This special issue examines the evolving legal responsibilities and accountability frameworks that organizations must navigate as artificial intelligence technologies become increasingly sophisticated and integrated into business operations. The focus is on understanding corporate duty of care obligations, liability exposures, and the regulatory landscape that governs AI use in corporate settings.

Appel publié par Business Horizons. Voir l'appel sur le site de l'éditeur. Fiche de l'appel sur kerostig.

Timeline

• April 1, 2027: Submission deadline

Javier Cifuentes-Faura, University of Murcia

Governments worldwide are increasingly using economic tools such as trade policy, industrial policy, and strategic investments to advance geopolitical objectives, a phenomenon known as geoeconomic statecraft. However, research has largely focused on geopolitical and economic outcomes, leaving a significant gap in understanding how public organizations manage, finance, and evaluate these interventions.

This special issue addresses this gap by examining public management and public value implications of geoeconomic governance. As governments take on roles as investors, market participants, and coordinators of critical sectors, public organizations face challenges in balancing transparency with security, efficiency with resilience, and fiscal discipline with long-term strategic goals. The issue seeks contributions exploring how public value should be defined when economic, security, and societal objectives compete.

Appel publié par Public Money & Management. Lire l'appel complet sur le site de l'éditeur. Fiche de l'appel sur kerostig.

Potential topics

• Public management of geoeconomic strategies and strategic state interventions
• Public value creation and distribution in geoeconomic governance
• Public financial management of strategic economic interventions
• Accountability and performance management in geoeconomic and mission-oriented public policies
• Governance and management of strategic public investments
• Administrative capacity for managing geoeconomic risks and strategic industries
• Fiscal governance and accountability of industrial subsidies and strategic investments
• Transparency, oversight, and accountability in strategic public procurement
• Public sector governance of strategic infrastructure and critical sectors
• Measuring and evaluating public value in strategic economic interventions
• Public management of economic sanctions and export controls
• Governance of critical supply chains and strategic dependencies
• Accountability in sovereign wealth funds and state-owned enterprises
• Governance of national security-related public expenditure
• Investment screening and public sector accountability
• Multi-level governance of strategic economic policies
• Public–private partnerships in strategically important sectors
• Institutional and organizational responses to geopolitical and economic uncertainty
• Comparative public management approaches to geoeconomic governance

Timeline

• December 30, 2027: Manuscript deadline for research articles and new development pieces
• March 1, 2028: Manuscript deadline for debate pieces

Deborah Agostino, Politecnico di Milano

Enrico Bracci, University of Ferrara

Laurence Ferry, Durham University

Laura Maran, University of Trento

Jarmo Vakkuri, Tampere University

Public sector organisations face competing pressures between financial efficiency and public values such as equity, transparency, and sustainability. These tensions intensify in hybrid governance systems where public, private, and non-profit actors collaborate, and are amplified by digital transformation and emerging technologies. Accounting frameworks are pivotal in mediating or intensifying these conflicts, as calculative devices embed power structures that determine which values become dominant.

This special issue examines how accounting practices and calculative devices influence institutional conflicts between financial imperatives and democratic public values within hybrid governance systems. The call welcomes contributions exploring how calculative tools reshape accountability relations, redistribute authority, stabilise hybrid arrangements, and redefine legitimate accountability across different sectors and contexts.

Appel publié par Financial Accountability and Management. Voir l'appel sur le site de l'éditeur. Fiche de l'appel sur kerostig.

Potential topics

• Conceptualisations of institutional tensions and conflicts in accounting and accountability frameworks
• How hybrid forms of accountability emerge at the intersection of competing logics (financial, professional, social, political)
• The role of accounting, performance measurement, and classification systems in mediating or amplifying tensions
• How specific calculative tools (e.g. rankings, integrated reports, ESG scores, algorithms) enact and enforce particular logics and create new visibilities and invisibilities, thereby reconfiguring power relations
• How hybrid organisations devise novel accounting arrangements to navigate their multiple missions and what types of new hybrid accountabilities are thus constructed
• Negotiating accountability across professional, managerial, and citizen arenas in hybrid and collaborative settings
• The impact of sustainability, legitimacy, and digital transformation on accountability regimes
• Accountability in contexts of vulnerability, marginalization, or crisis
• Comparative perspectives on accountability conflicts across institutional fields (e.g. healthcare, prisons, education, cultural organisations, local government)
• Resilience and adaptability of accountability systems under conditions of disruption and uncertainty
• In-depth qualitative case studies across diverse institutional and national contexts
• Comparative and cross-country analyses of accountability practices
• Longitudinal studies exploring the evolution of accountability tensions and hybrid forms
• Critical and interpretive analyses of calculative practices and their performativity
• Historical and archival research on accountability regimes and their institutionalisation
• Studies examining the role of digital technologies and platforms in reshaping accountability
• Interdisciplinary approaches bridging accounting research with sociology, political science, organisational studies, and public administration

Timeline

• September 30, 2026: Submission deadline

Mariannunziata Liguori, Durham University

Noel Hyndman, Queen's University Belfast

Henry Midgley, Durham University

Tjerk Budding, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam

Laurence Ferry, Durham University

Patricia Gomes, Polytechnic University of Cávado and Ave

This special issue examines management control practices within public-service organisations, including government agencies, nonprofits, and charities. Control systems encompass cost control, budgeting, performance measurement, and accountability mechanisms. Public-service organisations face unique challenges compared to for-profit entities, including multiple objectives, diverse stakeholders, and social missions that must be evaluated and communicated to both external and internal audiences.

The special issue addresses a research gap regarding the current role and design of internal organisational controls in public services. It seeks contributions exploring how control systems function individually and collectively, how they shape dialogue among stakeholders, and how they influence the creation of public value. The editors welcome diverse methodological approaches and international comparative studies on management control, performance measurement frameworks, budgeting practices, and accountability dynamics in public-service contexts.

Appel publié par Financial Accountability and Management. Voir l'appel sur le site de l'éditeur. Fiche de l'appel sur kerostig.

Potential topics

• Different forms and roles of management-control practices
• The interaction between performance-measurement frameworks and controls
• Linkages between non-financial performance targets and financial allocations in the budget process
• The potential for (and consequences of) the over-use of non-financial performance targets and the embracing of 'simple' (or simplistic) overall performance frameworks
• The alignment of performance targets at various organisational and inter-organisational levels
• Studies of contexts where the use of judgement in decision making is (or should be) paramount, and the possible consequences when it is not
• How internal and external controls work together and their effects on public-service provision
• How performance-measurement frameworks can be constructed using the participation of different stakeholder groups
• Different forms of budgeting and their development over time
• The exploring of contexts where tight-central budgeting and looser more-flexible budgeting systems might be beneficial
• The historical evolution of internal control
• The role of boards, controllers and line managers in the context of different organisational budgeting and performance-management systems
• Inter-organisational controls and practices
• How service users (or beneficiaries) contribute to shaping control and accountability processes
• How nonprofit organisations contribute to the delivery of public services in a perspective of network governance

Timeline

• July 16, 2027: Submission deadline

Rebecca Warren, Northumbria University

Anne Steinhoff, University of Essex

Jeremy Morales, University of Bristol

Susan O'Leary, University of London

Ileana Steccolini, University of Essex

This special issue examines accountability as a mechanism for enabling social change and democratic participation across multiple levels of organization. Rather than reinforcing conventional accountability frameworks, the editors seek to reimagine how accountability practices can support collective, citizen-led initiatives and challenge existing power structures through dialogic, decolonial, feminist, and environmental approaches.

The call welcomes diverse submission formats beyond traditional research articles, including methodological reflections on participatory research, practice notes developed with activists and practitioners, and experimental visual presentations. Contributions should engage with transformative accountability as a situated, relational process that attends to lived experiences and examines transformation from local community practices to large-scale systemic change.

Appel publié par Financial Accountability and Management. Voir l'appel sur le site de l'éditeur. Fiche de l'appel sur kerostig.

Potential topics

• Conceptualising transformative accountability: beyond compliance with traditional practices and the critique of alternatives - what makes accountability transformative?
• Accountability beyond a principal-agent focus: mutual, collective and relational forms, where stakeholders have assumed accountability and created shared stewardship
• Engaging in citizens-led accountability, including, for example community organising and social movements such as campaigns, coalitions and assemblies as sites of transformative accountability
• Prefiguration and the struggle for transformation: How do alternative accountability practices engage in prefigurative practices and politics?
• Relational accountability as transformative: How do dialogic and participatory practices foster transformative accountability?
• Methodologies for engaged, messy research: including approaches to an ethics of care, positionality, co-production in research and navigating risk and harm in such research
• Explorations of how disclosures are interpreted, mobilised or re-appropriated by communities and movements
• Different levels and scales of transformation, from the individual to the systematic or structural and the mechanisms that enable transformative accountability at different levels
• Decolonial, feminist and environmental perspectives that challenge coloniality and neoliberal logics in accountability
• Pedagogies of transformative accountability and transformative learning
• Consequences and limits: when transformative accountability backfires or become performative
• Academic engagement: How can researchers move beyond critique to co-creation of transformative accountability practices? Explorations of the ways that we as academics can engage in impactful and transformative forms of accountability

Timeline

• July 30, 2027: Submission Deadline

Lisa Powell, Monash University

Eija Vinnari, Tampere University

Niina Ylönen, Tampere University

This special issue examines how accounting and accountability frameworks can address animal flourishing, extending beyond traditional focuses on organisational profitability and human welfare. Drawing on the Capabilities Approach, which emphasises innate freedoms and opportunities for creatures to exercise agency through movement, autonomy, sensory experience, and social relations, the issue explores how accounting might enable these conditions across different animal contexts: domesticated animals in human-controlled spaces, liminal animals occupying boundaries between wild and domestic, and wild animals in conservation settings.

Appel publié par Social and Environmental Accountability Journal. Lire l'appel complet sur le site de l'éditeur. Fiche de l'appel sur kerostig.

Potential topics

• How could accounting help shape conditions for animal flourishing?
• How could we account for or enable the flourishing of individual animals, including those with preferences diverging from species-specific capabilities?
• How would we account for animal flourishing and what forms would these accounts take?
• Where could we find existing examples of accounts of flourishing beyond sanctuaries for rescued animals?
• What opportunities exist for accounting and what does flourishing mean for animals across domestic, liminal, and wild spaces?
• How could multispecies justice inform alternative forms of accounting that recognise agricultural animals beyond inputs and production units?
• What accounting practices could address better justice for domesticated and liminal animals?
• To what extent is flourishing possible for domesticated animals in asymmetrical dependency relationships or liminal animals considered pests?
• How could accounting contribute to conservation efforts recognising individual wild animals alongside ecological collectives?
• How could accounting navigate ethical tensions when working towards simultaneous flourishing of individual animals and ecological collectives?
• What should organisations be accountable for in terms of animal flourishing?
• To what extent are organisations accountable for animal flourishing and how could they demonstrate this accountability?
• What collaborative opportunities exist between companies and other organisations regarding animal flourishing?
• How could accountability approaches resist the human/nature binary and enhance understanding of reciprocal human-nonhuman relations?
• What responsibilities do organisations have in supporting wild animal flourishing and what form could interventions take?

Timeline

• December 15, 2027: Manuscript submission deadline

Vicky Lambert, University of Dundee

Darren Jubb, University of Dundee

Lee Roberts, University of Dundee

Julie Bertz, Dublin City University

Maresa Reill, Durham University

This special issue explores how accounting and accountability can support the achievement of Sustainable Development Goal 11 on sustainable cities and communities. While SDG 11 addresses urban sustainability broadly, existing implementation has been criticised for its top-down orientation, often overlooking the capacity of local communities to inform behaviour change, generate local knowledge, and create participatory spaces. The special issue seeks to understand how accounting and accountability mechanisms can mobilise local capacities to advance a just transition toward SDG 11 that prioritises community voices and participation.

Appel publié par Social and Environmental Accountability Journal. Lire l'appel complet sur le site de l'éditeur. Fiche de l'appel sur kerostig.

Potential topics

• How diverse theoretical, methodological, and empirical approaches can enrich understanding of accounting and accountability's role in advancing sustainable cities and communities
• What accounting and accountability mechanisms are mobilised in cities to adapt SDG implementation to unique local contexts and ensure sustainable outcomes for diverse communities
• The role of accounting and accountability in co-productive and participative spaces which enhance community involvement in achieving sustainable outcomes
• The extent to which emancipatory accounting and accountability approaches can shift power from city elites to marginalised communities in pursuit of sustainable cities and communities
• How conflicts within cities impede sustainability goals achievement and whether accounting and accountability mechanisms can intervene to mediate or resolve such conflicts

Timeline

• December 31, 2026: Manuscript deadline

Kim Ceulemans, TBS Business School

Lotfi Karoui, ISC Paris

Agota Szabo, VU Amsterdam

Wafa Khlif, TBS Business School

Organizations increasingly rely on AI for consequential decisions across hiring, credit, and compliance. Yet governance frameworks designed for human-centered processes struggle to address distributed, opaque systems operating at unprecedented scale and speed. Traditional oversight mechanisms—boards, audit committees, regulators—were not built to govern technologies that challenge assumptions about accountability and responsibility.

This special issue examines how corporate governance frameworks can evolve to address AI's organizational implications. Rather than treating governance as purely technical, the issue emphasizes that governance shapes whose interests matter and how accountability is defined. The call seeks research exploring the mismatch between rapid, complex AI-enabled decision-making and slower institutional oversight.

Appel publié par Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences / Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l Administration. Lire l'appel complet sur le site de l'éditeur. Fiche de l'appel sur kerostig.

Potential topics

• Board oversight of AI, algorithmic risk, and digital infrastructures
• Fiduciary duty, corporate purpose, and stakeholder accountability in AI-intensive firms
• AI, sustainability, and the governance of social and environmental impacts
• Algorithmic management, the organization of labour, and workplace surveillance
• Audit, assurance, internal control, and the challenge of model opacity
• AI regulation, soft law, and the organizational translation of legal requirements
• Data governance, data ownership, and cross-border accountability
• Bias, discrimination, and issues related to classification, prediction, and fairness in AI systems
• Human oversight, contestability, and the limits of explainability
• AI in public administration, welfare systems, healthcare, policing, and education
• The role of AI in sensitive or high-impact contexts, including security, defense, and critical infrastructures
• Alternative and plural governance models for responsible AI
• Stakeholder participation, oversight, and engagement in AI governance

Timeline

• December 25, 2026: Submission deadline

Zoe Radnor, Aston University

David Walker, Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust

This special issue examines the intersection of populism and public management, inviting cross-disciplinary perspectives from law, social sciences, politics and public administration. The rise of populist movements worldwide, spanning both left and right of the political spectrum, raises fundamental questions about how public managers and administrators navigate their responsibilities when faced with politicians whose values may conflict with liberal democratic principles and established governance standards.

The issue seeks contributions that explore critical tensions in public administration under populism: whether public managers have ethical obligations to defend democratic institutions, how they balance political responsiveness with professional integrity, and whether existing accountability frameworks adequately address challenges posed by populist policies. Contributors are encouraged to consider international comparisons and examine how different governmental structures and civil service frameworks respond to populist pressures.

Appel publié par Public Money & Management. Lire l'appel complet sur le site de l'éditeur. Fiche de l'appel sur kerostig.

Potential topics

• Are we facing the limits of traditional thinking in public management? Do public managers have a 'moral personality' with value commitment to liberal democracy and/or state continuity?
• Does populism create a challenge for public managers to abide by good governance principles?
• Are public managers obliged to defend the state from attack, rhetorical or actual?
• Have public managers traditionally lacked 'voice' within the political–administrative interface and what challenges do they face with the rise of populism?
• Is there a problem facing public managers if they are becoming answerable to politicians with antagonistic value sets or who may break the law?
• How anachronistic are Weberian doctrines of 'responsiveness' in the face of populism?
• What is 'extremism'/populism and can it be defined ex ante?
• Do public managers observe/answer to a code that protects them against orders?
• How far do existing doctrines of accountability accommodate answerability for extremist policies?
• Do public managers have ethical commitments that equip them to resist political directives that might subvert constitutional order?
• What lessons could public managers learn from international and comparative perspectives on populism?
• Is the UK a special case with its uncodified constitutional system?

Timeline

• January 31, 2027: Submission deadline for research articles and new development pieces
• March 31, 2027: Submission deadline for debate pieces

Amalie Ringgaard, University College Cork

Maude Plante, Université Laval

Michelle Carr, University College Cork

Per Nikolaj Bukh, Aalborg University Business School

Valuations permeate nearly every facet of contemporary organisational and societal life. Whether explicitly or implicitly, actors across domains are constantly engaged in determining what is valuable, which values matter and how value is represented, produced and distributed. In this context, valuations refer to the situated and socially constructed processes through which entities, performances, people and practices are evaluated, ranked, compared and legitimised. Therefore, valuations influence not only decision-making and governance but also fundamental perceptions of what is worth preserving, changing or investing in.

Appel publié par Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. Lire l'appel complet sur le site de l'éditeur. Fiche de l'appel sur kerostig.

Potential topics

• The mobilisation of accounting valuation techniques (e.g., calculation, quantification, classification, ranking)
• Accounting's interaction with processes of commensuration, financialisation, capitalisation, assetisation or monetisation
• Accounting as a moral and performative instrument in the construction of (accountability for) value or worth
• Valuations undertaken by accounting and auditing professionals, and how these intersect with their roles and identities
• Tracking how valuation practices 'travel', cross-boundaries, along with their epistemic and ontological translations
• Accounting's role in shaping and contesting valuations in relation to socio-political objectives (e.g., ESG, diversity, well-being or care)
• Studies on valuation grammars, including reflections on the boundaries between accounting, valuation studies and economic sociology

Timeline

• August 6, 2026: Opening date for manuscripts submissions
• January 30, 2027: Closing date for manuscripts submission

Othmar M. Lehner, Hanken School of Economics

Hendrik Vollmer, Warwick Business School

Lies Bouten, IESEG School of Management

For more than three decades, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal has advanced a vision of accounting scholarship as a civic and moral project rather than a narrow technical domain. Its pages have persistently urged scholars to interrogate how accounting and auditing mediate the relationship between economic order, social justice, and ecological survival. Against this backdrop, the contemporary expansion of assurance into the sustainability arena reactivates core concerns about the politics of expertise, the plurality of value, and the search for a more equitable society through accountability. Yet the present moment also introduces qualitatively new conditions. Audit and assurance now intervene in domains of life, climate, and planetary risk that exceed traditional regimes of verification, raising questions not only of institutional adaptation but also new ethical dilemmas, epistemic challenges as well as questions of ontological design and pluriversal politics.

Appel publié par Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. Lire l'appel complet sur le site de l'éditeur. Fiche de l'appel sur kerostig.

Potential topics

• Planetary and biopolitical accountability: How assurance practices translate planetary limits, biodiversity loss, or climate risk into auditable form; how audit participates in the governance of life and the environment.
• Ethics and social justice in assurance: How the expanding remit of sustainability audit redefines the moral economy of accountability and whose voices and vulnerabilities are recognised or silenced.
• Decolonial, linguistic, and transnational translations: How assurance is localised across global South-North contexts, how linguistic mediation shapes the meaning of evidence and credibility, and how post-colonial epistemologies challenge Western audit rationalities.
• Practice-based and participatory methodologies: How experimental, ethnographic, or action-research designs can reveal the micro-politics of assurance work and the reflexive production of legitimacy.
• Audit Expectation Gaps and Sustainability Assurance: how sustainability engagements reshape traditional distinctions of reasonableness, standards, and performance, and generate new legitimacy struggles; how potential users of assurance are enrolled to shape new forms of audit and audit reporting and how their diverging demands are navigated.
• Boundary Objects, Hybridisation, and Translation Work: The role of concepts such as materiality, assurance levels, or sustainability risks as mediating devices between professional, organisational, and institutional domains; the blending of accounting and audit practice, the formation of accounting-sustainability hybrids.
• Key Audit Matters and Transparency Practices: how the articulation of KAMs and equivalent disclosures in sustainability reports transform perceptions of audit judgment, credibility, and public accountability, how audits designed to verify whether mission-led companies genuinely implement and monitor their stated sustainability objectives can transform perceptions of audit judgment, enhance credibility and public accountability, and foster meaningful change within the organization.
• Institutional Work: how professionals establish, fail to establish, promote or resist the institutionalisation of sustainability assurance; how sustainability assurance shapes and is itself shaped by the formation of new professional fields, standard-setting arenas, and regulatory infrastructures.
• Auditor Identities and Professional Jurisdictions: how audit firms and individual practitioners navigate competing logics of financial audit, sustainability consultancy, and broader public accountability; how regulatory reporting and assurance reforms reshape the prevailing professional habitus and virtues of independence, ethics and technical competence, and more broadly positions of professional accounting bodies and accreditation processes.
• Surveillance, Traceability, and Digitalization: The effects of platformisation, digital taxonomies, machine-readable accountings, algorithmic verification, and datafication on the epistemics of audit practice, professional authority, and client relationships.
• Public Interest, Value(s), and Materiality: How pluralistic notions of publicness, planetary concerns, and double materiality are constructed, resisted, or institutionalised in assurance engagements.
• Group Judgment and Cross-Professional Collaboration: How auditors coordinate with specialists, regulators, and clients in multi-professional and cross-organisational contexts, shaping assurance outcomes.
• Historical and Comparative Perspectives: How earlier transformations of financial auditing illuminate the present trajectory of sustainability assurance.

Timeline

• April 1, 2026: Closing date for abstract submission
• June 12, 2026: Online paper development workshop (hybrid) at Hanken School of Economics, Helsinki
• September 1, 2026: Opening date for manuscripts submissions
• December 1, 2026: Closing date for manuscripts submission