Purpose-The purpose of this paper is to make sense of the tensions and contradictions between different conceptions of the meaning of carbon accounting. Design/methodology/approach-The paper draws on theories of framing to help explain the divergent understandings and practices currently encompassed by the term 'carbon accounting'. The empirical core of the paper is based on a review of the literature and illustrated through examples of some of the contemporary problems in carbon accounting. Findings-Tensions and contradictions in carbon accounting can be understood as the result of 'collisions' between at least five overlapping frames of reference, namely physical, political, market-enabling, financial and social/environmental modes of carbon accounting. Practical implications-Unresolved tensions in carbon accounting can undermine confidence in climate science, policies, markets and reporting, thereby ultimately discouraging action to mitigate climate change. Understanding this problem can contribute to finding practical solutions. Originality/value-The paper makes three distinct contributions to the emerging theoretical literature on carbon accounting. First, it provides a unique 'unpacked' definition of carbon accounting that attempts to represent the contemporary range of meanings encompassed by the term. Second, we demonstrate how social science ideas about framing can help explain why definitions and understandings of carbon accounting vary. Third, by making the interactions between different forms of carbon accounting explicit through the metaphor of colliding frames of reference, the origins of some of the contemporary intractable issues in carbon accounting can be better understood.

No abstract

a b s t r a c tCarbon accounting has evolved rapidly over the past twenty years and now encompasses a wide range of activities with significant financial implications. This paper examines how competence in carbon accounting is being defined and claimed by different actors and communities. Specifically, it focuses on the role of the accountancy profession in carbon accounting, charting its engagement over time and its relationship with other communities involved in carbon accounting. The paper builds on recent work showing that multiple framings and activities are associated with carbon accounting, leading to conflicting views on what it means, how it should be done, and who should be involved. It draws on the concepts of epistemic communities and boundary-work to help explain the role of professions and the emergence of new institutions that mediate between different communities to achieve policy change. We find that, while accountants have undisputed authority in the field of financial reporting of rights and liabilities created under emissions trading schemes ('financial carbon accounting'), their claims to competence in other aspects of organisational carbon accounting overlap with those made by several other communities. Although the accountancy profession's interest in organisational carbon accounting can be traced back at least as far as 2001, the introduction of emissions trading in Europe in 2005 coincided with the start of a new, as yet largely un-scrutinised, initiative to extend its claims of relevant expertise, through a variety of methods including the promotion of standards for disclosure of physical and strategic climate-related information. The Climate Disclosure Standards Board provides an example of a boundary organisation that has been established by different communities with an interest in carbon accounting, with mutually beneficial results, which has nevertheless resulted in the production of a new Climate Change Reporting Framework that is heavily aligned towards the existing competence of accountancy professionals.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Negative emissions technologies (NETs) are an essential part of most scenarios for achieving the Paris Agreement goal of limiting warming to below 2°C and for all scenarios that limit warming to 1.5 °C. The deployment of these technologies requires carbon accounting methods for a range of different purposes, such as determining the effectiveness of specific technologies or incentivising NETs. Although the need for carbon accounting methods is discussed within the literature on NETs, there does not appear to be a clear understanding of the range of different accounting challenges. Based on a systematic literature review this study identifies five distinct accounting issues related to NETs: 1. estimating total system-wide change in emissions/removals; 2. non-permanence; 3. nonequivalence of 'no overshoot' and 'overshoot and removal'; 4. accounting for incentives for NETs; and 5. the temporal distribution of emissions/removals. Solutions to these accounting challenges are proposed, or alternatively, areas for further research and the development of solutions are highlighted. One key recommendation is that carbon accounting methods should follow a 'reality principle' to report emissions and removals when and where they actually occur, and an important overall conclusion is that it is essential to use the correct accounting method for its appropriate purpose. For example, consequential methods that take account of total system-wide changes in emissions/removals should be used if the purpose is to inform decisions on the deployment or incentivisation of NETs. Attributional methods, however, should be used if the purpose is to construct static descriptions of possible net zero worlds.

No abstract