Counting nature: some implications of quantifying environmental issues in corporate reports

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to examine the role numbers play in corporate environmental reporting. To deeply examine the ontological meanings of enumeration in the context of nature, the histories of number and accounting are explored. Some key tropes emerge from these histories, namely, distancing and control. Design/methodology/approach To explore some of the implications of quantifying nature, three years of environmental reports of ten companies from the ASX200 are analysed through a Barthsian lens. Examples of enumerating nature are highlighted and explored in terms of what this means for the corporate relationship with nature. This study has focussed on some specific aspects of nature that are commonly counted in corporate environmental reporting: carbon, energy, water, biodiversity and waste. This study explores how monetisation and obfuscation are used and how this informs the myth that nature is controllable. Findings This study finds that quantifying nature constructs a metaphorical distance between the company and the natural world which erodes the sense of connection associated with an authentic care for nature. These findings are critical in light of the detrimental impact of corporate activity on the natural world. The reports themselves, while promoted as a tool to help mitigate damage to the natural environment, are implicitly perpetuating its harm. Research limitations/implications Given the extent to which companies are responsible for environmental damage and the potential capacity embedded in corporate communications, better understanding the implications of quantifying nature could powerfully instigate a new but necessary approach to nature. Originality/value The insights of this paper are relevant to those aiming to improve the underpinning approaches used in corporate environmental reporting. This paper provides new understandings of the ways quantitative expression of environmental values constructs the myth that nature is controllable.

Interconnectedness and the web of accountabilities: Humboldtian approaches to social and environmental accounting

“…Moreover, it connects well with the recent progressive approaches of Bebbington et al. (2017, 2020a), Cuckston (2017), Gallhofer (2018), Morrison (2020), Morrison et al. (2022) and many others.…”

“…Humboldtian science may also be seen as an inspiration and guiding light for researchers seeking to overcome the current epistemological and methodical limitations of SEA, by transcending the qualitative/quantitative divide and including aesthetics and emotions. Moreover, it connects well with the recent progressive approaches of Bebbington et al (2017Bebbington et al ( , 2020a, Cuckston (2017), Gallhofer (2018), Morrison (2020), Morrison et al (2022) and many others. A truly Humboldtian understanding of SEA will require deep reflection on its very nature, inviting us to revisit its philosophical paradigmatical foundations and finally commence long-overdue debate on its origins and purpose.…”

“…Morrison and Lowe (2021, p. 820) conclude that what is needed is a "polyphonic" version of events, and that one way to facilitate this might be through qualitative, contextualized storytelling that acknowledges and brings together the voices of multiple stakeholders. Morrison et al (2022) also find that "quantifying nature constructs a metaphorical distance between the company and the natural world which erodes the sense of connection associated with an authentic care for nature." Overcoming this distance can be seen as a prerequisite for achieving true accountability.…”

“…Morrison et al. (2022) also find that “quantifying nature constructs a metaphorical distance between the company and the natural world which erodes the sense of connection associated with an authentic care for nature.” Overcoming this distance can be seen as a prerequisite for achieving true accountability.…”

Flattening or addressing complexity? The future role of GRI in light of the sustainability accounting (r)evolution

“…Defining a new notion of capital and value that includes sustainability deeply changes the traditional financial accounting conceptualizations (Gray, 1994; Lamberton, 2005; Nicholls, 2020; Morrison et al , 2022).…”