Search results

Drought conditions affected an acute water scarcity crisis across large parts of Australia through the late 1990s and into the 2000s. Public policy responses emphasised demand management strategies. This study aims to examine the response to these challenges within a large Australian university from 1999 to 2010.

Case study utilising semi-structured interviews.

Staff empowered to take an emergent approach to issues of social concern, initiated water accountability change focused on water efficiency from 1999, and “water principles” from 2002. A growing network had some success translating and enrolling others over coming years. However into the late 2000s, as drought conditions abated and with a renewed focus on financial control, developments that had not established clear links to core accountability mechanisms eroded. This study demonstrates that measurement is essential to understanding patterns of water usage, but also needs to establish links to core systems of accountability to broadly change behaviour.

Higher education continues to be an environment where creative responses to community challenges can be nurtured. Despite increasing pressures to focus on financial outcomes, the sector should continue to nurture opportunities to shape issues of community concern through leading practice.

This study provides insight into the development, fragility, and contested meaning of emergent systems of water accountability within the context of a university.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the perceptions of potential users about water accounting reports prepared under Australian general purpose water accounting (GPWA), which applies financial accounting techniques to water and could be extended to other areas of natural resource management. In particular, the paper examines the extent to which users believe GPWA reports are useful and facilitate the discharge of accountability by water managers.

As a theoretical lens the authors apply an extended version of Gray et al.’s (1996) accountability model. The authors utilise mixed method research design comprising a questionnaire administered to users with water-related interests and an analysis of public submissions to the Water Accounting Standards Board on the Exposure Draft of Australian Water Accounting Standard 1.

Overall, users perceive the introduction of GPWA as useful and believe that the benefits will outweigh the costs. The adoption of a financial accounting approach in terms of accounting standards and prescribed methods for booking and disclosing water “transactions” was broadly supported. In terms of the main users of reports, there was some ambiguity but findings suggested that government agencies were likely to be the main users of GPWA. Users were also concerned about the degree of judgement required to determine the identity and boundaries of a “water report entity”. Perhaps the most controversial aspect related to accountability; while the Accountability Statement was broadly supported there was little consensus that GPWA collectively discharged the accountability of water managers. Taken collectively, these results suggest that GPWA may be more useful for improving management performance than accountability.

The findings suggest that future iterations of the standard need to reconsider how accountability might be discharged through the production of GPWA. The broad support for GPWA suggests, however, that the financial accounting approach – and hence the accounting community – may also make a valuable contribution to other areas of natural resource accounting.

This study contributes to the emerging but still limited literature on GPWA and the fundamentally different approach to natural resource accounting it represents. While some previous studies have examined potential users of GPWA none have done so after the standard has been fully developed, and no previous studies have adopted the mixed research design utilised in this study.

This study analyses how the implementation of PPPs to operate rural water infrastructures and deliver water to local population has led to a new accountability archetype.

The archetype theory is used to analyse the process of implementing PPPs as a new archetype and setting up systems and structures of accountability between contracting parties. The empirical part of the study is based on extensive document analysis in an East African country. Documents analysed are from governmental sources, UNICEF and the World Bank and cover a period from 1998 to early 2019.

The process of implementing PPPs was revolutionary at the national level and evolutionary at micro levels. The sequence of the change process moved from central to peripheral. The linearity followed a reorientation track strategy. Setting up systems and structure of accountability was evolutionary, peripheral to central following the reorientation strategy. National authorities reacted proactively to comments and suggestions from international donors and local population. However, not all districts have fully implemented PPPs in their rural water sector. The structure of accountability at the local level, however, still suffers from logistical and professional capacity constraints.

Empirical findings cannot be generalised to other situations, but the theoretical framework used in this study can be applied elsewhere.

Giving priority to hearing from end users themselves before designing and implementing policies that intend to respond to specific local needs is recommended.

This study explains the ways in which micro-organisational change can lead to revolutionary archetypes such as PPPs, whereas the implementation of systems and the structure of accountability at inter-organisational level remain evolutionary.

The aim of this chapter is to determine the need for water management and accounting.

This chapter first gives an overview of water-related business risks and exposes the need for sound corporate water management and accounting; it then critically examines water-related issues from an accountability perspective. Furthermore, it gives an overview of Australian Standardised Water Accounting (SWA) and General Purpose Water Accounting (GPWA) as possible practices to strengthen water disclosure.

The present study confirms the need for, and the importance of, transparent, high-quality, credible and comparable water disclosure. Water is considered a public good and involves a public interest and, consequently, public responsibility for its usage, management and protection. Following this line of reasoning, the chapter draws attention to the need for accountability to be ‘public’ or at least shared between crucial stakeholders (government – at national and international levels, water industries, communities, environmentalists, NGOs, etc.).

Company efforts are commonly focused on internal and self-referred operations. The different and conflicting uses that may be made of water, and the fact that water is geographically and temporally sensitive, necessitate a search for more flexible and more extended forms of accountability. An implication of these findings is the need and opportunity to switch focus from a single/private perspective to a more general/public one, with benefits for all the stakeholders.

This research enhances our understanding of water management and accounting and may serve as a sound base for future studies on this challenging topic.

In decades since the Rio Summit, freshwater has become an increasingly prominent issue in the global arena and attention has turned to the role of the corporate sector. Various (predominantly voluntary) corporate water accounting standards currently exist, from water-related components in wide-ranging sustainability standards such as the Global Reporting Initiative through to standards specifically focused on water and/or a particular industry. While academic research on adoption of these standards is sparse, initial findings reveal generally poor water reporting in terms of both quality and quantity. In future, the major areas where reporting (and standards) could be improved are the provision of site-level water information and the assessment of water risk throughout the supply chain.

This chapter investigates the awareness of consumers to the water supply chain and if the introduction of water labelling information increases the degree of accountability. This research examines how fresh water can be traded as a direct physical entity or indirectly as part of the supply chain of a product. With greater pressure put on finite global resources, demand for this natural commodity is slowly overtaking supply. Fresh water is essential to life and its equitable management is critical in protecting the long-term survival of the World’s inhabitants.

This research uses a case study basis for the research undertaken and analyses what factors business decision-makers consider when making their choices. A bookshop has been used as the business context for this investigation. The research is based on a qualitative methodology and uses semi-structured interviews to gather the data. The findings indicate that water awareness is low amongst consumers and that water labelling information whilst being endorsed by consumers would only yield modest changes in buying behaviour patterns.

This research has been gathered using a small sample of the population, but in order to draw general conclusions it is recommended that the study be extended to include a variety of organisations located in different countries that are motivated by profit and not for profit objectives.

This paper aims to explore the potential for the labelling of the water footprint of products in an Australian context. It considers theoretical contribution and technical challenges of water labelling and in particular how non-fungible water extractions might be evaluated and communicated.

The paper examines the theoretical contribution of labels drawing on the sustainability typology articulated by Hopwood et al. and more recent claims that access to product-level environmental information may constitute a consumer right. The paper also explores labelling empirically via an extensive literature review and ten interviews with water regulators and commercial water users.

Water footprint reporting could make a significant contribution to public water literacy. Significant technical hurdles remain, however, in appropriately distinguishing differing impacts of water extractions as well as in relation to measurement, allocation and information overload. This suggests that labelling of complex products is currently infeasible but existing and emerging solutions to these issues suggest that labelling of simpler products is a realistic possibility.

Given the relatively small scope of interviews, the findings of this study might be triangulated with other research methods such as surveys and/or focus groups for the findings to be validated. Additionally, future research might focus on overcoming each of the challenges noted above for a particular product in order to bring water labelling closer to practical reality.

Labelling schemes offer improved corporate supply-chain accountability yet have received little attention in the social and environmental accounting literature to date. This paper therefore seeks to make a theoretical and empirical contribution to this emerging field of labelling in the area of water, a key sustainability issue.

The research objectives of this chapter are threefold. First, we explore what is the current status of corporate water accounting tools and methodologies. Second, we develop a framework for analyzing corporate water accounting and reporting. Third, we investigate what French CAC 40 companies account for and report in relations to the water challenge.

We collected annual and sustainability reports from all CAC 40 companies as well as their water Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) responses when available. We also collected all publically available corporate water accounting methodologies to assess the international water accounting field. We coded the data according to our designed framework via qualitative data analysis software.

Although water is seen as equally important to climate change (Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA), 2009), French multinationals have a very immature reporting on this topic. Most still do not report to the water disclosure questionnaire of CDP in 2014 and rely on basic figures such as global water consumption. We analyzed the multiple water accounting, reporting, and risk assessment frameworks that have mushroomed since 2000, and question the impact of this fragmented field on the maturity of the water performance reporting by French companies.

The developed framework for analysis of water reporting can be used for sustainability teaching at university level.

We developed the first comprehensive analytical framework for water corporate reporting assessment. Moreover, this research is the first comprehensive study of water reporting in Europe. We therefore contribute to extend our comprehension of corporate maturity in water stewardship and water performance reporting.

The purpose of this study is to explore the sustainability reporting of a public sector organisation (PSO). This study focuses on socio-environmental practices of a major agro-economic platform in Australia – the Murray–Darling Basin Authority (MDBA) to provide a unique perspective on water resource management and sustainability.

This longitudinal qualitative case study collects published data from the MDBA’s annual reports over 21 years (1998–2018) and considers economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainability using legitimacy and institutional theory.

This study finds that the MDBA’s sustainability reporting is influenced by its response to the Water Act 2007 and the Basin Plan 2012 regulations and to maintain its legitimacy with stakeholders. The MDBA wished to pursue sustainability through integrating these regulations complemented by stakeholder expectations. Although all categories increased in reporting, the environment category has the highest primacy in achieving a healthy basin through sustainable water management for the long-term benefit of the stakeholders.

This study contributes to the PSOs sustainability reporting literature. Particularly, this study provides insights of sustainability reporting patterns and practices over a long period through a longitudinal study. This study contributes new knowledge on the awareness of PSOs sustainability practice which has implications for governments, regulators, policymakers, managers and other stakeholders.

The Australian PSOs setting is under-researched from the perspective of a regulatory framework. The MDBA case provides unique insights on water resource management and sustainability which has value for many countries around the world.

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.