Purpose - The paper aims to analyse accounting rationalities and
practices which lie behind biodiversity offsetting. The way in which
accounting functions as a technology of government through the practice
of biodiversity offsetting is to be considered and its effects examined.
Design/methodology/approach - Governmentality is drawn upon to examine
ways in which power and authority are exercised in a single case study
setting. Data analysed comprise corporate and industry websites and
documents, corporate reports, public documentation and interviews. The
arena concept is utilised to highlight contestation in the case, and
signal concerns regarding the wider impact of the use of particular
accounting rationalities and technologies in the context of biodiversity
offsetting. Findings - The paper provides empirical insights into how
accounting for biodiversity offsetting rationales and practices
constitute an attempt to reproduce power relations in favour of
particular parties and foster disciplinary effects. The practice of
biodiversity offsetting is problematised through critiquing accounting's
governing role in the areas of biodiversity quantification and
biodiversity trading. Questions are raised as to whether biodiversity
offsetting enabled by accounting techniques is leading to greater
accountability and ultimately protection of biodiversity, or whether it
represents a mechanism through which particular species and habitat
destruction can be justified, or at least hidden in its accounting.
Originality/value - While biodiversity offsetting research is not
uncommon within science and law, the analysis of how accounting
functions as a technology of government within biodiversity offsetting
is believed to be unique.