We are now entering an era of ‘subsequent’ crises. The interconnectedness of international economic, financial, societal and ecological systems has reached its apogee, as individual, organizational or national disasters, increasingly hit our global world.
States’ resilience and preparedness were never as important as today. The recognition by both practitioners and academics of being ready to deal with natural or biological risks (Shimizu & Fujimura, 2010; Grossi et al., 2020; Rinaldi, 2022; Sargiacomo, 2015), so-called ‘disasters of non-human origin’, has recently been stressing the importance of accounting, auditing and accountability during and after disasters. Yet, we know very little about how the most powerful democracies and international organizations respond to human-made disasters (for example socio-technical disasters related to plant, factory, transport, ‘public space’ or production failures, and warfare disasters related to inter-state and international conflicts) and why they select governance mechanisms to address these crises (Shaluf, 2007). The recent tragedy of the war in Ukraine showed the paradoxical nature of such responses (Grossi and Vakulenko, 2022), allowing us to learn more about the role of international institutions in responding to conflicts. Moreover, we dramatically lack the ‘from-the-inside’ perspective—how a government can financially sustain itself when responding to a disaster spreading on its territory which is presenting an existential danger to the country. More research is urgently needed on the diversity of responses, which could prevent or mitigate the causalities of wars that lead to subsequent disasters—economic downturns, food shortages, ecological catastrophes, forced immigration, refugees, asylum seekers or a global deficit of natural resources.
As the war escalates on the European continent, Public Money & Management (PMM) has decided to publish a theme on responding to human-made disasters. The theme will reflect on the role, choices of different strategies and responses made by international organizations and leading democracies when facing human-made emergencies and subsequent disasters. These discussions will enrich knowledge on crisis management and resilience from an international perspective, allowing academics, practitioners, and politicians to enhance their understanding of emergency responses to human-made and subsequent disasters—to learn from the past and inform decisions in this new era of crises.
We welcome theoretical and empirical contributions focusing on accounting, auditing and accountability practices emerging during and after human-made disasters from different geographical contexts and disciplines. For example, we are looking for articles that seek to find answers to the following questions related to human-made and subsequent disasters:
- Accounting and reactions to emergency and uncertainty in unstable environments.
- Role of international organizations, governmental and non-governmental organizations in managing huge disasters. Is a new co-ordinating body needed?
- Financial mechanisms and governance strategies used by international financial institutions.
- Potential challenges and risks (for example corruption) in accounting, auditing and accountability of the funds used for supporting the states involved both directly and indirectly in human-made disasters.
- National emergency budgeting, accounting and auditing practices during and after disasters.
- Wider sustainability issues, not only financial but also social, human-centric and environmental, connected to the UN’s sustainable development goals.
- The use and role of digital technologies and social media.
