industrial practices. We find thatFumifugiumwas used in challenging, resisting and seeking to solve an environmental problem by highlighting the adverse consequences to those in power and rendering new solutions thinkable. Originality/value - This is the first research paper to extend investigations of the historical roots of social and environmental accounting into the 17th century. It also extends research investigating alternative forms of account by focusing on a report produced by an interested party and includes a novel use of the emancipatory accounting theoretical lens to investigate this historic report.Fumifugiumchallenged the lack of accountability of businesses in ways similar to present-day campaigns to address the overwhelming challenge of climate change.
Suggested Citation
Jill Atkins & Karen McBride, 2021.
"“Fumifugium: Or the inconvenience of the Aer and Smoake of London Dissipated”: emancipatory social accounting in 17th century London,"
Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 35(5), pages 1262-1286, December.
Handle:
RePEc:eme:aaajpp:aaaj-01-2021-5108
DOI: 10.1108/AAAJ-01-2021-5108
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
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:eme:aaajpp:aaaj-01-2021-5108. 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: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.