From intellectual emancipation to radical thought: Genealogy of a critical paradigm
Abstract
Critical accounting thinking emerges as an imperative to rethink accounting beyond its technical function, recognizing it as a practice with profound social, ethical, and political implications. This paradigm questions the supposed neutrality of accounting language, highlighting that every decision and omission has material and symbolic consequences that affect individuals, organizations, and social structures. Thus, the role of the accountant must transcend the technical realm to become an active agent of change committed to social justice and sustainability. However, transformation cannot be limited to destructive criticism; a strategic reconstruction is essential to translate theory into effective practice, as proposed by "middle-of-the-road accounting," which balances radical critique with institutional viability. Despite persistent resistance within educational and institutional systems, which maintain traditional and technocratic models, the consolidation of critical academic and professional communities is essential to moving toward a more ethical and committed accounting. The plurality of approaches within critical thinking—environmental, feminist, decolonial, Marxist—does not fragment but enriches the discipline, paving the way for a diverse and contextualized epistemology that questions profitability and focuses on equity, human dignity, and care for the planet. In short, accounting must be embraced as a complex social and political practice that demands a shift in consciousness to address contemporary challenges, contributing to building more just and sustainable organizations and societies.
Downloads
Metrics
References
Ahrens, T., & Chapman, C. S. (2004). Accounting for flexibility and efficiency: A field study of management control systems in a restaurant chain. Contemporary Accounting Research, 21(2), 271–301.
Burchell, S., Clubb, C., Hopwood, A. G., Hughes, J., & Nahapiet, J. (1980). The roles of accounting in organizations and society. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 5(1), 5–27.
Chua, W. F. (1986). Radical developments in accounting thought. The Accounting Review, 61(4), 601–632.
Cooper, C. (1992). The non and nom of accounting for (m)other nature. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 5(3), 16–39.
Covaleski, M. A., & Dirsmith, M. W. (1988). The use of budgetary symbols in the political arena: An historically informed field study. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 13(1), 1–24.
Dillard, J. F., Rigsby, J. T., & Goodman, C. (2004). The making and remaking of organization context: Duality and the institutionalization process. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 17(4), 506–542.
Englund, H., & Gerdin, J. (2014). Structuration theory in accounting research: Applications and applicability. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 25(2), 162–180.
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. University of California Press.
Hopwood, A. G. (1983). On trying to study accounting in the contexts in which it operates. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 8(2–3), 287–305.
Laughlin, R. (2014). Tony Lowe and the interdisciplinary and critical perspective on accounting project: Reflections on the contributions of a unique scholar. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 27(5), 760–776.
Lowe, E. A., & Tinker, A. M. (1977). Siting the accounting problematic: Towards an intellectual emancipation of accounting. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 4(3), 263–276.
Miller, P., & O’Leary, T. (1987). Accounting and the construction of the governable person. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 12(3), 235–265.
Roberts, J. (1991). The possibilities of accountability. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 16(4), 355–368.
Townley, B. (1994). Reframing human resource management: Power, ethics and the subject at work. Sage.
