SDG 13 and the entwining of climate and sustainability metagovernance: an archaeological–genealogical analysis of goals-based climate governance

Charnock, Robert; Hoskin, Keith

doi:10.1108/aaaj-12-2018-3790

Cited by 24 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this special section, two papers provide novel research insights that can help to improve the effectiveness of SDG accounting both in respect of one of the most frequently addressed SDGs in the PwC (2019) survey, SDG 13 (the paper by Charnock and Hoskin, 2020) and areas of sustainability that PwC found to be relatively overlooked in reports by companies (the paper by Barrett et al , 2020).…”

Section: Contrasting the Sustainable Development Goals Accounting Scholarship With The Sustainable Development Goals Accounting Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In contrast to Barrett et al ’s (2020) highlighting of older and deeper ways of thinking that could point accountants and accounting research towards neglected but crucial elements of the SDGs, Charnock and Hoskin (2020) explored dynamics of climate governance in decisions leading to quantification of indicators in SDG 13 (climate change). Using a Foucauldian archaeological–genealogical approach, they analysed over 100 texts used in addressing climate change to explore tensions between ideals motivating the development of SDG 13 and the techniques developed and proposed for implementing SDG 13.…”

Section: Contrasting the Sustainable Development Goals Accounting Scholarship With The Sustainable Development Goals Accounting Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Advancing research into accounting and the UN Sustainable Development Goals

Bebbington¹,

Unerman

2020

AAAJ

174

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis paper introduces a special section devoted to accounting scholarship that addresses the United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and has three purposes. First, to explore the puzzle of a relative absence of accounting-related scholarship that addresses the SDGs. Second, the papers within the special section are introduced and located within streams of existing research and practice. Third, the paper then suggests framings, approaches and/or conditions under which the authors might see more accounting scholarship in support of advancing the SDGs.Design/methodology/approachA structured review of publication patterns in accounting journals over the last five years is undertaken to explore the nature and extent of SDGs-related accounting research. These patterns and foundational accounting literature are used to shape a series of observations and propositions underlying the line of argument developed in the paper.FindingsDespite the SDGs' prominence in the policy world, and the widespread embrace of their utility for shaping understandings of organizational responsibilities, accounting scholars have been slow to engage in SDGs-motivated research. This gap creates two issues. First, accounting scholarship is less available to the web of knowledge that is being developed about how to enact the ambitions of the SDGs. Second, accounting scholarship is not developing in a way that incorporates SDGs-related challenges facing organizations. This paper suggests ways in which accounting scholarship can overcome these limitations.Originality/valueAccounting research on the SDGs is in an early stage of development, despite almost five years having elapsed since their formal adoption. This paper highlights avenues for accounting scholars' engagement with the SDGs’ agenda.

show abstract

Section: Contrasting the Sustainable Development Goals Accounting Scholarship With The Sustainable Development Goals Accounting Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Contrasting the Sustainable Development Goals Accounting Scholarship With The Sustainable Development Goals Accounting Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Advancing research into accounting and the UN Sustainable Development Goals

Bebbington¹,

Unerman

2020

AAAJ

174

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First, it extends the literature on governance and sustainability (Bebbington and Unerman, 2018;Bebbington et al, 2017;Charnock and Keith, 2020;Rosati and Faria, 2019;Spence and Rinalidi, 2014) through insights from a DC, namely Tanzania, on efforts undertaken (or not) to adopt an integrated approach to governance when implementing the SDGs. Second, it augments the sparse literature on how the modes of governance and accountability mechanisms may affect achieving the SDG agenda (Abhayawans et al, 2021;Meuleman, 2018), and the metagovernance challenges encountered (Bebbington and Unerman, 2018;Charnock and Hoskin, 2020;Hopper, 2019;Niles and Moore, 2021;Sobkowiak et al, 2020). We extend this literature by showing how the complex governance system and local context in Tanzania shaped its mode of governing and the accountability systems for achieving the SDGs.…”

mentioning

confidence: 55%

“…Accounting scholars have problematised the paradox of accountability and sustainability governance in contemporary society (Barrett et al. , 2020; Bebbington and Unerman, 2018, 2020; Charnock and Hoskin, 2020; Hopper, 2019; Niles and Moore, 2021; Sobkowiak et al. , 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accountability and governance in implementing the Sustainable Development Goals in a developing country context: evidence from Tanzania

Lauwo

Hopper²

2022

AAAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis paper examines the accountability and governance mechanisms and the challenges in a multi-stakeholder partnership seeking to implement the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in a developing country (DC), namely Tanzania.Design/methodology/approachThe paper draws on work on the shift from government to governance to meta-governance to examine the SDGs framework's governance regime. The data stems from documentation, focussed group discussions and face-to-face interviews with key stakeholders involved in the localisation of SDGs in Tanzania.FindingsDespite the emphasis given by promoters of SDGs on the need for multi-stakeholder engagement, and network and market-based governance, Tanzania's hierarchical governance framed in national legislations dominated the localisation of the SDGs. The national-level meta-governance structures were somewhat dysfunctional, partly due to a lack of well-designed coordination mechanisms for collaborative engagement with key stakeholders. The limited involvement of different meta-governors, and particularly network and market-based governance arrangements, has had severe implications for achieving the SDGs in DCs in general and Tanzania, in particular.Practical implicationsThe paper calls for a more explicit SDG policy and strategy, alongside strengthening institutional structures and related governance arrangements in Tanzania, to promote the realisation of the SDGs. For the SDGs framework to succeed, the authors suggest that, in addition to adopting SDG friendly policies, the Tanzanian government should devise plans for financial resources, strategies for empowering and engaging with key stakeholders and promote an integrative governance system that underpins accountability at the local level.Originality/valueFocussing on Tanzania, the paper sheds light on how context in DCs, interactions between state and non-state actors, modes of governance and accountability mechanisms shape the localisation of SDGs and realising the SDGs' agenda. The implementation in Tanzania focussed on priorities in the development plan, thereby neglecting some important SDGs. This raises doubts about the possibility of meeting the SDGs by 2030. The localisation of SDGs remained within the top-down governance structure, as Tanzania's government failed to enact the policy and strategy for multi-stakeholder partnership consistent with the SDGs' principle of “leave no-one behind”. Consequently, meta-governors' efforts and ability to monitor and demand accountability from the government was constrained by the political context, the governance system and regulations enacted to side-line them.

show abstract

“…Numerous existing literature on the economics of climate change (e.g., Popkova et al, 2021) provides a lot of evidence that climate change is changing the economic landscape. For example, unpredictable and unfavorable climates threaten agriculture and prevent food provision (Charnock and Hoskin, 2020). It is also noted that responsible and sustainable agriculture can help combat climate change (Bruce et al, 2018;de Albuquerque, 2020).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%