IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-04639877.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Re-founding organizational ontology for sustainability: the role of ecological accounting as a bridge between scientific and practical knowledge

Author

Listed:
  • Victor Counillon

    (CERAG - Centre d'études et de recherches appliquées à la gestion - UGA - Université Grenoble Alpes)

  • Eléonore Disse

    (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - Mines Paris - PSL (École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris) - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - I3 - Institut interdisciplinaire de l’innovation - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

We are looking to identify what organizational ontology is adapted to integrate ecological issues into accounting and explore how this ontological focus can help building a shared understanding of organizations in the context of ecological crises, by bridging sciences. We adopt a conceptual approach by unveiling the ontological presuppositions underlying some financial and socio-environmental accounting. A hypothetical case study is mobilized to illustrate how C.A.R.E ecological accounting relies on alternative assumptions about the organizational ontology. Ontological presuppositions on organizations are related to the purpose of each accounting framework. Integrating the ecological responsibility of human activities into accounting demands to better consider the impacts organizations have on natural and social entities. "Relational ontologies" seem best adapted to such an understanding. Coupled with a process-based ontology from an extension of traditional accounting, natural and human capitals' uses can be followed and managed. Taking this ontological prism renews the role of accounting: ecological accounting structures and makes sense of information, is fed by and feeds other domain-specific ontologies (e.g. hydrology, climatology, pedology, law, economics). This enables conceptualization of organizational ontology as intrinsically related to these same ontologies. Only then can knowledge generated about organizational processes be rendered relevant in these domains.

Suggested Citation

  • Victor Counillon & Eléonore Disse, 2024. "Re-founding organizational ontology for sustainability: the role of ecological accounting as a bridge between scientific and practical knowledge," Post-Print hal-04639877, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04639877
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-04639877
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-04639877/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Deegan, Craig, 2017. "Twenty five years of social and environmental accounting research within Critical Perspectives of Accounting: Hits, misses and ways forward," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 65-87.
    2. Johan Rockström & Will Steffen & Kevin Noone & Åsa Persson & F. Stuart Chapin & Eric F. Lambin & Timothy M. Lenton & Marten Scheffer & Carl Folke & Hans Joachim Schellnhuber & Björn Nykvist & Cynthia , 2009. "A safe operating space for humanity," Nature, Nature, vol. 461(7263), pages 472-475, September.
    3. Bebbington, Jan & Larrinaga, Carlos, 2014. "Accounting and sustainable development: An exploration," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 395-413.
    4. Gail Whiteman & Brian Walker & Paolo Perego, 2013. "Planetary Boundaries: Ecological Foundations for Corporate Sustainability," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(2), pages 307-336, March.
    5. James Guthrie & Amanda Ball & Federica Farneti, 2010. "Advancing Sustainable Management of Public and Not For Profit Organizations," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(4), pages 449-459, July.
    6. Orts, Eric W. & Strudler, Alan, 2002. "The Ethical and Environmental Limits of Stakeholder Theory," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(2), pages 215-233, April.
    7. Geoff Lamberton, 2005. "Sustainability accounting—a brief history and conceptual framework," Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(1), pages 7-26, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bigoni, Michele & Mohammed, Sideeq, 2023. "Critique is unsustainable: A polemic," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    2. Hörisch, Jacob & Ortas, Eduardo & Schaltegger, Stefan & Álvarez, Igor, 2015. "Environmental effects of sustainability management tools: An empirical analysis of large companies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 241-249.
    3. Delphine Gibassier & Giovanna Michelon & Mélodie Cartel, 2020. "The future of carbon accounting research: “we’ve pissed mother nature off, big time”," Post-Print hal-02810507, HAL.
    4. Larrinaga, Carlos & Garcia-Torea, Nicolas, 2022. "An ecological critique of accounting: The circular economy and COVID-19," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    5. Ruy de Castro Sobrosa Neto & Carlos Rogério Montenegro de Lima & Daniel Goulart Bazil & Manoela de Oliveira Veras & José Baltazar Salgueirinho Osório de Andrade Guerra, 2020. "Sustainable development and corporate financial performance: A study based on the Brazilian Corporate Sustainability Index (ISE)," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(4), pages 960-977, July.
    6. Lukka, Kari & Becker, Albrecht, 2023. "The future of critical interdisciplinary accounting research: Performative ontology and critical interventionist research," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    7. Brown, Paul & Ly, Tuan & Pham, Hannah & Sivabalan, Prabhu, 2020. "Automation and management control in dynamic environments: Managing organisational flexibility and energy efficiency in service sectors," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(2).
    8. Rodrigue, Michelle & Romi, Andrea M., 2022. "Environmental escalations to social inequities: Some reflections on the tumultuous state of Gaia," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    9. Sorina Geanina Stanescu & Ion Cucui & Constantin Aurelian Ionescu & Liliana Paschia & Mihaela Denisa Coman & Nicoleta Luminiţa Gudanescu Nicolau & Marilena Carmen Uzlau & Mihaela Leasa Lixandru, 2021. "Conceptual Model for Integrating Environmental Impact in Managerial Accounting Information Systems," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-21, February.
    10. Heikkurinen, Pasi & Ruuska, Toni & Wilén, Kristoffer & Ulvila, Marko, 2019. "The Anthropocene exit: Reconciling discursive tensions on the new geological epoch," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
    11. Beata Zyznarska-Dworczak, 2020. "Sustainability Accounting—Cognitive and Conceptual Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-24, November.
    12. Pätäri, Satu & Tuppura, Anni & Toppinen, Anne & Korhonen, Jaana, 2016. "Global sustainability megaforces in shaping the future of the European pulp and paper industry towards a bioeconomy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 38-46.
    13. Nelson, Ewan & Warren, Peter, 2020. "UK transport decoupling: On track for clean growth in transport?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 39-51.
    14. Richter, Andries & Dakos, Vasilis, 2015. "Profit fluctuations signal eroding resilience of natural resources," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 12-21.
    15. Natalie Slawinski & Jonatan Pinkse & Timo Busch & Subhabrata Bobby Banerjeed, 2014. "The role of short-termism and uncertainty in organizational inaction on climate change: multilevel framework," Working Papers hal-00961226, HAL.
    16. Merriam Haffar & Cory Searcy, 2018. "Target‐setting for ecological resilience: Are companies setting environmental sustainability targets in line with planetary thresholds?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(7), pages 1079-1092, November.
    17. Rostami-Tabar, Bahman & Ali, Mohammad M. & Hong, Tao & Hyndman, Rob J. & Porter, Michael D. & Syntetos, Aris, 2022. "Forecasting for social good," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 1245-1257.
    18. Huiyuan Guan & Yongping Bai & Chunyue Zhang, 2022. "Research on Ecosystem Security and Restoration Pattern of Urban Agglomeration in the Yellow River Basin," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-19, September.
    19. Filipa Correia & Philipp Erfruth & Julie Bryhn, 2018. "The 2030 Agenda: The roadmap to GlobALLizaton," Working Papers 156, United Nations, Department of Economics and Social Affairs.
    20. Erik G. Hansen & Stefan Schaltegger, 2018. "Sustainability Balanced Scorecards and their Architectures: Irrelevant or Misunderstood?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 150(4), pages 937-952, July.

    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:hal:journl:hal-04639877. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.