Philosophy and sociology of science have devoted significant attention to processes which define what counts as valid scientific knowledge thus making the producers of such knowledge legitimate academics at the expense of those who do not conform to the cliché. In accounting, too, a vibrant debate has augmented our understanding of the conditions which make certain kinds of accounting knowledge more acceptable than others. The debate included, but was not limited to, issues such as, the institutional arrangements of accounting academic associations and doctoral training regimes and how these shape journals' editorial boards and the selection of published articles. This introduction aims to reopen that debate on the two realms of institutions and practices. In terms of institutional arrangements, we note relevant changes in the forces which contribute to define the quality and relevance of accounting knowledge. We discuss the institutional space towards which accounting departments and scholars are increasingly migrating, that is, business schools. These are often separated from universities and operate under pressures which are sometimes only marginally academic in nature. In terms of practices, we observe changes in academic training regimes which favour the proliferation of opportunistic behaviours. These changes call for a debate on the governance of accounting academia, if academia is to be a knowledge and ethical, and not simply rather a business enterprise.