Application of sustainability appraisal to the Canterbury Water Management Strategy

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to establish and advance the role of academic accounting in the pursuit of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which are regarded as the most salient point of departure for understanding and achieving environmental and human development ambitions up to (and no doubt beyond) the year 2030. Design/methodology/approach This paper provides a synthesis of interdisciplinary perspectives on sustainable development and integration of this with the accounting for sustainability literature. In addition, potential accounting research contributions are proposed so as to support the development of new research avenues. Findings Existing research in accounting that is relevant to individual SDGs serves as an initial link between them and the accounting discipline. At the same time, the SDGs focus highlights new sites for empirical work (including interdisciplinary investigations) as well as inviting innovation in accounting theoretical frameworks. Moreover, the SDGs provide a context for (re)invigorating accounting’s contribution to sustainable development debates. Originality/value This is the first paper to explore the roles academic accounting can play in furthering achievement of the SDGs through enhanced understanding, critiquing and advancing of accounting policy, practice and theorizing. It is also the first paper to propose a research agenda in this area.

show abstract

“…• SDG 6clean water and sanitation (see Hazelton, 2013Hazelton, , 2015Jenkins et al, 2014;Larrinaga-Gonzélez and Pérez-Chamorro, 2008);…”

Section: Accounting Research Relevant To the Sdgsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals

Bebbington

Unerman

2018

AAAJ

709

458

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…accounting for biodiversity, carbon accounting, human rights and accounting, and water accounting) (Bebbington & Larrinaga, 2014). Similarly, there is a number of existing research relating clearly to SDG 6, "clean water and sanitation" (Bebbington & Larrinaga, 2014;Jenkins et al, 2014;Schneider and Andreaus, 2018); a grouping of SDGs 5, 10 and 16 -concentrating on equalities and human rights (McPhail et al, 2016;Tweedie and Hazelton, 2015); SDG 13 -climate action (Brander, 2017; de Sousa Fragoso and de Almeida Noéme, 2018); and both SDGs 14 and 15 -life on land/life below the water (Cuckston, 2013). Although prior research offered some insights into SDGs implementations, this work was not informed by the SDG framing as it was conducted before the formulation of the UN SDG agenda.…”

Section: Previous Sdg Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Corporate adoption of SDG reporting in a non-enabling institutional environment: Insights from Libyan oil industries

Gerged

Almontaser

2021

Resources Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The downstream effects of broad-scale land management practices on water quality, both in Australia and New Zealand, has been a recurrent focus of articles published in the AJEM (Abell, Hamilton & Paterson 2011;Bowmer 2014;Jenkins et al 2014), particularly in relation to impacts on the Great Barrier Reef (McDonald & Roberts 2006;Robinson et al 2009;Carter & Ross 2015). In this issue, Steven Rust and Megan Star report an analysis of cost-effectiveness of different approaches to reduce gully erosion and hence reduce downstream sediment loads.…”

Section: Articles In This Issuementioning

confidence: 99%

Is Australia strong in environmental research?

Dovers

Carter

Ross

2018

Australasian Journal of Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

'game' the system, and universities will seek to avoid making submissions in weaker areas. The ERA then uses several measures to rate quality across a set of variables within each FoR, including research income, commercialisation, esteem measures (e.g. academy fellowships), and especially citations (the number of times a publication is cited in others). In the science FoR, where the environmental field sits, journal citations are the key. The more often a peer-reviewed journal article is cited by others around the world, the more significant and useful it is judged to be. The very sharp point of the ERA is the assignment of a 1-5 rating of quality, where 3 is 'world standard', 1 is seriously substandard and 5 is 'well above world standard'. These ratings can delight and greatly assist a university in a given discipline (that is, getting a 5), or hurt them badly (that is, getting a 1). 'World standard' is possibly a misnomer and 'world average' is more accurate since the citation ratings show where a citation rate is in relation to world average for a discipline (FoR). A 3 is indeed a world average citation rate. This underlines the absurdity of some universities boasting of being 'world standard' since what it really says is they are mediocre, although 'world standard' does sound much better! We should take these indicators seriously, as a measure of Australia's capacity to confront future challenges and embrace opportunities. Before looking at our capacity to confront the environment and sustainability challenges of the future via FoR Environmental Science and

show abstract

Application of sustainability appraisal to the Canterbury Water Management Strategy

Cited by 9 publications

References 6 publications

Achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals

Achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals

Corporate adoption of SDG reporting in a non-enabling institutional environment: Insights from Libyan oil industries

Is Australia strong in environmental research?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About