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

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Standard

Seeking an ecologically defensible calculation of net loss/gain of biodiversity. / Cuckston, Thomas.

In: Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, Vol. 32, No. 5, 17.06.2019, p. 1358-1383.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Bibtex

@article{2ded266c41ef497d8e0340caf07738cb,
title = "Seeking an ecologically defensible calculation of net loss/gain of biodiversity",
abstract = "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{\textquoteright}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{\textquoteright}s framing and overflowing metaphor can be used to enable the kind of interdisciplinary engagement needed for researchers to address sustainable development challenges. ",
keywords = "Conservation, Framing, Biodiversity, Sustainable development,, Ecology, Offset",
author = "Thomas Cuckston",
year = "2019",
month = jun,
day = "17",
doi = "10.1108/AAAJ-01-2018-3339",
language = "English",
volume = "32",
pages = "1358--1383",
journal = "Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal",
issn = "0951-3574",
publisher = "Emerald",
number = "5",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Seeking an ecologically defensible calculation of net loss/gain of biodiversity

AU - Cuckston, Thomas

PY - 2019/6/17

Y1 - 2019/6/17

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

KW - Conservation

KW - Framing

KW - Biodiversity

KW - Sustainable development,

KW - Ecology

KW - Offset

U2 - 10.1108/AAAJ-01-2018-3339

DO - 10.1108/AAAJ-01-2018-3339

M3 - Article

VL - 32

SP - 1358

EP - 1383

JO - Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal

JF - Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal

SN - 0951-3574

IS - 5

ER -