Rawls and accountability
Accounting and accountability theory, in its utilisation of Kantian and Rawlsian decision-making models, is firmly focused on the impacts of corporations on the rights of people. Often Rawls’ (1971) work is introduced by explaining how it develops Kant’s categorical imperative which we have referred to as the principles of justice which are to govern and guide a well-ordered society. The Kantian and Rawlsian focus on rights and justice is particularly appealing to accounting. This is so because the craft of accounting and accountability claims to be about the satisfaction of the rights of citizens, communities and relevant publics. Accounting researchers use Rawls’ decision-making model which is called the original position to determine the fairness and justice of particular actions. The original position is based on 12 crucial elements,’ with the veil of ignorance being the most prominent element (Rawls, 1971). The original position operates behind a veil of ignorance and can be thought of as an ethical device to determine the ethical content of an action (Gaa, 1988). Behind this veil, representative individuals who are motivated by the economic assumptions of rationality and self-interest choose principles of justice. Rawls developed the original position using this economic approach where representative individuals would choose and develop the principles of justice. These principles of justice are concerned with the rights of individuals and the plight of the least advantaged. These are:
- 1 Each person is to have an equal liberty to the most extensive total system of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar system of liberty for all.
- 2 Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both (a) to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged, consistent with the just saving principle, and, (b) attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity.
The accounting theorist, Williams (1987) uses the Rawlsian original position to extend the accounting focus. The focus becomes one on those user groups who are expected to give a just and fair account of their actions. This may involve providing information concerning the environmental and social impacts of corporations to these groups or parties as part of an accountability relationship (Williams, 1987, p. 170). The focus turns to the fairness of general-purpose financial reporting where information is assumed to be relevant to making and evaluating decisions about the allocation of scarce resources. In developing the moral dimension in critical accounting, Williams and Ravenscroft (2014) focus on the obligatory implications of the moral dimension.6 Moreover, Williams and Ravenscroft (2014) propose an inclusive democratic structure where accounting plays a pivotal role in reporting corporate impacts7 (Lehman, 1995, 1999, 2015).
