A preliminary analysis of Australian Government’s Indigenous reform agenda ‘Closing the Gap’ and corporate accountability

This chapter provides a preliminary analysis of Australian Government’s reform agenda popularly known as ‘Closing the Gap’.” Closing the Gap” sets a commitment by all Australian governments to improve the lives of Indigenous Australians, and in particular provide a better future for indigenous children. This article discusses how the coalition of Australian Governments prepared this agenda and how this program involves Australian corporations in this task. Our observations suggest that another reform is required for the government to mandate corporate involvement and contribution to this reform agenda.

Corporate accountability in relation to human rights: Have RIOs done enough?

This chapter focuses on the development of corporate human rights standards since the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, better known as the Earth Summit was held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. One of the important agendas for this Summit was human rights (apart from the climate change issue). This chapter provides a critical evaluation of institutional change in human rights guidelines and associated corporate (non) accountability in relation to human rights in line with the RIO summit. Based on a review of the media reports, archival documents and a case study, we argue that while there are a number of international organisations working towards the creation of corporate accountability in relation to human rights, there is limited real change in corporate action when faced with no government regulation. A radical (reform-based) approach, such as mandatory monitoring (compliance audit) and disclosure requirements is necessary to ensure corporate accountability in relation to human rights.

Stakeholder pressures on corporate climate change-related accountability and disclosures: Australian evidence

This study investigates stakeholder pressures on corporate climate change-related accountability and disclosure practices in Australia. While existing scholarship investigates stakeholder pressures on companies to discharge their broader accountability through general social and environmental disclosures, there is a lack of research investigating whether and how stakeholder pressures emerge to influence accountability and disclosure practices related to climate change. We surveyed various stakeholder groups to understand their concerns about climate change-related corporate accountability and disclosure practices. We present three primary findings: first, while NGOs and the media have some influence, institutional investors and government bodies (regulators) are perceived to be the most powerful stakeholders in generating climate change-related concern and coercive pressure on corporations to be accountable. Second, corporate climate change-related disclosures, as documented through the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP), are positively associated with such perceived coercive pressures. Lastly, we find a positive correlation between the level of media attention to climate change and Australian corporate responses to the CDP. Our results indicate that corporations will not disclose climate change information until pressured by non-financial stakeholders. This suggests a larger role for non-financial actors than previously theorized, with several policy implications.

Corporate social reporting and stakeholder accountability:the missing link

Recent years have witnessed a significant degree of administrative reform, in terms of the increasing number of major companies proclaiming their social responsibility credentials, and backing up their claims by producing substantial environmental, social and sustainability reports. The paper critically evaluates the degree of institutional reform, designed to empower stakeholders, and thereby enhance corporate accountability, accompanying these voluntary initiatives, together with that potentially ensuing from proposed regulations, later rescinded, for mandatory publication of an Operating and Financial Review by UK quoted companies. It is concluded that both forms of disclosure offer little in the way of opportunity for facilitating action on the part of organizational stakeholders, and cannot therefore be viewed as exercises in accountability. © 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Corporate environmental responsibility and accountability:what chance in vulnerable Bangladesh?

Bangladesh has recently been enjoying significant economic growth mainly arising from an export led development strategy. However, in that process its natural environment has been degraded and become more vulnerable in geophysical terms (e.g. environmental pollution). Much of the Bangladeshi population are also vulnerable in socio-economic terms due primarily to widespread poverty. In this context we ask, albeit sceptically, whether there is any chance of holding corporations to account for their environmental responsibilities. Using the notions of vulnerability and ecological rifts we answer this question by providing evidence from published sources and a series of 32 semi-structured interviews with Bangladeshi stakeholder groups. Key findings include, inter alia, corporate reluctance to take responsibility for the environmental impact of their activities. Our interviewees discuss the possibility of a role for mandatory corporate reporting in enhancing corporate accountability and we argue that this is essential if the contradictions and irrationalities of the globalized capitalist system are to be made visible. Achieving such accountability, however, will not be easy due to a lack of political will and the prohibitive costs involved. Incurring such costs could raise the dangerous prospect of Bangladesh losing business to other, less regulated, economies.

Regulating for corporate human rights abuses : the emergence of corporate reporting on the ILO’s human rights standards within the global garment manufacturing and retail industry

Despite the ubiquitous nature of the discourse on human rights there is currently little research on the emergence of disclosure by multinational corporations on their human rights obligations or the regulatory dynamic that may lie behind this trend. In an attempt to begin to explore the extent to which, if any, the language of human rights has entered the discourse of corporate accountability, this paper investigates the adoption of the International Labour Organisation's (ILO) human rights standards by major multinational garment retail companies that source products from developing countries, as disclosed through their reporting media. The paper has three objectives. Firstly, to empirically explore the extent to which a group of multinational garment retailers invoke the language of human rights when disclosing their corporate responsibilities. The paper reviews corporate reporting media including social responsibility codes of conduct, annual reports and stand-alone social responsibility reports released by 18 major global clothing and retail companies during a period from 1990 to 2007. We find that the number of companies adopting and disclosing on the ILO's workplace human rights standards has significantly increased since 1998 – the year in which the ILO's standards were endorsed and accepted by the global community (ILO, 1998). Secondly, drawing on a combination of Responsive Regulation theory and neo-institutional theory, we tentatively seek to understand the regulatory space that may have influenced these large corporations to adopt the language of human rights obligations. In particular, we study the role that International Governmental Organisation's (IGO) such as ILO may have played in these disclosures. Finally, we provide some critical reflections on the power and potential within the corporate adoption of the language of human rights.

On the perspectives of the implementation of 'corporate social responsibility'

In the face of changes in corporate regulation scholarship, the percepts of corporate governance and legal policies have minimized the controversies over the potentials and limitations of corporate accountability mechanisms. In the contemporary scholarly works on the implementation of corporate social responsibility (CSR), there are evidences that support CSR principles to be implemented through legal regulation. Scholars and current practices, however, emphasize that this implementation should not be based on any single strategy. From this perspective, this article argues that the regulatory strategies for this implementation should be based on a fusion of legal sanction, market incentives and the demand of private ordering.

Convergence of corporate social responsibility and corporate governance in weak economies : the case of Bangladesh

The convergence of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and corporate governance (CG) has changed the corporate accountability mechanism. This has developed a socially responsible ‘corporate self-regulation’, a synthesis of governance and responsibility in the companies of strong economies. However, unlike in the strong economies, this convergence has not been visible in the companies of weak economies, where the civil society groups are unorganised, regulatory agencies are either ineffective or corrupt and the media and non-governmental organisations do not mirror the corporate conscience. Using the case of Bangladesh, this article investigates the convergence between CSR and CG in the self-regulation of companies in a less vigilant environment.

Public policy on corporate audit committees : case study evidence of current practice

Corporate failures and malpractices have led to an increasing emphasis on the governance role of audit committees. The Smith report Audit Committee Combined Code Guidance and the Higgs Review of the Role and Effectiveness of Non-Executive Directors (now incorporated in a Revised Combined Code) represent further attempts to strengthen corporate accountability in the UK. Although the regulatory focus on audit committees indicates confidence in their role as part of the solution to governance failures, questions remain about their efficacy in practice. Against the background of the publication of the Smith report and the wider reliance on audit committees in several countries to help improve corporate accountability, this paper provides research evidence, drawn from an ACCA-sponsored project, on the processes and effects of the audit committees in three UK companies. This study complements other research on audit committees by adopting a case study approach, in order to reflect the importance of investigating audit committee operations from within the organisation and to develop a closer understanding of audit committee impact than is available from generally observable data. The empirical evidence for the case studies was obtained from semi-structured interviews with personnel involved in the audit committee process, internal documents made available by the companies, and publicly available information, including annual reports.

Risk accountability in the tender process of contractors in Ghana and UK

The process of how contractors take account of risk when calculating their bids for construction work is investigated based on preliminary investigations and case studies in Ghana and UK. Ghana and UK were chosen, more or less arbitrarily, for the purpose of case studies, and to test the idea that there are systematic differences between the approaches in different places. Clear differences were found in the risk pricing approaches of contractors in the two countries. The difference appeared to emanate from the professional knowledge and competence of the bid team members, company policy, corporate accountability and the business environments in which the contractors operate. Both groups of contractors take account of risk in estimates. However, risk accountability was found to be higher on the agenda in the tender process of UK contractors, documented more systematically, and assessed and managed more rigorously with input from the whole bid team. Risk accountability takes place at three levels of the tender process and is dictated strongly by market forces and company circumstances.

Privatisation, empowerment and accountability: What are the policy implications for establishing effective farmer organisations?

Weak institutional development and information flows have constrained the extent to which the small-holder farming sector in developing countries can significantly drive growth and poverty reduction. Thisis despite widely implemented economic liberalisation policies focussing on market efficiency. Farmerorganisations are viewed as a potential means of addressing public and private institutional failure but thishas frequently been limited by inequalities in access to power and information. This article investigatestwo issues that have received little research attention to date: what role downward accountability plays inenabling farmer organisations to improve services and markets, and what influences the extent to whichdownward accountability is achieved. Kenya Tea Development Agency (KTDA), one of the largest farmerorganisations in the world (>400,000 farmers) is examined alongside wider literature. Mixed methodswere used including key informant interviews, and eight months of participant observation followedby a questionnaire survey. The article concludes that without effective downward accountability farmerorganisations can become characterised by institutions and mechanisms that favour elites, restrictedweak coordination and regulation, and manipulated information flows. This in turn reduces individuals’incentives to invest. If farmer organisations are to realise their potential as a means of enabling the small-holder sector to significantly contribute to economic growth and poverty reduction, policy and researchneeds to address key factors which influence accountability including: how to ensure initial processes information of farmer organisations establish appropriate structures and rules; strong state regulation toenhance corporate accountability; transparent information provision regarding actions of farmer organi-sation leaders; and the role independent non-government organisations can play. Consequently attentionneeds to focus on developing means of legitimising rights, building poor people’s capacity to challengeexclusion, and moving from rights to obligations regarding information provision.

When bookkeepers become beekeepers: why bee accountability

Accounting for biodiversity has received increasing attention from the academic accounting community in recent years. Despite a stream of research investigating the quality and quantity of biodiversity reporting in general, no academic research has focused on reporting related to one specific species. This paper explores the quality and quantity of corporate disclosures relating to bees. Society is becoming increasingly concerned about the accelerating fall in bee populations around the world. Colony Collapse Disorder has been spreading through global bee populations since 2006, decimating commercial hives. Concerns are fuelled by fears that pollinators may become extinct which would have dire consequences for the majority of world food production, leaving human pollination, at immense cost, the only alternative. On the basis of these fears, companies as well as other organisations, have started to establish programmes aimed at rejuvenating global bee populations. In this paper we explore the bee-related disclosures provided by a large selection of UK listed companies. We assess the extent to which companies believe they have a role to play in enhancing and protecting bee populations. Further we consider whether corporate accountability in this area derives solely from a business case or whether there is a deeper societal connection with bees as a species which is encouraging companies to protect their survival. The paper investigates the historical and philosophical connection between bees and human beings, for example the ways industrial production has been likened to honey production. We draw parallels between bees and human industrial organisation as well as between the role and responsibilities of the bookkeeper and the beekeeper.