Search results

The purpose of this paper is to propose a new ecological-issues-centered accounting research agenda, at the crossroads of accounting research and conservation science.

Based on a case study of the Natural Capital Project, the research examines the efforts and challenges of conservation practitioners regarding the use of evaluative information systems for conservation (EISC) in complex social and ecological contexts. It discusses why and how, to address these challenges, EISC promoters would benefit from theoretical and empirical insights coming from accounting research.

The paper suggests that the use of new information systems centered on organized collective action for biodiversity conservation should be regarded as a new type of accounting for the management of ecosystems, complementary to organization-centered biodiversity accounting and to ecosystem accounting at the national scale. A research agenda inspired by critical accounting should be developed for EISC design and use by: critically analyzing the organizational models currently underlying the use of new calculative practices for ecosystems; and developing new analytical and practical avenues on the basis of more explicit and powerful theories adapted to collective action for conservation perimeters.

The paper shows the importance of combining three domains of research and practice that are usually disconnected: the design and use of innovative information systems in biodiversity conservation research and practice; accounting research; and theories and conceptual models of collective action to resolve ecological challenges.

Population migration to the coastal zone has increased by 50 to 70 per cent. Conflicts of inhabitation and use are escalating rapidly. Single use is economically risky if not unsound. In traditional societies multiple‐use has been exercised successfully. Concentration among today′s users should lead to an acceptable balance and to sustainable situations. Physical, biological and geological equilibria and conservation should be maintained. For this to happen communication approaches should be fine‐tuned.

The purpose of this paper is to review and synthesise academic research in environmental accounting and demonstrate its shortcomings. It provokes scholars to rethink their conceptions of “accounts” and “nature”, and alongside others in this AAAJ special issue, provides the basis for an agenda for theoretical and empirical research that begins to “ecologise” accounting.

Utilising a wide range of thought from accounting, geography, sociology, political ecology, nature writing and social activism, the paper provides an analysis and critique of key themes associated with 40 years research in environmental accounting. It then considers how that broad base of work in social science, particularly pragmatic sociology (e.g. Latour, Boltanksi and Thévenot), could contribute to reimagining an ecologically informed accounting.

Environmental accounting research overwhelmingly focuses on economic entities and their inputs and outputs. Conceptually, an “information throughput” model dominates. There is little or no environment in environmental accounting, and certainly no ecology. The papers in this AAAJ special issue contribute to these themes, and alongside social science literature, indicate significant opportunities for research to begin to overcome them.

This paper outlines and encourages the advancement of ecological accounts and accountabilities drawing on conceptual resources across social sciences, arts and humanities. It identifies areas for research to develop its interdisciplinary potential to contribute to ecological sustainability and social justice.

How to “ecologise” accounting and conceptualise human and non-human entities has received little attention in accounting research. This paper and AAAJ special issue provides empirical, practical and theoretical material to advance further work.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss how French universities can play a key role in generating Smart City (SC) through an innovative Public-Private Partnership (PPP) dedicated to urban transformation.

The authors led an action-research study for five years with several research and pedagogic projects, including users or citizens.

The paper points out main factors of SC development. It also presents shared demonstrators’ characteristics, including industrial scale, sustainability, and citizens’ participation.

This research is experimented with only one regional multi-case study.

Practical implications of this paper include a University of Lorraine diversification strategy through the “Chaire REVES” supported by public and private partners.

At the regional level, industrial-university-territorial partnerships could tackle both societal and economical issues “with,” “for,” and “by” citizens.

Based on the Living Lab concept, this case study shows a concrete regional university strategy involving: user-centric design, collaborative processes, citizens’ workshops, and new financial and organizational answers enabling collaboration between private companies and public institutions. The paper also argues that innovative PPPs involving users are necessary for developing SC.