The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 40 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Legitimacy theory: Despite its enduring popularity and contribution, time is right for a necessary makeover
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to reflect upon the contributions made to the social and environmental accounting literature by papers that comprised a 2002 Special Issue of Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal (AAAJ) entitled social and environmental reporting and its role in maintaining or creating organisational legitimacy. This paper will also provide insights into the origins of legitimacy theory as used in the social and environmental accounting literature as well as providing reflections about the strengths, and shortcomings, of the theory. Suggestions are made with respect to the ongoing application, and development, of legitimacy theory. Design/methodology/approach: As a commentary, this paper utilises a review of the social and environmental accounting and institutional literature across a number of decades to reveal insights about the development and use of legitimacy theory as a basis to explain social and environmental reporting practices. Citation data are also used to indicate the potential impact that the papers in the 2002 Special Issue had upon subsequent research. Findings: This commentary shows that the 2002 Special Issue is the most highly cited issue in the history of AAAJ. It also shows that individually, some of the papers in the Special Issue represent some of the most highly cited papers in the social and environmental accounting literature. The commentary provides arguments to suggest that the development of legitimacy theory is in need of further refinement, and suggests a way in which this refinement might take place. Research limitations/implications: This paper is largely based on the opinions of one researcher, and the evidence presented in the paper is selected on the basis that it is deemed sufficient to support the opinions being projected. The paper also relies on citation data as an indicator of “impact”. The implication of the research is that it identifies a “way forward” for the development of theory applicable to the understanding of organisational social and environmental reporting practices. Originality/value: The study provides evidence to show that the 2002 Special Issue was significant within the context of AAAJ, and also within the context of the evolution of the social and environmental accounting literature. The description of the history of the development of legitimacy theory, and of the theory’s subsequent application, provides a solid impetus for future refinements to the theory.
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
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (2004) · Advances in Strategic Management · doi:10.1016/s0742-3322(00)17011-1 · Cited by 25,802
Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches
Suchman, M. C. (1995) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258788 · Cited by 19,903
The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence, and Implications
Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258887 · Cited by 5,846
Organizational Legitimacy: Social Values and Organizational Behavior
Dowling, J., & Pfeffer, J. (1975) · The Pacific Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/1388226 · Cited by 3,876
Deegan, C. (2002) · Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal · doi:10.1108/09513570210435852 · Cited by 3,829
Self-citationGray, R., Kouhy, R., & Lavers, S. (1995) · Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal · doi:10.1108/09513579510146996 · Cited by 3,321
The Double-Edge of Organizational Legitimation
Ashforth, B. E., & Gibbs, B. W. (1990) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1.2.177 · Cited by 2,228
Legitimacy in Organizational Institutionalism
Deephouse, D. L., & Suchman, M. (2008) · The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism · doi:10.4135/9781849200387.n2 · Cited by 1,570
A Study of the Environmental Disclosure Practices of Australian Corporations
Deegan, C., & Gordon, B. (1996) · Accounting and Business Research · doi:10.1080/00014788.1996.9729510 · Cited by 1,526
Self-citationPatten, D. M. (1992) · Accounting, Organizations and Society · doi:10.1016/0361-3682(92)90042-q · Cited by 1,493
Cited by
The determinants of business contribution to the 2030 Agenda: Introducing the SDG Reporting Score
Pizzi, S., Rosati, F., & Venturelli, A. (2021) · Business Strategy and the Environment · doi:10.1002/bse.2628 · Cited by 426
Asogwa, I. E. (2023) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.135842 · Cited by 12
Metadata
- Authors
- Deegan, C. M.
- Venue
- Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2019-07-16
- Volume
- ahead-of-print
- Issue
- ahead-of-print
- ISSN
- 0951-3574 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2963794647
- Cited by
- 328
- References
- 40
- FWCI
- 28.59
- 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: Legitimacy theory: Despite its enduring popularity and contribution, time is right for a necessary makeover. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1108/aaaj-08-2018-3638
- The paper
- Deegan, C. M. (2019). Legitimacy theory: Despite its enduring popularity and contribution, time is right for a necessary makeover. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/aaaj-08-2018-3638
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.