Four priorities for new links between conservation science and accounting research

Feger, C.; Mermet, Laurent; Vira, Bhaskar; Addison, Prue; Barker, Richard; Birkin, Frank; Burns, John; Cooper, Stuart; Couvet, Denis; Cuckston, Thomas; Daily, Gretchen C.; Dey, Colin; Gallagher, Louise; Hails, Rosemary S.; Jollands, Stephen; Mace, Georgina M.; McKenzie, Emily; Milne, Markus J.; Quattrone, Paolo; Rambaud, Alexandre; Russell, Shona; Santamaria, Marta; Sutherland, William J.

doi:10.1111/cobi.13254

Cited by 27 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…If the objective of accounting for biodiversity research is to contribute to addressing the challenge of biodiversity loss (cf. Bebbington & Larrinaga, 2014), then it needs to begin by seeking out the work of conservation and then looking to explain how (or whether) efforts to render biodiversity calculable have made this work possible (Cuckston, 2018c;Feger et al, 2018). Some studies have sought to do this by examining how conservationists use accounting techniques to frame biodiversity in ways that enable them to restore and/or protect particular ecological systems (Cuckston, 2017;Dey & Russell, 2014;Feger & Mermet, 2017…”

Section: Accounting For Biodiversitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Framing sustainable development challenges: accounting for SDG-15 in the UK

Sobkowiak¹,

Cuckston²,

Thomson

2020

AAAJ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis research seeks to explain how a national government becomes capable of constructing an account of its biodiversity performance that is aimed at enabling formulation of policy in pursuit of SDG 15: Life on Land.Design/methodology/approachThe research examines a case study of the construction of the UK government's annual biodiversity report. The case is analysed to explain the process of framing a space in which the SDG-15 challenge of halting biodiversity loss is rendered calculable, such that the government can see and understand its own performance in relation to this challenge.FindingsThe construction of UK government's annual biodiversity report relies upon data collected through non-governmental conservation efforts, statistical expertise of a small project group within the government and a governmental structure that drives ongoing evolution of the indicators as actors strive to make these useful for policy formulation.Originality/valueThe analysis problematises the SDG approach to accounting for sustainable development, whereby performance indicators have been centrally agreed and universally imposed upon all signatory governments. The analysis suggests that capacity-building efforts for national governments may need to be broader than that envisaged by the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

show abstract

Section: Accounting For Biodiversitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Framing sustainable development challenges: accounting for SDG-15 in the UK

Sobkowiak¹,

Cuckston²,

Thomson

2020

AAAJ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The accountant had previously been involved with the organisation as a member of their Advisory Council and was aware of the difficulties they had been facing in communicating the value of their biodiverse wildlife corridor plantations to key stakeholders including landowners and government funding bodies. Hence the initial stage of the action research cycle involved identifying the problem (Susman & Evered, 1978) as being difficulties in communicating value, and recognising that accounting methods may help to resolve this problem (Feger et al, 2018).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…He argues that in order to provide insights that are useful to conservation, accounting researchers must move beyond traditional accounting tools to engage with broader conservation and human-nature relations research (Cuckston, 2018). However, whilst the potential for accounting to contribute to conservation has been recognised (Feger et al, 2018), collaborative research between the fields of conservation science and accounting has until recently been almost non-existent (Feger & Mermet, 2017).…”

Section: Environmental Stewardship Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Accounting for biodiverse wildlife corridor plantations

Horner

Davison

2020

MEDAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This paper aims to explore the feasibility of implementing the natural inventory model (NIM) developed by Jones (1996, 2003) in biodiverse wildlife corridor plantations, from a non-government organisations’ (NGO) perspective. Design/methodology/approach Undertaking the first cycle of an action research approach, the project involves collaboration with Greening Australia Tasmania (GAT). GAT is endeavouring to establish native wildlife corridors throughout the Tasmanian midlands, using science-based biodiverse plantations. The majority of the areas identified by GAT as essential for the establishment of these wildlife corridors are on privately owned land, primarily used for agricultural purposes. This paper explores whether stewardship of the land “sacrificed” by landowners may be demonstrated via the quantification and communication of improvements in biodiversity using the NIM. Findings Results suggest that the existing NIM is impractical for use by an NGO with limited resources. However, with some adaptations incorporating science-based measurements, the NIM can be used to account for biodiverse wildlife corridor plantations. Practical implications The findings have implications for not-for-profit, corporate and government sectors in terms of how accounting may facilitate the quantification and communication of conservation and restoration efforts. Social implications Biodiversity loss is now considered to be a greater threat to the planet than climate change. Efforts to account for biodiversity are consistent with the UN 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda and the Australian Government’s “Biodiversity Conservation Strategy” (2010). Originality/value While prior studies have successfully implemented the NIM using secondary data, this is the first known to test the feasibility of the model using primary data in collaboration with an NGO.

show abstract

“…Biodiversity losses are classified as being serious and irreversible where the loss concerns a threatened species or habitat that is rapidly declining, has a very small population size, has a very limited geographic distribution, or is unlikely to respond to conservation measures aimed at improving habitat. Detailed criteria, based on IUCN Red List criteria for critically endangered species 8 (see Cuckston, 2018), are set out by the NSW government to aid determination of whether biodiversity losses should be classified as serious and irreversible.…”

Section: Extracting a Net Loss/gain Of Biodiversitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…By instead looking to conservation research literature, this paper has been able to meaningfully engage with extant critique expressed within the conservation science community (cf. Feger et al, 2018).…”

Section: Framing/overflowing: Opportunities For Further Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seeking an ecologically defensible calculation of net loss/gain of biodiversity

Cuckston

2019

AAAJ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: This paper explains how proponents of biodiversity offsetting have sought to produce an ecologically defensible mechanism for reconciling economic development and biodiversity conservation.Methods: The paper analyses a case study biodiversity offsetting mechanism in New South Wales, Australia. Michel Callon's framing and overflowing metaphor is used to explain how accounting devices are brought into the mechanism, to (re)frame a space of calculability and address anxieties expressed by conservationists about calculations of net loss/gain of biodiversity.Findings: The analysis shows that the offsetting mechanism embeds a form of accounting for biodiversity that runs counter to the prevailing dominant anthropocentric approach. Rather than accounting for the biodiversity of a site in terms of the economic benefits it provides to humans, the mechanism accounts for biodiversity in terms of its ecological value. This analysis, therefore, reveals a form of accounting for biodiversity that uses numbers to provide valuations of biodiversity, but these numbers are ecological numbers, not economic numbers. So this is a calculative, and also ecocentric, approach to accounting for, and valuing, biodiversity. Originality/value: This paper contributes to extant literature on accounting for biodiversity by revealing a novel conceptualisation of the reconciliation of economic development and biodiversity conservation, producing an ecologically defensible form of sustainable development. The paper also makes a methodological contribution by showing how Callon's framing and overflowing metaphor can be used to enable the kind of interdisciplinary engagement needed for researchers to address sustainable development challenges.

show abstract

Four priorities for new links between conservation science and accounting research

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

Cited by 27 publications

References 29 publications

Framing sustainable development challenges: accounting for SDG-15 in the UK

Framing sustainable development challenges: accounting for SDG-15 in the UK

Accounting for biodiverse wildlife corridor plantations

Seeking an ecologically defensible calculation of net loss/gain of biodiversity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About