Accountability as mourning: accounting for death in the time of COVID-19
Accountability as mourning: accounting for death in the time of COVID-19
In view of the increasing coronavirus death toll around the globe, centralized governments have been put under the spotlight to account for the deaths in the sovereign states they represent. But could it be a problem if we simply hold governments accountable for deaths by demanding accurate and transparent accounting of the total? Is there a better way to account for deaths in a pandemic without ignoring the pathos of loss and undermining our capacity to act spontaneously? I engage with these questions by looking at how the ethics/politics of death, as two sides of the same coin, affect our understanding of accountability in the time of COVID-19. I distinguish between two types of accountability that correspond to the two meanings of “account for”: “to explain the reason or the cause of something” and “to form part of a total” (Cambridge Dictionary1). The second type of accountability, informed by a Deleuzian ethics of death, is explored through an interpretative case study of accounting for the deaths in Wuhan, where the global pandemic began. It shows that accountability is essentially a freedom-enabled endeavour to account for deaths through our repetition in mourning, which forms part of honouring the dead, the dying and the living. This new configuration implies that a more radical form of accounting is needed in order to appreciate the value of life and be mindful of the socio-psychological costs associated with deaths.
Yu, Ai
0c59d45f-7d68-4e4b-88a4-1333fe30a49d
15 April 2021
Yu, Ai
0c59d45f-7d68-4e4b-88a4-1333fe30a49d
Yu, Ai
(2021)
Accountability as mourning: accounting for death in the time of COVID-19.
Accounting, Organizations and Society, 90, [101198].
(doi:10.1016/j.aos.2020.101198).
Abstract
In view of the increasing coronavirus death toll around the globe, centralized governments have been put under the spotlight to account for the deaths in the sovereign states they represent. But could it be a problem if we simply hold governments accountable for deaths by demanding accurate and transparent accounting of the total? Is there a better way to account for deaths in a pandemic without ignoring the pathos of loss and undermining our capacity to act spontaneously? I engage with these questions by looking at how the ethics/politics of death, as two sides of the same coin, affect our understanding of accountability in the time of COVID-19. I distinguish between two types of accountability that correspond to the two meanings of “account for”: “to explain the reason or the cause of something” and “to form part of a total” (Cambridge Dictionary1). The second type of accountability, informed by a Deleuzian ethics of death, is explored through an interpretative case study of accounting for the deaths in Wuhan, where the global pandemic began. It shows that accountability is essentially a freedom-enabled endeavour to account for deaths through our repetition in mourning, which forms part of honouring the dead, the dying and the living. This new configuration implies that a more radical form of accounting is needed in order to appreciate the value of life and be mindful of the socio-psychological costs associated with deaths.
This record has no associated files available for download.
More information
e-pub ahead of print date: 10 November 2020
Published date: 15 April 2021
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 456139
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/456139
ISSN: 0361-3682
PURE UUID: 4a30e9de-7cb9-42bc-82ee-e69f8aebea94
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 26 Apr 2022 15:02
Last modified: 16 Mar 2024 16:33
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Ai Yu
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics