10.1.1.538.2762.pdf

Accounttng, OrgantzattonsandSoctety, Vol. 17,No. 5,pp. 399---425,1992. Printed in Great Britain

0361-3682/92 $5.00+.00 Pergamon Press Ltd

ACCOUNTING AND ENVIRONMENTALISM: AN EXPLORATION OF THE CHAI.I.ENGE OF GENTLY ACCOUNTING FOR ACCOUNTABILITY, TRANSPARENCY AND SUSTAINABILITY*

ROB GRAY

University o f D u n d e e

Abstract

Concern for the natural environment has not occupied a prominent role in accounting scholarship and practice. This paper attempts to redress this omission by investigating the implications for accounOng of placing the environment at the centre of the analysis.The paper introduces the principlesof this "deep green" position and expiores how accounting might ~ e them. Whilst there may be no place for what we currently consider to be conventional financialaccounting in any "green utopia" the paper does attempt to operationalise, within a non-green world, certain of the principlesof the green positiotLFanplmstsis placed on an accounttng's potemial for contribution to accountability and wanspatency in partidpative democracy, the potential for non-financial accounts of the biosphere and, perhaps most contentiously, the use of current accounting techniques for operatinnalisation of an accounting for sustainabillty.

A t t e m p t s t o r e i n t r o d u c e p r o t e c t i o n a n d c a r e for the environment into our thinking and into our ways of doing things leads slowly but inevitably t o r a d i c a l r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f c u r r e n t attitudes, s t r u c t u r e s , beliefs and m o d i operandi. The e x t e n t t o w h i c h w e m i g h t c h o o s e to " p l a c e t h e e n v i r o n m e n t at t h e c e n t r e o f all things" ( a s t h e "deep greens" are increasingly accused of doing) will profoundly influence the impact of that reconsideration. H o w e v e r , e v e n a p r a g m a t i c a p p r o a c h t o survival ( o f t h e h u m a n s p e c i e s , o f other species or of the planet) and to the s u s t a i n a b i l i t y o f c u r r e n t h u m a n s o c i e t i e s (as, for example, taken by the Brundtland Commission - - U n i t e d Nations, 1 9 8 7 ) i n e x o r a b l y f o r c e s r e a l i s a t i o n that t h e r o o t s o f m o d e r n ( e s p e c i a l l y Western) society are essentially incommensura b l e b o t h w i t h c o n t i n u e d survival a n d w i t h a n y

sets o f v a l u e s o t h e r t h a n t h o s e o f ( v e r y ) shortt e r m ( h u m a n a n d e c o n o m i c ) self-interest. T h e e x t e n t o f this r e a l i s a t i o n s e e m s w e l l illustrated b y t h e h o s t o f a p p a r e n t l y i n c o m p a t i b l e commentators, from a wide range of seemingly c o n t r a d i c t o r y b a c k g r o u n d s , offering f u n d a m e n tally similar, b u t s u b v e r s i v e , c o n c e p t s as w a y s o f r e s p o n d i n g t o t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l crisis. W h e n a f u t u r e k i n g o f England, t h e W o r l d C o u n c i l o f C h u r c h e s , e c o l o g i c a l h u m a n i s t s (e.g. Furkiss, 19 74 ), t h e U n i t e d Nations, h o l i s t i c s e e k e r s o f t h e T a o (e.g. Lovelock, 1982; D a u n c e y , 1988), c o n v e n t i o n a l t h e o l o g i a n s (e.g. Daly & C o b b , 1990), a n d activists f r o m t h e w h o l e o f t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l p o l i t i c a l s p e c t r u m (e.g. C a p r a & Spetnak, 1984; Parkin, 1 9 8 9 ) c a n b r o a d l y a g r e e a b o u t a r o o t issue a n d a b o u t t h e e l e m e n t s o f its c o r r e c t i o n , t h e n p e r h a p s o b s e r v e r s s u c h as

* I very gratefully acknowledge the helpful comments received on earlier drafts of the paper from Jan Bebbington, Jane Broadbent, Tony Clayton, David Collison, Sonja Gallhofer, Sue Gray, John Grinyer, Jim Haslam, Ruth Hines, Anthony Hopwood, Richard Laughlin, Linda Lewis, Margaret Llston, Keith Maunders, Sheila Morrison, Rolland Munro, ArmNeale, Dave Owen, Mike Power, Tony Tinker, Diane Wakers, David Weston and TOES, colleagues at the Universities of Edinburg~ Essex, Heriot-Watt and Manchester, participants at EIASMWorkshop 1990, BAA Conference 1991, IPA Conference 1991 and the anonymous referees for IPA and AOS. 399

400

1~ GRAY

R o b e r t s o n (e.g. 1 9 7 8 ) a r e justified in s u g g e s t i n g that h u m a n s o c i e t y ( e s p e c i a l l y in t h e d e v e l o p e d w o r l d 1) is in t h e p r o c e s s o f e x p e r i e n c i n g a " p a r a d i g m shift". 2 This p a p e r is an a t t e m p t to e x p l o r e o n e o f t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y c e n t r e d p o s i t i o n s - - that o f t h e " d e e p g r e e n s " - - a n d s o m e o f t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s it m i g h t h a v e for f o r m s o f a c c o u n t i n g . 3 T h e p a p e r is m o t i v a t e d b y t h r e e strands. Firstly, I a m t r y i n g to e x t e n d t h e p r o j e c t o f d e v e l o p i n g a social a c c o u n t i n g t h a t takes an a c c o u n t a b i l i t y , c o m munity and environment-centred approach ( G r a y et aL, 1987, 1988, 1991; Gray, 1990a, c, d), whilst trying to begin the process of r e s p o n d i n g t o t h e r a d i c a l c r i t i q u e o f this p r o j e c t ( s e e b e l o w ) . Secondly, t h e s p l e n d i d g e n e r o s i t y and vision o f Arrington's r e c e n t call for s o l / d a r / ~ a n d his a t t e m p t s t o " . . . m a k e t h o s e i n t e r e s t e d in p u b l i c i n t e r e s t a c c o u n t i n g feel g o o d a b o u t t h e i r r e s e a r c h . . . " ( A r r i n g t o n , 1900, p. 5 ) e m p o w e r s and encourages the pursuit of new possibilities " u n f e t t e r e d b y t h e stifling a n d i n t e l l e c t u a l l y a r c h a i c m e t h o d s o f s c h o l a r s h i p " . A n d w h i l s t this is n o e x c u s e for p o o r s c h o l a r s h i p it e n c o u r a g e s t h e o p e n i n g o f different d o o r s . Thirdly, t h e present intellectual climate now encourages o p e n n e s s a b o u t beliefs in g r e e n possibilities. The long-standing urgency of environmental issues (e.g. Gray, 1990d, c h a p t e r 2 ) has n o t o v e r c o m e t h e c o n s i d e r a b l e r e s i s t a n c e t h e r e is t o t h e c o n c e p t s involved. This has t e n d e d t o e n c o u r a g e t h e u s e o f social a c c o u n t i n g as t h e T r o j a n h o r s e ( a l t h o u g h o n e w h i c h has n o t b e e n w a r m I y w e l c o m e d i n t o t h e gates o f t h e c i t a d e l ) . E n v i r o n m e n t a l i s m c a n n o w rise f r o m its p o s i t i o n

as an "also" issue in social D a n d i n d e e d in conventional D accounting to a matter of c e n t r a l i m p o r t a n c e . This p a p e r f o l l o w s o n f r o m G r a y ( 1 9 9 0 d ) in t r y i n g t o d o this. Before i n t r o d u c i n g t h e s t r u c t u r e o f t h e p a p e r , I b e l i e v e it is n e c e s s a r y t o briefly a c k n o w l e d g e o n e v e r y p e r t i n e n t a n d i m p o r t a n t t e n s i o n in t h e a c c o u n t i n g l i t e r a t u r e - - o n e w h i c h pred o m i n a n t l y c e n t r e s a r o u n d t h e social a c c o u n t i n g literature. This is t h e a p p a r e n t , b u t p r o b a b l y unnecessary, tension between scholarly rigour a n d p o l i t i c a l a c t i o n arising f r o m scholarship. D e s p i t e t h e g r o w i n g b o d y o f insightful analysis i n t o t h e r o l e s t h a t a c c o u n t i n g p l a y s in organisat i o n a l a n d social activity, a n d t h e i n c r e a s i n g n u m b e r o f calls for t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f n e w accountings, the researchers who have offered their hostages to fortune by way of concrete p r o p o s a l s for a c t u a l n e w f o r m s o f a c c o u n t i n g r e m a i n f e w in n u m b e r . It is, it w o u l d s e e m , difficult t o t r a n s l a t e r a d i c a l insight i n t o suggest i o n s for action, n o t least, I s u s p e c t , b e c a u s e s p e c u l a t i o n a n d p r o p o s a l in a c c o u n t i n g r a r e l y m a i n t a i n t h e r i g o r o u s level o f c r i t i c a l a n d analytical sophistication associated w i t h scholarly activity. T i n k e r e t al. (1991) a n d R o s l e n d e r (1990) note the importance of the distinction that m u s t b e d r a w n b e t w e e n " i n t e l l e c t u a l " a n d "political" radicalism. T h a t is, i n t e l l e c t u a l l y r a d i c a l insights m a y v e r y w e l l clarify, l i b e r a t e and enable and thus encourage new discourse and perceptions (and thus creations) of new "realities" b u t this is n o t t h e e x t e n t o f t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f t h e scholar. I n t h e s a m e w a y that "positivists" m a y b e a c c u s e d o f i m p l i c i t l y

"Developed world" is used here only because of the easy immediate referents which it connotes. I am conscious that it is a potentiallypejorative term but the use of the preferred term "over-developedworld" will raise too many other issues that, for reasons of practicability,have been excluded from this paper. Ethnocentricity is a danger that every commentator must face and whilst I have tried to limit it, I must apologise in advance for the inevitable occasions upon which it creeps througtL 2For more detail on the case for paradigm shift see Goldsmith (1988), Daly & Cobb (1990), Dauncey (1988), Robertson (1978), Lovelock (1982). 5 The various shades of "green" are eloquently explored in Plant & Plant ( 1991 ). The "deep green" position employed in this paper must be distinguished from that of "deep ecology", in that the former is anthropocentric whereas "deep ecology" is ecology-centred.That is, this paper places the environment at the centre ofbuman analysis but privilegeshuman-idnd, "deep ecology" attempts to place human-kind on an equal footingwith all species. For an especiallygood introduction to this and its implications in accounting see Maunders & Burritt (1991) and see also Dobson (1990).

ACCOUNTINGANDENVIRONMENTALISM

taking o n the bias of the status quo, it seems to follow that the "intellectual radical" takes on a dissatis~-action with the w a y things are. This suggests a desire for social change. But what social change? The "political radical" recognises that his or her project is o n e o f seeking social change and that insight and debate - - of subverting d i s c o ~ m are not the only means of seeking this. Such scholars will seek various means to try and m o v e agendas, etc., and, it seems to me, will p r o p o s e " n e w ways of doing" that will also shift attitudes as well as shifting practice. The social accounting literature contains s o m e of the m o r e obvious examples of these issues. Projects for social change through accounting change of o n e sort or another are generally coupled with theoretical flaccidity resulting from ( 1 ) an implicit, or at least underspecified value and belief base; ( 2 ) a lack o f rigorous d e v e l o p m e n t of the proposals from s o m e scholastic framework; and ( 3 ) a failure to fully explicate social structures and tensious and thus, as a result, a failure to articulate ( o r at least hypothesise) the mechanisms of social change. These criticisms are splendidly highlighted b y Tinker e t a l . ( 1 9 9 1 ) and b y Puxty (1986), and are accurately targeted at the w h o l e social accounting project. 4 This p a p e r is an attempt to develop that project but tries to begin the process o f taking these criticisms on board. The p a p e r is structured as follows. The next section examines the failures of "conventional" economics (being the foundation of "conventionar' accounting) with particular regard to its inability to encompass adequately environmental issues. The section which follows then focuses on the particular failure with regard to "externalities". Next, a very brief critique of a "conventional" Marxian analysis suggests that an approach based in this thought w o u l d also fail to give sufficient p r o m i n e n c e to the p r o t e c t i o n of the environment. The " d e e p green" position and the guiding principles of environmentalism are then outlined. Then the question of " h o w to get

401

there from here" is approached, first by exploring the sort of actions that are open to the accounting scholar and then b y specifying a n u m b e r of limitations inherent in the ensuing discussion. The t w o sections which follow are attempts to m o v e towards social action and explore, respectively, h o w accounting might contribute to accountability and transparency and h o w and w h y (if at all) w e might account for sustainability. The final section contains conclusions. The principal argument of the p a p e r begins with an examination of conventional economics and it is to this that I n o w turn.

LIMITATIONS OF TRADITIONAL ECONOMICS AND THE NEED FOR PARADIGM SHIFT It w o u l d s e e m that a major part of the process of radically re-thinking the world must begin from the role that e c o n o m i c s has played in constructing o u r world, the ubiquity o f that role, the effects of that role and the profound limitations which economists, in general, have failed to notice and/or to sufficiently clarify. This is critically the case w h e n w e are considering environmental issues and w h e n w e are considering accounting. This is because our conceptious of "environment", the steady but rapid destruction of the biosphere, the m a n n e r of that destruction and the w a y in which accounting is implicated in this (Gray, 1990d) must all, I suggest, b e laid firmly at the d o o r of " m o d e r n conventional" e c o n o m i c thinking, W e must, therefore, first identify the cage in which w e place ourselves through e c o n o m i c thought, and then escape that cage if w e are to adequately address either changes in accounting in general, and protection and e n h a n c e m e n t of the environm e n t in particular (Gray, 1990f; see also Maunders & Burritt, 1991). The extent to which traditional e c o n o m i c thinking dominates o u r conceptualisation, language and explanation of the world ( b o t h the

4 And, in particular, at the project of Gray at al. ( 1986, 1987, 1988, 1990b, 1991 ).

402

IL GRAY

world as is and the w o r l d as can b e ) has b e e n widely remarked upon. It would seem that the extent of this colonisation must not b e underestimated. Any reasoning in the world of economics, politics, sociology and environmentalism that fails to explicitly explore the influence of traditional economic thinking seems, b y default, to adopt the limitations and assumptions of traditional economics and all the baggage of the status quo, the w o r l d of business and the roles of organisations that currently pervade our world (Tinker et al., 1982, 1991 ). Perhaps this would not matter if traditional e c o n o m i c thought could b e seen as principally benign to life and the planet, but there is an increasing amount of argument that suggests quite the opposite. "Economic theory presents the guiding principles of 'doing business' and the infi~astructure of assumptions, values and beliefs that govern political and social behaviour" (Reilly & Kyj, 1990, p. 691; see also Owen, 1990). It presents a construction of the world that profoundly influences attitudes to and behaviour towards that w o r l d ( Smith, 1980 ). Economic theory thus helps construct the w o r l d (see Hines', 1988, argument along the same lines for the role of accounting). It is founded in a faith about the world (McKee, 1986) - - a faith that is maintained as implicit and unquestioned (McKee, 1986; Heilbroner, 1984; Tinker, 1984a, c; Boulding, 1982; see also Hines, 1991a for exploration of the same p h e n o m e n a in accounting). The faith is founded u p o n a severe simplification and reinterpretation of the founding ideals of, especially, Adam Smith and J o h n Stuart Mill (Coker, 1990; Daly, 1980; Reilly & Kyj, 1990; Hardin, 1968; Held, 1987; Gray, 1989) and yet, as with any c o m m i t t e d believer, the faith remains unexamined and is assumed to contain absolute truth (Schumacher, 1968). There are a n u m b e r of highly significant characteristics of traditional economics 5 which

seem irrefutably to be neither necessarily of unqualified desirability nor logically supportable as immutable truths. These can b e briefly rehearsed ( b u t see also Gorz, 1989; Daly & Cobb, 1990). There is no necessary intrinsic desirability in rational economic man (Gambling, 1978; Reilly & Kyj, 1990). The exclusion of loyalty, compassion, altruism, sympathy, concern for others, etc., from any definition of human rationality could well exclude economics as having any pretensions to being a science of humanity ( Reilly & Kyj, 1990; see also Armstrong, 1991 ). Similarly, ethical issues remain implicit (as a simplistic utilitarian version of consequentialist value-reasoning) and thus persuade to a view of value-freedom which is unsustainable (McKee, 1986; Raines &Jung, 1986; Heilbroner, 1984) and/or exclude other forms of moral reasoning from any analysis within an economics paradigm (Daly, 1980; Gray, 1990e; Turner & Pearce, 1990). Initial distributions of wealth, p o w e r and opportunity are ignored, "efficiency" c o m e s to m e a n only a very specialised, and perhaps irrelevant, type of activity (Schumacher, 1974) and, as Erlich & Erlich ( 1 9 7 8 ) argue from Boulding, perhaps w e do efficiently that which should not be done at all (see also Machin & Lowe, 1983). Economic growth is seen as selfevidently desirable w h e n there is no real argument to support it being any such thing (Daly, 1980), whilst technology is p r e s u m e d to be neutral and to arrive deus e x m a c h i n a w h e n this is precisely what it is not (Dickson, 1974; Georgescu-Roegen, 1975). Furthermore, e c o n o m i c reasoning only achieves its considerable p o w e r by grossly simplifying and reducing the w o r l d (Smith, 1980; Daly, 1980), and whilst there may b e m u c h to applaud in such an approach to modelling c o m p l e x systems, it is the case that reductionism necessarily violates structures ( v o n Bertlanffy, 1956, 1971, 1972) and can have little to say about the c o m p l e x world from which it was extrapolated

5 "Traditional" or "conventional" economics refers here to capitalist economics as opposed to (say) Islamic economics. Reference to neo-classicaleconomics, which might be an easier term to use, usually stands accused of being a straw-person (e.g. Gray, 1990f).

ACCOUNTINGAND ENVIRONMENTALISM ( T i n k e r , 1984a, c; Silverman, 1970; Allen, 1975). 6 O n e c o u l d c o n t i n u e b u t that is n o t the p u r p o s e o f this paper. T h e f o r e g o i n g c o m m e n t s p r o v i d e a b a c k d r o p to a s s u m p t i o n s a b o u t t h e ubiquity and intellectual integrity of economic r e a s o n i n g . T h e r e is m u c h to b e w a r e of i n e c o n o m i c r e a s o n i n g and, w i t h o u t a n e x p l i c i t awareness, w e m a y so easily find o u r s e l v e s especially i n a c c o u n t i n g , b u s i n e s s a n d m a n a g e m e n t s u b j e c t s ~ falling b a c k i n t o t h e categories a n d a s s u m p t i o n s o f r e d u c t i o n i s t , traditional e c o n o m i c s ( T i n k e r e t al., 1991; Tinker, 1984a, c). T h u s t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l i s t s ' c r i t i q u e s of e c o n o m i c r e a s o n i n g s h o u l d n o t b e s e e n as i n t e l l e c t u a l l y isolated ~ t h e y b u i l d u p o n a n d extend a substantive critique of conventional t h o u g h t that already p e r v a d e s o u r discipline.

ENVIRONMENT AS "EXTERNALITY" OR AS "INTERNALITY" A l t h o u g h t h e r e is a c o n s i d e r a b l e l i t e r a t u r e i n w h i c h c o n v e n t i o n a l e c o n o m i c t h o u g h t addresses the issues arising from the physical e n v i r o n m e n t (e.g. Fisher & Peterson, 1976; Fisher, 1981; Pearce e t al., 1989), it is i n r e s p e c t of e n v i r o n m e n t a l matters that traditional e c o n o m i c t h o u g h t has r e c e i v e d w h a t is p r o b a b l y its m o s t t h o r o u g h attack. B o u l d i n g has l o n g b e e n a critic o f e c o n o m i s t s ' h a n d l i n g o f e n v i r o n m e n t a l issues, h i g h l i g h t i n g t h e i r failure to d i s t i n g u i s h b e t w e e n o p e n and closed systems (Boulding, 1966) and thus failing to realise that t h e r e is m u c h w h i c h a n e c o n o m i s t seeks to m a x i m i s e ( s u c h as t h r o u g h p u t a n d use o f r e s o u r c e s ) that should, i n the i n t e r e s t s o f life a n d t h e planet, n o t b e maximised but minimised. B o u l d i n g later ( B o u l d i n g , 1 9 8 2 ) goes o n to r e m i n d e c o n o m i s t s "... a law o f e c o n o m i c s that has b e e n m u c h n e g l e c t e d is: 'goods a n d bads t e n d to b e j o i n t l y p r o d u c e d ' " . Such c o m p a s s i o n a t e a n d e v e n f o n d criticisms are to b e c o n t r a s t e d w i t h b r o a d s i d e s

403

b y t h e like o f Victor ( 1 9 7 9 ) . Victor effectively argues that e c o n o m i c s a n d t h e physical e n v i r o n m e n t are f u n d a m e n t a l l y i n c o m p a t i b l e ( a n argum e n t e c h o e d in, for example, Daly, 1980; Zaikov, 1986 and, i n a different vein, Coppock, 1977). For e x a m p l e , w h i l s t a n e c o n o m i s t will see e n v i r o n m e n t a l issues as arising f r o m breakd o w n s i n t h e m a r k e t a n d seek t h e r e f o r e to r e p a i r o r e x t e n d t h e market, Victor w o u l d a r g u e that t h e y r e p r e s e n t b r e a k d o w n s i n e c o n o m i c s itself (see also, for example, Schumacher, 1974; Smith, 1980; G e o r g e s c u - R o e g e n , 1975; Daly, 1985). But to m y mind, the m o s t persuasive a r g u m e n t is that o f Daly ( 1 9 8 0 , pp. 2 3 8 e t seq.). In an a r g u m e n t w h i c h i n d e p e n d e n t l y parallels that of ReiUy & Kyj ( 1 9 9 0 ) o n the s u b j e c t of ethical values, Daly q u e s t i o n s h o w a m a t t e r as i m p o r t a n t as t h e physical e n v i r o n m e n t c a n b e t r e a t e d as e x t e r n a l to a s u b j e c t w h i c h claims so m u c h for h u m a n e x i s t e n c e a n d b e h a v i o u r . Surely t h e e n v i r o n m e n t ( a n d , for Reilly & Kyj, ethical v a l u e s ) m u s t b e m o s t firmly e m b e d d e d i n m that is, i n t e r n a l to - - a n y c o n s t r u c t w h i c h p u r p o r t s to c o n t r i b u t e to life a n d t h e planet: Such [dramatic environmental] phenomena have long been recognised (grudgingly) in economic theory under the heading of externalities - - that is, interrelationships whose connecting links are external to the economists' abstract world of commodities but very much internal to the world in which we live, move and have our being. Pehaps "non-market interdependence" is a more descriptive term. It would be easy to liken this concept to a deus ex machina lowered into the scene by our theoretical playwrights to save an awkward plot, but it is by no means easy to suggest a better treatmenL A better treatment is called for, however, since externalities are spending more time center stage and less time in the wings than previously. Or, changing the metaphor, to continue theoretical development via continued ad hoc introduction of externalities is reminiscent of adding epicycles and in the long run will only lead to Ptolemaic complications in economic theory. Our economic cosmos is not one of uniform circular motion of commodities among men but one of elliptical orbits through interdependent ecological sectors (Daly, 1980, pp. 245-246).

6 The whole issue of modelling and abstraction is clearly problematic in all discourse. The matter is side-stepped here but only for reasons of clarity.

404

IL GRAY

The construction of a "New Economics'; thus becomes not only a daunting but an urgent p r o j e c t . T h e r e are, in fact, an i n c r e a s i n g n u m b e r of attempts to construct a new economic paradigm, building from the early inspiration of S c h u m a c h e r ( s e e , for e x a m p l e , S c h u m a c h e r , 1968, 1973, 1 9 7 4 ) a n d e m b o l d e n e d b y T h e O t h e r E c o n o m i c S u m m i t a n d T h e N e w Economics Foundation (arising out of Schumacher's t h i n k i n g ) t h e y h a v e m a n y things in c o m m o n m t h e m o s t c r i t i c a l o f w h i c h is a r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e n e e d for t h e r e to b e a r o o t - r e a p p r a i s a l o f assumpt i o n s b e f o r e t h e e x e r c i s e c a n b e successful (e.g. R o b e r t s o n , 1978, 1985; G o l d s m i t h , 1988; D a u n c e y , 1988; H e n d e r s o n , 1978, 1991; Daly & C o b b , 1990; Ekins, 1986).

MARX AND THE ENVIRONMENT As H e i l b r o n e r has c o n t i n u a l l y a n d successfully a r g u e d (e.g. H e i l b r o n e r , 1983, 1984), t h e m o s t c o g e n t critique o f t h e status quo, e m b e d d e d as it is in liberal d e m o c r a c y and economics, m u s t c o m e f r o m Marx. 7 H o w e v e r , t h e l i t e r a t u r e is far f r o m c l e a r a b o u t t h e e x t e n t to w h i c h M a r x i a n analysis c a n b e said to b e c o m p a t i b l e w i t h o r at variance with environmentalism. 8 The value and influence o f t h e c r i t i q u e that M a r x i a n analysis has s u p p l i e d c a n n o t b e o v e r v a l u e d . H o w e v e r , t h e a r g u m e n t s s u c h as t h a t f r o m ( f o r e x a m p l e ) Daly & C o b b ( 1 9 9 0 ) , that in t h e focus o n employment, the derivation of value from labour, t h e a t t r a c t i o n s o f c e n t r a l i s a t i o n , a b e l i e f in g r o w t h , a faith in t e c h n o - c e n t r i s t solutions, t h e c e n t r a l p o s i t i o n o f conflict a n d an u n c o n s c i o u s s u b s c r i p t i o n t o scientism, p l a c e s M a r x

(from

an e n v i r o n m e n t a l i s t ' s v i e w ) c l o s e r t o liberal economics than to environmentalism. H o w e v e r , it is i n e v i t a b l e that s u c h a r g u m e n t s will b e r e j e c t e d b y s o m e Marxist scholars. T h e p r i n c i p a l g r o u n d s for this r e j e c t i o n c e n t r e o n t h e r e c o g n i t i o n t h a t M a r x gave b o t h t o " e n v i r o n m e n t " a n d t o " l a b o u r " as d i s t i n c t f r o m e m p l o y m e n t in his e a r l i e r writings. T h e d e v e l o p m e n t in Marx's t h o u g h t led, h o w e v e r , t o t h e r e c o g n i t i o n of the need to explicate the processes that g e n e r a t e d t h e p r o b l e m s ( w h e t h e r "social" o r " e n v i r o n m e n t a l " , in so far as t h e y c a n b e d i s t i n g u i s h e d ) that o n e s o u g h t t o address. W i t h o u t an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e s e p r o c e s s e s , the recommendations of solutions would stand i s o l a t e d a n d i m p o t e n t . 9 It is c e r t a i n l y t h e case that the "deep green" position (see below) offers little in t h e w a y o f detailed analysis o f t h e h i s t o r i c a l social p r o c e s s e s t h a t b r o u g h t us t o this p o i n t o f e n v i r o n m e n t a l crisis a n d so s t a n d s a c c u s e d o f failing t o r e c o g u i s e social tension, p o w e r a n d conflict (e.g. Sandbach, 1980). H o w e v e r , t h e significant c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o t h e g r e e n d e b a t e f r o m w r i t e r s s u c h as Ryle ( 1 9 8 8 ) , G o r z ( 1 9 8 9 ) , Frankel ( 1 9 8 7 ) a n d D o b s o n ( 1 9 9 0 ) s h o w that, at a m i n i m u m , t h e r e are s o m e i m p o r t a n t p o i n t s o f c o m m o n a l i t y . T h a t is, t h e r e w o u l d s e e m t o b e little q u e s t i o n that M a r x i a n s c h o l a r s h i p still p r o v i d e s a c r u c i a l i n p u t t o t h e explication of the causes of environmental destruction and can continue to enlighten the e n v i r o n m e n t a l debate, e t e n though, the p o s i t i o n o f t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l issues is n o t c o n s i d e r e d b y e n v i r o n m e n t a l i s t s to b e sufficiently c e n t r a l in t h e analysis. T h e e x t e n t o f t h e shift in t h i n k i n g that a d e e p g r e e n p e r s p e c t i v e is asking for is i l l u s t r a t e d b y

7 Heilbroner, it seems, doubts whether other viable alternatives can be found. Daly ( 1980 ) attacks this notion and, effectively silences it (to my mind) in Daly & Cobb (1990). However, the ubiquity of these two, adversarial positions which might represent the whole of human p o s s i b i l i t y s e e m s a fair reflection of most social science literature. The literature of environmentalism is a real attempt to move away from this two-sided debate and add a third, significantly different, dimension. 8 Such a concern is deeply apparent within the political movements themselves, see Capra & Spremak (1984) and Parkin (1989). 91 am especially grateful to Tony Tinker fur taking the time to raise these issues with me.

ACCOUNTINGAND ENVIRONMENTALISM recognition that this conclusion on the place of Marxian scholarship is m u c h the same as the conclusion reached by Daly & Cobb ( 1990 ) and, for example, Dauncey ( 1 9 8 8 ) with respect to l i b e r a l e c o n o m i c s ~ there is m u c h that is a l s o salvageable from liberalism for the development of environmentalism. 1° The principal issue here, and the reason w h y I have not further developed the Marxist critique, is that whilst pluralism and liberal e c o n o m y on the one hand, and socialism and Marxist reasoning on the other, have been seen as the major, and possibly only, substantive positions for analysing and reconstructing the western world (e.g. Heilbroner, 1983, 1984), the deep greens are attempting to define a t h i r d major position that draws from both the other two (see also Dobson, 1990). This is examined in the next section.

DEEP GREEN AND THE PRINCIPLES OF ENVIRONMENTALISM Harte e t al. ( 1 9 9 0 ) correctly note that environmental degradation is only one part of the environmentalism agenda m it just happens to be the most prominent and the one to w h i c h most parties are responding. However, whilst Harte e t al. correctly identify that responses to this issue generally lie within the parameters of the current business and economics agenda (and therefore stands accused by the radical critique; Tinker e t aL, 1991; Puxty, 1986), they fail to identify the essential separateness of the "deep green" position from either the dominated agenda or the radical critique agenda. A central factor in the thinking of deep

405

greens H is the importance of systems theory and concepts (von Bertalanffy, 1971; Boulding, 1956; Beishon & Peters, 1972, 1981; Kemp & Wall, 1990; Gray, 1990d). General systems theory (yon Bertalanffy, 1956, 1971) is primarily a way of thinking about the world. It has two principal characteristics. First, one recognises that all things are c o n n e c t e d and thus total understanding of any one thing requires a complete understanding of all other things. Second, one recognises that such complete understanding is impossible and that issues must be addressed through the consideration of b o u n d e d subsystems - - a complex process by which the universe of all possible events or things is reduced to more manageable systems, at a higher level of resolution. The selected subsystem is chosen by reference to the question of influenceability: given the issue of concern, what are the major sources of influence u p o n it and what are the major elements in the environment upon which the issue in turn has influence. This process inevitably involves leaving some issues of significance outside the systems boundary, and a major c o n c e r n of systems thinking is attempting to identify the violence done to perception through the essential limiting of the elements considered in any subsystem ( y o n Bertalanffy, 1956, 1971; Boulding, 1956; Emery, 1969; Beishon & Peters, 1972; Checkland, 1981; Carter e t al., 1984). Systems thinking has had a major influence on ecology and environmentalism. The ecological view is perhaps best illustrated by the image of "Spaceship Earth" (e.g. Ward, 1966; Boulding, 1966). The image of the Earth hanging in space illustrates the way in which our "habitat" is finite, and whilst it is not a "closed system"

to The analysislater in this paper will draw from equallyfrom MacPherson,whose Marxist influences are obvious, Dalyand Daly& Cobb,whose liberal and pluralist antecedents are explicit, as well as from Held, who has sought to tease out ways of drawing together both strands of analysis. ~There are manyterms for the deep greens-- deep or radical or social ecologists,ecologicalhumanists and all the shades of deep green (eco-greeus,value conservatives,visionary/holisticgreens, red greens). In the end the ideas intended by the term and the definition of that term will result in the usual tautology.However, "deep green" (rather than more typically"deep ecology") is used here because of its association with the Green political movement from which this paper draws its direction. Again,see Maunders & Burritt (1991) and Dobson (1990) for further development of this.

406

IL GRAY

(subject as it is to, principally, the sun and the m o o n ) it can be so considered for most purposes. That is, the Earth is a subsystem of the universe and whilst there is influence between the two, examination of most (for example) human issues from a planet-based level of resolution is unlikely to represent a serious limitation on any analysis. The subsystem Earth is a complex interreacting set of systems which support life. There are various subsystems of rain, cloud and water; of birth, growth, death and decay; of creatures and species interdependence; of species and habitat dependencies; and so on. Removal or interference with one of these elements will influence many, if not all others. For example, and rather simply, the extinction of one species allows the flourishing of a species upon which the extinct species grazed and the possible extinction of another species which depended upon the extinct species for its food. Such a break in the ecological chain can happen for many reasons ~ loss of habitat, use of insecticide, etc., but it takes little imagination to see that once started, the process is irreversible and will, potentially, accelerate. The process of extinction is n o w rapid. Mankind apparently does not have the wherewithal to stop it nor the knowledge to assess whether any ecological harmony will ever be possible again without man's constant interference to deal with excess manifestations (such as algal bloom, for example) or to artificially preserve habitats and species. (But see, for example, Lovelock, 1982, 1988.) This is summarised by C o m m o n e r in Table 1. TABLE 1. The four principles of ecology • • • •

Everyseparate entity is connected to all the rest Everythinghas to go somewhere You cannot get something for nothing from it Nature knows best

Source: commoner (1972). The ecological emphasis, however, is not only upon the biological systems and their interaction, survival, etc. Interacting with the ecosystems are the human, social, technical and economic systems. The interaction between all these

systems is clearly complex but (the message of systems theory) you cannot look at one without considering the others. General systems theorists have also held out claims that systems thinking w o u l d enable a uniting of the disciplines, but whilst systems thinking has provided powerful insights in the social sciences (e.g. Kast & Rosenweig, 1974; Lowe, 1972; Lowe & McInnes, 1971) its essentially scientistic, and hence functional, positivist basis has attracted considerable criticism (e.g. Hopper & Powell, 1985). It is important to recognize, though, that the criticism of systems theory has applied, principally, to its applications in functional settings (e.g. organisational contingency theory), that is to "hard" systems theory. On the other hand, the use of "soft" systems theory, that is, as a way of seeing and thinking rather than as a problem solving tool, has remained largely untouched by the assault. Its protection (and thus, for some scholars, its ultimate weakness) has lain in "soft" systems theory's level of generality and lack of specificity its breadth rather than its depth. Whatever its purported weaknesses, systems thinking remains the basis for ecological perceptions and, as w e shall see, the lack of analytical specificity is c o m m o n to m u c h of the deep green vision so that any failures of systems theory in this regard are by no means remarkable. It reduces, ultimately, to a matter of faith as to w h e t h e r this lack of analytical specificity is to be considered as a strength or as a weakness. ( For more detail of this in an accounting context, see Maunders & Burritt, 1991; Gray, 1990d, f.) This role of systems thinking in environmentalism will b e c o m e increasingly obvious as the green ideas are discussed below, but there is one important manifestation of this that needs early introduction. Daly & Cobb (1990), echoing the famous dictum of Ackoff ( 1 9 6 0 ) that 'Wee must stop behaving as though nature was organised in the same way as university departments are", are eloquent in their concern over disciplinarity - - the reductionist tendency to divide up the world into defined subjects with each with its o w n varieties, methods, biasses and career tracks. This carries, of course, all the

ACCOUNTINGAND ENVIRONMENTALISM

407

TABLE 2. The principles of environmentalism DEEP ECOLOGY: Holistic systems thinking; non-intrusive, soft, alternative technology; nonpollution; sustainable; - - leads on to "social ecology": recognition of individual and group systemic interactions; pursuit of"wholeness"; non-hierarchical; humanity as part of environment; SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY:Including the economic domain; social justice; prevention of suffering though inequality in transition; social contract; social and civil fights of (especially) women and minorities; GRASSROOTS DEMOCRACY: Participatory (as opposed to e.g. representative) democracy; autonomy; non-hierarchical; communication; openness; personal accountability; constraint of central power; NON-VIOLENCE: Both personal violence and structural violence (oppression); non-exploitive economics; employee ownership and control; "There is no way to peace, peace is the way", Gandhi; DECENTRALISATION:Need for more individual control over the complex interplay of social, ecological, economic, political forces; self-determinism ( n o t individualism); resist centralisation which reduces democracy, increases power, bureaucracy, surveillance; reclaim power from centralised state; smaller countries/regions; "Europe of the regions"; POSTPATRIARCHAL PERSPECTIVES:Feminist; non-aggressive politics; balance of"masculine" and "feminine" values as well as "women's issues"; - - non-competitive, intimate, nurturing, instinctive, emotional; SPIRITUALITY:beyond science; the oneness of life; Boulding's transcendental systems; human spirit as mode of consciousness connecting self to rest; Adapted from Capra & Spremak (1984, Chapter 2). reductionist problems. Some way must be found to b r e a k o u t f r o m this a n d r e - p r i v i l e g e h o l i s t i c a t t e m p t s at t h o u g h t , i n v e s t i g a t i o n a n d social c han g e. T h e i n e v i t a b l e c o n s e q u e n c e s o f a n y s u c h a t t e m p t , h o w e v e r , are ( a ) t h e failure t o a tt r act m u c h s u p p o r t f r o m t h e t r a d i t i o n a l c o r e s o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l s u b j e c t divisions, a n d ( b ) t h e t e n d e n c y t o b e c o m e r a t h e r g e n e r a l i s t a n d thin, sacrificing r e d u c t i o n i s t d e p t h for holistic breadth. O n e is c o n s c i o u s o f this in w h a t follows. Despite the very widespread nature of the e n v i r o n m e n t a l i s t m o v e m e n t in all its guises, a n d despite the very wide range of backgrounds u n d e r p i n n i n g as pe c ts o f t h e d e e p greens, it d o e s a p p e a r that t h e r e are a substantial n u m b e r o f p r i n c i p l e s w h i c h c a n b e said t o u n d e r p i n

t h e d e e p g r e e n p o s i t i o n an d w h i c h c o m m a n d w i d e a c c e p t a n c e in g r e e n p o l i t i cal m o v e m e n t s , p o l i t i c a l p a r t i e s and e n v i r o n m e n t a l g r o u p s generally t h r o u g h o u t t h e workL T h e s e principles are c e n t r a l t o t h e c o r e m a n i f e s t o s o f t h e g r e e n p a r t i e s an d are s u m m a r i s e d in Tab l e 2.12,13 T h e r a n g e o f p r i n c i p l e s is b o t h far r e a c h i n g an d radical b u t in ( w h a t a m o u n t s t o ) an a t t e m p t to re-design the world, the sheer enormity of the i n t e l l e c t u a l an d e m p i r i c a l task leaves m u c h u n d e v e l o p e d . F u r t h e r m o r e , this e n o r m i t y m u s t r e m a i n e m b e d d e d in sy st em s t h i n k i n g an d c a n n o t r e s o r t t o r e d u c t i o n i s m t o simplify t h e p r o b l e m . At t h e s a m e t i m e, m a n y w r i t e r s h a v e r e s o r t e d t o a l m o s t spiritual (and, at times, e v e n m a g i c a l ) a s s e r t i o n t o o v e r c o m e l a c u n a e an d t h e

12Although only apparently summarised from one source, a reading of such widespread sources as Parkin (1989), Kemp & Wall ( 1990 ), Schumacher ( 1968, 1973, 1974 ), Dauncey ( 1988 ), Robertson ( 1978 ), Goldsmith ( 1988 ), etc., will bring a very similar conclusion. ~3In what follows, an attempt will be made to illuminate and develop some of these themes. However, the complexity and interrelatedness of the ideas counsels caution and leads at times to the treatment of matters under different headings and with different emphasis.

408

1L GRAY

sheer c o m p l e x i t y o f the p r o b l e m (e.g. Dauncey, 1988). W h e t h e r this appeal to o t h e r spirituality in place o f scientistic logic is the ( v e r y p r o p e r ) re-establishment o f alternative m o d e s o f rationality, alternative means of establishing legitimacy in assertion and policy, o r else simply a failure to use the traditions o f W e s t e r n reasoning (masculine m o d e s o f rationality?) is largely a matter o f faith. T h e a t t e m p t b y the d e e p greens to r e i n t r o d u c e the spiritual dimension is essential to the p r o j e c t b u t raises very difficult questions a b o u t h o w to legitimate discourse and assess c o m p e t i n g truth claims w h e n there is an elemental tension b e t w e e n this a t t e m p t and o u r usual means o f arbitrating academic conflict t h r o u g h the use o f analytic reasoning (see also Hines, 1991b). This is the first, and p e r h a p s m o s t critical, vulnerability o f the d e e p g r e e n position. Its appeal is only partly at an intellectual, analytic and empirical level and derives its principal p o w e r f r o m emotional and spiritual appeal t h r o u g h the intervening variable o f simultaneously deemphasising consequentialist moral reasoning whilst c h a m p i o n i n g a h e i g h t e n e d emphasis o n deontological ethics. This m u s t have the effect o f identifying e m p a t h y ( o r the existentialist conc e p t o f " i n t e g r i t y " ) rather than rigorous analysis as the d o m i n a n t d e t e r m i n a n t o f o u t c o m e in discourse. Thus the "objective" is de-emphasised and the "subjective" emphasised. T h e r e is, clearly, a d a n g e r h e r e that this m a y equally e m p o w e r triviality and bigotry (for a related discussion see Hines, 1991b). Partly as a result o f this, recognisably coherent, c o m p l e t e and traditionally rigorous expositions o f the d e e p g r e e n w o r l d d o n o t s e e m to be available in the

literature. H o w e v e r , w e d o find that elements o f the d e e p g r e e n vision e m e r g e in a n u m b e r o f "traditional" areas o f scholarship. So, for example, the g r o w i n g re-examination o f e c o n o m i c s (e.g. Daly & Cobb, 1 9 9 0 ) and the exploration o f softt e c h n o l o g y and the m o r e radical re-appraisal o f the forces o f technological c h a n g e (e.g. Dickson, 1974) accord well with, and are embodied in, the deep green perspective. Similarly, the exploration o f participatory d e m o c r a c y in, especially, the w o r k of MacPherson (e.g. MacPherson, 1973, 1977, 1 9 7 8 ) and, m o r e generally in the developm e n t o f the "neo-pluralist" c o n c e p t i o n s o f d e m o c r a c y (e.g. Held, 1 9 8 7 ) have b e e n essential foundations for the d e e p green c o n c e p t i o n s o f the organisation o f social life. And there is a considerable h a r m o n y b e t w e e n environmentalism and the feminist literature. Feminism - especialy its attempts to distinguish "masculine" and "feminine" f r o m any necessary link with being male o r f e m a l e - - has e x p o s e d the c u r r e n t m o d e s o f social, intellectual, business, financial and a c c o u n t i n g w a y s o f d o i n g things as predominantly "masculine" and u n b a l a n c e d and unbalancing in the a b s e n c e of "feminine" traits f r o m their practice (e.g. Maupin, 1990; Reed & Kratchman, 1990; I_dmmn, 1990; Bem 1974, 1975, and also see, for example, Robertson, 1978, 1984; Hines, 1991b). 14 These concerns with the "feminine" and with emancipatory forms o f d e m o c r a c y have b e e n significant elements in the g r o w i n g attempts at the reestablishment o f b o t h the c o n c e p t and the practice o f " c o m m u n i t y " . This w o u l d involve s o m e m o r e sharing c o n c e p tions o f c o m m u n i t y ("Gemeinschaft" as Pallott, 1987, 1991, articulates it) that have strong implications for c o n c e p t i o n s o f p r o p e r t y rights

4 To open debate on this issue in the present climate is to beg many questions indeed. However, the terms as used here (and as used in much of the deep green literature) hypothesise wisdom and completeness of the human as deriving from a harmony of characteristics. The characteristics of apparent success in the current hegemony and which it seems are admired and sought after - - characteristics such as intellect, traditional logic, aggression, cunning, "calculated cleverness in the interests of self" (March, 1987, p. 158), energy and dynamism, accumulation and consumption of observable goods, insight, friendliness and warmth - - can be considered "masculine" traits, which have dominated to the exclusion of "feminine" traits such as nurture, emotion, parenthood and family, spontaneity, physical well-being, calmness, stability, continuity, cheerfulness, happiness, childlikeness, innocence, etc. The actual categorisation is obviously problematic and this categorisation does not fully accord with Bern. In part this is because the characteristics listed here need bear no relationship to sex or gender - - whether socially constructed or not.

ACCOUNTINGAND ENVIRONMENTALISM (MacPherson, 1973, 1 9 7 8 ) a n d w h i c h m a y raise n e w consciousness o f a m b i e n c e such as "solidarity" (Rorty, 1980, as articulated b y Arrington, 1990; Hines, 1991a). 15 All of these projects are predicated u p o n a re-examination of ethical reasoning. T h e g r o w i n g a t t e m p t s to re-establish w i d e r ethical bases for the assessment of the rightness of action, i.e. to r e - e x p a n d t h e n o t i o n s o f u t i l i t a r i a n i s m as originally d e v i s e d (Mill, 1857, 1859, 1863; b u t see also Daly, 1980; D o n a l d s o n , 1988; Held, 1 9 8 7 ) a n d r e - e n a b l e ethical c o n c e p t u a l i s a t i o n s w i t h i n m o t i v i s m a n d ( e s p e c i a l l y ) d e o n t o l o g y are p r e r e q u i s i t e s for t h e e m e r g e n c e o f t h e possibility o f a d e e p g r e e n world. A n d finally, w e find a p r o f o u n d ree x a m i n a t i o n o f m a n k i n d ' s r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h the planet, e a r t h a n d b i o s p h e r e is i n h e r e n t i n t h e ree x a m i n a t i o n of, a n d attempts to articulate, the n o t i o n of sustainability (e.g. Pearce e t aL, 1989; U n i t e d Nations, 1987; Pezzey, 1989; T u r n e r , 1989; T u r n e r & Pearce, 1990; Gray, 1991). Such a w i d e - r a n g i n g a n d a m b i t i o u s a g e n d a for t h e d e e p g r e e n s w i t h its a t t e m p t s to unify a n d i n t e g r a t e s u c h d i v e r s e a n d difficult t h e o r i s i n g offers great v i s i o n a n d possibility. For t h e d e e p greens, h o w e v e r , it still has a v e r y l o n g w a y to go i n e s t a b l i s h i n g its c o h e r e n c e , viability a n d t r u t h claims a n d i n d e a l i n g w i t h t h e substantial criticisms that are levelled at it (e.g. Sandbach, 1980).

409

M a i n t a i n i n g the g r e e n vision at this level of n o w t u r n s t o a t t e m p t i n g to assess a n y i m p l i c a t i o n s this m i g h t have for a c c o u n t i n g a n d w h e t h e r it is possible for a c c o u n t i n g ( i n w h a t e v e r g u i s e ) to e i t h e r articulate o r c o n t r i b u t e to t h e process.

generality, t h e p a p e r

A C C O U N T I N G IN ENVIRONMENTAL UTOPIA AND H O W T O GET THERE T h e holistic radicalism of t h e d e e p g r e e n vision is s u c h that a n t i c i p a t i o n of e x a c t l y h o w it m i g h t f u n c t i o n o w e s m o r e to d a y - d r e a m i n g t h a n to reasoning. 16 T h u s a n t i c i p a t i o n o f "truly g r e e n " a c c o u n t i n g is u n k n o w a b l e . 17 At a n e x t r e m e , h o w e v e r , s o m e o r all o f t h e f u n c t i o n s that a c c o u n t i n g serves i n s o m e p r e s e n t - d a y societies (e.g. Burchell e t al., 1 9 8 0 ) will b e largely r e d u n d a n t . T h e formal a n d r a t h e r antago n i s t i c a c c o u n t a b i l i t y that a c c o u n t i n g m i g h t b e i n t e r p r e t e d as c u r r e n t l y s e r v i n g w o u l d similarly b e e s c h e w e d ( A r r i n g t o n , 1990, p. 2). Also, the c o n c e p t i o n of m o n e y i n a g r e e n w o r l d a n d the role it serves m i g h t b e v e r y different (e.g. D a u n c e y , 1988). F u r t h e r m o r e , it is n o t o b v i o u s that formal a c c o u n t i n g w o u l d still b e n e c e s s a r y as the informal accountability of d e e p e r social relationships a n d a t t e n d a n t t r a n s p a r e n c y t o o k over. m So

~s This then plays back into the economic system. That is, community may be incompatible with a dominant price-only exchange process which is generally alienating (see, for example, Dauncey, 1988, chapters 6 & 7), and thus non-financial economy, trust and personal contact through economic exchange would all re-establish communitywhilst removing much of traditional economic exchange as it currently exists. t6 This is not intended pejoratively. For example, the better science fiction fiterature has alwayshad the aim-- in which it has often succeeded-- in exploring possible new futures unfettered by current constraints. Such speculation is what is needed here - - see, for example, Moorcock ( 1984, pp. 191-201 ) and writing such as SamuelButler's Erehwon. More specifically,a major theme in feminism is the empowering of the intuition and imagination (e& Hines, 1991b). 17

A similar point is made in the context of Marxist accounting by Laughlin & Puxty (1986).

s A hint of this has emerged in the research followingon from Gray ( 1990d ). A series of interviews and working groups were established with some New Zealand companies. The smaller scale of operations, the small total population of the country and the different cultural attitudes to environmental issues seemed to place a very different emphasis on accountability. That is, as most communities could identify those organisations which were operating in ways counter to community values (overcropping, polluting, flooding sensitive areas, noise, etc.) and could also identify employees up to and including senior management, there was not only no anonymitybehind which the miscreants could hide, but the communityvalues became the values of the employees and thus of the organisation. Transparency appeared to operate, thus making some aspects of formal accountability unnecessarily cumbersome.

410

IL GRAY

much so that "accountants" as a separate tribe (Gambling, 1978, 1985) may be an entirely redundant breed in such a world. What then for the role of accounting in the present world and its emancipatory possibilities to enable change t o w ~ d s " u t o p i a " - - w h e r e v e r , or whatever that might be? Without knowing the processes of social change, the pragmatism articulated in Gray et al. ( 1 9 8 7 ) and Harte et al. ( 1 9 9 0 ) appears to be the only solution. It seems that the Tinker et al. ( 1 9 9 1 ) criticism that this simply embodies and enables the (at least AngloAmerican) status quo may be addressed as follows. First, the vision towards which one might be pushing can be radical, as is the deep green vision articulated here. One then has two channels along which progress may be pursued - - the intellectual and the immediately practical. The two need not be in tension but, as appears t o be the case with many socialists, the two can be separately applied. That is, attempts to change intellectual and research agendas, to expose fallacies and limitations of the present hegemony, etc., b e c o m e desirable activities but which do not preclude action on other fronts. On the immediately practical front, the deep greens, like all radical groups before them, face three possibilities: ( 1 ) the direct attempts to destroy the current system; ( 2 ) totally eschewing the present system and living and working in a separate system (the c o m m u n e or colony model adopted by a number of greens throughout Europe and North America); ( 3 ) w o r k with the present system and attempt to change it by attempting either to directly subvert education and agendas or to directly subvert current actions (current accounting practices). 19 The suscription to non-violence by the greens

and the emphasis on the integrity of process (as opposed to means-ends calculations) ensures the exclusion of option (1). Option ( 2 ) is perhaps the most obvious one. The existence of this paper is evidence that this option has not been taken, as an examination of the current and possible roles of accounting (at least as traditionally conceived) becomes almost entirely redundant under such circumstances. There is also the tension felt throughout the green movement (e.g. Plant & Plant, 1991) over the relative merits of "supping with the devil". As has been identified above, a major criticism of the greens is that they have no systematic conception of h o w they are to bring about social change, and so the tendency is to try and seek change by any means possible. For many, including myself, working alongside the places where one imagines the p o w e r to lie u with governments and politicians, investors, company directors, civil servants and so on - - seems likely to be more effective, if considerably more uncomfortable, than the more ideologically sound strategy of throwing elegantly crafted intellectual stones from the "outside" (e.g. Porritt, 1989.). Hence the choice of option (3). The articulation of option ( 3 ) for accounting derives from the recognition that as accounting helps to construct the world (in the big picture) and influences decisions and expresses accountability (in the more immediate picture) then accounting designed with environmentalism in mind can change these things. ( H o w substantially or successfully is, obviously, unknowable.) Such was the intention in Gray (1990d), whose suggestions are summarised in Table 3. This project is continued here. With this in mind, the paper n o w turns to look just at two specific elements of the deep green philosophy which can be articulated through a possible accounting. To do this, however, the

t9 The Marxistcritique ofthe green movementis, once a~itL importanthere. Without a thesis about the essential structure of society,the forces that produced the status quo and the nature and process of change,the green attempts to seek changeare, at best, empty and, at worst, may either produce a "worse" situation or be captured by the institutional forces of reaction. There has been little green response to this charge, although Dobson(1990) represents a useful step in this direction (e.g Tinker et al. 1991).

ACCOUNTING AND ENVIRONMENTALISM

411

TABLE 3. Environmental accounting and information systems 1. COMPLIANCE AND ETHICAL AUDITS are information systems designed to m o n i t o r w h e t h e r t h e organisation m e e t s legal requirements and its o w n code of conduct. 2. WASTE AND ENERGY AUDITS are a m e a n s o f examining w h e t h e r t h e organisation is making t h e best u s e o f its inputs. 3. ENVIRONMENTAL BUDGETS can set green targets for activity centres and act as a part of the

performance appraisal of the organisation. 4. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT, ENVIRONMENTAL HURDLE RATES, Best Practicable Environmenal Option (BPEO), Best Available T e c h n i q u e Not Entailir~g Excessive Cost (BATNEEC), ENVIRONMENTAL RISK ASSESSMENT, etc., are techniques w h i c h bring environmental criteria into investment and project choice and post-audit. 5. ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL REPORTING w o u l d aid the discharge of t h e organisation's accountability and increase its environmental transparency. Reporting might c o n s i s t - o f ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY, ENVIRONMENTAL CONTINGENCIES, ENVIRONMENTAL SPEND (possibly capitalised) and EMISSION STATEMENT, possibly in a COMPHANCE-WITHSTANDARD REPORT. DISCLOSURE OF CRITICAL, NA'IIIRAL AND MAN-MADE ASSETS plus TRANSFERS BI/TwI~EN THE CATEGORIES w o u l d probably also be essential if t h e organisation's environmental response was to be fully reported (see below). 6. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSET ACCOUNTING AND MAINTENANCE w o u l d attempt to capture t h e non-priced elements o f cr/t/cal and natural c a p i t a l - - both those that are entirely ignored by t h e pricing systems and those w h i c h are incorporated into the priced e l e m e n t s of man-made capital - - e.g. the habitat/biodivcrsity cost of extracting a particular mineral. There is n o necessary suggestion that this accounting n e e d be in financial t e r m s although there are both financial and non-financial implications. It should enable t h e organisation to assess the e x t e n t to w h i c h it is destroying natural capital to create man-made capital. Source: adapted from Gray (1990d).

limitations of the ensuing p e r c e p t i o n need to be considered briefly.

AN INTERMEDIATE AND LIMITED CONCEPTION OF ORGANISATION Having adopted, earlier in the paper, a position which applauds holism and denigrates reductionism, there is an imperative to ensure that w h a t follows learns the lessons of systems thinking and takes care in specifying its limitations, systems boundaries and level of resolution. Firstly, despite the analysis of Hines ( 1 9 8 8 ) and Tinker (1985), a c o n c e p t i o n of "organisation" is maintained. Thus "company", "university" and "local authority" are retained as assumed social constructs having independent existence from those w h o give t h e m life and the observer

that creates them. (Thus individuals and groups can be said to be internal or external to the organisation at any o n e time for any particular act. Individuals and groups may operate in m a n y roles, b o t h internal and external, from time to time.) In general, however, these conceptions will b e treated as o p e n systems with soft boundaries rather than as concrete, semi-closed systems with hard boundaries, as w o u l d normatly b e the case in the accounting literature. Secondly, excluded from the analysis which follows are the critical questions of ( 1 ) h o w accounting defines and reinforces the p o w e r of exploitive relationships within the organisation, and ( 2 ) accounting as an expression of a "masculine" rationality. Whilst it appears to b e an increasingly widespread element of academic o r t h o d o x y that accounting serves these functions, I am unaware of proposals for

412

1L GRAY

n e w a c c o u n t i n g s 2° that m i g h t deal w i t h these issues, a n d the p r o p o s a l "there s h o u l d b e n o ( traditional o r formal) accountingS' is a fascinating, b u t different, paper. At a n i n s t i n c t i v e level only, I am u n a w a r e that w h a t follows increases the p r e s s u r e o n t h e s e issues, a n d it m a y e v e n soften them. Thirdly, the o r g a n i s a t i o n will b e a s s u m e d to exist i n fairly traditional space. That is, " i n t e r n a l d e c i s i o n makers" will p r o b a b l y take decisions, p r o b a b l y i n r e s p o n s e to information. It is a s s u m e d that a c h a n g e i n i n f o r m a t i o n will c h a n g e d e c i s i o n b e h a v i o u r . I a m n o t aware that a n y l i m i t i n g o b j e c t i v e f u n c t i o n n o r utility f u n c t i o n is assumed. F u r t h e r m o r e , the organisat i o n is p l a c e d i n a pluralist (actually neopluralist; e.g. Held, 1 9 8 7 ) world. That is, t h e r e exist individuals, groups, publics, States in the o r g a n i s a t i o n ' s substantial e n v i r o n m e n t w h o are i n f l u e n c e d b y a n d i n f l u e n c e t h e organisation. P o w e r a s y m m e t r y clearly exists, b u t ( a n d here, I think, is the d e p a r t u r e from b o t h s t a n d a r d p l u r a l i s m a n d Marxist c o n c e p t i o n s ) p o w e r c a n b e e x e r c i s e d i n s o m e d e g r e e b y all of these e x t e r n a l participants. T h e neo-pluralist c o n c e p t i o n and, m o r e particularly, the participative d e m o c r a t i c process, see a future i n w h i c h p o w e r is m o r e w i d e l y shared w i t h a n e m p h a s i s o n local d e m o c r a c y . Rather t h a n d e m o c r a c y t h r o u g h representatives, participatory d e m o c r a c y requires m u c h m o r e active i n v o l v e m e n t b y t h e d e m o s ( M a c P h e r s o n , 1973, 1977). Held ( 1 9 8 7 ) sees

p a r t i c i p a t o r y d e m o c r a c y as a last, u n t r i e d v e r s i o n of d e m o c r a c y a n d o n e w h i c h w a y u n i t e m u c h o f t h e e m a n c i p a t o r y p o w e r i n b o t h liberal and Marxist c o n c e p t i o n s of society. 21 This paper, i n line w i t h the p r i n c i p l e s of e n v i r o n m e n t a l i s m , is a s s u m i n g the desirability of p a r t i c i p a t o r y d e m o c r a c y a n d s e e k i n g ways of m o v i n g t o w a r d s it. For a n y p o w e r to b e e x e r c i s e d in a p a r t i c i p a t o r y d e m o c r a c y t h e r e is a n essential n e e d for i n f o r m a t i o n , a n d this i n f o r m a t i o n will b e a n e x t e n s i o n of that c u r r e n t l y available. That is, the w i d e s t possible r a n g e of p a r t i c i p a n t s m u s t b e e m a n c i p a t e d a n d e n a b l e d t h r o u g h the m a n i f e s t a t i o n of e x i s t i n g b u t unfulfilled rights to i n f o r m a t i o n (e.g. Likierman, 1986; l.ikierman & Creasey, 1985). Finally, t h e o r g a n i s a t i o n is p e r c e i v e d as a flowt h r o u g h system; d r a w i n g i n p u t s from the social, industrial, legal, e c o n o m i c a n d e n v i r o n m e n t a l substantial e n v i r o n m e n t , p r o c e s s i n g these, a n d p r o d u c i n g outputs. O n l y s o m e of these will b e addressed here. T h e h u m a n , social a n d legal i n p u t s will b e c o n s i d e r e d o n l y to the e x t e n t that they legitimate the organisation, d e t e r m i n e rights and provide an assumed ethical framework and thus, as m e n t i o n e d above, m a n y of the i m p o r t a n t issues will b e excluded. It is currently envisaged in this p a p e r that different a c c o u n t i n g systems are n e e d e d to " c a p t u r e " the inputs, t h e p r o c e s s i n g a n d the o u t p u t s of t h e o r g a n i s a t i o n e v e n for simply the physical e n v i r o n m e n t a l inputs (natural r e s o u r c e s ) a n d o u t p u t s ( w a s t e a n d p o l l u t i o n ) . 22

2oThis is a generalised problem, I believe. That is, analyses of the functions of current accounting practice are not generally balanced by researchers offering hostages to fortune and proposing new accountings. It is not apparent to me that critique without proposal is entirely justifiable in the long term. 2t I acknowledge that provision of information to the demos will not ensure that the demos then behaves in a way I might approve. Subject to the constraints of power to act, it is fully accepted that the demos may continue along a path towards extinction. Despite the anthropocentric focus of the paper, I (and, I believe, most environmentalists) am content to let the human species wipe itself out. The point at issue is whether this was a democratically chosen path and (given the greater emphasis on deontological ethics in the green vision) both the manner of the extinctionand the state of the planet and other species at the time of extinction. 22It is also recognised that this, and what follows,effectivelyconcretises the organisation and, to a degree at least, accepts the organization which accounting cremes. Further, there is the hint of a suggestion that accounting captures reality (Hines, 1988). The "organisation" remains the central unit of analysisfor accounting and so is retained though, I would claim, in a softer form than is typical in accounting. Hines is not suggesting that accounting does not capture some aspects of some reality. I am making no claims to trying to do more than this. I am simply trying to throw up new realities which, in part, will reflect a different (and additional) set of aspects of some reality.

ACCOUNTINGAND ENVIRONMENTALISM ACCOUNTING FOR ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY The accounting literature on accountability is of fairly recent vintage. 23 So m u c h so, that before 1980 one w o u l d have been hard pressed to discover any significant analysis of a c o n c e p t which seems, plausibly, so central to the practice of accounting. In principle, the notion of accountability was used in Gray ( 1 9 8 3 ) and Gray e t al. (1986, 1987, 1988, 1991) as an emancipatory c o n c e p t helping to expose, enhance and develop social relationships through a re-examination and expansion o f established rights to information. The difficulty that arises here is in determining some empirical base for those rights (Gray e t al., 1987). The trade-off is between ( 1 ) accepting some empirical basis for accountability, which must be flawed and reflect elements of a status q u o that cannot necessarily be considered to be just or equitable, or else which fail o n some other criteria of propriety (see Gray etal., 1988, 1991, for more detail), or ( 2 ) resorting to argument and assertion as to what one's o w n faith demands as rights. (See Likierman, 1986; Likierman & Creasey, 1985, for a nice introduction to this problem.) Gray et ai. preferred to establish an elementary empirical basis and develop from that. The argument in essence was that anything which developed accountability practice from its current position a n d was justifiable within the status q u o held out a practicable promise of evolution as a developing emancipation. That principle will be continued but extended here. There are, however, some further substantive criticisms levelled at the accountability concept. The first is that most aggressively stated in

413

Arrington ( 1 9 9 0 ) but articulated in more detail b y Roberts & Scapens ( 1 9 8 5 ) and developed further in Roberts ( 1991 ). This is the observa. tion that the process o f " b e i n g held to account" determines, reflects, reilies, strengthens and solidifies p o w e r relationships between the accountee and the accountor. The implication is that this is an odious activity - - exploitive and suppressive. The second criticism arises from Tricker ( 1983 ) in w h i c h he argues that accountability only exists w h e n the right to account is enforceable. Thus, in Tricker's view, the only true accountability relationships which currently exist are those w h i c h are empirically observable in flows of accounting information between accountor and accountee. It seems that both of these observations have truth value but neither need be the case. Accountability is c o n c e r n e d with the right to receive information and the duty to supply it. The first is an essential element of any neo.pluralist or participatory democracy and the second, derived from the principle of personal accountability which is central to deep green thinking, is a tenet of personal development. So Tricker's arguments reduce to one of terminology which, whilst according with positive observation, does not necessarily exclude the possibility o f many u n f u l f i l l e d accountability relationships. The criticism that accountability is necessarily exploitive largely presupposes an antagonistic and manipulative world. The deep green vision seeks to minimise and eventually replace such characteristics and thus sees accountability processes as social and liberating, a means of defining and re-defining c o m m u n i t y Gemeinschaft as Pailot ( 1987, 1991 ) and Burkitt ( 1 9 8 8 ) articulate it. 24 Such is also the w o r l d that

25This is to be distinguished from the analysesof stewardship which did appear in the accountingliterature but, in general, took the term as ex cathedra rather as a contestable notion whose precedents and implicationsrequired exploration. This should also be distinguished from the accountability literature outside accounting (e.g. public admtrdstration) in which accounting was implicated but not central (see, for example, Munkman, 1971; Greer et al., 1978; and, for an exception, Gjesdal. 1981). The term "accountability"has alwayshad a high currency in the public sector accountabilityliterature but this, again until recently, was very underdeveloped (e.g. Gray, 1983; Perrin, 1981). 24This vision has been accused of naivety and trying to side-step the critical issues (Sandbach, 1980). Thismaybe so, but the importance of havingand maintainingvision and emphasisingprocess over ends does seem to counsel this sort of approach.

414

R. GRAY

w a s s o u g h t b y J o l m Stuart Mill a n d A d a m Smith 25 a n d w h i c h has b e e n p r o f o u n d l y a n d s u c c e s s f u l l y developed by MacPherson: ... MacPtmrson'stheoryof"DevelopmentalDemocracy"... is non-emsactive and developmental. R is non-extractive in that it does not depend upon the continued existence of class-based power-relationships. By developmental, MacPherson means that the theory implies the expansion of a person's power to use his ability to develop his supposedly essential human capabilities. These include a person's capacity for moral judgement and acticm, for aesthetic creation and contemplation, for friendship, love, and even religious experience. ~ e s e rights, based on a person's potential ability must not be materially destructive. They are not the rights that everyone might like, especially not the Hobbesian right of any man to anything he desireg Developnmnml demcx:ratic theory, according to MacPherson,requires not the maxiwiTarionof individual utilities, but rather the ability of each to use and develop those capabilities, the use of which does not prevent others from using theirs (Clarke & Tilman, 1988, p. 187). As, o n t h e o n e hand, t h e d e e p g r e e n v i e w demands the development of (and, indeed, the d u t y o f ) p e r s o n a l a c c o u n t a b i l i t y ( s e e Fig. 2 ) and, o n t h e o t h e r hand, t h e rights e s t a b l i s h e d b y M a c P h e r s o n s u g g e s t r i g h t s t o i n f o r m a t i o n 26 it seems inescapable that the development of p r o c e s s e s o f a c c o u n t a b i l i t y a r e essential t o t h e d e e p g r e e n vision. T h e q u e s t i o n s o f " f o r w h a t ? ", "who?", "to whom?" and "how?" then present t h e m s e l v e s for solution. G r a y e t aL (1986, 1987, 1988, 1991 ) t r i e d t o solve these questions by reference to law and quasi-law. I n p a r t i c u l a r , t h e s e p a p e r s a r g u e d t h a t s o c i e t y at large h a d a r i g h t to i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t the extent to which organisations had complied

with the (minimum) standards of law and other r e g u l a t i o n o f a quasi-legal n a t u r e . T h e p r o b l e m was, h o w c o u l d this basis b e e x t e n d e d f u r t h e r w i t h o u t r e s o r t i n g t o o p i n i o n a n d assertion? Likierman (1986) and l.ikierman & Creasey (1985) argue that the existence of natural and m o r a l rights is n o t d i s p u t e d . ( A l t h o u g h this is a c o n t e s t a b l e p o s i t i o n , it is e s s e n t i a l t o t h e g r e e n v i s i o n . ) W h a t is d i s p u t e d , a n d u l t i m a t e l y u n r e s o l v a b l e , is w h a t t h o s e f i g h t s a c t u a l l y a r e at a n y o n e t i m e in a n y o n e p l a c e for a n y p a r t i c u l a r situation. T h e rights are social a n d ethical, b u t there are so many conceptions ofwhat the social a n d t h e e t h i c a l i m p l i e s t h a t little r e s o l u t i o n is f o r t h c o m i n g . G r a y et aL a t t e m p t t o a l l o w t h e d e m o c r a t i s i n g f o r c e s o f social c h a n g e t o t a k e o n t h e r o l e o f e x p a n d i n g d e m o c r a t i c rights. T h a t is, for e x a m p l e , t h e w o r k o n e x t e r n a l s o c i a l a u d i t s ( H a r t e & O w e n , 1987; G r a y et aL, 1991), o n d e v e l o p m e n t s in e t h i c a l i n v e s t m e n t ( O w e n , 1990; H a r t e e t aL, 1 9 9 0 ) a n d p r e s s u r e g r o u p c h a n g e s u c h as t h e i m p a c t o f F r i e n d s o f t h e Earth a n d G r e e n p e a c e ( B u r r i t t & M a u n d e r s , 1990 ) all s e e k t o e x p a n d t h o s e a c t i o n s for w h i c h t h e organisation owes accountability. Gray ( 1990e ) and Malachowski (1990) both suggest that b a r o m e t e r s o f p u b l i c opinion c a n b e legitimately i n t e r p r e t e d as f o u n d a t i o n s f o r a d d i t i o n a l rights a n d a c c o u n t a b i l i t y . T h u s t h e e m p i r i c a l basis o f accountability can be substantially extended f r o m l a w a n d quasi-law t o p u b l i c d o m a i n m a t t e r s o f s u b s t a n c e . This w o u l d n o t b e u n c o n t e s t a b l e o f course, but something closer to a particular specification of a community's moral and natural r i g h t s m i g h t b e g i n t o e m e r g e . 27

Further, to talk of Gemeinschaft in isolation from GesselschaR (formal contractual relationships) is perhaps overly simple. The green vision seeks to soften the Gesselschaft accountability in an attempt to develop something which looks more like Gemeinschaft. 2s Despite the terrible press they now receive and the perversion of their ideas which purportedly informs much that passes for Modernist (Arrington, 1990) thinking I should also note in passing the similarityof tone between the following passage and that of Arrington's (1990) exposition of Rorty. 26 Information is essential to liberate, inform, enable and educate. From an alternative perspective, it would seem bizarre to grant fights to action but not rights to information concerning action. 27Tricker's ( 198 3) point concerning the enforcing of accountabilityupon organisationsis clearlycritical in this, The present discussion has a naive faith about it that impliesthat all peoples will gladlyopen up when the "truth" is demonstrated to them.

ACCOUNTING AND ENVIRONMENTALISM It is p r o b a b l y n e c e s s a r y t o n o t e t h a t t h e r e a r e two, r e l a t e d , p u r p o s e s b e h i n d t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f a c c o u n t a b i l i t y systems. Firstly, as s e e n a b o v e , a c c o u n t a b i l i t y is c o n s i d e r e d to b e a m e a n s o f d e v e l o p i n g c l o s e r s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s a n d an e l e m e n t in b r i n g i n g p o w e r b a c k t o t h e d e m o s . Secondly, the development of accountability also i n c r e a s e s t h e t r a n s p a r e n c y o f organisations. T h a t is, it i n c r e a s e s ( o r , in t h e g r e e n vision, should increase ) the number of things which are m a d e visible, i n c r e a s e s t h e n u m b e r o f w a y s in w h i c h t h i n g s a r e m a d e visible and, in d o i n g s o e n c o u r a g e s an i n c r e a s i n g o p e n n e s s . T h e "inside" of the organisation becomes more visible, t h a t is, t r a n s p a r e n t . 28 T h e p r o c e s s o f b e c o m i n g m o r e t r a n s p a r e n t is initially a painful p r o c e s s for t h e " i n t e r n a l p a r t i c i p a n t s " , b u t s h o u l d e n c o u r a g e t h e d i m i n u t i o n o f t h e "internal" versus "external" t e n s i o n as c o m m u n i t i e s are all o f o w n e r s , customers, m a n a g e m e n t , e m p l o y e e s , etc. F o r t h e d e e p g r e e n vision, t r a n s p a r e n c y and, thus, t h e r i g h t t o i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t a c t i o n s which influence the society, other societies, f u t u r e s o c i e t i e s o r t h e b i o s p h e r e is n o t in q u e s t i o n . This i n f o r m a t i o n m u s t b e in t h e p u b l i c domain. Further, given the prominence of " c o m m u n i t y " in t h e vision, t h e l e v e l at w h i c h i n f o r m a t i o n is r e p o r t e d - - t h e l e v e l at w h i c h t r a n s p a r e n c y m u s t b e s o u g h t - - m u s t b e that o f t h e c o m m u n i t y . Thus, w e a r e n o w c h a r g e d w i t h t h e task o f devising f o c a l a c c o u n t a b i l i t y informat i o n systems; i.e. t o w h a t i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t o r g a n i s a t i o n s d o c o m m u n i t i e s h a v e rights? T h e a r g u m e n t in G r a y et al. that t h e i n f o r m a t i o n c o n t e n t is g o v e r n e d b y t h e c a t e g o r i e s r e c o g n i s e d in l a w a n d quasi-law c a n p r o b a b l y n o w b e e x p a n d e d in t h e light o f t h e a b o v e t o i n c l u d e , p a r t i c u l a r l y , social a n d e n v i r o n m e n t a l

415

impact information. Remaining with the systems t h e o r e t i c p e r s p e c t i v e , s u c h i n f o r m a t i o n will b e o f t h r e e sorts: I n p u t dat6. on, for e x a m p l e , p h y s i c a l a n d h u m a n r e s o u r c e s used; e n v i r o n m e n t a l i m p a c t s a n d d i s t u r b a n c e s c a u s e d (e.g. h a b i t a t d e s t r u c tion); ethical data on purchasing, investment a n d h i r i n g activities. Processing datat, on, for e x a m p l e , efficiency (resource input to level of output or activity) data; a c c i d e n t data; c o n t r o l o f e m p l o y e e s . O u t p u t dat6. on, for e x a m p l e , p o l l u t i o n emissions; w a s t e p r o d u c e d a n d d i s p o s e d o r s t o r e d ; influence a n d c o n t r o l e x e r c i s e d ; stress c a u s e d , etc. ( A l t h o u g h this is c l e a r l y n a i v e in t h e c u r r e n t climate, it m i g h t act as a starting-of-discussion point_) This, w i t h o t h e r compliance-with-standard d a t a ( i n c l u d i n g e t h i c a l c o d e c o m p l i a n c e data, e.g. Gray, 1990e; M a l a c h o w s k i , 1 9 9 0 ) w o u l d form the basis o f t h e a c c o u n t i n g for accountability and transparency n informing the community a b o u t t h e u s e o f its r e s o u r c e s a n d t h e b u r d e n s ( a n d b e n e f i t s ) it has b e e n o b l i g e d to bear. T h e n e x t issue w o u l d a p p e a r to b e t h e s y m b o l s u s e d to e n c o d e t h e m e s s a g e s o f a c c o u n t a b i l i t y . It has l o n g b e e n a r g u e d ( s e e also G r a y et al., 1986, 1987, 1988, 1991; a n d e s p e c i a l l y Gray, 1 9 8 3 ) that t h e a c c o u n t a b i l i t y n e e d n o t b e in t e r m s o f c u r r e n t financial units. I n d e e d it w o u l d b e m o r e in a c c o r d w i t h a c o n c e p t i o n o f p a r t i c i p a t o r y d e m o c r a c y if t h e e v e n t s so d e s c r i b e d w e r e d e s c r i b e d at t h e lowest level of resolution possible and thus the community could, collectively, exercise any " v a l u a t i o n " p r o c e s s o n t h e d a t a as it s a w fit. 29 I n Fact, t h e c a s e for " a c c o u n t i n g " b e i n g a p r e d o m i n a n t l y financial a c t i v i t y is far f r o m o b v i o u s ;

This is clearly nonsense. It is anicipated that regulatory means would be necessary to take the process a long way down the road. The implicationsof this and the form that regulation must take in order to be compatible with the green vision are not explored in this paper. as The making of things visible must, inevitably make some things invisible. The more things made visible, and the more ways in which they are made visible should decrease invisibility. It is essentially experimental but this process should enable the creation of new, additional and more complex social realities. 29This notion is largely informed by the (predominantly unsuccessful) exercises in valuing social activities in social accounting in the 1970s. See, for example, Gray et al. (1987), Estes (1976), Belkaoui (1984).

416

1L GRAY

indeed a restriction to only financial accounts would critically limit the attempts at holism in the green vision. Finally, there is the question of h o w the accountability will b e c o m m u n i c a t e d ~ which channel(s) will be used for the transmission of the signal. Gray ( 1 9 8 3 ) emphasises the point that the discharge of accountability can be achieved by simply making the information available in the public domain, the accommodafing gymnastics of decision usefulness discussion are not essential to the process. However, the emphasis u p o n the duty to be personally accountable would tend, perhaps, to encourage the "steward" towards seeking a m o r e targeted accountability (see also Gray,

1990b). Speculating about the possible shape of possible accounting systems loses its pertinence very quickly. The foregoing should be enough to begin the process of exploring w h e t h e r such systems can b e developed and/or applied and of seeking ways of moving accounting policy and practice towards the green ideals of personal accountability, participatory d e m o c r a c y and c o m m u n i t y transparency. Whilst I w o u l d see the developments of these sorts of accountability systems as necessary conditions for the d e v e l o p m e n t of the green vision I cannot see that such systems represent sufficient conditions. As argued in Gray ( 1 9 9 0 d ) there is an urgent need to develop environmental asset accounting and maintenance systems: to develop, in fact, sustainable accounting.

ACCOUNTING FOR SUSTAINABILITY Although the t e r m "sustainable" had b e e n in wide currency amongst enviroumenralists for s o m e time, the Brundtland Report to the United Nations in 1987 (United Nations, 1987) put the term firmly centre-stage of the economic, political and business agenda- Since then, whilst there has b e e n considerable debate o v e r w h a t this t e r m means (e.g. Pearce etal., 1989; Pezzey, 1989), the w o r d has entered everyday speech (and is used to mean a very wide range of

different things, m o s t of them, in fact, not sustainable at all, e.g. Gray, 1991). Sustainability, at its m o s t general, relates to the planet and biosphere's ability to r e n e w itself, to maintain its "carrying capacity". A sustainable action is thus one which does not disturb the essential ecology. However, all actions by all species could be considered as disturbing an ecology, which leaves us width the p r o b l e m of deciding which actions disturb the ecology and which actions arepart o f the ecology. The issue is far from trivial and involves judgements about b o t h the time necessary for an ecology to reestablish itself and the nature of "disturbance" versus "transformation". (For m o r e detail see Lovelock, 1982, 1988; Maunders & Burritt, 1991; and, on the "entropy" and transformation issue, GeorgescuRoegen, 1971, 1975.) However, sustainability is most usually considered in an anthropocentric context and such is the case in this paper. From an anthropocentric perspe cfive, the level of activity which is sustainable then c o m e s to mean that the current generation takes from the planet no m o r e than the m a x i m u m which leaves the planet and future generations no worse off. Practice which sustains the planet must leave future generations with the same opportunities as w e w e r e bequeathed by our parents. O f course, it is accepted that, in an anthropocentric sense this is impossible (almost any action by man depletes the biosphere to some degree), unrealistic (it assumes that there will be no advances in technology, energy sources, etc.), underspecified (it does not clarify the question of w h e t h e r substitution b e t w e e n elements is p e r m i t t e d ) and imprecise (it assumes a static m o d e of action and does not allow for systemic change in social life). It seems inevitable that, faced with a c o n c e p t of such importance and the obvious (to an environmentalist at least) observation that mankind's behaviour is anything but sustainable, some attempt will be made to try and operationalise it. This process of operationalisafion has tended to be not only anthropocentric, but also calculative. There are clearly profound dangers in trying to employ calculation in a world w h e r e ( 1 ) the calculation can b e identified as a r o o t cause (e.g.

ACCOUNTINGAND ENVIRONMENTALISM Gray, 1 9 9 0 d ) a n d ( 2 ) a n y c a l c u l a t i o n m u s t r u n t h e risk o f r e i n f o r c i n g analytic a n d scientistic solutions when, within a deep green context, o n e is a t t e m p t i n g to d o q u i t e t h e opposite. 3° This is a critical p r o b l e m b u t o n e w h i c h s e e m s i n e v i t a b l e o n c e o n e has t a k e n t h e d e c i s i o n to w o r k " w i t h t h e s y s t e m " r a t h e r t h a n a r o u n d it. I n general, t h e a t t e m p t s at o p e r a t i o n a l i s i n g sustainability have n o t b e e n d i r e c t e d t o w a r d s finding p r e c i s e a n s w e r s b u t have r a t h e r b e e n d i r e c t e d t o w a r d s t r y i n g to b e t t e r u n d e r s t a n d this idea a n d to assess, i n b r o a d terms, just h o w u u s u s t a i n a b l e ( W e s t e r n ) m a n is. This p a p e r offers t w o further, p r a g m a t i c justifications - - n a m e l y that the p r o c e s s will m a k e visible that w h i c h is c u r r e n t l y invisible i n organisational settings ( t h a t is, the b i o s p h e r e ) and, secondly, the r e s u l t a n t data s h o u l d b e b o t h d i s r u p t i v e a n d shocking. 31 M o v i n g to t h e m o r e specific, Daly & C o b b a r g u e ( 1 9 9 0 ) that, at its simplest, sustainability is no more than an extension and re-interpretation o f I-Iicksian i n c o m e a n d traditional n o t i o n s of capital m a i n t e n a n c e . I n effect, a level o f sustainable activity is that level w h i c h m a i n t a i n s the p l a n e t ' s capital ( s e e also P e a r c e et al., 1989). Every a c t i o n that uses l i m e s t o n e , oil, clay, peat, metals, etc., - - all finite r a w materials u leaves m a n k i n d ( a n d the c u r r e n t b i o s p h e r e ) potentially w o r s e off. Every u s e of t i m b e r a n d t i m b e r p r o d u c t s , c l e a n air o r w a t e r that is n o t replaced, e v e r y a c t i o n i n v o l v i n g e n e r g y b a s e d o n fossil fuels, e v e r y p r o d u c t that p r o d u c e s w a s t e w h i c h has to b e physically d i s p o s e d of, e v e r y p e r s o n a l

417

o r i n d u s t r i a l a c t i o n w h i c h r e m o v e s habitat, a n d so on, leaves t h e p l a n e t w i t h a d e p l e t e d capital. I n this s c e n a r i o e v e n t h e m u c h - v a u n t e d rec y c l i n g is far f r o m sustainable m each c y c l e loses r a w material, a n d involves e n e r g y f r o m finite ( i f p o t e n t i a l l y large) reserves. Ultimately, each a c t i o n m u s t lead to the u s e o f the last o f a r e s o u r c e o r the last of a h a b i t a t a n d the e x t i n c t i o n of y e t a n o t h e r species. 32 E n v i r o n m e n t a l e c o n o m i s t s (see, for example, T u r n e r , 1987, 1988, 1989; T u r n e r & Pearce, 1990; Daly, 1 9 8 0 ) p r o p o s e that w e start to deal w i t h t h e p r o b l e m b y r e c o g n i z i n g that the p l a n e t will have to p r o v i d e for the m a i n t e n a n c e o f t h r e e different types o f capital b e f o r e w e c a n b e g i n to c o u n t a n y residual as " i n c o m e " . T h e s e are: Critical n a t u r a l capital., that p a r t of the biosphere that m u s t be immutable. This includes s u c h things as the o z o n e layer, a critical mass of trees ( n o t a b l y t h e rain forests, "the l u n g s o f the w o r l d " ) , t h e w e t l a n d s a n d critical habitats. T h e biologists s e e m to tell us that w e c a n n o t e x p e n d this capital w i t h o u t suffering the biggest loss of all (e.g. G o l d s m i t h , 1988; G o l d s m i t h etal., 1972; M e a d o w s et al., 1972);

Sustainable or substitutable ( o r "other") n a t u r a l capitaL, that p a r t of the b i o s p h e r e w h i c h is r e n e w a b l e (e.g. w a t e r a n d air, t i m b e r , m u c h land, the p o p u l a t i o n o f n o n - e x t i n c t creatures, agricultural p r o d u c t s ) o r w h i c h c a n b e s u b s t i t u t e d for its use-value; h o w e v e r , that m i g h t b e d e f i n e d (e.g. Pearce, 1977). Examples o f s u b s t i t u t a b l e capital m i g h t i n c l u d e m i n e r a l

3oThis parallels the reason examination of"juridification', see, for example, Teubner ( 1987 ), Laughlin& Broadbent ( 1991 ), and see also Gorz (1989) and Power (1991). 3t Ultimately I can only offer a deontological position on this - - any action which accords with the green vision, raises awareness of environmentalissues and attempts to recapture "sustainability" from the Western politicians and economists who see it as entirely consistent with more Western (old-style) economic growth, seems to me to be a fight action. 32The use of words such as "loss" and "depletion" are totally anthropocentric and conservative. Nothing is "lost", it is merely transformed. In a "total ecology" world, we would focus upon entropy and the transformation of elements in the biosphere. The anthropocentric focus of the paper rejects the Lovelock Gaia hypothesis and sees actual diminutionof the biosphere's ability to sustain human and non-humanlife. At the opposite extreme, the more conventional environmentaleconomists' position would be concerned with assessingtransformation in an economic sense - - from biosphere into goods, for example. The extreme version of this is rejected ( e.g. Gray, 1990d, f) and the paper will reject absolutely the notion that there can be some equivalence between biosphere and goods that can be measured and assessed through prices. However, the persuasive thesis of Daly (1980) and Daly & Cobb (1990) counsels the careful use of some of the economists' tools and concepts. This will be obvious in what follows.

418

IZ GRAY

fuels or m i n e r a l b u i l d i n g materials w h i c h c a n perhaps be substituted with some other means o r material. 33 Man34-made capital: W e s t e r n capitalism has p r o v i d e d each s u b s e q u e n t g e n e r a t i o n , i n t h e d e v e l o p e d c o u n t r i e s at least, w i t h a n everi n c r e a s i n g a m o u n t o f m a n - m a d e capital - - s u c h things as m a c h i n e r y , t e c h n o l o g y a n d k n o w - h o w , materials, housing, etc. This is w h a t c o m m e r c i a l activity appears to have set o u t to d o and, for most people in the "over-developed" Western "democracies", does it excessively w e l l (e.g. H e n d e r s o n , 1981, 1991). H o w e v e r , t h e r e are non-pricedaspects of the man-made capital stock w h i c h are also b e i n g t r e a t e d non-sustainably;for example, infrastructure, b u i l t e n v i r o n m e n t and, p e r h a p s critically f f e t h n o c e n t r i c a l l y , ethical a n d aesthetic values, h u m a n f r e e d o m a n d selfactualisation, justice, c o m m u n i t y a n d so on. It is a m o o t q u e s t i o n as to w h e t h e r m a n - m a d e capital; if m e a s u r e d b y o t h e r t h a n traditional National I n c o m e m e t h o d s , has actually b e e n increasing, e v e n i n t h e W e s t ( D a l y & Cobb, 1990; Ekius, 1986; Dauncey, 1988). T h e r e is s o m e d i s p u t e a b o u t the level at w h i c h sustainability s h o u l d b e sought: planetary, n a t i o n a l o r c o m m u n i t y , for example. Such d i s p u t e is largely fruitless if it b e c o m e s an e x c u s e for inaction. So o n e w a y f o r w a r d m i g h t b e to try a n d translate t h e s e c o n c e p t s to t h e level o f the i n d i v i d u a l o r g a n i s a t i o n a n d seek ways in w h i c h t o i n t r o d u c e t h e m to o u r a c c o u n t i n g . As

organisations c o n t r o l m u c h of t h e w o r l d ' s industrial capacity, are d e e p l y i m p l i c a t e d in e n v i r o n m e n t a l d e g r a d a t i o n a n d must, therefore, b e part o f any solution, it s e e m s r e a s o n a b l e to e x p l o r e organisational sustainability as a c o m p l e m e n t to, n o t a s u b s t i t u t e for, sustainability at o t h e r levels. 35 It s e e m s that a n y s u c h a c c o u n t i n g w o u l d have t w o m a j o r functions, b o t h derived from the necessity of accountability a n d t r a n s p a r e n c y d i s c u s s e d above. T h e s e functions w o u l d b e ( 1 ) to k e e p organisational d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s i n f o r m e d of the e x t e n t to w h i c h their particular organisation was depleting t h e p l a n e t ' s capital. I n effect, this w o u l d , to use e c o n o m i s t s ' terms, b e a n a t t e m p t to "internalise" w h a t have p r e v i o u s l y b e e n t r e a t e d as "externalities"; a n d ( 2 ) to k e e p s o c i e t y i n f o r m e d a b o u t the w a y its capital was b e i n g e m p l o y e d w h e t h e r or n o t it was b e i n g maintained. T h e r e are, it s e e m s to me, t w o ways i n w h i c h sustainability a c c o u n t i n g c o u l d b e a p p r o a c h e d b a s e d u p o n t h e foregoing. T h e first w o u l d b e a non-financial a c c o u n t i n g w h i c h a t t e m p t e d to identify a n d t h e n track e l e m e n t s i n the t h r e e categories o f "capital" w h i c h lay u n d e r the c o n t r o l of t h e organisation. T h e practical ( a n d d e f i n i t i o n a l ) p r o b l e m s are clearly critical but, in p r i n c i p l e at least, t h e very p r o c e s s of i d e n t i f y i n g critical, r e n e w a b l e o r s u b s t i t u t a b l e a n d manm a d e capitals w o u l d start the p r o c e s s of m a k i n g b i o s p h e r e i n t e r a c t i o n m o r e visible. Thus, again i n p r i n c i p l e , it m i g h t b e possible to identify

33R must be noted that from a d e e p ecology perspective very nearly all natural capital is "critical" in this sense. That is, first, the introductionof an ethic which gives all lifeformsa reasonable right to life places all habitat - - human and non-human - on a par. Second, in our world of increasing scientific ignorance (i.e. scientific and economic developments are advancing faster than mankind's ability to understand them and their interactions and implications) we cannot know which action will be life-threatenin4g.Third, most, if not all, human interventions in the biosphere are major disruptions of the ecology (if only because of the scale of industrial activity and the levels of population) and, therefore, either directly or indirectly interferes with critical capital. For more detail, see Maunders & Burritt (1991). 341 apologise for the gender-specific term. No sexism is intended - - even though the male may well be held principally responsible for the devastation we are w i t n e s s ~ The continued use of this term is (a) to maintain consistency with other literature, and (b) because other terms - - created capital, humankind-made capital, etc. - - rather lack the directness and historical referents of the term "man-made". 35It is possible, of course, that focus on sustainability at organisational levels might hinder essential developments at community and national levels, for example. It is far from obvious that this need be the case and recent research experience would suggest that the opposite is more likely-- namely that assumptions that responsibility for sustainabilitylie at national levels are hindering experiments at the organisational level (e.g. Porritt, 1989).

ACCOUNTING AND ENVIRONMENTALISM t h e d i m i n u t i o n s ( a n d i m p r o v e m e n t s ) in b o t h natural capitals (depletion of mineral resources, use of non-renewable and renewable energy, h a b i t a t d e s t r o y e d o r r e p l a c e d , i n f l u e n c e o n air a n d w a t e r quality, e t c . ) w h i c h h a v e b e e n n e c e s s a r y t o " c r e a t e " t h e i n c r e a s e s in m a n - m a d e c a p i t a l as s h o w n , for e x a m p l e , b y c h a n g e s in b a l a n c e - s h e e t values. 36 T h e r e c o u l d b e little p r e c i s i o n in s u c h a c c o u n t s ( a n d l a c k o f p r e c i s i o n might well be actually desirable), but they w o u l d p o i n t in t h e d i r e c t i o n o f sustainability. An a l t e r n a t i v e a p p r o a c h w h i c h has a m u c h c l o s e r relationship w i t h c o n v e n t i o n a l a c c o u n t i n g ( a n d t h e r e b y suffers a c u t e l y f r o m t h e earlier criticisms but has the advantage of being more i m m e d i a t e l y p r a c t i c a b l e , p e r h a p s m o r e accept° able, a n d t h e r e b y m o r e s u b v e r s i v e ) is t o a t t e m p t to c a l c u l a t e a s u s t a i n a b l e cost. W h i l s t I h a v e argued elsewhere about the critical problems t h a t arise f r o m c o n s i d e r i n g e n v i r o n m e n t a l issues within a price-driven framework and thus the i n c i p i e n t d a n g e r s o f a financial n u m b e r s - b a s e d s o l u t i o n t o e n v i r o n m e n t a l issues ( G r a y , 1990d, f), it m a y w e l l b e t h a t m u c h p r o g r e s s c a n b e a c h i e v e d - - a n d ( w i t h l u c k ) little v i o l e n c e d o n e -- by employing some conventional-looking financial a c c o u n t i n g c o n c e p t s t o a d d r e s s t h e environmental sustainability of organisational activity. T h a t is, f o l l o w i n g D a l y a n d C o b b ' s analysis o f s u s t a i n a b i l i t y a n d t h e i r s u b s e q u e n t reanalysis o f t h e c o n c e p t s in H i c k s i a n i n c o m e , I wonder whether accounting might contribute to t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f s u s t a i n a b i l i t y b y e x p l o r ing t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f e m p l o y i n g s u s t a i n a b l e c o s t analysis as a s h a d o w o f c u r r e n t p r i c e - d r i v e n a c c o u n t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n . 37 This m i g h t p r o v i d e us

419

w i t h a s t a r t i n g p o i n t ( a n d at a m i n i m u m it m i g h t s t o p s o m e o f t h e r i d i c u l o u s c l a i m s for sustainable activity which are now being made). This m i g h t w o r k b y t r y i n g t o d e r i v e a p a r a l l e l accounting system which provided calculations of what additional costs must be borne by the o r g a n i s a t i o n if t h e o r g a n i s a t i o n a l a c t i v i t y w e r e n o t to l e a v e t h e p l a n e t w o r s e off, i.e. w h a t it w o u l d c o s t at t h e e n d o f t h e a c c o u n t i n g p e r i o d t o r e t u r n t h e p l a n e t a n d b i o s p h e r e t o t h e p o i n t it w a s at at t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h e a c c o u n t i n g p e r o d . O n t h e face o f it, t h e r e is m u c h t o r e c o m m e n d s u c h an idea. Critical n a t u r a l c a p i t a l is i r r e p l a c e able; its " s u s t a i n a b l e c o s t " is infinite. T h u s n o "economic" decision would ever choose to use it, a n d this is t h e a n s w e r t h a t is r e q u i r e d for a green, sustainable accounting. Other natural capital will obviously cause profound problems b u t as w e a r e t r y i n g t o m o v e a w a y f r o m m e c h a n i s t i c c a l c u l a t i v e d e c i s i o n making, a n y i n f o r m a t i o n w h i c h b r o a d l y illustrates t h e s o r t o f magnitude of costs which must be incurred to r e t u r n t h e p l a n e t t o t h e state in w h i c h it w a s before a transaction may well encourage a more s e n s i t i v e a p p r o a c h t o d e c i s i o n making. To b e effective, this s h a d o w a c c o u n t i n g system would, preferably, produce numbers which can b e d e d u c t e d f r o m c a l c u l a t e d a c c o u n t i n g profit a n d b e e x p e n d e d in t h e r e s t o r a t i o n o f t h e b i o s p h e r e . This will, thus, l e a d to a r e c o g n i t i o n t h a t o r g a n i s a t i o n a l i n c o m e has b e e n g r o s s l y o v e r s t a t e d for s o m e c o n s i d e r a b l e t i m e a n d t h a t c u r r e n t g e n e r a t i o n s h a v e b e e n b e n e f i t i n g at t h e cost of some future generation. Theprobabtlity

is that n o Western c o m p a n y has m a d e a "'sustainable" profit f o r a very long time, i f

36 New Zealand local authorities have been experimenting with these ideas through reporting physical quantities of types of land, natural leisure facilitiesand aspects of the built environment that fall into their dominion. The idea is still in early stages of development. An alternative approach, this time using principallyfinancial data, is being explored in France. In this case the development of satellite environmental accounts is being constructed as part of the National Income accounting system, and then attempts are being made to link these through to the accounts of the individual enterprise (e.g. Christophe, 1989). 37 It is fully accepted that, in addition to all the other problems intrinsic to accounting and the use of calculative regimes to solve calculative problems, this suggestion is both potentially utterly conservative and, furthermore, relies upon prices, a pseudo-economic notion, and a concept "income" which is a socially constructed accounting artifact anyway. I think it is apparent that the ideaswhich follow flow from the earlier discussions and are not entirely incompatiblewith them. Ultimately though, any justification must be largely pragmatic--something needs to be done, this is sufficiently like "accounting" being a Trojan horse and, as we shall see, it produces the right sort of answers!

420

1L GRAY

ever. 38 ( F o r m o r e d e t a i l see, for e x a m p l e , Daly, 1980; Daly & C o b b , 1990; G o l d s m i t h et al., 1972; G o l d s m i t h , 1988; Ekins, 1986; Porritt, 1989; R o b e r t s o n , 1978, 1984; W a r d , 1979.) T o illustrate t h e i d e a a n d to e x p l o r e t h e n o t i o n just a little further, it m i g h t b e w o r t h a brief speculation on one or two aspects that m i g h t f o r m p a r t o f this " s u s t a i n a b l e c o s t " o f inputs method of dealing with sustainable activity. There will be several categories of "other n a t u r a l capital" a n d t h e y w i l l differ f r o m o r g a n i s a t i o n to organisation. 39 T h e s e m i g h t b e classified as: Primary resource inputs: these w o u l d i n c l u d e minerals, t i m b e r , a g r i c u l t u r e , fisheries, etc. T h e sustainable cost w o u l d o n l y have to b e calculated o r e s t i m a t e d at t h e p o i n t o f e x t r a c t i o n , subs e q u e n t p r i c e s p a s s i n g this o n t o s e c o n d a r y users. T h e n e e d for sustainable fishing, agriculture a n d f o r e s t r y is c u r r e n t l y w i d e l y discussed. T h e c o s t o f sustaining s e l f - r e n e w i n g s p e c i e s m i g h t b e e s t i m a t e d as t h e c o s t o f r e p l e n i s h m e n t b u t d i s c o u n t e d in s o m e w a y t o t h e p o i n t o f m a t u r i t y , i.e. t o t h e p o i n t w h e r e t h e fish c o u l d b e c a u g h t a n d eaten, t h e t i m b e r logged, etc. 4° T h e c o s t o f ( e . g . ) o v e r - l o g g i n g o r over-fishing ( a state w h i c h is difficult t o d e f i n e ) m i g h t t h e r e f o r e b e so c o n s i d e r a b l e as t o p r e v e n t " e c o n o m i c a l l y " worthwhile exploitation of the resource. For n o n - s e l f - r e n e w i n g r e s o u r c e s , n o t a b l y minerals, some decision about "use-substitute" would h a v e to b e m a d e so that ( e . g . ) e n e r g y m i n e r a l e x t r a c t i o n w a s c h a r g e d w i t h s o m e figure for (say) research into renewable energy resources

m c o a l profits i n t o s o l a r p a n e l o r w i n d - p o w e r g e n e r a t i o n . 41 Similarly ( w h i l s t r e c o g n i s i n g t h a t it is i m p o s s i b l e t o assess w h a t f u t u r e a n d essential u s e f u t u r e g e n e r a t i o n s m i g h t find for ( e . g . ) l i m e s t o n e o r oil), t h e i n c o m e f r o m t h e a c t i v i t y w o u l d h a v e to b e a r a c h a r g e for e s t a b l i s h i n g an a l t e r n a t i v e s o u r c e o f r e n e w a b l e r e s o u r c e w i t h t h e s a m e u s e a n d use-substitute. "'Input" o f waste-sink capacity: t h e u s e o f air, sea, w a t e r , land, etc., for e m i s s i o n s a n d for w a s t e disposal must be charged with correction of d a m a g e costs; that is, t h e c o s t s n e c e s s a r y to r e t u r n t h e sink t o its original state. This m a y w e l l tend to encourage organisations (as governments the world over are attempting) to reduce w a s t e t o w a r d s z e r o and, w i t h d e v e l o p m e n t s s u c h as t h e U.S.A. S u p e r f u n d Act (e.g. Specht, 1991 ) t h e s e c o s t s a r e b e i n g a r t i c u l a t e d t h r o u g h legislation. W h e r e this is i m p o s s i b l e o r n o t d i r e c t l y p o s s i b l e (as, for e x a m p l e , in t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n to t h e g r e e n h o u s e effect), alternative a m e l i o r a t i n g i n v e s t m e n t c o u l d b e c h a r g e d . This c o u l d , for e x a m p l e , b e r e l a t e d t o t h e ree s t a b l i s h m e n t o f f o r e s t to at least a t t e m p t t o b a l a n c e t h e c a r b o n d i o x i d e issue ( i f this is n o t naive c h e m i s t r y ! ) . Stewardship assets., s u c h m a t t e r s as l a n d a n d habitats m u s t b e r e t u r n e d t o t h e i r original c o n d i t i o n o r a l t e r n a t i v e s p r o v i d e d . T h e r e is an i n c r e a s i n g a m o u n t o f this in i n d u s t r y w h e r e these costs are now directly borne by the organisation, in r e - l a n d s c a p i n g o r r e - h a b i t a t i n g after u s e o f l a n d (e.g. Elkington, 1987). The practical and theoretical problems with this s o r t o f a p p r o a c h a r e c l e a r l y m o n u m e n t a l 42

3s And this looks like the sort of answer we might want. The desire and shock is probably achieved. It is also clear that this enables us to introduce consideration of the issues raised by the "lesser-developed"countries, but that is outside the scope of the present paper. 39There are "private" aspects of man-made capital that perhaps should also be dealt with here - - notably built environment. This, however, raises severe problems of definition that will need to be dealt with and so are left for future analysis. 4oThere are any number of obvious and perhaps not so obvious problems with this analysisbut it might provide a starting point. 41 As is beginning to happen - - at least in electricity generation industries. 42 And these problems to some extent echo earlier attempts and financially based social accounting (see, for example, Gray et

al., 1987; Estes, 1976).

ACCOUNTING AND ENVIRONMENTALISM

but are offered h e r e as suggestions, as stimuli and as a first a p p r o x i m a t i o n f r o m w h i c h the essential but a w e s o m e task o f a c c o u n t i n g for sustainability m i g h t d e v e l o p .

CONCLUSIONS

Essentially, this paper, as it currently stands, has sought to make an explicit introduction of deep green thinking to the accounting literature and therefore begin a process of providing a more explicit and theoretical basis for the development of n e w accountings in the social

421

and environmental public interest. As I started so I finish; the accounting literature is increasingly informed by scholarly critiques of accounting as it is but the radical developments have offered very few hostages to fortune in the form of detailed proposals of what accounting might look like. This has been the explicit project of Gray et al. (1986, 1987, 1988, 1991, forthcoming) and Gray ( 1990d ). One explanation for the lack is the observation that it is profoundly difficult to begin to reconstruct the world through the imaginings founded upon (financial) accounting. I suspect this paper has illustrated this point rather clearly.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Ackoff, R. L., Systems, Organisations and Interdisciplinary Research, General Systems Theory Yearbook (1960) pp. 1-8. Allen, V., Social Analyst~ a Marxist Critique a n d Alternative (Harlow: Longman, 1975). Armstrong, P., Contradiction and Social Dynamics In the Capitalist Agency Relationship, Accounting Organizations a n d Soc/ety (1991) pp. 1-26. Arrington, E., Intellectual Tyranny and the Public Interest: the Quest for the Grail and the Quality of Life, Advances in Public Interest Accounting (1990) pp. 1-16. Beishon, J. & Peters, G., Systems Behavlour (London: Open University/Harper & Row, 1972, 1981). Belkaoui, A., Socto-Economic Accounting (Connecticut: Quorum Books, 1984). Bern, S. L., The Measurement of Psychological Androgynydournal o f Consulting and ClinicalPsychology (1974) pp. 155-162. Bern, S. L, Sex Role Adaptability: One Consequence of Psychological Androgyny, J o u r ~ l o f Personality and Social Psychology (1975) pp. 634--643. Bertalanffy, L yon, General Systems Theory, General Systems Yearbook (1956) pp. 1-10. Bertalanffy, L. von, General Systems Theory: Foundationg Developmeng Applications (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1971 ). Bertalanffy, L. yon, General Systems Theory - - a Critical Review, in Beishon, J. & Peters, G. (eds), Systems Behavlour (London: Open University/Harper & Row, 1972). Boulding, K. E., General Systems Theory - - the Skeleton of Science, Management Science (1956) pp. 197-208. Boulding, I~ E., The Economics of the Coming Spaceship Earth, in Jarratt, H. (ed.), Environmental Quatity in a Grouting Economy (Baltimore: John Hopkins Press, 1966) pp. 3-14. Boulding, K. E., Review of Ecodevelopmen~. Economic,~ Ecology and Development - - an Alternative to Growth.Imperative Modeis, Journal o f Economic Literature (1982) pp. 1076-1077. Burchell, S., Clubb, C., Hopwood,/L, Hughes,J. & Nahapiet, J., The Roles of Accounting in Organisations and Society, Accounting~ Organizations and Society (1980) pp. 5-27. Burkitt, W. P., Concept of Accountability, Paper presented to British Accounting Association, Bath (1988). Burritt, R. L & Maunders, K. T., Accounting and Ecological Crisis, paper presented to the European Accounting Association Congress, Budapest (1990). Capra, F. & Spretnak, C., Green Polittcg. the Global Promise (London: Hutchinson, 1984). Carter, 1L, Martin, J., Mayblin, B. & Munday, M., System~ Management and Change a Graphic Guide (London: Harper Row, 1984). Checkland, P. B., Systems Thinkin~ Systems Practice (Chichester: Wiley, 1981 ). Christophe, B., L'envirounement naturel: Source de rapprochement entre la compatabilite nationale et la compatahilite d'enterprise?, Revue Francaise de Comptabilite (Novembre 1989) pp. 67-73.

422

IZ GRAY Clarke, M. & Tilman, R., C. B. MacPherson's Contribution to Democratic Theory, Journal o f Economic Issues (March 1988) pp. 181-196. Coker, E. W., Adam Smith's Concept of the Social System, Journal o f Business Ethics (February 1990) pp. 139--142. Commoner, B., The Social Use and Misuse of Technology, in Benthall, J. (ed.), Ecology: the Shaping Enqu/ry, pp. 335--$62 (London: Longman, 1972). Coppock, 1~, Life Amongst the Environmentalists: an Elaboration on Wildavsky's Economic and environmental/rationality and ritual, Accounttn~ Organizations and'Soc/ety ( 1977 ) pp. 125-129. Daly, H. E. (ed.), Economy, Ecology, Ethics. Essays toward a Steady State Economy (San Francisco: Freeman, 1980). Daly, H. E., Ultimate Confusion: the Economics of Julian Simon, Futures (1985) pp. 446-450. Daly, H. E. & Cobb,J. B., Jr, For the Common Good.Redirecting the Economy Towards the Community, the Environment and a Sustainable Future (London: Greenprint, 1990). Dauncey, G., After the Crash: the Emergence o f the Rainbow Economy ( Basingstoke: Greenprint, 1988). Dickson, D., Alternative Technology and the Politics o f Technical Change (Glasgow: Fontana, 1974). Dobson, A., Crreen Political Thought (London: Unwin Hyman, 1990). Donaldson, J., Key Issues in Business Ethics (London: Academic Press, 1988). Eldus, P. ( ed.), The Living Economy: a New Economics in the Making (London: Routledge, 1986). FJkirtgton, J. (& Burke, T.), The Green Capitatist~. Industry's Search f o r Environmental Excellence (London: Victor Gollancz, 1987). Emery, F. E. (ed.), Systems Thinking (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1969). Erlich, P. R. & Erlich, A. H., Humanity at the Crossroads, StamfordMagazine(1978). Reprinted in Daly, H. E. (ecL ),Economy, Ecology, Ethicg. Essays toward a Steady State Economy (San Francisco: Freeman, 1980 ) pp. 38-43. Estes, R. W., Corporate Social Accounting (New York: Wiley, 1976). Fisher, A. C., Resource and Environmental Economics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981 ). Fisher, A. C. & Peterson, F. M., The Environment in Economics: a Survey,Journal o f Economic Literature (1976) pp. 1-33. Frankel, B., The Post.Industrial Utopians (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1987). Furldss, V., The Future o f Technological Civilization (New York: Brazilier, 1974). Gambling, T., The Evolution of Accounting Man, Accountants" Weekly (10 November 1978a) pp. 30-31. Gambling, T., Beyond the Conventions o f Aecounting (London: Macmillan, 1978b). Gambling, T., The Accountants' Guide to the Galaxy, including the Profession at the end of the Universe, Aecountin~ Organizations a n d Soaety (1985) pp. 415-425. Georgcscu-Roegen, N., The Entropy Law and the Economic Problem, Distinguished Lecture Series No. 1 University of Alabama, 1971. Reprinted in Daly, H. E. (ed.),Economy, Ecology, Ethic&. Essays toward a Steady State Economy (San Francisco: Freeman, 1980) pp. 49-60. Georgescu-Roegen, N., Selections from "Energy and Economic Myths", Southern Economic Journal (January 1975 ). Reprinted in Daly, H. E. (ed.), Economy, Ecology, Ethic&. Essays toward a Steady State Economy (San Francisco: Freeman, 1980) pp. 61--81. Gjesdal, F., Accounting for Stewardship, Journal o f Aecounting Research (1981) pp. 208-231. Goldsmith, E., The Great U-Turin De-industrializing Society (Devon: Green Books, 1988). Goldsmith, E. et aL, Blueprint f o r Survival (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1972). Gorz, A~, Critique o f Economic Reason (transl. Handyside, G. & Turner, C.) (London: Verso, 1989). Gray, 1~ H., Accountability, Financial Reporting and the Not-for-profit Sector, British Accounting Review (Spring 1983)pp. 3--23. Gray, 1Z H., Accounting and Democracy, Aecountin~ Auditing and Accountability Journal (1989) pp. 52-56. Gray, 1Z H., Greenprint for Accountants, Certified Accountant (March 1990a) p. 18. Gray, IZ H., Corporate Social Reporting by UK Companies: a Cross-sectional and Longitudinal Study - - an Interim Report. Paper presented to British Accounting Association, University of Dundee (1990b). Gray, R. H., The Accountant's Task as a Friend to the Earth, Accountancy (June 1990c) pp. 65--69. Gray, IC H., The Greening o f Accountancy: the Profession after Pearce (London: Chartered Association of Certified Accountants, 1990d). Gray, R~H., Business Ethics and Organisational Change: Building a Trojan Horse or Rearranging Deckchairs on the Titanic?, Managerial AuditingJournal (1990e) pp. 12-21.

ACCOUNTING AND ENVIRONMENTALISM Gray, R. H., Accounting and Economics: the Psychopathic Siblings - - a Review Essay, British Accounting Review (1990f) pp. 373-388. Gray, IL H., Sustainability: Do you REALLYWant to Know what it Means?, CBI Environment Newsletter Oanuary 1991)pp. 10-11. Gray, 1~ H., Owen, D. L & Maunders, K. T., Corporate Social Reporting: the Way Forward? Accountancy (December 1986) pp. 6--8. Gray, R. H., Owen, D. L & Maunders, K. T., Corporate Social Reporting: Accounting and Accountability (Hemel Hempstead: Prentice-Hall, 1987). Gray, 1Z H., Owen, D. L & Maunders, K. T., Corporate Social Reporting: Emerging Trends in Accountability and the Social Contract, Accounting Auditing a n d Accountability Journal (1988) pp. 6-20. Gray, IZ H., Owen, D. L. & Maunders, K. T., Accountability, Corporate Social Reporting and the External Social Audits, Advances in Public Interest Accounting (1991) pp. 1-21. Greer, S., Hedlund, R. D. and Gibson, J. L. (eds),Accountabtlity in Urban Society (Sage: London, 1978). Hardin, G., The Tragedy of the Commons, Science (December 1968 ) pp. 1243-1248. Reprinted in Daly, H. E. (ed.), Economy, Ecology, Ethics. Essays toward a Steady State Economy (San Francisco: Freeman, 1980) pp. 100-114. Hardin, G., Second Thoughts on "The Tragedy of the Commons", Ch. 7 in Daly, H. E. (ed.), Economy, Ecology, Ethics.. Essays toward a Steady State Economy (San Francisco: Freeman, 1980 ) pp. 115-120. Harte, G. & Owen, D. L., Fighting De-industrialisation: the Role of Local Government Social Audits, Accounting Organizations a n d Society (1987) pp. 123-142. Harte, G., Lewis, L. & Owen, D. L., Ethical Investment and the Corporate Reporting Function. Paper presented at EAA Annual Congress, Budapest (1990). Heilbroner, R. L., The Worldly Philosophers (London: Pelican, 1983). Heilbroner, IZ L., Economics and Political Economy: Marx, Keynes and Schumpeter,Journal o f Economic Issues (September 1984) pp. 681-695. Held, D., Models o f Democracy (Oxford: Polity Press, 1987). Henderson, H., Creating Alternative Futures (New York: Berkley, 1978). Henderson, H., The Politics o f the Solar Ag~. Alternatives to Economics (Doubleday: New York, 1981 ). Henderson, H., New Markets, New Commons, New Ethics, Accounting Auditing and Accountability J o u r n a / ( 1 9 9 1 ) pp. 72-80. Hines, R. D., Financial Accounting: In Communicating Reality, we Construct Reality, Accounting Organizations and Society (1988) pp. 251-261. Hines, R. D., The FASB'sConceptual Framework, Financial Accounting and the Maintenance of the Social World, Accounting Organizations a n d Sociefy (1991a) pp. 313-332. Hines, R. D., Accounting: Filling the Negative Space, Proceedings o f the Third Interdtsciplinary Perspectives on Accounting Conference Vol. 1 (1991b) pp. 1.6.1-1.6.20. Hopper, T. & Powell, A., Making Sense of Research into the Organisational and Social Aspects of Management Accounting: a Review of its Underlying Assumptions,Journal o f Management Studies (September 1985) pp. 429--465. Kast, F. E. & Rosenweig,J. E., Organtsation and Management.. a Systems Approach (Kograkusha: McGrawHill, 1974). Kemp, P. & Wall, D., A Green Manifesto f o r the 1990s (London: Penguin, 1990). Laughlin, R. C. & Broadbent, J., Accounting and Jurisdiction: an Exploration with Specific Reference to the Public Sector in the United Kingdom, Proceedings o f the Third Interdisciplinary Accounting Conference, Vok 1, Manchester (1991) pp. 1.10.1-1.10.16. Laughlin, 17, C. & Puxty, A. G., The Socially Conditioning and Social Conditioned Nature of Accounting: Review and Analysis through Tinker's "Paper Prophets", British Accounting Review (Spring 1986) pp. 77-90. Lehman, C., The Importance of Being Ernest: Gender Conflicts in Accounting, Advances in Public Interest Accounting (1990) pp. 137-157. Liiderman, A., Rights a n d Obligations in Public Information (Cardiff: University College Cardiff Press, 1986). Lilderman, & & Creascy, P., Objectives and Entitlements to Rights in Government Financial Information, Financial Accountability a n d Management (Summer 1985) pp. 33-50. Lovelock, J., Gaiet. a New Look at Life on EaCh (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1982). Lovelock, J., The Ages o f Gaia (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988 ).

423

424

IL GRAY Lowe, A. E., The Finance Director's Role in the Formulation and Implementation of Strategy, Journal o f Business Finance (1972) pp. 58--63. Lowe, A. E. & Mchmes, J. M., Control of Socio-Economic Organisations,Journal o f Management Studies (1971) pp. 213-227. McKee, A., The Passage from Theology to Economics, International Journal o f Soctal Economics (1986) pp. 5-19. MacPherson, C. B.,Democratic Theory: Essays in Retrieval (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1973). MacPherson, C. B., The Ltfe and Times o f Liberal Democracy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977). MacPherson, C. B., Property (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1978). Machin, W. & Lowe, K E., New Perspectives in Management Control (London: Macmillan, 1983). Malachowsid,/L, Business Ethics 1980-2000: An Interim Forecast, ManagertalAuditingJournal (1990) pp. 22-27. March, J. G., Ambiguity and Accounting: the Illusive Link between Information and Decision-malting, Accounting Organizations a n d Society (1987) pp. 153-168. Maunders, IC T. & Burritt, R., Accounting and Ecological Crisis, Accounting Auditing andAccountabiltty Journal (1991) pp. 9-26. Maupin, IL J., Sex Role Identity and Career Success of Certified Public Accountants, Advances in Public Interest Accounting (1990) pp. 97-105. Meadows, D. H., Meadows, D. L, Randers, J. & Behrens, W. H., The Limits o f Growth (London: Pan, 1972 ). MiU, J. S., Principles o f Political Economy Vol. II (London: John W. Parker, 1857). Mill, J. S., On Liberty (London, 1859) Reprint (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1982). Mill, J. S., Utilitarianism (London, 1863) Reprint (London: Fontana, 1962). Moorcock, M., The Opium General (London: Harrap, 1984). Munkman, C. A., Accountability and Accounting (London: Hutchinson, 1971 ). Owen, D. L, Towards a Theory of Social Investment: a Review Essay, Accounting Organizations and Society (1990) pp. 249-266. Pallot, J., Infrastructure Assets as a Concept in Governmental Accounting. Paper given to AAANZ Canberra (1987). Pallot, J., The Legitimate Concern with Fairness: a Comment, Accounting Organizations and Society (1991) pp. 201-208. Parldn, S., Green Partieg. an International Guide (London: Heretic Books, 1989). Pearce, D., Accounting for the Future, Futures (1977) pp. 365-374. Reprinted in O'Riordan & Turner (op cir.). Pearce, D., Markandya, A. & Barbier, E. B . , B l u e l ~ n t f o r a Green Economy (London: Earthscan, 1989). Perrin, J. IL, Accounting Research in the Public Sector, in Bromwich, M. & Hopwood, A. G. (eds), Essays in B r i t i ~ Accounting Research (London: Pitman, 1981 ). Pezzey, J., Definitions o f Sustainabitity (No. 9) (UK CEED: 1989). Plant, C. & Plant, J., Green Business. Hope or Hoax? (Devon: Green Books, 1991 ). Porritt, J., Accounting for the Planet's Survival, Accountancy (September 1989) pp. 19-20. Power, M., Auditing and Environmental Expertise: Between Protest and Professionalism, Accounting Auditing and Accountubility Journal (1991) pp. 30-42. Puxty, A. G., Social Accounting as Immanent Legitimation: a Critique of Technist Ideology, Advances in Public Interest Accounting (1986) pp. 95--112. Raines, J. P. & Jung~ C. R., Knight on Religion and Ethics as Agents of Social Change, American Journal o f Economics and Sociology (October 1986) pp. 429--439. Reed, S. A. & Kratchman, S. H., The Effects of Changing Role Requirements on Accountants, Advances in Public Interest Accounting (1990) pp. 107--136. Reilly, B. J. & Kyj, M. J., Economics and Ethics, Journal o f Business Ethics (September 1990) pp. 691-698. Roberts, J., The Possibilities of Accountability, Accounting Organizations and Society (1991) pp. 355-370. Roberts, J. & Scapens, IL, Accounting Systems and Systems of Accountability, Accounting Organizations and Society (1985) pp. 443--456. Robertson, J., The Sane Alternative (London: James Robertson, 1978). Robertson, J., Introduction to the British Edition, in Capra & Spretnak (op cir.) (1984) pp. xxiii--xxx. Robertson, J., Future Work: Jobg Self-employment and Leisure after the Industrial Age ( Gower/Temple Smith, 1985).

ACCOUNTING AND ENVIRONMENTALISM Rorty, IL, Philosophy and the Mirror o f Ltfe (Princeton: princetown University Press, 1980). Roslender, IL, Sociology and Management Accounting Research, British Accounting Review (1990) pp. 351-372. Ryle, M., Ecology a n d Socialism (London: Radius, 1988). Sandbach, F., Environmental Ideology and Policy (Oxford: BLack'well, 1980). Schurnacher, E. F., Buddhist Economics, Resurgence (January-February 1968). Reprinted in Daly, H. E. ( ed. ),Economy, Ecology, Ethics. Essays toward a Steady State Economy (San Francisco: Freeman, 1980) pp. 138-145. Schumacher, E. F., Small is Beautiful (London: Abacus, 1973). Schumacher, E. F., The Age o f Plenty: a Christian View (Edinburgh: St. Andrews Press, 1974 ). Reprinted in Daly, H. E. (ed.), Economy, Ecology, Ethics. Essays toward a Steady State Economy (San Francisco: Freeman, 1980)pp. 126-137. Silverman, D., The Theory o f Organisationg. a Sociological Framework (London: Heinemarm, 1970). Smith, G. A., The Teleological View of Wealth: a Historical Perspective, Ch. 14 in Daly, H. E. ( ed. ), Economy, Ecology, Ethic,g. Essays toward a Steady State Economy (San Francisco: Freeman, 1980) pp. 215-237. Specht, L, What Auditors don't know about Environmental Laws can Hurt them! Proceedings o f the Third Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Accounting Conference, Vol. 1 (1991) pp. 1.12.1-1.12.11. Teubner, G. (ed.),Juridiflcation o f Social Spheres (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1987). Tinker, A. M., Theories of the State and the State of Accounting: Economic Reductionism and Political Voluntarism in Accounting Regulation Theory, Journal o f Accounting and Public Policy (1984a) pp. 55-74. Tinker, A. M. (ed.), Social Accounting f o r Corporations (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1984b). Tinker, A. M., Accounting for Unequal Exchange: Wealth Accumulation versus Wealth Appropriation, in Tinker (ed.) (op. cir.) (1984c). Tinker, A. M., Paper Prophetg. a Social Critique o f Accounting (Eastbourne: Holt Saunders, 1985). Tinker, ,L M., Merino, B. D. & Neimark, M. D., The Normative Origins of Positive Theories: Ideology and Accounting Thought, Accounting Organizations a n d Society (1982) pp. 167-200. Tinker, A. M., Neimark, M. & Lehman, C., Falling down the Hole in the Middle of the Road: Political Quietism in Corporate Social Reportinlg Accounting Auditing and Accountability Journal ( 1991 ) pp. 28-54. Tricker, IL I., Corporate Responsibility, Institutional Governance and the Roles of Accounting Standards, in Bromwich, M. & Hopwood, A. G. (eds), Accounting Standards Setting - - an InternationalPerspective (London: Pitman, 1983). Turner, ILK., Sustainable Global Futures: Common Interest, Interdependence, Complexity and Global Possibilities, Futures (1987) pp. 574--582. Turner, ILK. ( ed. ), Sustainable EnvironmentalManagement. Principles and Practice ( London: Bellmven Press, 1988). Turner, IL K., Interdisciplinarity and Holism in the Environmental Training of Economists and Planners, Symposium on Education for Economists and Planners, International E n v i r o m e n t Institute, University of Malta (December 1989). Turner, 1L K. & Pearce, D. W., Ethical Foundations of Sustainable Economic Development (London: International Institute for Environment and Development/London Enviromental Economics Centre Paper 90-01, March 1990). United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development, Our Common Future (The Brundtland Report) (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987). Victor, P. K, Economics and the Challenge of Environmental Issues, in Leiss, W. (ed.), Ecology versus Politics in C a ~ (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1979). Reprinted in Daly, H. E. (eeL), Economy, Ecology, Ethicg. Essays Toward a Steady State Economy (San Francisco: Freeman, 1980) pp. 194-214. Ward, B., Spaceship Earth (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1966). Ward, B., Progress f o r a Small Planet ( Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1979 ). Zalkov, G., Political and Economic Problems of Accounting for Ecological Factors in Social Production, Problems o f Economics (1986).

425