Aligning policy and science: a teleological analysis of biodiversity accounting and accountability under the European Green Deal
Gespeichert in:
| Titel: | Aligning policy and science: a teleological analysis of biodiversity accounting and accountability under the European Green Deal |
|---|---|
| Autoren: | Öhlinger, Eva Maria, Lehner, Othmar Manfred |
| Weitere Verfasser: | Accounting, Helsinki |
| Quelle: | Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal. 16:62-97 |
| Verlagsinformationen: | Emerald, 2025. |
| Publikationsjahr: | 2025 |
| Schlagwörter: | 1 - Self archived, 2 - Hybrid open access publication channel, Biodiversity accounting, Sustainability accounting, biodiversity accounting, regulation, sustainability accounting, 1- Publicerad utomlands, Biodiversity, 0- Ingen affiliation med ett företag, 1- Minst en av författarna har en utländsk affiliation, KOTA2025?, PREM0000, European Green Deal, SDG 14 - Life Below Water, European Union, 512 Business and Management, 1 - Publication available open access by the publisher, SDG 12 - Responsible Consumption and Production, biodiversity, SDG 15 - Life on Land, Regulation |
| Beschreibung: | Purpose This study aims to analyse biodiversity accounting and accountability regimes under the European Green Deal (EGD), focusing on whether both regulations and actions align with the scientific consensus on biodiversity conservation, particularly regarding underrepresented drivers such as land-use change. Design/methodology/approach The research uses a teleological methodology, as articulated by Scott Shapiro and Richard Gardiner, interpreting legal texts through their intended outcomes and broader normative objectives. It critically examines the EGD’s legislative texts and actions, comparing them with scientific evidence from Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services and key literature on biodiversity drivers, policy gaps and regulatory enforcement. Findings The study finds that while the EGD encompasses numerous regulations aimed at halting biodiversity loss, it overemphasizes pollution control at the expense of other critical biodiversity loss drivers like land-use change. The analysis reveals a significant gap between EGD regulations and the scientific consensus on biodiversity drivers, highlighting the need for stronger land-use policies, improved enforcement mechanisms and better integration of biodiversity considerations into sectoral policies like agriculture. Practical implications The study provides actionable policy recommendations for reforming land-use policies, enhancing enforcement mechanisms and improving corporate biodiversity disclosures. It also outlines a teleological approach to help policymakers evaluate the effectiveness of biodiversity-related regulations in the EGD, ensuring better alignment with scientific recommendations and sustainable practices. Social implications By addressing the gap between EGD regulations and the broader scientific consensus on biodiversity drivers, this study promotes more effective biodiversity conservation strategies that will benefit both the environment and society by fostering sustainable land use and reducing ecosystem pressures. Originality/value This research highlights the necessity of aligning policy measures with scientific understanding to enhance biodiversity conservation. It offers original insights into the misalignment between the EGD’s regulatory focus and biodiversity loss drivers and outlines clear policy recommendations such as reforming land-use policies, enhancing enforcement and improving corporate biodiversity reporting through frameworks like the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive. This study further concludes with necessary future research avenues on biodiversity accounting, regarding anthropocentricism, valuation, telecoupling and equity perspectives. |
| Publikationsart: | Article |
| Dateibeschreibung: | application/pdf |
| Sprache: | English |
| ISSN: | 2040-803X 2040-8021 |
| DOI: | 10.1108/sampj-07-2024-0751 |
| DOI: | 10.5281/zenodo.15183406 |
| DOI: | 10.5281/zenodo.15183407 |
| Zugangs-URL: | http://hdl.handle.net/10138/596598 |
| Rights: | CC BY URL: https://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/ |
| Dokumentencode: | edsair.doi.dedup.....8350c15ebc305f4837d092b26af40fdb |
| Datenbank: | OpenAIRE |
Full Text Finder 
Nájsť tento článok vo Web of Science | Abstract: | Purpose This study aims to analyse biodiversity accounting and accountability regimes under the European Green Deal (EGD), focusing on whether both regulations and actions align with the scientific consensus on biodiversity conservation, particularly regarding underrepresented drivers such as land-use change. Design/methodology/approach The research uses a teleological methodology, as articulated by Scott Shapiro and Richard Gardiner, interpreting legal texts through their intended outcomes and broader normative objectives. It critically examines the EGD’s legislative texts and actions, comparing them with scientific evidence from Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services and key literature on biodiversity drivers, policy gaps and regulatory enforcement. Findings The study finds that while the EGD encompasses numerous regulations aimed at halting biodiversity loss, it overemphasizes pollution control at the expense of other critical biodiversity loss drivers like land-use change. The analysis reveals a significant gap between EGD regulations and the scientific consensus on biodiversity drivers, highlighting the need for stronger land-use policies, improved enforcement mechanisms and better integration of biodiversity considerations into sectoral policies like agriculture. Practical implications The study provides actionable policy recommendations for reforming land-use policies, enhancing enforcement mechanisms and improving corporate biodiversity disclosures. It also outlines a teleological approach to help policymakers evaluate the effectiveness of biodiversity-related regulations in the EGD, ensuring better alignment with scientific recommendations and sustainable practices. Social implications By addressing the gap between EGD regulations and the broader scientific consensus on biodiversity drivers, this study promotes more effective biodiversity conservation strategies that will benefit both the environment and society by fostering sustainable land use and reducing ecosystem pressures. Originality/value This research highlights the necessity of aligning policy measures with scientific understanding to enhance biodiversity conservation. It offers original insights into the misalignment between the EGD’s regulatory focus and biodiversity loss drivers and outlines clear policy recommendations such as reforming land-use policies, enhancing enforcement and improving corporate biodiversity reporting through frameworks like the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive. This study further concludes with necessary future research avenues on biodiversity accounting, regarding anthropocentricism, valuation, telecoupling and equity perspectives. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2040803X 20408021 |
| DOI: | 10.1108/sampj-07-2024-0751 |