On the SEAJ Ethos: Mentorship and Peer Review

References

• Andreaus, M., J. Bebbington, K. Bewley, G. Michelon, R. Roberts, M. Rodrigue, and A. Romi. 2023. Remembering and celebrating Tom Ervin Schneider. Social & Environmental Accountability Journal 43, no. 3.
   Google Scholar
• Apostol, O. 2022. Accounting for anticorruption: Where are the social and environmental accounting scholars? Social and Environmental Accountability Journal 42, no. 3: 223–234.
   Google Scholar
• Arjaliès, D.-L., P. Chollet, P. Crifo, and N. Mottis. 2023. The motivations and practices of impact assessment in socially responsible investing: The French case and its implications for the accounting and impact investing communities. Social and Environmental Accountability Journal 43, no. 1: 1–29.
   Google Scholar
• Bebbington, J., and J. Unerman. 2007. Introducing and imagining a new literature. Social and Environmental Accountability Journal 27, no. 2: 4–7.
   Google Scholar
• Bebbington, J., and J. Unerman. 2011. The importance of peer-reviewed social and environmental accountability research in advancing sustainability. Social and Environmental Accountability Journal 31, no. 1: 1–6.
   Google Scholar
• Brander, M. 2022. There should be more normative research on how social and environmental accounting should be done. Social and Environmental Accountability Journal 42, no. 1-2: 11–17.
   Google Scholar
• Cahaya, F.R., N. Nursalim, and N. Dhirathiti. 2023. Expectations on labour-related CSR reporting: Voices from labour unions in Indonesia and Thailand. Social and Environmental Accountability Journal 43, no. 3.
   Google Scholar
• Corazza, L., D. Torchia, and D. Cottafava. 2023. Academics applying interventionist research to deal with wicked and complex societal problems. Social and Environmental Accountability Journal 43, no. 2: 105–122.
   Google Scholar
• Correa Ruiz, C., J.J. Déniz Mayor, N.D. Ruiz, and J. Dillard. 2023. The role of the social and environmental accounting community ‘post’ pandemic. Social and Environmental Accountability Journal 43, no. 1: 56–81.
   Google Scholar
• Elden, S. 2008. Editorial. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 26, no. 6: 951–953.
   Google Scholar
• Ellis, C., and J.A. Stimson. 2012. Ideology in America. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gendron, Y., and M. Rodrigue. 2021. On the centrality of peripheral research and the dangers of tight boundary gatekeeping. Critical Perspectives on Accounting 76: 102076.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hames, I. 2007. Peer review and manuscript management in scientific journals: Guidelines for good practice. Oxford: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Jeacle, I., and C. Carter. 2014. Creative spaces in interdisciplinary accounting research. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 27, no. 8: 1233–1240.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krlev, G., and A. Spicer. 2023. Reining in reviewer two: How to uphold epistemic respect in academia. Journal of Management Studies 60 (6): 1624–1632.
   Google Scholar
• Moerman, L., D. Murphy, S. van der Laan, and D. McGrath. 2023. Accounting and accountability in competing Worlds: An overview. Social and Environmental Accountability Journal 43, no. 2: 95–104.
   Google Scholar
• Moizer, P. 2009. Publishing in accounting journals: A fair game? Accounting, Organizations and Society 34, no. 2: 285–304.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murphy, D. 2023. Sociology of worth: Justifying an ambitious sustainability agenda at a university. Social and Environmental Accountability Journal 43, no. 2: 123–150.
   Google Scholar
• Okafor, O.N., M. Opara, C. Maier, and K. Kalu. 2023. Exploring the attitudes of CFOs towards carbon tax policy. Social and Environmental Accountability Journal 43(3).
   Google Scholar
• Peterson, D.A. 2020. Dear reviewer 2: Go F’ yourself. Social Science Quarterly 101, no. 4: 1648–1652.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raeni, R., I. Thomson, and A.C. Frandsen. 2022. Mobilising Islamic funds for climate actions: From transparency to traceability. Social and Environmental Accountability Journal 42, no. 1–2: 38–62.
   Google Scholar
• Rockström, J., W. Steffen, K. Noone, Å Persson, F.S. Chapin, E.F. Lambin, … J.A. Foley. 2009. A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 461: 472–475.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodrigue, M., and C. Dey. 2022. Reflecting on inspiration and orientation. Social and Environmental Accountability Journal 42, no. 3: 129–139.
   Google Scholar
• Rodrigue, M., and H. Tregidga. 2021. Editorial 2021: Reflections on vision and perseverance. Social and Environmental Accountability Journal 41, no. 3: 139–149.
   Google Scholar
• Sobkowiak, M., J. Senn, and H. Vollmer. 2023. Rethinking planetary boundaries: Accounting for ecological limits. Social & Environmental Accountability Journal 43, no. 3.
   Google Scholar
• Sopt, J. 2023. An American political ideological conflict and its revelations about accounting and the accounting profession. Social and Environmental Accountability Journal 43, no. 2: 151–179.
   Google Scholar
• Souder, L. 2011. The ethics of scholarly peer review: A review of the literature. Learned Publishing 24, no. 1: 55–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomson, I., and R. Charnock. 2022. Engaging with the IPCC on climate finance: A call to action and platform for social and environmental accounting scholars. Social and Environmental Accountability Journal 42, no. 1-2: 1–10.
   Google Scholar
• Umphress, E.E., F. Rink, C.P. Muir Zapata, and I. Hideg. 2022. From the editors—Insights on how we try to show empathy, respect, and inclusion in AMJ. Academy of Management Journal 65, no. 2: 363–370.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, R., and C. Noronha. 2023. Assessing the nexus between cross-border infrastructure projects and extinction accounting—From the belt and road initiative perspective. Social and Environmental Accountability Journal 43, no. 1: 30–55.
   Google Scholar