Abstract:
In recent years there has been a marked resurgence of interest in the areas of corporate social responsibility
(CSR) and social and environmental accounting (SEA) among business, Governments, public policymakers,
investors, unions, environmentalists and others. While at one level there appears to be widespread
agreement that CSR and SEA are worthy topics of attention, different groups have very different
understandings of these fields. This article provides a meta-analysis of these differences by comparing three
broad approaches to SEA: the business case, stakeholder-accountability and critical theory approaches. It
also responds to concerns a number of commentators have expressed regarding the current dominance of
'business case' discourses. While not seeking to impose on readers a 'correct' way of viewing SEA and CSR,
exposure to competing perspectives is viewed as one way of challenging us to think more reflectively about
the frames available to us and their implications for the social realities we construct, embed or seek to
change.
