دانلود رایگان ترجمه مقاله سیاسی سازی پلورالیستی، حسابداری و فناوری های آن (نشریه الزویر ۲۰۱۶) (ترجمه رایگان – برنزی ⭐️)
این مقاله انگلیسی ISI در نشریه الزویر در ۲۰ صفحه در سال ۲۰۱۶ منتشر شده و ترجمه آن ۱۷ صفحه میباشد. کیفیت ترجمه این مقاله رایگان – برنزی ⭐️ بوده و به صورت ناقص ترجمه شده است.
دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی + خرید ترجمه فارسی | |
عنوان فارسی مقاله: |
آگونیستی (ANT): سیاسی سازی پلورالیستی، حسابداری و فناوری های آن |
عنوان انگلیسی مقاله: |
ANT) agonistics: Pluralistic politicization of, and by, accounting and its technologies) |
|
مشخصات مقاله انگلیسی (PDF) | |
سال انتشار | ۲۰۱۶ |
تعداد صفحات مقاله انگلیسی | ۲۰ صفحه با فرمت pdf |
رشته های مرتبط با این مقاله | حسابداری |
گرایش های مرتبط با این مقاله | حسابداری مالی |
چاپ شده در مجله (ژورنال) | دیدگاه های انتقادی در حسابداری – Critical Perspectives on Accounting |
کلمات کلیدی | کثرت گرایی آگونیستی، نظریه عامل-شبکه، دموکراسی، حسابداری محاوره ای |
رفرنس | دارد ✓ |
کد محصول | F1434 |
نشریه | الزویر – Elsevier |
مشخصات و وضعیت ترجمه فارسی این مقاله | |
وضعیت ترجمه | انجام شده و آماده دانلود |
تعداد صفحات ترجمه تایپ شده با فرمت ورد با قابلیت ویرایش | ۱۷ صفحه (۲ صفحه رفرنس انگلیسی) با فونت ۱۴ B Nazanin |
ترجمه عناوین تصاویر | ترجمه شده است ✓ |
ترجمه متون داخل تصاویر | ترجمه نشده است ☓ |
درج تصاویر در فایل ترجمه | درج شده است ✓ |
کیفیت ترجمه | کیفیت ترجمه این مقاله متوسط میباشد |
توضیحات | چند صفحه اول این مقاله ترجمه شده است. |
فهرست مطالب |
۱-مقدمه |
بخشی از ترجمه |
چکیده |
بخشی از مقاله انگلیسی |
Abstract Agonistics has been put forth as a theoretical/conceptual basis for developing more democratic forms of accounting, such as dialogic accounting. However, an area of agonistics based dialogic accounting that requires further theorization is “the moment of decision”— how the democratic discussion and debate can maintain its pluralistic ethos while being focused in such a way as to ultimately lead to choosing and implementing an action. In developing a richer theorization of agonistic dialogic accounting, we engage actor–network theory, particularly the due process envisioned in Bruno Latour’s Politics of Nature (2004a). In doing so, we contribute to the critical accounting literature focusing on agonistic dialogic accounting by introducing Latour’s bicameral parliament and by refining Brown’s dialogic accounting principles. As a secondary contribution, our (ANT)agonistic framework responds to the calls for more democratic forms of governance in the context of accounting. We illustrate our theoretical framework with an example regarding the development of integrated reporting. ۱- Introduction In fundamental terms, we are concerned with the tension between pluralist democracy and political decision-making. More particularly, we develop a theoretical framework that addresses this issue in the context of applying and developing accounting and its technologies. Alternative accounting research has long recognized the myth of accounting as a neutral technology. The origins of this myth stem from accounting’s grounding in neoclassical economic “science”, and the presumptions of objectivity, rationality and utility maximization (e.g. Chua, 1986; Neimark & Tinker, 1986; Scapens, 1994; Tinker, Merino, & Neimark, 1982; see Fleischman, Funnel & Walker, 2013 for a review). Accounting does not only reflect a reality, it participates in the construction of that reality (Hines, 1988; Morgan, 1988), imposing an ideologically imbued set of values on a variety of actors. For example, accounting research (inter alia, Cooper and Sherer, 1984; Young, 2006) confirms the political nature of financial standard setting and reporting as they cater to the information needs of owners/shareholders and of management accounting tools privileging profit maximization over social, environmental and other non-financial goals (e.g. Nørreklit, 2000; Contrafatto & Burns, 2013). The exclusivity and partiality of the current hegemonic accounting regime has prompted calls for new accountings and accounting technologies that explicitly recognize the political nature of the extant processes ranging from standard setting to practice (for reviews, see e.g. Broadbent and Laughlin, 2013; Gray, Brennan, & Malpas, 2014). Following from the inherent subjectivity of any social science (Flyvbjerg, 2001), democratic processes and forms of governance have been called for to facilitate participatory dialogue and debate addressing the information needs of an expanded set of constituency groups (e.g., Brown, Dillard, & Hopper, 2015; Brown, 2009; Brown & Dillard, 2015; Boyce, 2000; Gray, 2002; O’Dwyer, 2005; Gray et al., 2014). In response to such calls, Bebbington et al. (2007) proposed dialogic accounting as a way of analyzing and improving the efficacy of social and environmental reporting, arguing that dialogics could provide a useful conceptual context for social and environmental accounting. Inspired by the radical work of Freire (1972, 1996),Bebbington et al. (2007) employ the term dialogic accounting to denote the involvement of multiple constituencies in developing accounting tools and techniques that create and communicate relevant and timely information, enabling all to participate in decision making and to engage in back and forth dialogue to establish common ground for addressing perceived problems in organizational conduct.1 Brown (2009) has since refocused dialogic accounting to emphasize its connections to political theories of democracy. In particular, she has suggested that Mouffe’s (1995, 2000, 2005) agonistic pluralism2 offers a promising theoretical foundation for dialogic accounting. Agonistic democracy, while celebrating the diversity of perspectives, emphasizes also ineradicable tensions and conflicts among various actors as well as the associated power dynamics. Brown’s (2009) suggestion has been followed in a number of papers discussing and critiquing agonistic democracy as a basis for dialogic accounting (see Blackburn, Brown, Dillard & Hooper, 2014; Brown, 2009; Brown & Dillard, 2013a, 2013b, 2014, 2015; Brown et al., 2015; Dillard & Brown, 2012; Dillard and Roslender, 2011; Dillard and Yuthas, 2013; Söderbaum and Brown, 2010; for a review see Dillard & Brown, 2015).. |
دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی + خرید ترجمه فارسی | |
عنوان فارسی مقاله: |
آگونیستی (ANT): سیاسی سازی پلورالیستی، حسابداری و فناوری های آن |
عنوان انگلیسی مقاله: |
ANT) agonistics: Pluralistic politicization of, and by, accounting and its technologies) |
|