Search results

Biodiversity conservation is a major challenge globally. This global challenge exists due to the Scarcity of funds to preserve biodiversity. The need for more funds is the primary issue in managing biodiversity in this uncertain environment wherein different challenges emerge routinely. Thus, the main purpose of this study is to focus on the issues of biodiversity conservation and to examine alternative sources for biodiversity financing. Biodiversity is a multidimensional aspect covering several facets of the environment. It acts as a life support on earth and is a catalyst for human survival. However, biodiversity conservation is critical due to the Scarcity of biodiversity financing (Negacz, Petersson, Widerberg, Kok, & Pattberg, 2022). Thus, it is the need of the hour to overcome this issue by examining varied sources to generate more funds for preserving biodiversity. The study is based on a systematic review of past research wherein possible alternatives have been provided for generating necessary funds to mitigate biodiversity loss. It is revealed through past literature that though effort is made to combat the problem of funds, a very minimal effort is made at the individual level. More so framework lneeds to be not implemented globally. Therefore, the present study has proposed the practice of Green finance as an innovative financial mechanism to deal with biodiversity loss by emphasising environmental benefits. As laid down in this paper, a theoretical framework about biodiversity loss will encourage researchers to carry out various studies from varied outlooks to have a holistic approach towards this issue, hence ensuring environmental sustainability.

Argues that conserving biodiversity requires a combination of policy reform and appropriate economic instruments. Presents policy reforms which would remove the underlying causes of the loss of biodiversity and create incentives for the efficient use of biological resources. The economic instruments would further strengthen the incentives for behaviour which is supportive of the objectives of the convention on biological diversity and generate the additional financial resources required to fund investments in biodiversity.

Economic and market-based instruments are not “the” answer for nature-based solutions (NBS) in cities, but they are “part” of the answer. Regulatory instruments are needed when specific behaviors must be avoided. Voluntary instruments may be effective, especially at the local scale, but do not often guarantee the pursued performance result. Economic instruments, if well designed, implemented, and used, often have a comparative advantage in terms of efficiency and performance. They are also a source of funding for financing NBS. Too many policy experts and decision-makers are ready to propose public expenditure and subsidies, including for urban policies, and for policies in favor of natural capital, ecosystems services, and biodiversity. Yet, they too often forget to indicate where the revenues to finance the initiatives must come from, however excellent and ambitious they might be. Without using also economic instruments in the policy portfolio, many objectives for sustainable cities will be much more difficult to achieve, especially in the perspective of the Paris Agreement on climate change and of the UN Agenda 2030 with its Sustainable Development Goals.

This paper seeks to problematise “accounting for biodiversity” and to provide a framework for analysing and understanding the role of accounting in preserving and enhancing biodiversity on Planet Earth. The paper aims to raise awareness of the urgent need to address biodiversity loss and extinction and the need for corporations to discharge accountability for their part in the current biodiversity crisis by accounting for their biodiversity‐related strategies and policies. Such accounting is, it is believed, emancipatory and leads to engendering change in corporate behaviour and attitudes.

The authors reviewed the literature relating to biodiversity across a wide array of disciplines including anthropology, biodiversity, ecology, finance, philosophy, and of course, accounting, in order to build an image of the current state of biodiversity and the role which accounting can and “should” play in the future of biodiversity.

It is found that the problems underlying accounting for biodiversity fall into four broad categories: philosophical and scientific problems, accountability problems, technical accounting problems, and problems of accounting practice.

Through establishing a framework problematising biodiversity, a roadmap is laid out for researchers and practitioners to navigate a route for future research and policymaking in biodiversity accounting. It is concluded that an interdisciplinary approach to accounting for biodiversity is crucial to ensuring effective action on biodiversity and for accounting for biodiversity to achieve its emancipatory potential.

Although there is a wealth of sustainability reporting research, there is hardly any work exploring the role of accounting in preserving and enhancing biodiversity. There is no research exploring the current state of accounting for biodiversity. This paper summarises the current state of biodiversity using an interdisciplinary approach and introduces a series of papers devoted to the role of accounting in biodiversity accepted for this AAAJ special issue. The paper also provides a framework identifying the diverse problems associated with accounting for biodiversity.

The purpose of this article is to explore the current and historical state of accounting for biodiversity in Kalimantan (Borneo). It is also to evaluate various models for stand-alone biodiversity reporting in the context of the work undertaken in Kalimantan by the United Nations Collaborative Program on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation in Developing Countries (the REDD program). Economics and politics play a dominant role in hindering biodiversity conservation in the region. This article develops and presents an integrated biodiversity measuring, monitoring and reporting model with the aim of undermining the biodiversity damaging activities in the region. The model enables the provision of comprehensive information on biodiversity to support and inform stakeholders' decision-making and economic activities in relation to Kalimantan.

Kalimantan was selected as a case study site to identify the destruction of biodiversity caused by businesses driven by narrow and selfish economic motives. A number of measuring, monitoring and reporting models for biodiversity are analysed under Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD's) Kalimantan Forests and Climate Partnership's reporting framework.

Various social, political and economic impediments to the conservation of Kalimantan's biodiversity currently exist. A comprehensive and multifaceted framework of biodiversity reporting and disclosure needs to be implemented in order to promote accountability for Kalimantan's biodiversity. Such a framework is needed to ensure transparency in relation to the activities of stakeholders that impact biodiversity in the region. Biodiversity reporting can also promote the monitoring and control of the use of Kalimantan's land and labour by businesses. It can inform the economic decision-making at both the international and regional levels that needs to occur in order to protect and rehabilitate Kalimantan's biodiversity and biodiversity habitat.

In this article an integrated biodiversity measuring, monitoring and reporting model is presented. In addition to Kalimantan, this model can also be applied to biodiversity reporting in any economically developing region that requires international intervention, investment and guidance to ensure the protection of its biodiversity. The framework developed expands on the current REDD reporting framework for Kalimantan.

This is an original research paper.