Search results

This paper aims to increase awareness of work on accounting for natural capital at the national and international level that has been ongoing for many years and has recently culminated in the adoption of international statistical standards for environmental-economic accounting.

The paper provides the context for work on natural capital accounting with particular links to the measurement of progress and a brief history of the work on natural capital accounting from an official statistics perspective and summarizes the key aspects of the technical and accounting aspects of the new international statistical standards. The paper also outlines some of the limitations of the approach and required research.

The paper highlights that while natural capital accounting does not provide a complete basis for assessment of sustainable development, a broad body of work is now in place to use accounting approaches for the assessment of environmental sustainability.

The paper observes that much of the work on natural capital accounting from the perspective of the official statistics community has not engaged the academic community and there is strong potential for collaboration to take this work forward particularly in the area of land and ecosystem accounting.

The paper describes a framework for the organization of information on the links between environmental and economic issues and an indication of the relevance of this work for the broader measurement of progress. Compilation of data following the framework is intended to provide a broader base of information for public policy and other decisions and thus has the potential to influence social, economic and environmental outcomes.

The paper’s value lies in raising awareness of the work that has been developing outside of the academic community but which likely has many connections to existing research and ongoing policy discussions.

The production of waste creates both direct and indirect environmental impacts. A range of strategies are available to reduce the generation of waste by industry and households, and to select waste treatment approaches that minimise environmental harm. However, evaluating these strategies requires reliable and detailed data on waste production and treatment. Unfortunately, published Australian waste data are typically highly aggregated, published by a variety of entities in different formats and do not form a complete time-series. We demonstrate a technique for constructing a multi-regional waste supply-use (MRWSU) framework for Australia using information from numerous waste data sources. This is the first subnational waste input–output framework to be constructed for Australia. We construct the framework using the Industrial Ecology Virtual Laboratory (IELab), a cloud-hosted computational platform for building Australian multiregional input–output tables. The structure of the framework complies with the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting (SEEA). We demonstrate the use of the MRWSU framework by calculating waste ‘footprints’ that enumerate the full domestic supply chain waste production for Australian consumers.

Discourse concerning the most effective way for enterprises to offset environmental impacts is well established. While certain approaches like the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) have gained widespread acceptance, other initiatives like introducing the Carbon Tax in Australia have not been successful. This study examines the practical implementation of two environmental accounting models, the TBL and Carbon Tax, analysing their benefits and drawbacks and focusing on their application within the Australian accounting system. Using discourse and content analysis within two case studies of two different sectors – the banking sector (Westpac) and the manufacturing sector (BlueScope), this research contributes to the discourse concerning the implementation of such disclosures and how models such as the TBL and Carbon Tax initiative could be effectively used in practice. The results show that the implementation of the TBL was more widely adopted and seen as a positive factor in determining the company's environmental impact as viewed by investors. The Carbon Tax was initially adopted less frequently until modifications were made to allow for voluntary compliance. This was due to the misalignment of the cost of the tax with the financial priorities of each sector. Furthermore, the study suggests that a more comprehensive approach that leverages the strengths of both models to complement each other within an integrated framework may be the best solution for organisations seeking a more systemic approach to environmental disclosures and offsetting in their supply chain network.

The study aims to shed light on the historical and contemporary trends of biodiversity accounting literature, while simultaneously offering insights into the future of research in this sector. The paper also aims to raise awareness among accounting researchers about their role in preserving biodiversity and informing improvements in policy and practice in this area.

The Bibliometrix R-package is used to carry out an algorithmic historiography. The reference publication year spectroscopy (RPYS) methodology is implemented. It is a unique approach to bibliometric analysis that allows researchers to identify and examine historical patterns in scientific literature.

The work provides a distinct and comprehensive discussion of the four distinct periods demarcating the progression of scientific discourse regarding biodiversity accounting. These periods are identified as Origins (1767–1864), Awareness (1865–1961), Consolidation (1962–1995) and Acceleration (1996–2021). The study offers an insightful analysis of the main thematic advancements, interpretative paradigm shifts and theoretical developments that occurred during these periods.

The paper offers a significant contribution to the existing academic debate on the prospects for accounting scholars to concentrate their research efforts on biodiversity and thereby promote advancements in policy and practice in this sector.

The article represents the first example of using an algorithmic historiography approach to examine the corpus of literature dealing with biodiversity accounting. The value of this study comes from the fusion of historical methodology and perspective. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is also the first scientific investigation applying RPYS in the accounting sector.

This paper aims to present the findings of a government-initiated project that sought to explore the possibility of incorporating cultural connections to land within the federal national accounting system using the United Nations Systems of Environmental-Economic Accounting (UN-SEEA) framework as a basis.

Adopting a critical dialogic approach and responding to the calls for critical accountants to engage with stakeholders, the authors worked with two Indigenous groups of Australia to develop a system of accounts that incorporates their cultural connections to “Country”. The two groups were clans from the Mungguy Country in the Kakadu region of Northern Territory and the Ewamian Aboriginal Corporation of Northern Queensland. Conducting two-day workshops on separate occasions with both groups, the authors attempted to meld the Indigenous worldviews with the worldviews embodied within national accounting systems and the UN-SEEA framework.

The models developed highlight significant differences between the ontological foundations of Indigenous and Western-worldviews and the authors reflect on the tensions created between these competing worldviews. The authors also offer pragmatic solutions that could be implemented by the Indigenous Traditional Owners and the government in terms of developing such an accounting system that incorporates connections to Country.

The paper contributes to providing a contemporary case study of engagement with Indigenous peoples in the co-development of a system of accounting for and by Indigenous peoples; it also contributes to the ongoing debate on bridging the divide between critique and praxis; and finally, the paper delves into an area that is largely unexplored within accounting research which is national accounting.

Accounting and water industry experts are developing general‐purpose water accounting (GPWA) to report information about water and rights to water. The system has the potential to affect water policies, pricing and management, and investment and other decisions that are affected by GPWA report users' understanding of water risks faced by an entity. It may also affect financial returns to accounting and auditing firms and firms in water industries. In this paper the authors aim to examine the roles of the accounting profession, water industries and other stakeholders in governing GPWA. Recognising that the fate of GPWA depends partly upon regulatory power and economics, they seek to apply regulatory theories that explain financial accounting standards development to speculate about the national and international future of GPWA.

Official documents, internal Water Accounting Standards Board documents and unstructured interviews underpin the authors' analysis.

The authors speculate about the benefits that might accrue to various stakeholder groups from capturing the GPWA standard‐setting process. They also suggest that internationally, water industries may dominate early GPWA standards development in the public interest and that regulatory capture by accounting or water industry professionals will not necessarily conflict with public interest benefits.

Accounting for water can affect allocations of environmental, economic, social and other resources; also, accounting and water industry professional standing and revenues. In this paper the authors identify factors influencing GPWA standards and standard‐setting institutional arrangements, and thereby these resource allocations. The paper generates an awareness of GPWA's emergence and practical implications.

This is an early study to investigate water accounting standard‐setting regulatory influences and their impact.

There is a great deal of interest in ecosystem or natural capital accounting and in methods to estimate monetary valuations of ecosystems. This paper aims to explore methods that may assist agricultural (livestock grazing) enterprises to estimate the monetary value of the productive capacity of the ecosystems they use. Such estimations are expected to provide a more complete set of information about the performance of pastoral operations and may assist them to assure ecological and economic sustainability.

This paper applies five different methods for valuation of the productive ecosystems used in extensive agricultural (grazing) systems. The methods apply different approaches to valuation described in the United Nations System of Environmental-Economic Accounting (SEEA) and Australian Accounting Standards (AASs). To do this, the paper uses financial information drawn from the long-term performance of an economically and environmentally sustainable pastoral enterprise.

SEEA- and AAS-compliant methods to measure the value in use of provisioning ecosystems are practical and useful. The estimations contribute to a reasonable range of fair values required by AASs and improve the availability of information that would be useful in improving the performance of the operation and compare it to reasonable alternate management strategies.

The SEEA is an international standard and AASs are closely aligned to the International Accounting Standards, so the methods described in this paper are likely to be generalisable to enterprises grazing low-rainfall rangelands in other countries. However, their ability to appropriately accommodate the extensive modifications to ecosystems caused by cultivation and fertilisation needs to be tested before they are applied to grazing operations in high-rainfall areas or other forms of agriculture such as cropping or horticulture.

The availability of standards-compliant methods for ecosystem valuation means that companies who wish to include ecosystems on a voluntary and informal basis as sub-classes of land in their general purpose financial reports may be able to do so. If these methods are SEEA-compliant, they could be combined with information about the ecosystem type, extent and condition to produce a set of national ecosystem accounts so that the contribution of ecosystems to the economy can be estimated.

Many of the enterprises that rely on extensive agricultural ecosystems are unable to generate sufficient financial returns to cover their obligations to owners and creditors. The ability to determine the monetary value of the annual inputs provided by the ecosystems may assist landowners and citizens to detect and avoid depletion of their economic and ecological resources.

This paper applies an explicit interpretation of AAS and draws from valuation methods recommended in the SEEA to demonstrate that current accounting standards (national and corporate) provide a strong foundation for the valuation of the ecosystems used as economically significant factors of production.

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.

This study aims to examine the factors driving the adoption of carbon management accounting (CMA) and various considerations that mediate its effectiveness in accounting and disclosure practices.

This study used an exploratory, cross-sectional, quantitative design. Academics, managements/executives, professional accountants, professional auditors and researchers served as the primary units of analysis. This study used a survey method to gather data through a structured online questionnaire. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM).

The results revealed that the factors driving the adoption of CMA directly influence the effectiveness of CMA practices, with a significant mediating effect of regulatory and ethical aspects. Furthermore, this study revealed the difficulty of accounting, quantifying and reporting carbon emissions and revenue generation from the trading of carbon credits. This highlights the critical role of standard-setters and academics in deciding the concrete methodology to promote uniformity in carbon disclosures.

The major limitations of this study are that it considered only the perception of experts and did not study the actual practices of CMA by considering companies that have already implemented CMA. Further studies should consider this aspect to validate the results of this study. Furthermore, the findings highlight the insignificant effect of economic, environmental and social aspects in enhancing the overall effectiveness of CMA. This is because of the limited number of factors considered in the study of such metrics. To overcome this limitation, future studies should consider wider aspects to validate the outcomes of this study.

The major contribution of this study is that it serves as a base input for business organizations, academics, researchers and regulatory authorities who are working to implement CMA strategies to reduce carbon emissions and promote net-zero business practices.

The outcome of this study is unique and new, as the subject matter of this study is in the nascent stage. The outcome of this study may become a significant valid input for regulators and policymaking companies to gain knowledge about CMA practices and motivate them to integrate CMA practices as part of their sustainability initiatives.

Over the last few decades, corporate environmental reporting (CER) has received substantial attention due to complex societal and ecological challenges experienced at a global scale. While there has been growth in CER research across the world, we know very little of the state of CER research in Africa. In this paper, we provide a comprehensive literature review of CER in sub-Saharan Africa to demonstrate its current state, uncover gaps in extant studies and identify areas for further research in the region. We perform a metasearch on the Financial Times Top 50 journals in addition to wider analyses using African Journals Online (AJOL) and Google Scholar between 2008 and 2020. Though there is some progress in interrogating CER in the region, there is much leeway for further research into how public and private corporations provide an account for their interaction with nature. Extant studies have examined how CER is often subsumed within corporate social responsibility initiatives while other studies explore ways in which CER can provide accountability mechanisms in the mining sector of select countries. Important areas of future research include the influences of legal, cultural and political systems on the level of CER, the tensions between economic development driven by multinational corporations and the necessity for ecological protection. Finally, further research could investigate the role CER can play in encouraging specific corporate disclosures around GHG emissions, especially given global efforts being undertaken to mitigate the effects of climate change.