Carbon tax: Challenging neoliberal solutions to climate change

Andrew, Jane; Kaidonis, Mary A; Andrew, Brian

doi:10.1016/j.cpa.2010.03.009

Cited by 64 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As we discuss in Section 4, the 'incentives' in some PES schemes have integrated social exchanges that build relationships and reputation between actors (De Koning et al, 2011), cultural norms and values that proscribe relationships to socionatural systems (Mahanty et al, 2012), and reflect historical trajectories of state actors that define contextual limits of how PES is implemented and understood (McElwee, 2012). We also find that characterizing all incentives as neoliberal leads to impasses in classifying and recognizing myriad human responses to a range of structured interventions, from taxes to markets, for which there is very little agreement about the degree to which such interventions can be called neoliberal (Andrew et al, 2010;Harmes, 2012). For example, is any action by a state to redirect human behaviour by transferring resources "to align individual and/or collective land use decisions with the social interest" (Muradian et al, 2010(Muradian et al, :1205 neoliberal?…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 75%

Silencing Agency in Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) by Essentializing a Neoliberal ‘Monster’ Into Being: A Response to Fletcher & Büscher's ‘PES Conceit’

Hecken

Kolinjivadi

Windey

et al. 2018

Ecological Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A B S T R A C TIn this commentary we respond to Fletcher and Büscher's (2017) recent article in this journal on Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) as neoliberal 'conceit'. The authors claim that focusing attention on the micro-politics of PES design and implementation fails to expose an underlying neoliberal governmentality, and therefore only reinforces neoliberal capitalism as both the problem and solution of ecological crises. In response, we argue that a focus on the actions of local actors is key to understanding how and why such governmentality fails or succeeds in performing as theorized. Grand generalizations fixated on a particular hegemonic and neoliberal PES ontology overlook how actors intertwine theory and practice in ways which cannot be explained by a dominant structural theory. Such generalizations risk obscuring the complexity and situational history, practice and scale of the processes involved. Rather than relegating variegated and hybrid forms of what actually emerges from PES interventions as neoliberal conceit, we argue that an actor-oriented, 'weak theory' approach permits PES praxis to inform knowledge generation. This would open up a more inclusive and politically engaging space for thinking about and realizing political change.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 75%

Silencing Agency in Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) by Essentializing a Neoliberal ‘Monster’ Into Being: A Response to Fletcher & Büscher's ‘PES Conceit’

Hecken

Kolinjivadi

Windey

et al. 2018

Ecological Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…. .The three big advantages of a carbon tax over an ETS are that the tax would be more transparent and visible (and thus harder to evade or avoid), the revenue would flow to an accountable government which would be able to use the extra funds for a socially useful purpose such as providing access to 'green' energy for low-income households and to fund green energy sources (Andrew et al, 2010). The revenue under an ETS would flow to a range of market participants and the benefits-that is profits on trading carbon permits need not translate into carbon pollution reduction.…”

Section: Descriptions And/or Evaluations Of Social and Environmental mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The insights reflected in Andrew et al (2010) have ongoing relevance throughout the world as various jurisdictions consider the merits of ETS. In other related research, another paper in CPA, namely Mete, Dick, and Moerman (2010), undertook discourse analysis of key public documents to analyse the meanings attributed to terms such as 'carbon permits'.…”

Section: Descriptions And/or Evaluations Of Social and Environmental mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other areas of SEA research within CPA Apart from the topics of research already discussed above, there were a number of other issues/questions addressed within the SEA research published within CPA. In the area of government initiatives to address climate change we can consider Andrew, Kaidonis, and Andrew (2010). They address issues associated with the use of either emission trading schemes or carbon taxes.…”

Section: Descriptions And/or Evaluations Of Social and Environmental mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Twenty five years of social and environmental accounting research within Critical Perspectives of Accounting : Hits, misses and ways forward

Deegan

2017

Critical Perspectives on Accounting

222

195

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…On the other hand there were numerous articles with no journal self-references at all. AAAJ had seven (Boedker, 2010;Cristofoli et al, 2010;Czarniawska, 2010;Mc Watters and Lemarchand, 2010;Orij, 2010;Peng and Bewley, 2010), AOS had four (Bol and Moers, 2010;Gibbins et al, 2010;Koch and Schmidt, 2010;Norman et al, 2010) and CPA had eight (Andrew et al, 2010;Bessire and Onnée, 2010;Bettner et al, 2010;Harney, 2010;Hikaka and Prebble, 2010;Iyoha and Oyerinde, 2010;James, 2010b;Sathe, 2010) showing that journal self-referencing is not a prerequisite for publication.…”

Section: Referencingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Construction of research articles in the leading interdisciplinary accounting journals

Villiers

Dumay

2013

Acc Auditing Accountability J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To examine the construction of articles published in three highly ranked interdisciplinary accounting journals. Design/methodology/approach: We base our analysis on articles published during 2010 in Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal (AAAJ), Accounting, Organizations and Society (AOS) and Critical Perspectives on Accounting (CPA). In doing so, we develop a framework and examine characteristics of the published articles, including the prose. Findings: Based on the construction of accounting academic articles in the highly ranked interdisciplinary journals, we introduce a simplified concept of the five distinct major parts of an article. We also make some taken-for-granted aspects of article construction explicit and we conclude that alternatives, if used effectively, can add to the quality of an article. Finally, we conclude with a discussion of, and a reflection on, how the taken-for-granted rules of academic publishing can be challenged. Research limitations/implications:This article is limited by the authors' own analysis and interpretations of AAAJ, AOS and CPA articles published during 2010. Originality/value: As far as can be ascertained, we are the first to examine the construction of research articles published in high ranking interdisciplinary accounting journals. The paper can assist emerging scholars in the process of planning and writing their own articles. For seasoned researchers, our insights may serve to reaffirm or help further develop their approach. The paper also contributes to the ongoing debate around the pressure to publish, the measurement of publications, and the difficulties of getting published.Key words: Academic publishing; writing; research; article attributes Acknowledgements:We would like to thank the many people who have given us feedback during the development of this paper. Foremost we would like to thank James Guthrie for his support and insightful critique on several versions of this paper. Also, thanks to Lee Parker for his support and encouragement during the review process along with the insights from our two anonymous reviewers who have contributed to improving the quality of the paper in among other ways by suggesting additional avenues of investigation. Thanks also to Helen Sword (University of Auckland) and Imad Moosa (RMIT University) for their comments on early drafts of the paper. Also thanks to the comments, observations and encouragement from the participants of numerous workshops and seminars where we have been invited to present our work, even though it was unpublished and still in development. The list includes,

show abstract

Carbon tax: Challenging neoliberal solutions to climate change

Cited by 64 publications

References 10 publications

Silencing Agency in Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) by Essentializing a Neoliberal ‘Monster’ Into Being: A Response to Fletcher & Büscher's ‘PES Conceit’

Silencing Agency in Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) by Essentializing a Neoliberal ‘Monster’ Into Being: A Response to Fletcher & Büscher's ‘PES Conceit’

Twenty five years of social and environmental accounting research within Critical Perspectives of Accounting : Hits, misses and ways forward

Construction of research articles in the leading interdisciplinary accounting journals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About