To read this content please select one of the options below:

Dissensus and democratic accountability in a case of conflict

Matthew Russell Scobie (Department of Management, Marketing and Entrepreneurship, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand)
Markus J. Milne (Department of Accounting and Information Systems, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand)
Tyron Rakeiora Love (Department of Management and International Business, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand)

Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal

ISSN: 0951-3574

Article publication date: 5 May 2020

Issue publication date: 10 July 2020

954

Abstract

Purpose

This paper explores diverse practices of the giving and demanding of democratic accountability within a case of conflict around deep-sea petroleum exploration in Aotearoa New Zealand. These practices include submissions and consultations, partnership between Indigenous Peoples and a settler-colonial government and dissensus. These are theorised through the political thought of Jacques Rancière.

Design/methodology/approach

A single case study approach is employed that seeks to particularise and draws on interview, documentary and media materials.

Findings

By examining a case of conflict, the authors find that as opportunities for participation in democratic accountability processes are eroded, political dissensus emerges to demand parts in the accountability process. Dissensus creates counter forums within a wider understanding of democratic accountability. In this case, individuals and organisations move between police (where hierarchy counts those with a part) and politics (exercised when this hierarchy is disrupted by dissensus) to demand parts as police logics become more and less democratic. These parts are then utilised towards particular interests, but in this case to also create additional parts for those with none.

Originality/value

This study privileges demands for accountability through dissensus as fundamental to democratic accountability, rather than just account giving and receiving. That is, who is or who is not included – who has a stake or a part – is crucial in a broader understanding of democratic accountability. This provides democratic accountability with a radical potential for creating change. The study also advances thinking on democratic accountability by drawing from Indigenous perspectives and experiences in a settler-colonial context.

Keywords

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge funding and support from the Ngāi Tahu Research Centre, including Te Maire Tau and Virginia Irvine, The University of Canterbury Alumni Association and the UC Foundation. Special thanks go to the participants of this research project for their wisdom, time, enthusiasm and tireless commitment to the causes they believe in. This paper has also benefitted from conversations with many authors and interested individuals around the University of Canterbury and other parts of Aotearoa New Zealand since 2014 including Jesse Dillard, Annika Beelitz, Helen Tregidga, Stewart Smyth and Bill Lee. Finally, we sincerely thank the three anonymous reviewers whose feedback drastically improved the paper.

Citation

Scobie, M.R., Milne, M.J. and Love, T.R. (2020), "Dissensus and democratic accountability in a case of conflict", Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 33 No. 5, pp. 939-964. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-11-2016-2780

Publisher

:

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2020, Emerald Publishing Limited

Related articles