Natural Capital Accounting as a Strategic Tool for Biodiversity Preservation in Resource-Intensive Firms
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study examines the role of Natural Capital Accounting (NCA) as a strategic instrument for biodiversity preservation within resource-intensive firms, a sector characterized by significant ecological dependencies and impacts. The research aims to evaluate how NCA reshapes corporate governance, supports ecological risk management, and enhances biodiversity-related decision-making processes. Employing a qualitative research design through a systematic literature study, the analysis synthesizes theoretical contributions and empirical evidence from interdisciplinary scholarship in environmental accounting, ecological economics, and sustainability management. The methodological approach includes thematic content analysis of peer-reviewed studies, institutional reports, and contemporary policy frameworks to identify patterns in NCA implementation, operational challenges, and biodiversity outcomes. The findings reveal that firms adopting NCA meaningfully integrate ecological considerations into strategic planning, risk assessment, and performance evaluation, demonstrating clearer pathways toward biodiversity stewardship. However, the study also identifies significant methodological limitations, including data gaps, valuation complexities, and organizational constraints that hinder effective application. The results underscore that NCA contributes positively to biodiversity preservation when supported by strong governance structures, robust ecological data, and institutional commitment. The study concludes that NCA has considerable potential as a transformative sustainability tool, offering theoretical insights into multi-capital accounting and practical implications for aligning corporate operations with global biodiversity objectives.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
Argüello, J. (2022). Ecosystem natural capital accounting: The landscape approach. Conservation Science and Practice, 4(2), e1261. https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.1261
Barker, T. (2019). Natural capital and corporate environmental performance: Emerging perspectives. Journal of Environmental Management, 243, 45–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.04.123
Barbier, E. B. (2022). Policy implications of the Dasgupta Review: Land use change and biodiversity. Environmental and Resource Economics, 83(4), 911–935. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-022-00658-1
Beltramello, A., Martin, J., & Caruso, G. (2023). Barriers to implementing natural capital accounting in corporate systems. Journal of Cleaner Production, 412, 137002. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.137002
Dasgupta, P. (2021). The Economics of Biodiversity: The Dasgupta Review. HM Treasury. https://doi.org/10.2458/jpe.2289
Deutz, S., Gorman, M., & Lynch, K. (2021). Biodiversity and ecosystem valuation challenges in natural capital accounting. Ecological Indicators, 133, 108388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.108388
Fleming, A., Ogilvy, S., Horner, C., & O’Grady, A. P. (2024). Designing natural capital accounting for agriculture: Perceptions of farm accountants. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 15(7), 85–108. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-07-2023-1234
García-López, M. J. (2024). Mapping research on natural capital accounting. Business and Society Review, 14(2), 28–42. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm14020028
Grover, I., Suitor, S., & O’Reilly-Wapstra, J. (2025). Adoption of natural capital accounting in forestry: Lessons from Tasmanian primary industries. Forest Policy and Economics, 158, 103123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103123
Gupta, S., & Mason, C. (2020). Natural capital, biodiversity, and strategic resource dependence. Journal of Sustainable Business, 12(1), 44–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/jsb.2020.02.005
Haque, F., & Jones, M. J. (2020). Corporate biodiversity disclosures and board gender diversity. British Accounting Review, 52(2), 100893. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2020.100893
Hassan, A. M., Roberts, L., & Atkins, J. (2020). Factors influencing extinction disclosures: Corporate motivations for biodiversity reporting. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29(3), 1419–1436. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2442
Ingram, J., Bagstad, K., Hein, L., & Ruijs, A. (2022). Accounting for natural capital in decision-making: Public and private perspectives. Ecological Economics, 190, 107259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.107259
Jones, M., Carver, L., & Stoddard, R. (2020). Natural capital in mining: Applications and challenges. Resources Policy, 68, 101730. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2020.101730
Khan, N., Thomas, G., & El-Deen, S. (2023). Natural capital transparency and ESG integration in resource-intensive sectors. Journal of Environmental Management, 331, 117256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.117256
Kumar, A., Singh, D., & Rao, P. (2020). Biodiversity risk, ecological accounting, and corporate environmental behaviour. Ecological Economics, 177, 106778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2020.106778
Mace, G. M., Barrett, M., & Burgess, N. (2022). Biodiversity measurement for corporate natural capital accounting. Conservation Biology, 36(4), e13987. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13987
Reed, D., Fraser, E., & Nyberg, A. (2021). Symbolic versus substantive adoption of natural capital accounting. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 34(6), 1204–1233. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-10-2020-4990
Smith, C. L. (2021). Review of The Economics of Biodiversity: The Dasgupta Review. Biological Conservation, 264, 109395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.109395
TNFD. (2023). Biodiversity Footprinting Approaches for Financial Institutions: Technical Discussion Paper. Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures.
Vardon, M., Keith, H., Burnett, P., & Lindenmayer, D. (2022). Natural capital accounting and ecosystem condition: Implications for policy and corporate practice. Ecological Economics, 204, 107615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2022.107615