Accountin& Organizations and Society, Vol. 9, No. 3/4, pp 409-415, 1984 0361-3682/84 $3.00+ O0 Printed in Great Britain ~ 1984 Pergamon Press Ltd ACCOUNTING AND CORPORATE ACCOUNTABILITY: AN EXTENDED COMMENT* HEIN SCHREUDER Economic and Social Institute of the Free University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands and KAVASSERI V. RAMANATHAN University of Washington~ Seattle, U.SA Abstract This paper comments upon Benston's analysis (Accounting Organizations and Society, 1982, pp. 87- 105) of corporate social accounting and reportin~ It scrutinizes the mode of reasoning employed by Benston and pinpoints a number of deficiencies. Furthermore, it challenges the very framework of the analysis, questioning the appropriateness of the perspective adopted and revealing the normative issues involved. Our comments attempt to indicate that the value premises implicit in Benston's analysisare not the only ones possible or acceptable In a recent article in this journal, Benston (1982a) analyzes the rationale for and the techniques of corporate social accounting and reporting (CSAR). As may be expected of him, he approaches this task with a great deal of astute reasoning, knowledge of the literature, wit, and, we would add, debating skill. Perhaps it is equally no surprise to those familiar with his prior work that Benston's arguments are designed to make a forceful case against any attempts at CSAR in accounting research and practice. If his analysis is to be accepted, then so is his conclusion "...that the social responsibility of accountants can be expressed best by their forebearing from social responsibility account- ing" (p. 102). The purpose of this paper is to critically examine Benston's (1982a) analysis and thus to test the validity of his conclusions.1 Some of our comments will remain within the framework set up by Benston and thus provide an internal critique of his arguments. Other comments, however, will question the implicit normative foundations of his framework and will point toward the possibility of other normative posi- tions and, consequently, other analyses. For reasons stated below, it is very useful to first provide a summary of the main elements in Benston's arguments. First, it will make this paper self-contained and thus facilitate its read- ing. Next, it will reveal our understanding of his argument. If we have overlooked major points, * The first author wtshes to acknowledge the financialsupport of the Netherlands Organization for the Advancement of Pure Research We have benefited from the comments on a earlier draft of this paper from the participants in the Workshop on Accounting in a Changing Social and Political Environment at the European Institute for Advanced Studies in Management Similararguments have been made by Benston elsewhere (see e & Benston, 1981 and 1982b). Here we shall,however, only concentrate on the 1982a article 409