No abstract

Concern about the ecological consequences of global change has increasingly stimulated ecologists to examine the futures of ecological systems. Studying futures is not only a crucial element of the interaction between science, management and decision making, but also a critical research challenge per se, especially because futures cannot be observed or experimented on. In addition, researchers can encounter methodological and theoretical difficulties, which make interpretations and predictions problematic. In the literature which deals with futures of ecological systems two main lines of research can be distinguished: a predictive approach, which dominates the literature, can be contrasted with a rarer number of studies that elaborate potential scenarios for ecological systems. Scenario approaches currently concern mainly contacts with stakeholders or decision makers, or the use of climate scenarios to derive projections about ecological futures. We argue that a new direction for ecological futures research could be explored by using ecological scenarios in combination with predictive models to further fundamental ecological research, in addition to enhancing its applied value.

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.