Purpose 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. Design/methodology/approach 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. Findings 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. Originality/value 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.

International audienceThe quantification and integration of ecosystem services (ES) into urban planning decisions is becoming increasingly important. However, studies that quantify and analyze the impacts in terms of ES changes are still scarce. We analyzed multiple ES provided by the landscape of the Urban Community of Bordeaux (CUB), in France, between 1990 and 2006 as a result of land use and cover change (LUCC) with Corine Land Cover and other open data. These ES were selected with the help of local stakeholders and were calculated using a spatially explicit modeling approach with InVEST and own-produced models. It was found that all ES, except erosion regulation, have decreased as a consequence of LUCC. Results also suggest that LUCC change decisions which do not consider policy measures for ES protection tend to generate land use patterns providing lower levels of ES. This spatial explicit approach to ES modeling enables an informed discussion with stakeholders and may be used to effectively implement, monitor, and communicate future planning policies

Article impact statement: New collaborations with accounting research can improve conservation impact of ecosystem‐based information systems.