Balancing the books of nature by accounting for ecosystem condition following ecological restoration.

Demand for ecological restoration of Earth's degraded ecosystems has increased significantly since the adoption of The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework in December 2022, with target 2 aiming to ensure that at least 30% of degraded ecosystems are under effective restoration by 2030. More recently, in December 2023, the Australian Parliament introduced the Nature Repair Act, which establishes a framework for the world's first legislated, national, voluntary biodiversity market. How can the effectiveness of these ambitious targets be measured? Natural Capital Accounting (NCA) provides a framework to measure changes in ecosystem condition that is applicable across ecosystems and potentially catalogue effects of restoration interventions to drive investment, improvement to practice, and ultimately, to better protect the Earth's ecosystems. However, the framework has not been tested in this context. In this progressive approach, we populated the leading global NCA framework with ecological data to quantify changes in ecosystem condition after restoration. In principle, NCA is fit for purpose, however, methodological refinements and ecological expertise are needed to unlock its full potential. These tweaks will facilitate adoption and standardisation of reporting as efforts ramp up to meet ambitious global restoration targets.

Leveraging natural capital accounting to support businesses with nature-related risk assessments and disclosures.

Nature loss threatens businesses, the global economy and financial stability. Understanding and addressing these risks for business will require credible measurement approaches and data. This paper explores how natural capital accounting (NCA) can support business data and information needs related to nature, including disclosures aligned with the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures recommendations. As businesses seek to measure, manage and disclose their nature-related risks and opportunities, they will need well-organized, consistent and high-quality information regarding their dependencies and impacts on nature, which few businesses currently collect or track in-house. NCA may be useful for these purposes but has not been widely used or applied by businesses. National NCA guided by the U.N. System of Environmental-Economic Accounting may provide: (i) a useful framework for businesses in conceptualizing, organizing and managing nature-related data and statistics; and (ii) data and information that can directly support business disclosures, corporate NCA and other business applications. This paper explores these opportunities as well as synergies between national and corporate natural capital accounts. In addition, the paper discusses key barriers to advancing the wider use and benefits of NCA for business, including: awareness of NCA, data access, business capabilities related to NCA, spatial and temporal scales of data, audit and assurance considerations, potential risks, and costs and incentives. This article is part of the theme issue 'Bringing nature into decision-making'.

Biodiversity market doublespeak.

The notion that biodiversity markets can raise money desperately needed for biodiversity conservation is gaining momentum. The dire state of biodiversity and the enormous biodiversity repair bill means that every funding option must be explored. However, the risk that trading ill-defined generic biodiversity credits will result in biodiversity loss, not conservation, should be considered. Scarce resources could be diverted to market regulation rather than conservation. Without key elements, biodiversity markets could be perverse, leading to Orwellian "doublespeak"-saying one thing, but resulting in another.

From COVID-19 to Green Recovery with natural capital accounting.

The COVID-19 pandemic and related social and economic emergencies induced massive public spending and increased global debt. Economic recovery is now an opportunity to rebuild natural capital alongside financial, physical, social and human capital, for long-term societal benefit. Yet, current decision-making is dominated by economic imperatives and information systems that do not consider society's dependence on natural capital and the ecosystem services it provides. New international standards for natural capital accounting (NCA) are now available to integrate environmental information into government decision-making. By revealing the effects of policies that influence natural capital, NCA supports identification, implementation and monitoring of Green Recovery pathways, including where environment and economy are most positively interlinked.

An Indigenous perspective on ecosystem accounting: Challenges and opportunities revealed by an Australian case study.

The System of Environmental-Economic Accounting Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA-EA) is widely promoted in environmental and economic policy and management. Unfortunately, the SEEA-EA has not substantively addressed the aspects of accounting that may be of interest to, or used by, Indigenous peoples. We investigate an Indigenous perspective on the potential of the SEEA-EA to support cultural and environmental management through collaborative workshops with managers of Nyamba Buru Yawuru, the Prescribed Body Corporate representing the Yawuru Traditional Owners in Western Australia. Our discussions highlight that while the SEEA-EA may be a valuable tool for empowering Indigenous people and supporting the management of their lands and seas, there are areas where the SEEA-EA needs to be broadened to better reflect cultural values, and the services to ecosystems provided by Indigenous peoples. Embedding Indigenous perspectives into the SEEA-EA would mean that it is of greater use to Indigenous peoples and their representative organisations and ensure that these values are better recognised in the policymaking of government.

Land cover and fire accounts to support Indigenous land management: A pilot study of Yawuru Country.

Ecosystem accounting is emerging as a promising tool for environmental management by offering consistent information about ecosystem change over time. Via a United Nations process, ecosystem accounting has been standardised in the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting (SEEA). However, there are currently no examples of ecosystem accounts developed specifically to support Indigenous people's management of land or sea. More than 40% (3 million square kilometres) of Australia's land and sea territory has Indigenous Title. If Indigenous managers are to use ecosystem accounting, then it is essential for them to be involved in its development. We assessed how ecosystem accounts can be developed and applied in a manner that supports the management objectives of Indigenous owners and managers. Working collaboratively with the Yawuru Traditional Owners of the land and sea country around Broome, Western Australia, we constructed and assessed experimental ecosystem accounts for land cover and fire for the period 2000-2020. Three key benefits of ecosystem accounts for supporting the priorities of Yawuru managers were identified: (1) flexibility in the units used for the analysis; (2) the extended time scale of the accounts; and (3) the emphasis on consistent capturing and reporting of data. We also identified the need for further work to incorporate cultural knowledge and values within the broader SEEA, with implications for the recognition of Indigenous people, knowledge and values within accounting systems globally.

Evaluating nature-based solutions for climate mitigation and conservation requires comprehensive carbon accounting.

Nature-based solutions (NbS) can address climate change, biodiversity loss, human well-being and their interactions in an integrated way. A major barrier to achieving this is the lack of comprehensiveness in current carbon accounting which has focused on flows rather than stocks of carbon and led to perverse outcomes. We propose a new comprehensive approach to carbon accounting based on the whole carbon cycle, covering both stocks and flows, and linking changes due to human activities with responses in the biosphere and atmosphere. We identify enhancements to accounting, namely; inclusion of all carbon reservoirs, changes in their condition and stability, disaggregated flows, and coverage of all land areas. This comprehensive approach recognises that both carbon stocks (as storage) and carbon flows (as sequestration) contribute to the ecosystem service of global climate regulation. In contrast, current ecosystem services measurement and accounting commonly use only carbon sequestration measured as net flows, while greenhouse gas inventories use flows from sources to sinks. This flow-based accounting has incentivised planting and maintaining young forests with high carbon uptake rates, resulting, perversely, in failing to reveal the greater mitigation benefit from protecting larger, more stable and resilient carbon stocks in natural forests. We demonstrate the benefits of carbon storage and sequestration for climate mitigation, in theory as ecosystem services within an ecosystem accounting framework, and in practice using field data that reveals differences in results between accounting for stocks or flows. Our proposed holistic and comprehensive carbon accounting makes transparent the benefits, trade-offs and shortcomings of NbS actions for climate mitigation and sustainability outcomes. Adopting this approach is imperative for revision of ecosystem accounting systems under the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting and contributing to evidence-based decision-making for international conventions on climate (UNFCCC), biodiversity (CBD) and sustainability (SDGs).

Natural capital accounting for better policy.

A growing number of countries is setting up natural capital accounts (NCA) based on the system of environmental-economic accounting (SEEA); however, actually using them for better policy making turns out to be complex. This paper synthesises lessons on the institutional mainstreaming of the SEEA and its use in improving policy decisions affecting natural capital. It draws on discussions held at two Policy Forums organised by the World Bank Wealth Accounting and Valuation of Ecosystem Services program and the United Nations Statistical Division. Practical examples of how the SEEA helps to improve policy making are explored. Emerging from the Forums were ten principles for making NCA fit for policy. These principles promote a comprehensive NCA organisation, a purposeful use of accounts, trustworthy methods and institutionalisation of NCA mechanisms in government. To put these principles into practice, six strategies are outlined: (1) assure credibility of the accounts; (2) align supply and demand for NCA; (3) assure high level support for NCA; (4) encourage cooperation between institutions so NCA and policy are mutually constructive; (5) provide evidence that natural capital is economically important and; (6) assure policy-relevant communication of NCA results.

Putting biodiversity into the national accounts: Creating a new paradigm for economic decisions.

Economics has long taken precedence over the environment in both governmental and business decision making, with the System of National Accounts and the indicator GDP coming to represent much that is wrong with the current environmental conditions. Increasing recognition of the environmental damage human activity causes and that human well-being depends on biodiversity and ecosystems means that new systems to measure and sustainably manage the world are needed. Integrating the environment into national accounts has been suggested as a way to improve information but so far impact on decision making is limited. This outlook needs to change. Using examples from Australia and Botswana, we show how integrating information on biodiversity, resource use and the economy via accounting can help create a new decision-making paradigm and enable a new policy framing with spending on biodiversity conservation and sustainability seen as an investment, not a cost.

Ecosystem accounts define explicit and spatial trade-offs for managing natural resources.

Decisions about natural resource management are frequently complex and vexed, often leading to public policy compromises. Discord between environmental and economic metrics creates problems in assessing trade-offs between different current or potential resource uses. Ecosystem accounts, which quantify ecosystems and their benefits for human well-being consistent with national economic accounts, provide exciting opportunities to contribute significantly to the policy process. We advanced the application of ecosystem accounts in a regional case study by explicitly and spatially linking impacts of human and natural activities on ecosystem assets and services to their associated industries. This demonstrated contributions of ecosystems beyond the traditional national accounts. Our results revealed that native forests would provide greater benefits from their ecosystem services of carbon sequestration, water yield, habitat provisioning and recreational amenity if harvesting for timber production ceased, thus allowing forests to continue growing to older ages.

Environmental reporting and accounting in Australia: progress, prospects and research priorities.

Despite strong demand for information to support the sustainable use of Australia's natural resources and conserve environmental values and despite considerable effort and investment, nation-wide environmental data collection and analysis remains a substantially unmet challenge. We review progress in producing national environmental reports and accounts, identify challenges and opportunities, and analyse the potential role of research in addressing these. Australia's low and concentrated population density and the short history since European settlement contribute to the lack of environmental data. There are additional factors: highly diverse data requirements and standards, disagreement on information priorities, poorly measurable management objectives, lack of coordination, over-reliance on researchers and businesses for data collection, lack of business engagement, and short-term, project-based activities. New opportunities have arisen to overcome some of these challenges: enhanced monitoring networks, standardisation, data management and modelling, greater commitment to share and integrate data, community monitoring, increasing acceptance of environmental and sustainability indicators, and progress in environmental accounting practices. Successes in generating climate, water and greenhouse gas information appear to be attributable to an unambiguous data requirement, considerable investment, and legislative instruments that enhance data sharing and create a clearly defined role for operational agencies. Based on the analysis presented, we suggest six priorities for research: (1) common definitions and standards for information that address management objectives, (2) ecological measures that are scalable from local to national level, (3) promotion of long-term data collection and reporting by researchers, (4) efficient satellite and sensor network technologies and data analysis methods, (5) environmental modelling approaches that can reconcile multiple data sources, and (6) experimental accounting to pursue consistent, credible and relevant information structures and to identify new data requirements. Opportunities exist to make progress in each of these areas and help secure a more sustainable future.