IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/aaajpp/v28y2015i5p671-705.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Seeds of hope? Exploring business actors’ diverse understandings of sustainable development

Author

Listed:
  • Christine Byrch
  • Markus J. Milne
  • Richard Morgan
  • Kate Kearins

Abstract

Purpose - – The purpose of this paper is first, to investigate empirically the plurality of understanding surrounding sustainability held by those working in the business sector, and second, to consider the likelihood of a dialogic accounting that would account for the plurality of perspectives identified. Design/methodology/approach - – The subjects of this study are those people actively working to incorporate sustainability within New Zealand business, both business people and their sustainability advisors. Participant’s subjective understanding is investigated using Q methodology, a method used widely by social science researchers to investigate typical views on a particular topic, from an analysis of the order in which participants individually sort a sample of stimuli. In this study, the stimuli were opinion statements. Findings - – Five typical understandings of sustainable development were identified, including understandings more usually attributed to business antagonists than business. Conflicts between environment and development are acknowledged by most participants. However, an agonistic debate that will create spaces, practices, and institutions through which marginalised understandings of sustainable development might be addressed and contested, is yet to be established and will not be easy. Originality/value - – The paper contributes to the few empirical investigations of the plurality of understandings of sustainability held by those people working to incorporate sustainability within business. It is further distinguished by the authors attempt to describe divergent beliefs and values, absent from their immediate business context, and absent from any academic priming. The paper also provides an illustrative example of the application of Q methodology, a method not commonly used in accounting research.

Suggested Citation

  • Christine Byrch & Markus J. Milne & Richard Morgan & Kate Kearins, 2015. "Seeds of hope? Exploring business actors’ diverse understandings of sustainable development," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 28(5), pages 671-705, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:aaajpp:v:28:y:2015:i:5:p:671-705
    DOI: 10.1108/AAAJ-08-2013-1438
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/AAAJ-08-2013-1438/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/AAAJ-08-2013-1438/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/AAAJ-08-2013-1438?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.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. George, Sendirella & Brown, Judy & Dillard, Jesse, 2023. "Social movement activists’ conceptions of political action and counter-accounting through a critical dialogic accounting and accountability lens," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    2. François Maon & Valérie Swaen & Kenneth de Roeck, 2021. "Coporate branding and corporate social responsibility: Toward a multi-stakeholder interpretive perspective," Post-Print hal-03275858, HAL.
    3. Ozgur Isil & Michael T. Hernke, 2017. "The Triple Bottom Line: A Critical Review from a Transdisciplinary Perspective," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(8), pages 1235-1251, December.
    4. Tiberio Daddi & Domenico Ceglia & Guia Bianchi & Marcia Dutra de Barcellos, 2019. "Paradoxical tensions and corporate sustainability: A focus on circular economy business cases," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(4), pages 770-780, July.
    5. Yara Consuelo Cintra & Jim Haslam & Fernanda Filgueiras Sauerbronn, 2022. "Developing Appreciation of Emancipatory Accounting through Empirical Research: Issues of Method," RAC - Revista de Administração Contemporânea (Journal of Contemporary Administration), ANPAD - Associação Nacional de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa em Administração, vol. 26(sup2022), pages 210009-2100.
    6. Shahzad Uddin & Javed Siddiqui & Muhammad Azizul Islam, 2018. "Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosures, Traditionalism and Politics: A Story from a Traditional Setting," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 151(2), pages 409-428, August.
    7. Maria Vincenza Ciasullo & Raffaella Montera & Nicola Cucari & Francesco Polese, 2020. "How an international ambidexterity strategy can address the paradox perspective on corporate sustainability: Evidence from Chinese emerging market multinationals," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(5), pages 2110-2129, July.
    8. Sorola, Matthew, 2022. "Q methodology to conduct a critical study in accounting: A Q study on accountants’ perspectives of social and environmental reporting," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    9. Michela Magliacani, 2023. "How the sustainable development goals challenge public management. Action research on the cultural heritage of an Italian smart city," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 27(3), pages 987-1015, September.
    10. Emilio Passetti & Lara Bianchi & Massimo Battaglia & Marco Frey, 2019. "When Democratic Principles are not Enough: Tensions and Temporalities of Dialogic Stakeholder Engagement," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 155(1), pages 173-190, March.
    11. Tobias Hahn & Frank Figge & Jonatan Pinkse & Lutz Preuss, 2018. "A Paradox Perspective on Corporate Sustainability: Descriptive, Instrumental, and Normative Aspects," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 148(2), pages 235-248, March.
    12. Sarah Birrell Ivory & Simon Bentley Brooks, 2018. "Managing Corporate Sustainability with a Paradoxical Lens: Lessons from Strategic Agility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 148(2), pages 347-361, March.

    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:v:28:y:2015:i:5:p:671-705. 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.

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