The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Approaches and perspectives in social and environmental accounting: an overview of the conceptual landscape
Abstract
In recent years there has been a marked resurgence of interest in the areas of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and social and environmental accounting (SEA) among business, governments, public policymakers, investors, unions, environmentalists and others. While at one level there appears to be widespread agreement that CSR and SEA are worthy topics of attention, different groups have very different understandings of these fields. This article provides an analysis of these differences by comparing three broad approaches to SEA: the business case, stakeholder‐accountability and critical theory approaches. It also responds to concerns a number of commentators have expressed regarding the current dominance of ‘business case’ perspectives. While not seeking to impose on readers a ‘correct’ way of viewing SEA and CSR, exposure to competing perspectives is viewed as one way of challenging us to think more reflectively about the frames available to us and their implications for the social realities we construct, embed or seek to change. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Corporate Social and Financial Performance: A Meta-Analysis
Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840603024003910 · Cited by 7,641
Cited by
Evans, S., Vladimirova, D., Holgado, M., Van Fossen, K., Yang, M., Silva, E. A., & Barlow, C. Y. (2017) · Business Strategy and the Environment · doi:10.1002/bse.1939 · Cited by 1,370
Theorizing engagement: the potential of a critical dialogic approach
Bebbington, J., Brown, J., Frame, B., & Thomson, I. (2007) · Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal · doi:10.1108/09513570710748544 · Cited by 417
Self-citationMeta-analyses on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR): a literature review
Velte, P. (2022) · Management Review Quarterly · doi:10.1007/s11301-021-00211-2 · Cited by 367
Accounting technologies and sustainability assessment models
Bebbington, J., Brown, J., & Frame, B. (2007) · Ecological Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.10.021 · Cited by 364
Self-citationReviewing the Business Case for Corporate Social Responsibility: New Evidence and Analysis
Schreck, P. (2011) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-011-0867-0 · Cited by 318
Metadata
- Authors
- Brown, J., & Fraser, M.
- Venue
- Business Strategy and the Environment
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2006-03
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 103-117
- ISSN
- 0964-4733 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-0836
- OpenAlex
- W2079402056
- Cited by
- 281
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 24.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Approaches and perspectives in social and environmental accounting: an overview of the conceptual landscape. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/bse.452
- The paper
- Brown, J., & Fraser, M. (2006). Approaches and perspectives in social and environmental accounting: an overview of the conceptual landscape. Business Strategy and the Environment. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.452
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.