The audit of regional policy: 1934‐1939

This paper examines the cost-effectiveness of British regional policy during the 1930s. It takes issue with Correlli Barnett, who has argued that regional policy measures introduced from 1945 were already shown to be inefficient by the failure of similar assistance during the 1930s. The evolution of the main 1930s initiatives that influenced post-war policy is discussed and their effectiveness assessed. When account is taken of savings in government welfare payments these initiatives are shown to have been very cost-effective, producing an annual return to the exchequer of around 56%, or more.

The National Audit Office uses OR to assess the value for money of public services

Supreme audit institutions (SAIs) have an important role in assessing value for money in the delivery of public services. Assessing value for money necessarily involves assessing counterfactuals: good value for money has been achieved if a policy could not reasonably have been delivered more efficiently, effectively, or economically. Operations research modelling has the potential to help in the assessment of these counterfactuals. However, is such modelling too arcane, complex, and technically burdensome for organisations that, like SAIs, operate in a time- and resource-constrained and politically charged environment? We report on three applications of modelling at the UK's SAI, the National Audit Office, in the context of studies on demand management in tax collection, end-of-life care, and health-care associated infections. In all cases, the models have featured in the audit reports and helped study teams come to a value-for-money judgment. We conclude that OR modelling is indeed a valuable addition to the value-for-money auditor's methodological tool box.

Private climate change reporting: an emerging discourse of risk and opportunity?

Purpose – This paper aims to explore the nature of the emerging discourse of private climate change reporting, which takes place in one-on-one meetings between institutional investors and their investee companies. Design/methodology/approach – Semi-structured interviews were conducted with representatives from 20 UK investment institutions to derive data which was then coded and analysed, in order to derive a picture of the emerging discourse of private climate change reporting, using an interpretive methodological approach, in addition to explorative analysis using NVivo software. Findings – The authors find that private climate change reporting is dominated by a discourse of risk and risk management. This emerging risk discourse derives from institutional investors' belief that climate change represents a material risk, that it is the most salient sustainability issue, and that their clients require them to manage climate change-related risk within their portfolio investment. It is found that institutional investors are using the private reporting process to compensate for the acknowledged inadequacies of public climate change reporting. Contrary to evidence indicating corporate capture of public sustainability reporting, these findings suggest that the emerging private climate change reporting discourse is being captured by the institutional investment community. There is also evidence of an emerging discourse of opportunity in private climate change reporting as the institutional investors are increasingly aware of a range of ways in which climate change presents material opportunities for their investee companies to exploit. Lastly, the authors find an absence of any ethical discourse, such that private climate change reporting reinforces rather than challenges the “business case” status quo. Originality/value – Although there is a wealth of sustainability reporting research, there is no academic research on private climate change reporting. This paper attempts to fill this gap by providing rich interview evidence regarding the nature of the emerging private climate change reporting discourse.

Impression management, myth creation and fabrication in private social and environmental reporting: insights from Erving Goffman

This paper explores the nature of private social and environmental reporting (SER). From interviews with UK institutional investors, we show that both investors and investees employ Goffmanesque, staged impression management as a means of creating and disseminating a dual myth of social and environmental accountability. The interviewees’ utterances unveil private meetings imbued with theatrical verbal and physical impression management. Most of the time, the investors’ shared awareness of reality belongs to a Goffmanesque frame whereby they accept no intentionality, misrepresentation or fabrication, believing instead that the ‘performers’ (investees) are not intending to deceive them. A shared perception that social and environmental considerations are subordinated to financial issues renders private SER an empty encounter characterised as a relationship-building exercise with seldom any impact on investment decision-making. Investors spoke of occasional instances of fabrication but these were insufficient to break the frame of dual myth creation. They only identified a handful of instances where intentional misrepresentation had been significant enough to alter their reality and behaviour. Only in the most extreme cases of fabrication and lying did the staged meeting break frame and become a genuine occasion of accountability, where investors demanded greater transparency, further meetings and at the extreme, divested shares. We conclude that the frontstage, ritualistic impression management in private SER is inconsistent with backstage activities within financial institutions where private financial reporting is prioritised. The investors appeared to be in a double bind whereby they devoted resources to private SER but were simultaneously aware that these efforts may be at best subordinated, at worst ignored, rendering private SER a predominantly cosmetic, theatrical and empty exercise.

A Habermasian model of stakeholder (non)engagement and corporate (ir)responsibility reporting

Inspired by Habermas’ works, we develop a prescriptive conceptual model of stakeholder engagement and corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting against which empirical descriptions can be compared and contrasted. We compare the high profile case of Kraft's takeover of Cadbury with the conceptual model to illustrate the gap between an ideal speech situation and practice. The paper conducts a desk study of documents relating to the takeover and interviews with stakeholders from the local community to gauge their views of stakeholder engagement and CSR reporting by Cadbury/Kraft. The findings lead to policy recommendations for enhancing stakeholder accountability through improved steering mechanisms.

Impression management, fabrication and myth creation in private social and environmental reporting: insights from Erving Goffman

This paper explores the nature of private social and environmental reporting (SER). From interviews with UK institutional investors, we show that both investors and investees employ Goffmanesque, staged impression management as a means of creating and disseminating a dual myth of social and environmental accountability. The interviewees’ utterances unveil private meetings imbued with theatrical verbal and physical impression management. Most of the time, the investors’ shared awareness of reality belongs to a Goffmanesque frame whereby they accept no intentionality, misrepresentation or fabrication, believing instead that the ‘performers’ (investees) are not intending to deceive them. A shared perception that social and environmental considerations are subordinated to financial issues renders private SER an empty encounter characterised as a relationship-building exercise with seldom any impact on investment decision-making. Investors spoke of occasional instances of fabrication but these were insufficient to break the frame of dual myth creation. They only identified a handful of instances where intentional misrepresentation had been significant enough to alter their reality and behaviour. Only in the most extreme cases of fabrication and lying did the staged meeting break frame and become a genuine occasion of accountability, where investors demanded greater transparency, further meetings and at the extreme, divested shares. We conclude that the frontstage, ritualistic impression management in private SER is inconsistent with backstage activities within financial institutions where private financial reporting is prioritised. The investors appeared to be in a double bind whereby they devoted resources to private SER but were simultaneously aware that these efforts may be at best subordinated, at worst ignored, rendering private SER a predominantly cosmetic, theatrical and empty exercise.

Private climate change reporting: a discourse of risk and opportunity

Purpose – This paper aims to explore the nature of the emerging discourse of private climate change reporting, which takes place in one-on-one meetings between institutional investors and their investee companies. Design/methodology/approach – Semi-structured interviews were conducted with representatives from 20 UK investment institutions to derive data which was then coded and analysed, in order to derive a picture of the emerging discourse of private climate change reporting, using an interpretive methodological approach, in addition to explorative analysis using NVivo software. Findings – The authors find that private climate change reporting is dominated by a discourse of risk and risk management. This emerging risk discourse derives from institutional investors' belief that climate change represents a material risk, that it is the most salient sustainability issue, and that their clients require them to manage climate change-related risk within their portfolio investment. It is found that institutional investors are using the private reporting process to compensate for the acknowledged inadequacies of public climate change reporting. Contrary to evidence indicating corporate capture of public sustainability reporting, these findings suggest that the emerging private climate change reporting discourse is being captured by the institutional investment community. There is also evidence of an emerging discourse of opportunity in private climate change reporting as the institutional investors are increasingly aware of a range of ways in which climate change presents material opportunities for their investee companies to exploit. Lastly, the authors find an absence of any ethical discourse, such that private climate change reporting reinforces rather than challenges the “business case” status quo. Originality/value – Although there is a wealth of sustainability reporting research, there is no academic research on private climate change reporting. This paper attempts to fill this gap by providing rich interview evidence regarding the nature of the emerging private climate change reporting discourse.

International financial reporting standards (IFRS) as a change agent in Ukraine

This paper aims to examine the perception of key actors regarding the costs and benefits that result from adopting International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) in Ukraine. Authors showed that IFRS implementation impacts on internal reporting quality, the relationship with customers, creditors and shareholders, the access to international markets and external financing. They also indicated that financial managers have serious concerns about implementation costs related to the introduction of IFRS. These costs relate to training, instruction on IFRS adoption and translation of current IFRS, changes in software systems, double purpose accounting and deadlines for IFRS adoption and consulting services.

The emergence of integrated private reporting

Purpose: Private social and environmental reporting (SER) has grown considerably in recent years, consistent with a rise in institutional investor engagement and dialogue with investee companies. We interpret the emergence of integrated private reporting through the lens of institutional logics. We frame the emergence of integrated private reporting as a merging of two hitherto separate and possibly rival institutional logics. Methodology/Approach: We interviewed 19 companies listed on the FTSE100 and 20 UK institutional investors. The interviews were semi-structured and analysed in an interpretive fashion. Findings and Implications: We provide evidence to suggest that private SER is beginning to merge with private financial reporting and that, as a result integrated private reporting is emerging. This trend is mirroring the international trend in public reporting toward an integrated approach. Specifically, we find that specialist social responsible investment managers are starting to attend private financial reporting meetings whilst mainstream fund managers are starting to attend private meetings on environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues. Further, senior company directors are becoming increasingly conversant with ESG issues. We interpret our findings as two possible scenarios: (i) there is a genuine hybridisation occurring in UK institutional investment such that integrated private reporting is emerging, or; (ii) the financial logic is absorbing and effectively neutralising the responsible investment logic. Originality: This is the first research investigating the evolution of private integrated reporting.

The Article 51 reporting requirement for self-defense actions

This article examines one legal criterion for the exercise of the right of self-defense that has been significantly overlooked by commentators: the so-called “reporting requirement.” Article 51 of the United Nations (UN) Charter provides, inter alia, that “[m]easures taken by members in the exercise of this right of self-defense shall be immediately reported to the Security Council.” Although the requirement to report all self-defense actions to the Council is clearly set out in Article 51, the Charter offers no further guidance with regard to this obligation. Reference to the practice of states since the UN’s inception in 1945 is therefore essential to understanding the scope and nature of the reporting requirement. As such, this article is underpinned by an extensive original dataset of reporting practice covering the period from January 1, 1998 to December 31, 2013. We know from Article 51 that states “shall” report, but do they, and—if so—in what manner? What are the various implications of reporting, of failing to report, and of the way in which states report? How are reports used, and by whom? Most importantly, this article questions the ultimate value of states reporting their self-defense actions to the Security Council in modern interstate relations.

Is it significant? Guidelines for reporting BCI performance

Recent growth in brain-computer interface (BCI) research has increased pressure to report improved performance. However, different research groups report performance in different ways. Hence, it is essential that evaluation procedures are valid and reported in sufficient detail. In this chapter we give an overview of available performance measures such as classification accuracy, cohen’s kappa, information transfer rate (ITR), and written symbol rate. We show how to distinguish results from chance level using confidence intervals for accuracy or kappa. Furthermore, we point out common pitfalls when moving from offline to online analysis and provide a guide on how to conduct statistical tests on (BCI) results.