MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061604298 · doi:10.1108/srj-08-2011-0058

Accounting and incentives for sustainability in higher education: an interdisciplinary analysis of a needed revolution

2013· article· en· W2061604298 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Responsibility Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSustainability in Higher Education
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPositive accountingAccountingManagement accountingSustainabilityAccounting researchSociologyIncentiveHigher educationOriginalityDialogicPublic relationsAccounting information systemEconomicsPolitical scienceSocial sciencePedagogyFinancial accountingEconomic growthQualitative research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this interdisciplinary paper is to explore the constraining role of accounting in the higher education pursuit of sustainability goals and to provide recommendations to transform accounting in ways that create incentives for sustainability and a dialogic reporting culture in higher education accounting. Design/methodology/approach Critical social theory and “strong” sustainability provide the theoretical framework for this interdisciplinary analysis. A literature review and collection of anecdotal evidence supports conceptual development of accounting technologies that provide incentives for sustainability practices in higher education. Findings Conventional accounting practices are founded on positivism, managerialism, and neo‐classical economics, creating a psychic prison for the accounting discipline that fails to recognize the socially constructed nature of accounting reports and their explicit valuation role. University rewards structures, reporting mechanisms, and curricular foci dictate against the transformation of accounting technologies toward sustainability. Other anecdotes illustrate how accounting processes hinder sustainability initiatives in higher education. Research limitations/implications The paper recommends five changes that could be made to existing accounting reports for higher education institutions. It also proposes the adoption of both narrative reporting and a dialogic model of sustainability reporting and expansive learning in higher education organizations that would provide a transitional process for change. Originality/value Little literature has addressed the role of accounting in sustainability practices. This paper offers a sociological analysis of the assumptions built into the accounting profession and a reconceptualization of accounting practices that could be pioneered on the campuses of higher education institutions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.154
Threshold uncertainty score0.794

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.393 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it