TY - JOUR
T1 - Metonyms and metaphor: the rhetorical redescription of public interest for the International Accounting Standards Board
AU - Carter, David
AU - Warren, Rebecca
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018, © 2018 Institute of Local Government Studies, University of Birmingham.
Copyright:
Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2019
Y1 - 2019
N2 - We focus on what invoking the public interest ‘does’ for the International Accounting Standards Board [IASB], as a transnational, private regulator. Our study focuses on a snapshot from 2010 to 2015 post the global financial crisis, as the IASB and the International Financial Reporting Standards Foundation suffered a legitimacy crisis. We are interested in how the IASB restated the meaning of the public interest and the impact of invoking different conceptions of the public interest. With respect to metonyms, this article employs rhetorical redescription to identify the implications of defining the public interest as procedural due process, substantive due process and outcome-focused. At the same time, through careful interpretation, the article examines the rival metaphors attached to meanings of the public interest. By examining what invoking the public interest ‘does’, our ontological analysis illustrates how these redescriptions constituted a rhetorical strategy for organizational legitimacy, how the meanings operated as a form of ‘ideological cover’, and the political impact of constructing the ‘public interest’ as a floating signifier. We argue that these strategies operated to reinstitute the technocratic power of the IASB.
AB - We focus on what invoking the public interest ‘does’ for the International Accounting Standards Board [IASB], as a transnational, private regulator. Our study focuses on a snapshot from 2010 to 2015 post the global financial crisis, as the IASB and the International Financial Reporting Standards Foundation suffered a legitimacy crisis. We are interested in how the IASB restated the meaning of the public interest and the impact of invoking different conceptions of the public interest. With respect to metonyms, this article employs rhetorical redescription to identify the implications of defining the public interest as procedural due process, substantive due process and outcome-focused. At the same time, through careful interpretation, the article examines the rival metaphors attached to meanings of the public interest. By examining what invoking the public interest ‘does’, our ontological analysis illustrates how these redescriptions constituted a rhetorical strategy for organizational legitimacy, how the meanings operated as a form of ‘ideological cover’, and the political impact of constructing the ‘public interest’ as a floating signifier. We argue that these strategies operated to reinstitute the technocratic power of the IASB.
KW - Public interest
KW - International Accounting Standards Board
KW - retroduction
KW - rhetorical redescription
KW - metonym
KW - metaphor
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85041909534&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.mendeley.com/research/metonyms-metaphor-rhetorical-redescription-public-interest-international-accounting-standards-board
U2 - 10.1080/19460171.2018.1437460
DO - 10.1080/19460171.2018.1437460
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85041909534
SN - 1946-0171
VL - 13
SP - 280
EP - 305
JO - Critical Policy Studies
JF - Critical Policy Studies
IS - 3
ER -