Abstract
In many ways the conventional accounting and reporting model is limited by its focus on private costs and benefits. Inclusion of only these factors is, to some degree, a reflection of a reliance on traditional micro-economic theory for the underpinnings of accountancy. A justification for much of the current accounting model is its relationship to this theory.1 This supposedly value-free functional structural world view has recently come under increasing criticism, but it continues to represent the ‘mainstream’ status quo position of accountancy today.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Bibliography
American Textile Manufacturers Institute, Inc., et al. v. Raymond Donovan, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor, et al., 101 S.Ct. 2478 (1981).
Batstone, E., ‘Systems of Domination, Accommodation and Industrial Democracy’, in T. R. Burns and V. Rus (eds) Work and Power (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1979).
Burkhead, J. and J. Miner, Public Expenditure (Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company, 1971).
Chua, W. F., ‘Radical Developments in Accounting Thought’, The Accounting Review (1986), pp. 601–32.
Coase, R., ‘The Problem of Social Cost’, Journal of Law and Economics (1960), pp. 1–44.
Cooper, D. J. and M. J. Sherer, ‘The Value of Corporate Accounting Reports: Arguments for a Political Economy of Accounting’, Accounting, Organizations and Society (1984), pp. 207–32.
Kuhn, T. S., The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd ed. (University of Chicago Press, 1970).
Lakatos, I., ‘Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes’, in I. Lakatos and A. Musgrave (eds) Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge (Cambridge University Press, 1970).
Laughlin, R. C., ‘A Comment on “Accounting and the Exportation of Externalities”’, paper presented at the Interdisciplinary Perspectives in Accounting Conference (University of Manchester, 1985).
McHarg, J. L., ‘Values, Process, and Form’, in W. Johnson and J. Hardesty (eds), Economic Growth and the Environment (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Co., 1971).
Mansfield, E., The Economics of Technological Change (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1968).
Mansfield, E., Microeconomics: Theory and Applications (New York: W. W. Norton, 1970).
Mathews, M. R., ‘Towards Multiple Justifications for Social Accounting and Strategies for Acceptance’, Discussion Paper Series No. 35 (Massey University, 1985).
McHarg, I. L., ‘Values, Process and Forum’, in Fitness of Man’s Environment, Smithsonian Annual II: Papers Delivered at the Smithsonian Institution Annual Symposium (Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution, 1968) pp. 207–27.
Mishan, E. J., Economics for Social Decisions: Elements of Cost-Benefit Analysis (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1973).
National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, Occupational Exposure to Cotton Dust (Washington: US Government Printing Office, 1974).
Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Cotton Dust: Technological Feasibility Assessment and Final Inflationary Impact Statement (Washington: US Government Printing Office, 1976).
O’Leary, T., ‘Observations on Corporate Financial Reporting in the Name of Politics’, Accounting, Organizations and Society (1985), pp. 87–102.
Ratliff, J. R. and B. D. Merino, ‘Administrative Theory Versus Interest Group Pluralism — An Analysis of Alternative Public Interest Frameworks’, paper presented at the American Accounting Association Annual Meeting (New Orleans, 1983).
Shue, H., ‘Exporting Hazards’, in P. G. Brown and H. Shue (eds), Boundaries: National Autonomy and Its Limits (Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Littlefield, 1981).
Solomons, D., ‘The Politicization of Accounting’, The Journal of Accountancy (1978), pp. 65–72.
Stigler, G. J., The Theory of Price, 3rd edn. (New York: Macmillan, 1966).
Tinker, A. M., Paper Prophets (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1985).
Tinker, A. M., B. D. Merino, and M. D. Neimark, ‘The Normative Origins of Positive Theories’, Accounting, Organizations and Society (1982), pp. 167–200.
Wallerstein, I., The Modern-World System: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century (New York: Academic Press, 1976).
Watts, R. L. and J. L. Zimmerman, ‘Towards a Positive Theory of the Determination of Accounting Standards’, The Accounting Review (1978), pp. 112–34.
Worsley, P., ‘One World or Three? A Critique of the World-System Theory of Immanuel Wallerstein’, in R. Miliband and J. Saville (eds), The Socialist Register (London: Merlin Press, 1980).
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1990 David J. Cooper & Trevor M. Hopper
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Freedman, M., Stagliano, A.J. (1990). Consequences of the Failure to Account for Externalities. In: Cooper, D.J., Hopper, T.M. (eds) Critical Accounts. Palgrave, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-09786-9_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-09786-9_13
Publisher Name: Palgrave, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-09788-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-09786-9
eBook Packages: Palgrave Business & Management CollectionBusiness and Management (R0)