Social Accounting from a Social Movement Theory Perspective

Social accounting from a social movement theory perspective

Dr Colin DeyUniversity of Stirling

Are we really part of a movement...?

If so… do we agree on our aims?

Dissecting the social accounting movement

“Accounting theorists tend to go no further than producing critiques of corporate practice... as interventions either to be published in academic journals or submitted to policy-related inquiries. The modern anti-corporate movement has chosen, in contrast, a distinctly different mode of engagement. Their critical interventions are maintained through the participation of various communities of activists: investigative journalists and columnists, writers and broadcasters, documentary filmmakers, humanitarian pressure groups, independent corporate watchdogs, and local resistance movements.”

Coulson and Shenkin, 2007

Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals

If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counter side

The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative

Pick the target, freeze it, personalise it and polarize it

Other well-established activist rules include:Be oppositionalCommunicate valuesTarget the undecided

Convergence of communications techniques between activists and dominant institutions

Increasing emphasis on behavioural change at the individual level rather than problematising systemic concerns

Academic concepts of external social accounting

Political intent Implicit Explicit

Discursive approach

Dialectical? As a single account

Dey (2007) Harte & OwenShaoul Gallhofer & HaslamCooper

Dialogical? As multiple accounts

Gray Adams

Georgakopoulos & ThomsonDey et al. (2010)

Social movement theory

Resource mobilisationPolitical process/opportunityFrame analysis

Frame analysis in social movement theory

Framing as a basis for mobilising collective action: beliefs and meanings that inspire and legitimate the activities and campaigns of social movement organisations

Research has focused on identifying and analysing the various frames used by campaign organisations

Framing as ‘conceptual scaffolding’

“To frame is to select some aspects of a perceived reality and make them more salient in communicating text, in such a way as to promote a particular problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation and/or treatment recommendation”

Entman, 1993

Framing resource use… 1950’s style

Framing the same issue today...?

CORE FRAMING TASKS

1. DIAGNOSTIC FRAMING2. PROGNOSTIC FRAMING3. MOTIVATIONAL FRAMING

FRAMING DYNAMICS

AMPLIFICATIONBRIDGING

FRAMING CONTESTS AND COUNTERFRAMING

EXTENSION

TRANSFORMATION

SUCCESSFUL FRAMING: LINKED TO THE

NOTION OF RESONANCE

Framing contests: Climate change Progressive Weak Political right

Framing Strategies

Agitate/shame/ pressurize via media, regulators, investors and consumers

Capture of reform agenda and debate via variety of routes inc news and broadcast media

Counter-framing -undermining credibility of climate change evidence, conspiracy theories. Also astroturfing,

Articulation and Amplification

Appeals to common good, worst-case scenarios, risk predictions, overwhelming evidence base

Win-win scenarios, risk and reputation management,

Attacks on weak and biased and elitist science; think tank reports from neo-liberal perspective

Bridging Wider social movements, consumer reform, investor reform,

Cost efficiency, risk management, inves

Nanny-state, inefficient public sector, public distrust of science and the state

Extension Social justice, reform, wellbeing

Accountancy, PR Neo-liberalism

Transformation Resilience, zero-growth economy, progressive culture and lifestyles

Sustainable economic growth; Competitive strategy

Threats and conspiracies against western economic growth

Resonance: Objective relevance

Expert science but this is under attack May not translate into real personal or institutional change

Supported by ‘real-life’ cases of win-win examples, testimonies of influential figures and institutions

Weak but being pushed by media-driven counter-expert ‘science’

Resonance: Narrative fidelity

May require greater imagination or pre-existing liberal ‘values’

Reformist, popularist, focus on role of the individual

Appeals to limited personal experience or existing personal prejudices

Framing contests: Health inequality

Emergence of health inequality mirrors that of climate change

Initial coverage driven by expert science and popular risk predictions

Apparent political consensus emerges but conceals major schisms and tensions

Recent descent into all-out framing contest driven by political right

What is the role of social accounting in framing contests?

Towards a typology of shadow accounts as framing processes

Where/how is shadow accounting used?

In what circumstances is it successful?

Classify tactical approaches used:

Reformist or radical:

Symbolic or material damage

Mass participation or elite participation

Proactive companies vs laggard companies

Symbolic damage or gain

Towards a democratic and emancipatory social accounting…?