Author
Listed:
- Eva-Maria Öhlinger
- Othmar Manfred Lehner
Abstract
Purpose - This study aims to analyse biodiversity accounting and accountability regimes under the European Green Deal (EGD), focusing on whether both regulations and actions align with the scientific consensus on biodiversity conservation, particularly regarding underrepresented drivers such as land-use change. Design/methodology/approach - The research uses a teleological methodology, as articulated by Scott Shapiro and Richard Gardiner, interpreting legal texts through their intended outcomes and broader normative objectives. It critically examines the EGD’s legislative texts and actions, comparing them with scientific evidence from Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services and key literature on biodiversity drivers, policy gaps and regulatory enforcement. Findings - The study finds that while the EGD encompasses numerous regulations aimed at halting biodiversity loss, it overemphasizes pollution control at the expense of other critical biodiversity loss drivers like land-use change. The analysis reveals a significant gap between EGD regulations and the scientific consensus on biodiversity drivers, highlighting the need for stronger land-use policies, improved enforcement mechanisms and better integration of biodiversity considerations into sectoral policies like agriculture. Practical implications - The study provides actionable policy recommendations for reforming land-use policies, enhancing enforcement mechanisms and improving corporate biodiversity disclosures. It also outlines a teleological approach to help policymakers evaluate the effectiveness of biodiversity-related regulations in the EGD, ensuring better alignment with scientific recommendations and sustainable practices. Social implications - By addressing the gap between EGD regulations and the broader scientific consensus on biodiversity drivers, this study promotes more effective biodiversity conservation strategies that will benefit both the environment and society by fostering sustainable land use and reducing ecosystem pressures. Originality/value - This research highlights the necessity of aligning policy measures with scientific understanding to enhance biodiversity conservation. It offers original insights into the misalignment between the EGD’s regulatory focus and biodiversity loss drivers and outlines clear policy recommendations such as reforming land-use policies, enhancing enforcement and improving corporate biodiversity reporting through frameworks like the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive. This study further concludes with necessary future research avenues on biodiversity accounting, regarding anthropocentricism, valuation, telecoupling and equity perspectives.
Suggested Citation
Eva-Maria Öhlinger & Othmar Manfred Lehner, 2025.
"Aligning policy and science: a teleological analysis of biodiversity accounting and accountability under the European Green Deal,"
Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 16(7), pages 62-97, March.
Handle:
RePEc:eme:sampjp:sampj-07-2024-0751
DOI: 10.1108/SAMPJ-07-2024-0751
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:sampjp:sampj-07-2024-0751. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.