Metonyms and metaphor: the rhetorical redescription of public interest for the International Accounting Standards Board

David Carter, Rebecca Warren

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

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.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)280-305
Number of pages26
JournalCritical Policy Studies
Volume13
Issue number3
Early online date12 Feb 2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2019

Fingerprint

public interest
metaphor
legitimacy
political impact
floating
financial crisis
interpretation

Cite this

@article{09f1fd5bc8f24723b3b172dc835444ac,
title = "Metonyms and metaphor: the rhetorical redescription of public interest for the International Accounting Standards Board",
abstract = "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.",
keywords = "Public interest, International Accounting Standards Board, retroduction, rhetorical redescription, metonym, metaphor",
author = "David Carter and Rebecca Warren",
year = "2019",
doi = "10.1080/19460171.2018.1437460",
language = "English",
volume = "13",
pages = "280--305",
journal = "Critical Policy Studies",
issn = "1946-0171",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "3",

}

Metonyms and metaphor: the rhetorical redescription of public interest for the International Accounting Standards Board. / Carter, David; Warren, Rebecca.

In: Critical Policy Studies, Vol. 13, No. 3, 2019, p. 280-305.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Metonyms and metaphor: the rhetorical redescription of public interest for the International Accounting Standards Board

AU - Carter, David

AU - Warren, Rebecca

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

VL - 13

SP - 280

EP - 305

JO - Critical Policy Studies

JF - Critical Policy Studies

SN - 1946-0171

IS - 3

ER -