Recent Scientific Publications

Over the past thirty years or so, the accounting profession has turned its attention to climate-
, shifting from voluntary and discretionary reporting
to increasingly standardized reporting at both the French
and international levels. However, this evolution has been sporadic
and lacking in international alignment, leading to tensions and divergent approaches
regarding how to incorporate climate-related issues into companies’ financial reports
. The article illustrates some of the challenges of international regulation
through the accounting treatment of carbon allowances
and the standardization of sustainability disclosures in Europe
and internationally.

The Global Reporting Initiative (hereinafter the GRI), a pioneering organization focused on sustainability reporting standards, introduced a new standard dedicated to tax reporting in 2019 (GRI 207: Tax), recognizing tax disclosure as a material CSR issue. Accordingly, we examine tax disclosure as defined by GRI 207. The literature on CSR reporting shows that companies increase their CSR disclosures to mitigate negative attention to CSR issues. Based on this literature, we hypothesize that tax disclosure, as defined by GRI 207, is positively associated with firms’ reputational risks (RRs). Our sample consists of the 120 largest publicly traded companies on the French financial market that are most subject to scrutiny. The data were collected for the year 2019. We use linear regressions to identify the determinants of tax disclosure strategies. As expected, higher RR levels are associated with greater tax disclosure. Based on the GRI 207 disclosure items, three strategies are identified in reference to Carroll’s (1991) CSR pyramid. We find that reputational risks—measured by the presence of tax havens and financial controversies—are associated with distinct tax disclosure strategies. The issuance of a disclosure standard does not guarantee greater transparency. To our knowledge, our study is the first to examine tax disclosure strategies within the framework of the most recent GRI 207 standard as part of CSR reporting. We provide several implications and directions for future research.

Purpose – Since the withdrawal of IFRIC 3 in 2005, there has been a regulatory freeze on the accounting treatment of emission rights, which stands in contrast to the international momentum toward climate-related financial disclosures. This paper explores how different narratives and institutional dynamics explain the failure to issue guidance on the accounting treatment of emission rights.

Design/methodology/approach – This paper draws on the concept of field-configuring events to examine a sequence of six events that took place between 2003 and 2016, including four public consultations and two dialogues among standard-setting bodies. The paper presents a qualitative analysis of documents produced in this context, investigating how different practices and narratives shaped the field’s positions, agenda, and systems of meaning.

Findings – Accounting for emission rights was gradually separated from climate change and carbon markets, pushed into the research pipeline, and forgotten. The obstacles the IASB and EFRAG encountered in positioning themselves as central players in recurring events, the proliferation of representations, and the increasingly technical and abstract debates eroded the 2003 momentum for regulation, leaving the various initiatives to revitalize the project vulnerable and open to scrutiny. Lukes (2021) uses the term “nondecision-making” to describe the ph
, whereby certain issues are stifled before they can be articulated.

Originality/value – The regulation of accounting for emission rights, an area that has received scant attention in the literature, provides some insights into the different narrative mechanisms that, manifesting themselves in specific times and places, draw regulatory attention to particular accounting issues, which are problematized and, eventually, forgotten. This study also illustrates that identifying interests is problematic as actors shift between alternative positions over a long period. The case examined also raises some doubts about the past effectiveness of international standard-setters in addressing issues of connectivity between the environment and finance, as is the case with the accounting for emission rights.

In France, certain companies are required by law to undergo a corporate audit. The accounting profession holds a virtual monopoly on the corporate audit market, particularly the Big 4, which are considered professional service firms (PSFs). This study draws on sociological theories of professions and legitimacy to analyze the VS market. In this research, we focus on strategies for legitimizing VS engagements. We conducted a discursive analysis of how these engagements are promoted on auditors’ websites. The results highlight various strategies for promoting the implementation of social verification missions, aimed at legitimizing their new competencies and which can be linked to different forms of knowledge.

The purpose of this study is to investigate whether companies “walk the talk” when it comes to corporate governance and diversity. Using a sample of French publicly traded companies from 2012 and 2021, we analyze i) diversity in board composition and ii) CEO disclosure regarding diversity in their annual report letters. Despite growing societal pressure to increase diversity in organizations, our results show that over a ten-year period, companies have made almost no progress in terms of the age and ethnic diversity of board members, while we observe greater diversity in terms of gender. When it comes to the CEO letter, which sets the strategic direction for the company, we still observe little mention of diversity. Moreover, most of the images associated with the letter depict a white, Western, male CEO. Overall, our findings help challenge the current organizational rhetoric about diversity in corporate governance by showing that diversity at the top remains limited.

The literature has explored the characteristics of management control systems (MCS) capable of reconciling sometimes contradictory institutional logics only to a limited extent. Despite differences in values and time horizons between the water utility and its governing authority, this action research shows that it is possible to develop an interorganizational MCS that integrates these multiple logics.

In the water sector, major cities are ending public service concessions (PSCs) awarded to private operators and opting to return to direct municipal management—a move that may seem surprising given that new public management advocates the private-sector model. In the water sector—a “natural monopoly” characterized by significant moral hazard, information asymmetries, and numerous uncertainties—the DSP still raises serious governance issues both theoretically and empirically, despite increasingly stringent regulations. The three-year action research project conducted within a newly established municipal water utility contributed to the implementation of management tools. The diverse data collected (documents, interviews, participant observation, etc.) enable an analysis of micro-changes in governance. The choices made contribute to the development of a multilateral and hybrid governance model. The “customized public utility” status promotes controlled autonomy and pluralistic representation that includes citizen-users. The close relationship between the agency and the organizing authority facilitates a greater sharing of values, information, and knowledge. The negotiation of the objectives agreement results in a mix of oversight, trust, and reciprocity. This complex web of relationships—a delicate balance between hierarchy, exchange, and cooperation—ultimatelyenables more effective governance.

The need to measure the impact of health research in a more collaborative manner and from multidimensional perspectives has been recognized. A scorecard was developed as part of the Collective Research Impact Framework (CRIF) to engage stakeholders in assessing the impacts of health research and innovations. The purpose of this study was to describe the development process of the MULTI-ACT Master Scorecard (MSC) and how it can be used as a practical tool for collectively assessing future responsible research and innovation measures.

In this paper, we reflect on and provide insights into the environmental implications of post-COVID-19 economic recoveries. More specifically, we highlight the connection(s) between the environment and the COVID-19 crisis, particularly the intertwined links between Mother Nature and the virus. We then raise some concerns about the “illusory” positive and negative effects of the crisis on the environment before drawing on past lessons regarding crisis management and recovery. We argue that the current accounting and accountability mechanisms used in economic stimulus programs, as well as traditional environmental accounting approaches, are inadequate and limiting when it comes to achieving long-term sustainability. The paper concludes by offering accounting practitioners and researchers some possibilities for moving forward and developing new understandings of social and environmental value consistent with ecological principles and sustainable development—and we hope that these reflections will contribute to a broader debate on the role of accounting for sustainable development in the Anthropocene.

The purpose of this study is to provide insights into how accounting and accountability systems can contribute to transforming the metrics used to date in research performance evaluation. New metrics are needed to increase the impact of research on the challenges addressed by science. In particular, we document and reflect on accounting transformations toward responsible research and innovation (RRI). The study draws on the European H2020 MULTI-ACT research project, which focuses on the development of a collective research impact framework in the field of health research. We document, analyze, and report on our involvement in this project, which also included research funders, patient organizations, health researchers, accounting practitioners, and health care providers. Drawing on RRI, Mode 2 knowledge production, and accounting performativity, we explore the potential of accounting technologies to foster knowledge production and increase research impact. The study demonstrates how the integration of accounting with other disciplines enables the development of new and relevant forms of research impact assessment. We document how accounting can be leveraged to develop new forms of research impact assessment (i.e., indicators that evaluate key accountability dimensions to promote RRI) and how it helps overcome the challenges that may arise during this process. We also show how the design of multiple accountability indicators—though chronically partial—sparked a generative examination and discussion of how to translate RRI into research assessment in a practical setting, and the pivotal role of certain circumstances (e.g., the presence of authoritative actors) that arise during the knowledge production process in creating these generative opportunities.

This article identifies regulatory developments in the area of non-financial auditing. This societal audit is a process through which an independent third-party organization (ITO) verifies companies’ non-financial information and prepares a report setting out its conclusions on the quality and reliability of that information. This verification practice will inevitably expand and evolve with the new European Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), which aims to establish more detailed non-financial reporting applicable to a wider range of companies. 

In this research, the authors are interested in strategies for legitimizing the assurance missions of independent third-party bodies. Assurance providers use their websites to promote their

assignments. How do independent third-party bodies legitimize their assurance assignments within the regulatory framework established by European Directive 2014/95/EU?

The authors conducted a discursive analysis of the promotion of SA missions on the websites of independent third-party organizations. A content analysis was performed on the collected textual data.

The results highlight different strategies for promoting the implementation of assurance engagements aimed at legitimizing their new skills. Nevertheless, it appears that service providers make very little reference to the quality of nonfinancial information as the objective of assurance engagements.

Climate Reporting Related to the TCFD Framework: An Exploration of the Air Transport Sector

In recent years, international institutions have promoted initiatives to address climate-related issues, and a Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) was established as an extension of the Carbon Disclosure Project and Global Reporting Initiative standards. This study examines how the air transport sector complies with the TCFD framework, which is considered a mechanism for translating scientific knowledge on climate change from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Based on environmental criteria, our sample accounts for more than 65% of the sector’s total emissions. We analyze the climate-related disclosures of twenty-four airlines for the period 2015–2018. Although climate reporting increased from 2015 to 2018 (before and after the framework was issued), our study documents that compliance with TCFD recommendations is poor, particularly regarding the core element of strategy. Our contribution is twofold. First, we note that the climate change mitigation and adaptation policies disclosed in the reports could help close the information gap sought by the companies’ stakeholders, but they are currently insufficient. Second, the normative pressures exerted by the TCFD align with the coercive pressures identified in some regions of the world and are promoting the development of climate reporting.

Climate Reporting Related to the TCFD Framework: An Exploration of the Air Transport Sector

In recent years, international institutions have promoted initiatives to address climate-related issues, and a Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) was established as an extension of the Carbon Disclosure Project and Global Reporting Initiative standards. This study examines how the air transport sector complies with the TCFD framework, which is considered a mechanism for translating scientific knowledge on climate change from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Based on environmental criteria, our sample accounts for more than 65% of the sector’s total emissions. We analyze the climate-related disclosures of twenty-four airlines for the period 2015–2018. Although climate reporting increased from 2015 to 2018 (before and after the framework was issued), our study documents that compliance with TCFD recommendations is poor, particularly regarding the core element of strategy. Our contribution is twofold. First, we note that the climate change mitigation and adaptation policies disclosed in the reports could help close the information gap sought by the companies’ stakeholders, but they are currently insufficient. Second, the normative pressures exerted by the TCFD align with the coercive pressures identified in some regions of the world and are promoting the development of climate reporting.

Accounting for Carbon Emission Allowances: An Empirical Analysis of Phase 3 of the EU ETS

This study examines the accounting treatment of carbon emission allowances for participants in the EU Emissions Trading System to determine whether the auction-based allocation system implemented in 2013 led to changes in accounting practices. This study builds on the work of Allini, Giner, and Caldarelli (2018, “Opening the Black Box of Accounting for Greenhouse Gas Emissions: The Different Views of Institutional Bodies and Firms.” Journal of Cleaner Production 172: 2195–2205.) by conducting a comparative study of how emission allowances are recorded in the 2011 and 2016 financial statements of a large sample of the system’s highest emitters operating across eight different industries. We also update the analysis of the role of local standards in shaping carbon accounting practices in a context characterized by the lack of specific IFRS guidance. We found that auctioning did not change accounting practices, as they remain “messy” and are often absent. The high level of non-disclosure and the widespread use of the “net method” conceal the burden of allowances from users of financial statements. Additionally, we report that firms’ carbon accounting practices are more aligned with their local standards when those standards allow for only a limited representation of the financial impact of allowances. Therefore, current accounting practices fall far short of enabling an adequate assessment of the financial impact and risks arising from carbon markets.

The Limits of Environmental Accounting Disclosure: Enforcement of Regulations, Standards, and Interpretive Strategies

The objective of this study is to provide insights into the perspectives of insiders on environmental accounting disclosures, a topic that has received relatively little attention. Drawing on insights from key managers, we provide information on company decisions and practices related to the data disclosed in annual reports. More specifically, we explore how regulatory guidance affects and shapes disclosure strategies.

The Dual Narrative of a Multi-Stakeholder Supply Chain: Between Performativity and Local Embedment

Organizations produce narratives by telling stories about their management and their history. The concept of organizational narrative can be used to refer to the result of a polyphony of individual discourses emanating from various actors within the organization (Rivière, 2006). The functions of discourse in management science are diverse (Jacquot and Point, 2000), and it is recognized that some may take on a “performative” character in the sense that they have the power to bring about what they describe (Austin, 1962; Boje, 1991, 1995). Particularly in management, theory is said to have the power to produce the reality it is supposed to explain, leading to self-fulfilling prophecies (Callon, 1998). In this context, one can consider that part of managerial practice consists of producing discourses that constitute the action in and of themselves, and that management tools are artifacts of this discourse. The invocation of tools that convey rationality within this discourse would thus make the decisions taken appear rational and legitimate (Cabantous and Gond 2012). Members of organizations, like actors in a movie, perform a storytelling act that shapes the organization’s narrative (Boje, 1991, 1995). These actors adapt to the performance criteria imposed on them and cobble together a seemingly satisfactory solution, with certain accounting practices potentially facilitating this compromise (Chenhall et al. 2013). The study of multiple discourses within organizations regarding the same decision should reveal the paradoxes between the rational recommendations that are implemented and the motivations and goals pursued by individuals.

2Whilethe study of the specific influence of actors’ social and institutional embeddedness is not new in the field of accounting and auditing (Hopwood and Miller, 1994; Chapman et al., 2009), to the best of our knowledge, it has not been explicitly explored in the context of optimizing a multi-actor supply chain (MASC). A supply chain comprises three subsystems: the procurement of materials and components, production management, and the physical distribution of products (Paché, 2006). This chain can involve multiple actors, that is, multiple organizations. A growing number of companies are adopting this form of interorganizational coordination, and the value of further studying managerial discourse in this context warrants a diversification of analytical perspectives. Indeed, a vast body of literature focused on the use of management control tools in CLMAs highlights that certain clients benefit from outsourcing and quasi-integrating their logistics service providers in order to reduce overall costs and increase the value created for the end customer (Cooper and Slagmulder, 2004; Shank and Govindarajan, 1995, Fabbe-Costes 2002). Supply chain optimization would thus be based on selecting providers with competitive advantages in functions outsourced by the anchor firm. This instrumental perspective provides the arguments that, in our research, fall under the “theory of rational choice” (Cabantous and Gond, 2012).

3Theresearch questionaddressed in this study concerns the role of cost discourse in legitimizing the interorganizational control exercised by the hub of the integrated supply chain under study. What arguments does this hub firm—acting as the principal—present to its headquarters to justify its selection of logistics service providers, particularly with regard to the allocation of costs among partners? What arguments do local executives and managers use to justify the established operating model, particularly with regard to the costs borne by each partner? This approach, which focuses on analyzing the narratives of multiple actors within a multi-company case study, aims to shed additional light on the literature concerning control in integrated supply chains.

4Thefirst section of this article presents the conceptual and theoretical framework of this research. The second section outlines the qualitative research methodology used. The third section presents the empirical results of the case study. The final section offers points for discussion.

Does the Level of Assurance in Environmental Disclosure Affect Investor Assessment? An Experimental Study

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to examine whether different levels of assurance statements for environmental disclosures affect investment decisions in the French context, where environmental assurance was voluntary until 2012 and has since become regulated and mandatory.

Design/Methodology/Approach

The authors conducted an experiment in a voluntary setting—which represents the vast majority of countries—using a sample of 108 financial analysts.

Findings

Environmental disclosure has a positive impact on investment recommendations. More surprisingly, financial analysts are less likely to issue recommendations in favor of a company that provides environmental disclosures with a low level of assurance than they are for a company with no assurance statement at all.

Research Limitations and Implications

When assurance is voluntary and there are at least two levels, the results of this study suggest that firms should avoid choosing the lowest level of assurance because it negatively affects investor decisions. From this perspective, firms should devote sufficient effort and resources to obtain at least Level 2 environmental disclosure assurance.

Practical implications

Given the recommendations made by financial analysts, the authors could expect that firms might prefer to opt for a higher level of assurance or to provide no assurance at all rather than minimize their financial efforts and resources by choosing a lower level of voluntary assurance regarding environmental disclosure.

Social implications

This study has implications for voluntary environmental disclosure assurance practices and can assist regulators in promoting higher standards in environmental assurance. It highlights the importance of raising the level of assurance required for environmental disclosure.

Originality/Value

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, very few studies have examined the additional effect of assurance on environmental disclosure in investors’ decisions. The experiment was conducted with financial analysts in the context of voluntary assurance.

How Does Media Attention on Agri-Food Issues Shape Corporate Social Reporting? The Case of Bonduelle

The purpose of this article is to examine the contribution of Media Agenda Setting theory to the study of corporate social reporting. A case study of Bonduelle was conducted over a 10-year period. A comparison of news articles addressing specific societal issues in the agri-food sector with Bonduelle’s corporate social responsibility reporting reveals, on the one hand, their overall convergence, but on the other hand, distinct communication strategies.

Historical Cost vs. Fair Value for Measuring Accounting Income? A Comparison of Arguments from Accounting Professionals

The Accounting Standards Authority (ANC), France’s accounting regulatory body, issued a call for research proposals in 2011 on the topic of “the definition and representation of performance.” The call states that “the objective is to provide conceptual foundations and arguments to enable the ANC to contribute more effectively to current and future international debates” (ANC 2011, p. 1). The central question raised in this call is that of accounting’s ability to satisfactorily represent an entity’s performance through its reported financial results. Using the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS)—which are said to be based on an approach that emphasizes fair value and gives primacy to the balance sheet—as a point of comparison, the French accounting regulator echoes “increasingly strong calls [that] favor representing the performance of economic activity over the medium and long term, by restoring the role of the income statement and recognizing in these financial statements only those results that can be considered definitively realized ” (ANC 2011, p. 1). Thus, broadly speaking, two approaches appear to be at odds: a dualistic approach (a single balance sheet showing both the value of assets and the results of a firm’s operations), which would be inseparable from the use of fair values, and a monistic approach (a single balance sheet using historical cost to obtain the correct result—namely, the realized result), which, conversely, would entail the exclusive use of historical values.

The fact that the accounting regulator has placed this issue on the agenda marks the revival of a debate that has remained unresolved for several decades and has taken various forms. Against the backdrop of the debate between the dualist and monist approaches, the question centers on the primary users of financial statements and the missions assigned to the accounting information system. For whom should financial statements be prepared first and foremost? For what purposes? And consequently, which measurement conventions should be adopted? What role does the concept of prudence play in this choice? Since these questions do not necessarily have single answers, it is important to bear in mind that accounting is a historically rooted social construct and that the model underlying a set of accounting standards can be neither timeless nor universal (Capron 2005, pp. 6–7). Thus, expressing the need to define the type of performance that accounting should reflect in order to associate measurement conventions with it amounts to expressing the need to set the objectives one wishes to assign to it within a given jurisdiction. However, according to Colasse (2006), it is the role of a conceptual framework to define the objectives assigned to accounting and to establish the set of means for achieving them. The question raised by the French regulator regarding the concept of performance and its measurement through financial statements is thus, in our view, implicitly linked to that of the conceptual accounting framework. Conceptually, therefore, the objectives assigned to the accounting system determine the type of performance it is designed to reflect, which in turn requires the use of appropriate measurement conventions. However, neither the French accounting standards nor the IFRS explicitly define the performance that accounting is intended to represent (Pierrot 2006) [1]According to the PCG, “accounting is an organizational system…. Consequently, a certain degree of interpretive latitude is possible. Since the adoption of IFRS in Europe, several authors have supported the idea that, by making greater use of fair values, the international standards de facto transform a company’s performance, as the measure and the concept are, by their very nature, intrinsically interdependent (Chiapello 2005; Richard 2005a; Colasse 2006; Giordano-Spring and Lacroix 2007). Thus, “the new measure of performance risks reflecting changes in the environment and financial markets just as much as it does what is attributable to the actual production of goods and services” (Chiapello 2005, p. 129) [2]To simplify the reasoning: one must first present a…. This perspective is said to meet the needs of “the user of the financial statements—the provider of capital,” who is the primary audience targeted by the international standard-setter. The French standard-setter’s call suggests that a trade-off between fair value and historical cost will determine the choice of a conceptual approach, and that by rejecting a fair-value model, the monist approach—or the “income statement” approach—will be reinstated. This two-pronged proposal warrants examination from the perspective of the professionals affected by these choices, namely the preparers and users of financial statements.

There are two main motivations behind this research. First, since the accounting regulator has become the spokesperson for a societal demand in favor of an approach that prioritizes realized results—excluding unrealized gains—it is important to identify the arguments drawn from professional practice that justify such a position. What arguments do professionals put forward in favor of such an approach? Second, given that accounting is a system institutionally embedded in society, this research aims to highlight the key expectations expressed by accounting professionals regarding the contribution of financial statements to the assessment of a company’s performance, thereby contributing to the questions raised by the French standard-setter. Looking ahead, should we rule out the systematic use of fair values in preparing a statement of performance? What type of performance is appropriate to present through financial statements? What are the desirable avenues for improvement? Following the lead of Richard (2009, p. 1146), who argues that “an intelligent strategy […] would consist of joining forces rather than organizing an accounting showdown,” we should here move beyond the simplistic opposition between IFRS and French accounting standards in order to find ways to move forward and make proposals.

The primary objective of our research—in response to the ANC’s call for proposals—is therefore to understand the arguments put forward by accounting professionals in favor of, or against, the inclusion of unrealized capital gains in the determination of accounting income. With this objective in mind, we begin by examining how asset valuation conventions are conceptually justified through normative accounting theories. We then consider the introduction of the concept of prudence, as well as the alignment of profit distribution with the calculation of net income, as key determinants of the empirical accounting models promoted by French and international accounting standards.

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 31 accounting professionals (producers and users of accounting and financial information—hereinafter referred to as “AFI”) working in for-profit organizations who are familiar with the PCG and IFRS standards. The interviews were subjected to a two-part content analysis: an automated lexical analysis using Alceste software and a manual thematic analysis. The main findings of this qualitative research reveal four distinct categories of discourse representative of the professional positions of the respondents. It appears, first, that similarities in language and concerns among certain professions transcend the sender/user divide within the ICF. Second, it appears that historical cost and fair value are not characteristics of opposing accounting models, but rather are complementary today from the perspective of the professionals interviewed.

This article makes two contributions. First, the qualitative study conducted here offers a unique insight into how preparers and users of financial statements perceive the value of using fair value in addition to continuing to apply the historical cost convention. Second, we make recommendations to the standard-setter in response to its call for proposals.

This article consists of four sections. Following this introduction, the first section outlines the two theoretical approaches that underpin the contrast highlighted by the French regulator. The second section discusses the methodological approach. The third section presents the results of the analysis of interviews conducted with financial professionals. Finally, the last section offers points for discussion and conclusions.

The Normativity and Legitimacy of CSR Disclosure: Evidence from France

In 2001, France became one of the few countries to require corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting through its Nouvelles Régulations Économiques #2001-420 (NRE). However, initial compliance with the statute was low, suggesting that the law lacked normativity. In this exploratory study, we seek to determine whether there is a trend toward normativity by examining changes in CSR disclosure from 2004 to 2010 for a sample of 81 publicly traded French firms. We measure both the extent and the quality of CSR disclosures, with the latter including a measure based on informational quality attributes as discussed by the International Accounting Standards Board, the Financial Accounting Standards Board, and the Global Reporting Initiative. We find significant increases in the space allocated to CSR disclosure, as well as some evidence of improved quality; however, the informational quality of the disclosures remains quite low, and fewer firms are including negative performance information in their reports. Finally, we document that differences in disclosure space and quality in 2004 appeared to be associated with legitimacy-based variables and that those relationships remain largely unchanged in 2010. As such, it appears that the NRE’s goals of increased transparency remain unmet.

This Special Issue stems from the 2nd French CSEAR (Center for Social and Environmental Accounting Research) Conference. The conference took place at the Institut des Sciences de l’Entreprise et du Management (ISEM) at the Université Montpellier 1 and was organized under the auspices of the AFC (French Accounting Association). This second CSEAR France conference welcomed nearly 90 participants from 12 different countries (Australia, Canada, Egypt, Finland, France, Italy, Japan, Portugal, Spain, Tunisia, the UK, and the USA). The event attracted 94 submissions, and 65 papers were presented, of which 25 were in French and 40 in English. Two key moments provided particularly interesting and relevant insights into the discussions: a plenary session by Professor Den Patten (Illinois State University, USA) and an editors’ panel featuring Professor Christine Cooper (University of Strathclyde, UK), Co-Editor-in-Chief of the journal hosting and featuring this Special Issue—*Critical Perspectives on Accounting*—and Professor Gérald Naro, Co-Editor-in-Chief of the French journal *Finance Contrôle Stratégie*.

This Special Issue includes seven articles that explore—from different perspectives—the “paths” that organizations take to develop a narrative aimed at the general public regarding their societal responsibilities.