Search results

The purpose of this paper is to suggest a practical means of incorporating ecological capital into the framework of business entities. Investors and shareholders need to be informed of the viability and sustainability of their investments. Ecological (natural) capital risks are becoming more significant. Exposure to material risk from primary industry is a significant factor for primary processing, pharmaceutical, textile and the financial industry. A means of assessing the changes to ecological capital assets and their effect on inflows and outflows of economic benefit is important information for stakeholder communication.

This paper synthesises a body of literature from accounting, ecological economics, ecosystem services, modelling, agriculture and ecology to propose a way to fill current gaps in the capability to account for ecological capital. It develops the idea of the ecological balance sheet (EBS) to enable application of familiar methods of managing built and financial capital to management of ecological assets (ecosystems that provide goods and services).

The EBS is possible, practical and useful. A form of double-entry bookkeeping can be developed to allow accrual accounting principles to be applied to these assets. By using an EBS, an entity can improve its capability to increase inflows and avoid future outflows of economic benefit.

Although major efforts are under-way around the world to improve business impact on natural resources, these efforts have been unable to satisfactorily help individual businesses elucidate the practical economic and competitive advantages conferred by investment in ecological capital. This work provides a way for businesses to learn about what the impact of changes to ecological assets has on inflows and outflows of economic benefit to their enterprise and how to invest in ecological capital to reduce their enterprise’s material risk and create competitive advantage.

No one has synthesised knowledge and practice across these disciplines into a practical approach. This approach is the first demonstration of how ecological assets can be managed in the same way as built capital by using proven practices of accounting.

A conceptual and analytical approach is presented to reconcile weak and strong sustainability. It involves a reconsideration of the conception of total capital from an ecological‐economic system perspective. In particular, natural capital is classified into non‐renewable resources, renewable resources that are harvested, and those that are not used in production. Strong sustainability is defined in terms of constant environmental quality. Weak sustainability is characterised by non‐decreasing value of aggregate income and environmental quality, and formalised in terms of a “preference‐based social value function”. Ecosystem resilience and basic human needs are introduced as minimum sustainability requirements, and a “sustainability‐based social value function” is proposed, which is sensitive to potentially irreversible changes at the boundaries of the restricted opportunity space. It implies higher values associated to the trade‐offs between income and the environment than the preference‐based function, and the fact that sustainable development is only feasible if both minimum criteria are fulfilled.

Purpose – This chapter responds to the re-centering of agriculture and food in official forums and public discourse in the current crisis context.

Design – It re-examines the assumptions of the agrarian question through the lens of food regime analysis.

Findings – By examining these developments, particularly the recommendations of the IAASTD report, it is clear there is growing interest in the multifunctional conception of farming that is attentive to ecological and social sustainability.

Research implications – This rethinking is symptomatic of a transformation of the agrarian question: moving away from a concern with the political trajectory of capital in agriculture and the process of depeasantization, towards a concern with ‘peasant’ renewal. This registers an ontological shift towards an agro-ecological paradigm in which an ecologically driven conception of ‘value’ addressing social reproduction rather than capital accumulation is emerging.

Practical implications – New research on “repeasantization” undergirds this claim, and complements the global mobilization of small farmers around the project of food sovereignty. Practically, food sovereignty projects mean growing land rights claims and adoption of diverse forms of biological (rather than chemical) farming.

Social implications – This implies stabilizing rural populations and the possibility of health food and environments.

Value – Intellectually, such developments call for an analytical shift (in food regime and other analyses) towards values other than those of price and productivism in assessing the contribution of agriculture to human survival in a climate-challenged future.

The continuous increase in the negative gap between biocapacity and ecological footprint has remained globally persistent since early 1970. The purpose of this study is to examine the effect of foreign capital, domestic capital formation, institutional quality and democracy on ecological footprint within a global panel of 101 countries from 1995 to 2017.

The empirical procedure is based on data mix. To this end, this study uses a battery of testing and estimation approaches both conventional (no cross-sectional dependence [CD]) and novel approaches (accounting for CD). Among the battery of estimation techniques used, there are the dynamic ordinary least square, the mean group, the common correlation effect mean group technique, the augmented mean group technique, the Pooled mean group and the dynamic common correlation effect technique with the desire to obtain outcomes robust to heteroskedasticity, endogeneity, cross-correlation and CD among others.

The estimated outcomes indicate that using different estimators’ domestic capital formation consistently degrades the environment through an increase in ecological footprint, while institutional quality consistently enhances the quality of the environment. Further, the outcome reveals that, though foreign capital inflow degrades the environment, the time period is essential, as it shows a short-run environmental improvement and a long-run environmental degradation. Democratic activities show a mixed outcome with short-run degrading effect and a long-run enhancement effect on environmental quality.

Green investment should be the policy target of all economies, and these policies should be adopted to target both domestic capital and foreign capital alike. Second, the adoption of democratic practices will produce good leaders that will not just design short-term policies to blindfold the populace temporary but those that will produce long-term-oriented practices that will better and enhance the quality of the environment through the reduction of the global footprint. Equally, enhancing the institutional framework like respect for the rule of law in matters of abatement should be encouraged.

Although much research on the role of macroeconomic indicators on environmental quality has been done this far, democratic practices, intuitional quality and domestic capital have been given little attention. This research fills this gap by considering robust empirical techniques.

The purpose of this paper is to consider and compare different ways of using numbers to value aspects of nature-beyond-the-human through case analysis of ecological and natural capital accounting practices in the UK that create standardised numerical-economic values for beyond-human natures. In addition, to contrast underlying ontological and ethical assumptions of these arithmetical approaches in ecological accounting with those associated with Pythagorean nature-numbering practices and fractal geometry. In doing so, to draw out distinctions between arithmetical and geometrical ontologies of nature and their relevance for “valuing nature”.

Close reading and review of policy texts and associated calculations in: UK natural capital accounts for “opening stock” inventories in 2007 and 2014; and in the experimental implementation of biodiversity offsetting (BDO) in land-use planning in England. Tracking the iterative calculations of biodiversity offset requirements in a specific planning case. Conceptual review, drawing on and contrasting different numbering practices being applied so as to generate numerical-economic values for natures-beyond-the-human.

In the cases of ecological accounting practices analysed here, the natures thus numbered are valued and “accounted for” using arithmetical methodologies that create commensurability and facilitate appropriation of the values so created. Notions of non-monetary value, and associated practices, are marginalised. Instead of creating standardisation and clarity, however, the accounting practices considered here for natural capital accounts and BDO create nature-signalling numbers that are struggled over and contested.

This is the first critical engagement with the specific policy texts and case applications considered here, and, the authors believe, the first attempt to contrast arithmetical and geometrical numbering practices in their application to the understanding and valuing of natures-beyond-the-human.

Takes an exploratory approach to the development of an accountability framework for environmental performance of the Australian Commonwealth public sector. Explains that the aim of the environmental performance accountability framework is for the various stakeholders to understand the actions of Commonwealth public sector organizations and consequences of those actions for ecological systems; to become familiar with the trends and changes in trends in public sector environmental performance; and to place stakeholders in a position to promote change when performance is not acceptable. Examines three interrelated strands of literature. Identifies key institutional stakeholders in the Commonwealth public sector. Synthesizes the literature related to public sector transformation, and reviews the flourishing literature on environmental accounting and reporting, and links it to the concept of environmental accountability. Drawing on this literature, explores interrelationships between three characteristics of environmental performance at the federal level in the Australian public sector: criticality of natural capital; information uncertainty; and regulatory response. Examines environmental accountability dimensions of each of these characteristics. Concludes by making three policy recommendations: first, measurement of environmental performance should focus on criticality of natural capital and informational uncertainty as bounded by the precautionary principle; second, the measures of criticality of natural capital and informational uncertainty should determine the extent of direct accountability to parliament for each public sector organization’s environmental performance; and, finally, a third party attestation of reported information is needed. Also makes some suggestions for extending this exploratory research.

This chapter explores the domestication of Marx's critique of political economy within Marxist-oriented environmental sociology, and treadmill of production (ToP) theory, in particular. The aim is to explicate the theoretical resources for a rigorous critique of capital-induced planetary degradation. Shortcomings of ToP theory pertaining to the conceptualization of capital and value are identified. The reasons for these shortcomings, including how they might be addressed, are elaborated by reconsidering key aspects of Marx's critical theory of modern capitalist society. The chapter contributes to current discussions in both critical theory and environmental sociology by demonstrating the continued relevance of Marx's critical theory for understanding the political-economic, social, and ideational dimensions of planetary degradation. In contrast to ToP theory, which critically examines the production of wealth by counterposing finitude and limits against the expansionary tendencies of economic growth, the critical theory approach advanced in this chapter conceptualizes the acceleration of environmental degradation following World War II in terms of a ToP of value, whereby the necessity of the value form is continuously established in the present. The chapter discusses how Marxian critical theory facilitates a critical examination of the widespread growth of environmentalism as concomitant with the spread of neoliberal capitalism.

The research is geared towards studying the impact of “GDP per capita (GDP)”, “energy consumption (EC)”, “human capital (HC)” and “trade openness (TO)” on India's ecological footprint (EF) from 1997–1998 to 2019–2020.

The autoregressive distributed lag model (ARDL) bound test was used to look at the short-run and long-term coefficients and the cointegration of the variables.

The results depicted a long-run connection between the variables. The long-run results found a favourable relationship between GDP, EC and EF, indicating that economic growth through heavy reliance on fossil fuels contributes to environmental unsustainability. An inverse relationship between HC, TO and EF was also observed, indicating that education fosters pro-environmental behaviour and leads to adopting cleaner technology that contributes to environmental sustainability.

The research substantiates India's pressing requirement for sustainable development, ensuring a harmonious balance between economic performance and environmental preservation. A carefully designed policy needs to be formulated to mitigate emissions stemming from growth in India. Policymakers are urged to implement measures that promote ecologically friendly tools, utilities and transportation to curb long-term environmental degradation.

The study is novel, incorporating an exhaustive review using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). This study further examines how India's EF is affected by its HC; the preceding literature has yet to discuss much about the connection between HC and the environment. Finally, the study employed advanced econometric techniques, namely the cointegration technique and ARDL model, to find the relationship between EF, GDP, HC, EC and TO.

The Brundtland Commission report has been widely cited in debates about sustainable development (SD), but disagreements still exist about what SD is and the role or importance of ecology are central to the debate. SD is a movement that seeks to address social and economic issues to meet the needs of the entire community through alternative methods of development. The Kyoto Protocol, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), World Summit on Sustainable Development, and Rio+20 have all been significant initiatives to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This book focused on the development of sustainable infrastructure, which is linked to seven of the recently established Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Researchers emphasized the importance of developing an objective definition of SD. The most used definition of SD is proposed in the World Conference on Environment and Development (WCED) report, which emphasizes harmony among the three pillars: social, ecological, and economic. However, Lehtonen (2004) contends that separating the terms ‘social’ and ‘economic’ will isolate economic problems from their larger social context. This SD model recognizes that economic activities must be carried out for the benefit of society and that initiatives affecting humanity’s social context must be completed within ecological bounds. Mebratu (1998) classified SD definitions and origins into three categories: functional, conceptual, and intellectual. Hopwood et al. (2005) demonstrated the many ecological, social, and economic implications of SD. O’Riordan (1988) and Robinson (2004) define sustainability as an integral concept with a strong emphasis on nature. SD is a conservationist approach to natural resource allocation that focuses on technology to address pollution and resource depletion issues. To achieve development, current institutions must be transformed, with an emphasis on meeting people’s wants and interests in a way that is consistent with economic, equitable, and environmental concerns. It is frequently used to describe outdated economic development that disregards the environment. SD is viewed differently by different authors. Mitcham (1995) discovered ‘investigated or creative ambiguity’ in the term, which is a strength, not a flaw. O’Riordan (1988) admitted that the ambiguity surrounding the concept’s definition has sparked debate. Dresner (2008) demonstrated that the confusion surrounding SD does not render it ineffective. The Forum for the Future’s 5-capitals model and the triple bottom line (TBL) model are two examples of SD models that promote SD, but technological and scientific progress has been slow. The definition of SD is ambiguous, with various perspectives and insights from various authors. This section examined the body of knowledge on sustainability and its underlying concepts and principles, with references and a discussion of the TBL.