Accounting, Soci(et)al Risks, and Public Reason: Governmental Risk Discourses about the ILVA Steel Plant in Taranto (Italy)

The case of the ILVA steel plant in Taranto represents an example of contrasting, incommensurable sustainability issues; explored in terms of “social” and “societal” risks [Asenova et al., 2013 and 2015] . Given its size, the amount of pollution that the factory has produced, as well as evidence of high cancer rates in the nearest districts, the case has received significant attention from EU institutions, which has been echoed worldwide. In July 2012, the Italian Judiciary halted activity in the steel plant. Four months after, the Italian Government declared the steel plant site as a “Strategic National Interest Site”, and allowed the company to restart its activity. Drawing on governmentality [Foucault, 1991], the paper aims to explore the role of accounting - here broadly intended as calculative practices [Miller, 2001] – in moulding ministerial discourse to support decisions when the governance of contrasting risks is needed to safeguard public interest. Supported by discourse analysis of governmental speech, the research shows that the Italian Government based its decision on various experts’ risk appraisals: accounting shaped governmental discourse by giving more visibility and relevance to “social” risks (i.e. unemployment, economic development, productivity and competitiveness risks), while silencing “societal” ones (i.e. environmental and health risks). Focusing on a case of incommensurable contrasting issues, the findings contribute to show that accounting concurrently plays a significant role in government decisions legitimizing the business continuity through the creation of a specific risk discourse.