Rebutting PESTS: The five most common rationales against equity, diversity, and inclusion in Explorations of Accounting and Race.

Publication Type:
book chapters

Publication Year:
2024

Publication Bibliography:

This chapter explores the most common arguments against equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) initiatives intended to ameliorate discrimination more broadly but specifically in the context of anti-Black racism. The five major recurring rational are (1) public interest rationales (such as professional gatekeeping or legislation that facilitates systemic discrimination); (2) equity rationales (such as opposition by members of the same or another equity-seeking group to EDI initiatives and the creation of competition among equity-seeking groups); (3) supply-side rationales (the argument that there is no thriving pipeline of diverse candidates from equity-seeking groups); (4) temporal rationales (the idea that racism was worse in a different era); and (5) spatial rationales (the argument that racism is worse elsewhere)—encapsulated by the acronym PESTS.

Publication Reference Link:

Break down of publication data into fields

Publication Title:
Rebutting PESTS: The five most common rationales against equity, diversity, and inclusion in Explorations of Accounting and Race.

Author Name:
Akolisa Ufodike

Co-Author Name(s):

Conference Title:

Report Title:

Title of Paper:

Chapter Title:
Rebutting PESTS: The five most common rationales against equity, diversity, and inclusion.

Title of Journal:

Title of Book:
Explorations of Accounting and Race.

Conference Name:

City and Province/State/Country:

Editor's Name (if different from Author's Name):

Volume and Issue:

ISBN/Catalogue No:

Publisher:
Bingley: Emerald Publishing.

City:
New York

Page Number(s):

Publication Type:

Publication Category: