The emergence of sustainable development as the complex notion through which social and environmental issues must be addressed – whether at policy, personal or organisational levels – has had a growing influence in the accounting literature. In addition to explorations of what sustainability may mean for accounting and finance, we have experienced a growth in both critiques of sustainability reporting (sic) and in experiments and speculations on how accounting for sustainability might advance. This growth – as with social and environmental accounting before it – has very properly attracted critique. One convergent theme in that critique has been a challenge that much of the realist and procedural baggage associated with conventional accounting is no longer apposite when seeking to account for sustainability. What may be required, is a more nuanced understanding of what ‘sustainability’ actually is and how, if at all, it can have any empirical meaning at the level of the organisation. This essay seeks to initiate an auto-critique of accounting for sustainability via an examination of meanings and contradictions in sustainable development which, in turn, leads towards a suggestion for the development of multiple and conditional narratives that whilst no longer realist or totalising, explicitly challenge the hegemonic claims of business movements in the arena of sustainability and sustainable development.

Is accounting for sustainability actually accounting for sustainability…and how would we know? An exploration of narratives of organisations and the planet

Historically, management theory has ignored the constraints imposed by the biophysical (natural) environment. Building upon resource-based theory, this article attempts to fill this void by proposing a natural-resource-based view of the firm—a theory of competitive advantage based upon the firm's relationship to the natural environment. It is composed of three interconnected strategies: pollution prevention, product stewardship, and sustainable development. Propositions are advanced for each of these strategies regarding key resource requirements and their contributions to sustained competitive advantage.

A natural resource-based view of the firm

Eco-control is the application of financial and strategic control methods to environmental management. In this study, we investigate to what extent eco-control influences environmental and economic performance. Using survey-data from a sample of Canadian manufacturing firms, the results suggest that eco-control has no direct effect on economic performance. A mediating effect of environmental performance on the link between eco-control and economic performance is observed in different contexts. More specifically, eco-control indirectly influences economic performance in the context of (i) higher environmental exposure, (ii) higher public visibility, (iii) higher environmental concern, and (iv) larger size. This study contributes to the management accounting literature by providing insight into the roles and contributions of management accounting in the context of sustainable development.

/pdf/eco-control-the-influence-of-management-control-systems-on-3vhop0j1qz.pdf

Eco-control: The influence of management control systems on environmental and economic performance

https://oem.bmj.com/content/oemed/26/3/249.2.full.pdf

Questionnaire Design and Attitude Measurement

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to present a critical review of the development and current state‐of‐the‐art of social and environmental accounting (SEA) research, with particular reference to the role and contribution of the Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, while also offering some pointers as to how the field may develop in the future.Design/methodology/approach – The approach combines a literature review and critique, with particular emphasis on SEA papers published in AAAJ (1988‐2007) together with other papers published in a range of leading‐edge journals (2004‐2007).Findings – While published SEA research covers a wide range of topics, particular emphasis has been placed on polemical debate and studies investigating the organisational determinants and managerial motivations underpinning reporting initiatives. Some evidence is produced of a rapprochement between mainstream SEA scholars and critical theorists, with the moral foundation, and interventionist stance, of the former be...

Chronicles of wasted time

We seek insights into potential benefits for firms adopting strategies to improve business sustainability in a carbon-constrained future. We investigate whether lenders incorporate a firm’s exposure to carbon-related risk into lending decisions through the cost of financing, and if so, importantly whether firms can mitigate the penalty by demonstrating an awareness of their carbon risks. We use a sample of 255 firm-year observations from eight industries over the period 2009–2013. We measure carbon-related risk exposure as the firm’s historical carbon emissions and our primary measure of carbon risk awareness is based on the firm’s willingness to respond to the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) survey. We document a positive association between cost of debt and carbon risk for firms failing to respond to the CDP. Further, this association is economically meaningful, with a one standard deviation increase in carbon risk mapping into between a 38 and 62 basis point increase in the cost of debt. Equally, we find that this penalty is effectively negated for firms exhibiting carbon risk awareness. Our results are robust when we consider alternate measures of carbon awareness—disclosure through alternative medium to the CDP and firms’ annual cash investment in new capital assets using “cleaner” technology. Our results highlight not only the importance of carbon awareness as a business strategy for polluting firms, but also its importance to lenders exposed to their clients’ default and reputational risk. The debt market appears to incorporate historical carbon emissions and forward-looking indicators of carbon performance.

Carbon Risk, Carbon Risk Awareness and the Cost of Debt Financing

A lack of appropriate measurement techniques has constrained full cost environmental accounting (FCEA) experimentation. Yet, there has been little research on the applicability of valuation techniques recently developed by environmental economists within FLEA frameworks. This paper examines a reporting experiment using these valuation techniques that was undertaken by an Australian Government Department managing publicly owned forests. The FCEA experiment was ultimately not successful. However, the implementation experiences of the Department including the reactions of its managers and stakeholders provide an opportunity to critically reflect on the experimental outcomes to extend the current empirical knowledge of corporate social responsibility reporting. Such critical reflection has not been common in past FCEA experimentation. © 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

A full cost environmental accounting experiment

This paper explores the relation between sustainability performance and sustainability disclosure within the Australian extractive industries. The study utilizes Ullmann's (1985) stakeholder framework, which depicts sustainability disclosure and performance as two components of management strategy for dealing with stakeholder demands. Consistent with this framework, we predict a positive performance–disclosure relation. Extending prior research that has utilized problematic environmental performance indices such as CEP indices or toxic emissions levels, we develop a sustainability performance index based on the International Finance Corporation's Measuring Sustainability Framework (2001). Using data from 339 mining and energy firms listed on the Australian Securities Exchange in 2006, we find that corporate sustainability performance is strongly associated with disclosure as expected. Sustainability disclosure is also greater for firms with a proactive communication strategy as manifested through press release activity. Finally, asset age and firm size are both positively associated with sustainability, consistent with predictions from the stakeholder framework.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/ABAC_ABAC12036.pdf?abstractid=2536166&mirid=4

Corporate Social Responsibility: The Link Between Sustainability Disclosure and Sustainability Performance

Banks face a dilemma in choosing between maximising profits and facilitating the sustainable use of resources within a carbon-constrained future. This study provides empirical evidence on this dilemma, investigating whether a bank loan announcement for a firm with high carbon risk conveys information to investors about the firm’s carbon risk exposure collected through a bank’s pre-loan screening and ongoing monitoring. We use a sample of 120 bank loan announcements for ASX-listed firms over the period 2009–2015. We measure high (low) carbon risk exposure based on whether firms meet (do not meet) the reporting threshold of the NGER scheme. We document positive and significant excess loan announcement returns for loan renewals for high carbon risk firms, but not for loan initiations. Further, we document a more significant loan announcement return for renewals with favourable term revisions. Finally, we find no evidence that the market differentiates between domestic and foreign lenders. Taken together, our results suggest that investors perceive that banks incorporate carbon risk considerations into their lending decisions. Our results highlight the value of banks as financial intermediaries given the information asymmetry surrounding firms’ carbon risk exposure, and more generally the need to extend modern banking theory to consider issues such as the impact of banks’ CSR reputation on lending decisions.

Evidence on Whether Banks Consider Carbon Risk in Their Lending Decisions

This paper investigates the implications of International Accounting Standard 41 (IAS 41) for European Union (EU) entities reporting on material holdings of forest assets. To all intents and purposes, Australia has been a test for IAS 41 because of the close similarities between IAS 41 and the relevant Australian regulation on forestry that has been operational for the last four years. The Australian reporting experience is used to identify potential implications for EU reporting entities. Evidence suggests that constituents’ key concerns with IAS 41 relate to the measurement of biological assets at fair value and the inclusion in income of unrealised gains or losses from measuring these assets at fair value. These concerns are borne out by the Australian experiences. Evidence is presented that suggests that compliance with IAS 41 will allow statement preparers a choice of methods to determine the fair value of timber assets. Additionally, it seem likely that the recognition of unrealised gains and losses from timber assets from changes in fair value and the harvest of agricultural produce will markedly affect income statements, introducing greater volatility into reported income. The impact has been greater for government departments. The median timber gain expressed as a percentage of net profit ranged from 44.5% to 79.9% in individual years. An unresolved issue has been identified — do such accounting procedures reflect the nature of investment in forestry?

https://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:195955/SFEMP5_2Herbohn_Herbohn.pdf

Kathleen Herbohn

Papers

Carbon Risk, Carbon Risk Awareness and the Cost of Debt Financing

A full cost environmental accounting experiment

Corporate Social Responsibility: The Link Between Sustainability Disclosure and Sustainability Performance

Evidence on Whether Banks Consider Carbon Risk in Their Lending Decisions

International Accounting Standard (IAS) 41: What are the implications for reporting forest assets?