The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 40 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
NGOs, civil society and accountability: making the people accountable to capital
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this research is to seek to understand and explain the non‐governmental organisation (NGO) and its location in civil society in order to provide a basis for future research work. The paper aims to explore and develop understandings of accountability specifically in the context of the NGO and then extend these insights to the accountability of all organisations. Design/methodology/approach: The paper is framed within a theoretical conception of accountability and is primarily literature‐based. In addition secondary data relating to the issues of concern are collated and synthesised. Findings: The research finds that the essence of accountability lies in the relationships between the organisation and the society and/or stakeholder groups of interest. The nature of this relationship allows us to infer much about the necessary formality and the channels of accountability. In turn, this casts a light upon taken‐for‐granted assumptions in the corporate accountability and reminds us that the essence and basis of success of the corporate world lies in its withdrawal from any form of human relationship and the consequential colonisation and oppression of civil society. Research limitations/implications: The principal implications relate to: our need to improve the analytical incisiveness of our applications of accountability theory; and the possibility of the accounting literature offering more developed insights to the NGO literature. The primary limitations lie in the paper in being: exploratory of a more developed understanding of accountability; and a novel excursion into the world of the NGO and civil society – neither of which feature greatly in the accounting literature. Practical implications: These lie in the current political struggles between civil society and capital over appropriate forms of accountability. Corporations continue to avoid allowing themselves to be held accountable whilst civil society organisations are often accountable in many different and informal ways. Ill‐considered calls from capital for more oppressive NGO accountability are typically, therefore, hypocritical and inappropriate. Originality/value: NGOs are introduced in a detailed and accessible way to the accounting literature. The concept of accountability is further developed by examination of relationships and channels in the context of the NGO and, through Rawls' notion of “closeness”, is further enriched.
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
Cannibals with forks: the triple bottom line of 21st century business
(1999) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.36-3997 · Cited by 9,014
Partnerships from cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st‐century business
Elkington, J. (1998) · Environmental Quality Management · doi:10.1002/tqem.3310080106 · Cited by 5,341
Gray, R., Owen, D., & Adams, C. A. (1996) · ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) · Cited by 1,257
Self-citationWhen corporations rule the world
Korten, D. C. (1998) · European Business Review · doi:10.1108/ebr.1998.05498aab.007 · Cited by 1,230
Financial accounting: In communicating reality, we construct reality
Hines, R. D. (1988) · Accounting, Organizations and Society · doi:10.1016/0361-3682(88)90003-7 · Cited by 1,175
Politics and Markets: The World's Political-Economic Systems.
Sandford, C., & Lindblom, C. E. (1979) · Economica · doi:10.2307/2553756 · Cited by 1,121
Roberts, J., & Scapens, R. (1985) · Accounting, Organizations and Society · doi:10.1016/0361-3682(85)90005-4 · Cited by 1,033
The possibilities of accountability
Roberts, J. (1991) · Accounting, Organizations and Society · doi:10.1016/0361-3682(91)90027-c · Cited by 817
Gray, R. (1992) · Accounting, Organizations and Society · doi:10.1016/0361-3682(92)90038-t · Cited by 806
Self-citationOwen, D. (1995) · Cited by 727
Cited by
Gray, R. (2010) · Accounting, Organizations and Society · doi:10.1016/j.aos.2009.04.006 · Cited by 1,312
Self-citationMilne, M. J., & Gray, R. (2013) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-012-1543-8 · Cited by 1,240
Self-citationThe paradox of greater NGO accountability: A case study of Amnesty Ireland
O’Dwyer, B., & Unerman, J. (2008) · Accounting, Organizations and Society · doi:10.1016/j.aos.2008.02.002 · Cited by 381
Gualandris, J., Klassen, R. D., Vachon, S., & Kalchschmidt, M. (2015) · Journal of Operations Management · doi:10.1016/j.jom.2015.06.002 · Cited by 365
Cuckston, T. (2022) · Critical Perspectives on Accounting · doi:10.1016/j.cpa.2021.102374 · Cited by 21
Metadata
- Authors
- Gray, R., Bebbington, J., & Collison, D.
- Venue
- Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2006-05-01
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 319-348
- ISSN
- 0951-3574 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2091443962
- Cited by
- 425
- References
- 40
- FWCI
- 45.75
- 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: NGOs, civil society and accountability: making the people accountable to capital. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1108/09513570610670325
- The paper
- Gray, R., Bebbington, J., & Collison, D. (2006). NGOs, civil society and accountability: making the people accountable to capital. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570610670325
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.