Pacific Accounting Review

Water accounting knowledge pathways

Joanne Tingey-Holyoak, John D. Pisaniello,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Joanne Tingey-Holyoak, John D. Pisaniello, (2019) "Water accounting knowledge pathways", Pacific
Accounting Review, Vol. 31 Issue: 2, pp.258-274, https://doi.org/10.1108/PAR-01-2018-0004
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/PAR-01-2018-0004
Downloaded on: 22 April 2019, At: 02:12 (PT)
Downloaded by University of Liverpool At 02:12 22 April 2019 (PT)

References: this document contains references to 78 other documents.

To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 18 times since 2019*

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-
srm:187202 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.


PAR
31,2
258
Received 20 January 2018
Revised 7 December 2018
Accepted 31 December 2018
Downloaded by University of Liverpool At 02:12 22 April 2019 (PT)
Pacific Accounting Review
Vol. 31 No. 2, 2019
pp. 258-274
© Emerald Publishing Limited
0114-0582
DOI 10.1108/PAR-01-2018-0004
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0114-0582.htm
Water accounting
knowledge pathways
Joanne Tingey-Holyoak
Business School, University of South Australia, Adelaide,
South Australia, Australia, and
John D. Pisaniello
School of Commerce, University of South Australia, Adelaide,
South Australia, Australia
Abstract
Purpose – There are increasing demands on professional accountants in practice to generate water
accounts for clients using knowledge from other disciplines within and outside their firms. Whilst many
professional service firms have a broad range of in-house and consulting expertise, professional groups
within and between these organisations may not be generating and sharing the knowledge required for
successful water accounting. The purpose of this paper is to explore how additional disciplinary skills for
water volumetric measurement, understanding of licensing and allocations can effectively and efficiently be
shared between the disciplines required to be involved.
Design/methodology/approach – Two cross-sectional semi-structured surveys developed using a
social network lens were disseminated to Australian accountants operating in professional services firms, and
the results were descriptively analysed.
Findings – The authors find that, whilst accounting and engineering are acknowledged as core disciplines
for water accounting, there is a need for more standardised measures and frameworks across diverse scales to
fit in with current reporting practices and meet stakeholder needs. These need to be nested in a water
accounting regulatory model that includes the accountancy professional bodies as a platform for knowledge
generation and sharing.
Originality/value – The paper provides evidence of perceived barriers to and pathways for
interdisciplinary knowledge networks for a new type of accounting. It demonstrates how regulatory
frameworks can potentially assist rather than impede accountants in their contribution to solving of complex
corporate sustainability problems.
Keywords Professional service firms, Water accounting, Interdisciplinary teams,
Sustainable water management
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
The nature of accounting practice has shifted in line with the complexity of sustainability
problems faced by business. Possibly the most challenging of the problems is accounting for
business use of increasingly variable supplies of water around the globe, as moves are made
The authors gratefully acknowledge Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand for their
funding support for two research projects from 2012 to 2014. Thanks to Professor Roger Burritt,
former Director of the Centre of Accounting, Governance and Sustainability, where the research was
undertaken; Ms Kirsty Willis and her team at Ehrenberg Bass; and Mr Arthur Spassis, for data
collection.
 towards not only increased accountability for water storage, but for its efficient use to grow Water
profitability (Moroncini, 1993; Egan, 2014a). A variety of water accounting developments accounting
are widely reported, and Australia took the lead to develop standards based on financial
accounting for producing and assuring General Purpose Water Accounting Reports
knowledge
(GPWARs) (Chalmers et al., 2012). With the release of standards like these and moves pathways
further into water accounting and reporting for large water user clients (Aldaya et al., 2012;
Clark, 2014; CEO Water Mandate, 2018), the profession must increasingly evolve to embrace
effective interdisciplinary teams within professional firms (Morrison and Schulte, 2009; 259
Tingey-Holyoak, 2014; Gardner, 2016). Without such teams to generate, apply and transfer
water accounting knowledge, the accounting profession’s ability to fully embrace water
accounting is likely to be limited (Miller, 1998; Lowe et al., 2006; Gardner, 2016). Recently, the
chairman of Nestle indicated that corporate water awareness raising through accounting
and monitoring was more important than climate change awareness (Clark, 2014) and so
how the additional disciplinary skills for water volumetric measurement, understanding of
Downloaded by University of Liverpool At 02:12 22 April 2019 (PT)

licensing and allocations can most effectively and efficiently be shared requires exploration
(Hazleton, 2013, 2014). Therefore, this paper presents an investigation into knowledge
generation, application and transfer between disciplines for water accounting by answering
four research questions:

RQ1: How can water accounting knowledge be generated by professional accountants?

RQ2: How can water accounting knowledge be applied in professional accounting
practice?
RQ3: How can water accounting knowledge be transferred between the disciplines
required?
RQ4: What are the pathways that can support water accounting knowledge, application
and transfer?
A social network lens was used to assist the researchers in developing an
understanding of the pathways and pathway elements that are required to support
knowledge generation, application and sharing within and between effective teams in
and around these firms. The results show that water accounting knowledge needs to be
generated against frameworks that provide assistance with standardising information
across scales and industries, so there can be a fit with current economic practices of
water-consuming clients. Furthermore, new knowledge networks need to be supported
by the professional accountancy bodies. The following section introduces the water
accounting knowledge required, considers its generation, application and transfer
before furthering the conceptual framework and research design. This is followed by
presentation of results of two phases of surveys, discussion and conclusions which
suggest how accountancy professional bodies can play a leadership role in the
knowledge network and help to implement the knowledge pathways necessary for
successful water accounting.

2. Water accounting knowledge

Large water-consuming organisations around the world have increasingly recognised the
need to account for water (Labuschagne et al., 2004; Yeates, 2015; Cawood, 2015). Beyond
responding to regulatory pressure or social concern, water accounting is now being
recognised as also crucial for improving economic performance (Tingey-Holyoak, 2014). At
its most fundamental level, water accounting is the measuring of physical units of water
 PAR used and stored. Whilst most water accounting can be undertaken by experts internal to the
31,2 organisation, when it comes to standardised reporting and auditing, there is an advantage
for accounting firms to be able to offer this service to their clients. The inclusion of the
external accountant allows for integration of hydrological information with economic
information and report this clearly and consistently to facilitate economic, social and
environmental analysis by those inside and outside the firm (Gutiérrez-Martín et al., 2017).
260 Large water-consuming organisations are those most likely to be exposed to the stakeholder
pressure for water efficiency and conservation (Xeros, 2015). The realisation that it is
important for these organisations to integrate hydrological and economic information has
meant that various water accounting tools have been developed, for example: Standardised
Water Accounting (SWA) (Hazleton et al., 2011), the System of Environmental-Economic
Accounts for Water (SEEA-Water) (UNSD, 2018), water pricing (EEA, 2008), water
sustainability indices and guidelines (Loucks, 2000), Integrated Water Resources
Management (IWRM) (EC, 2000), water footprinting and labelling (Egan, 2014a; Hazleton,
Downloaded by University of Liverpool At 02:12 22 April 2019 (PT)

2013, 2014) and General Purpose Water Accounting (GPWA) (WASB, 2012; Godfrey and
Chalmers, 2012) .
However, most tools are catchment or basin level in orientation using published sources
of data such as the Bureau of Meteorology to avoid technically challenging micro- or
organisation-level data collection, estimation and interpretation. Any water accounting
knowledge generation at the micro or organisational level requires relatively specialised
expertise and use of technological knowledge for water use and storage measurement tools
(Galende, 2006; Tingey-Holyoak and Pisaniello, 2015; Garstone et al., 2017). Such technical
water accounting knowledge generation is defined broadly as appropriate quantity and
quality recognition and measurement (Hazleton et al., 2011). However, measured water
information is rarely simple, demanding knowledge of water use/management technology
or at least understanding of the physical and volumetric outputs produced. Water data are
required to be robust, and knowledge must be developed on how to measure and determine
water in-flows and out-flows, water rights/claims and current and non-current water storage
assets and liabilities (WASB, 2009). This includes the knowledge on how to read data from
interceptors, meters and dimensional analysis, evaporation, seepage loss, etc. for storages.
Most simply, at the micro/user level, metering exists that can provide a volumetric measure
for conversion to dollar amounts. However, these do not allow for a hydrological view of
stocks and flows (e.g. water balance, see Galante et al., 2017) nor do they account for hidden
costs inherent to water use and storage, such as maintenance and depreciation (Tingey-
Holyoak, 2014; Gutiérrez-Martín et al., 2017).
It is noted in the mining and other high water use industries that typically, the water
accounting role is taken on by a hydrologist requiring hydrology knowledge (Garstone et al.,
2017). However, preparers can also be removed from the water or resources function of the
organisation and even not from within the organisation, such as via the professional
services firms (Tello et al., 2016). Thus internal or external accountants will need to be able
to share knowledge generated by those inside the water function, such as hydrologists and
engineers. For example, food and beverage producers responded to the drought by
developing increasingly advanced water accounting methods (Egan, 2014b) requiring the
support and knowledge from both the corporate side of business and the water management
side (Egan et al., 2015). Pepsico has acknowledged that the knowledge generated about
water from many different units across their organisation was the necessary baseline to
start their 2012 water saving initiative (Pepsico, 2018), and winemakers are increasingly
seeking the production of water accounts using the data shared by both technical and
financial experts (Lamastra et al., 2014; Hoekstra et al., 2011). So, it is important to
 investigate how accountants can best generate, apply and share water accounting Water
knowledge, especially those operating externally to the client for whom water knowledge accounting
may not be easy to access.
knowledge
3. Conceptual framework and research design
pathways
The design of this research was informed by a social network theoretical lens. Whilst a
social network was not attempted to be established, the theoretical basis was useful because 261
of its application to knowledge generation, application and sharing, especially for strategic
decisions related to services designed to solve complex problems (Reagans and McEvily,
2003). The ability to generate, apply and transfer knowledge between professions is critical
to the development of new products and services (Hansen, 1999), best practices (Szulanski,
1996) and organisational sustainability (Baum and Ingram, 1998). To be successful, new
knowledge requires easy collection or arrangement (or “codifiability”) and a strong
relationship (or “tie”) between knowledge parties so there can be a pathway created for
Downloaded by University of Liverpool At 02:12 22 April 2019 (PT)

transfer (Reagans and McEvily, 2003). Knowledge codifiability is commonly measured on a

continuum from tacit (the degree to which knowledge is difficult to articulate) to explicit
(Reagans and McEvily, 2003). How easily knowledge can be turned into manuals and guides
will predict how easily it can be transferred (Reagans and McEvily, 2003). The content of the
relationship or tie between the parties refers to the degree to which knowledge-sharing
parties have relationship norms from purely business to socialised activities. The shared
content norms will increase knowledge sharers’ confidence in sharing information and could
ease its transfer (Watts et al., 2002; Reagans and McEvily, 2003). Tie content can be heighted
by cooperation, confidence and also informal or social relationships with similar
professionals. Pathways such as formal and informal information networks play a role in
supporting this knowledge generation, application and transfer within a community of
practice (Kankanhalli et al., 2005).
The field of water accounting represents distinct bodies of knowledge and expertise, and
so, acquiring knowledge generated from different disciplines inside and outside the firm
provides accountants with an opportunity to see a problem or task from an alternative
perspective, which can stimulate innovation (Hargadon and Sutton, 1997; Hansen, 1999).
Therefore, RQ1 asks How can water accounting knowledge be generated by professional
accountants? Whilst knowledge generation is beneficial, where there is insufficient
knowledge overlap between the knowledge source and recipient difficulty in application can
arise, especially for technology-based services, such as water accounting, which often have a
“local” language (Dougherty, 1992). Therefore, RQ2 asks How can water accounting
knowledge be applied in professional accounting practice? Lastly, Reagans and McEvily
(2003) proposed that network links and ties significantly affect knowledge transfer which
can impact success of water accounting initiatives. Therefore, RQ3 asks How can water
accounting knowledge be transferred between the disciplines required? Finally, to address
RQ4, a second phase of the research was required to assess the pathways that can help
support knowledge generation, application and transfer are explored. Critical to successful
pathways are:
 the codifiability of knowledge as how easily knowledge can be turned into manuals
and guides will predict how easily it can be transferred (Reagans and McEvily,
2003); and
 the strength of the relationship of “tie” between knowledge sharers, as knowledge
transfers more easily through strongly connected teams (Reagans and McEvily,
2003).
 PAR RQ4 asks, What are the pathways that can support water accounting knowledge, application
31,2 and transfer? Understanding what the optimal composition is for a knowledge pathway and
who in the network is going to facilitate its efficient and effective development is essential
(Kankanhalli et al., 2005; Tucker, 2013).

3.1 Methods
262 The data were collected over two years in two separate cross-sectional surveys of the same
population for Phase 1 (Year 1) and Phase 2 (Year 2). A survey approach for issues such as
water accounting was deemed appropriate as participants could respond to issues pertinent
to the problem and the researcher can also explore responses in greater detail (Horton et al.,
2004). Survey dissemination was mixed-modes (Dillman, 2000; Groves et al., 2009). With
Phase 1 surveys administered from July to September of 2012 via computer-assisted
telephone interview (CATI) to gather high-quality data from perceptions to inform the
Downloaded by University of Liverpool At 02:12 22 April 2019 (PT)

preliminary phase of the research (Dillman et al., 2014). Then, exploratory data from Phase 1
were analysed and reported before development of the questionnaire for Phase 2. The Phase
2 survey was conducted online, facilitated by a research assistant who made follow-up
phone calls to maximise response rate (Dillman et al., 2014). Human research ethics was
granted for Phase 1 on 6 June 2012 and for Phase 2 on 21 March 2013.

3.2 Population and sample

The population sampled comprised professional accounting individuals at professional
services firms (usually the managing partner, partner, director or manager responsible for
sustainability) with an interest in sustainability accounting (determined via web search or
phone call) in all states and territories in Australia. Purposive sampling was chosen to
ensure cost-effectiveness with expert knowledge and is most efficient when studying a
particular professional knowledge issue of which requires knowledgeable experts (USA
EPA, 2018). The inherent bias of the sample helps to understand the water accounting
knowledge generation, application and transfer issues from the accounting profession’s
perspective (Tongco, 2007). For Phase 1, the sampling frame generated included 238
possible practitioner respondents from which a sample of 57 was attained (response rate of
24 per cent). When the same sampling frame was approached one year later, there were
requests for non-repeat contact and also unavailability, so the sampling frame for Phase 2
generated included only 189 possible respondents from which a sample of 40 was attained (a
response rate of 21 per cent).

3.3 Measures
The questionnaire instrument for Phase 1 was exploratory, designed to elicit understanding
of the problem through largely open-ended questions with some closed questions which
used a seven-point Likert scale ranging from very strongly disagree (1) to very strongly
agree (7). These surveys then informed Phase 2 measures which were increasingly closed
ended and largely based on established scales developed by Reagans and McEvily (2003).
Threats to validity of the instruments were minimised and bias was reduced as much as
possible by providing that responses remained confidential (Brito et al., 2014). The
questionnaire was randomly ordered with multiple pre-tests via two reviewers to reduce
item ambiguity and increase reliability (Podsakoff et al., 2003). For both phases, statistical
analysis (including frequencies, cross-tabs and chi-squared statistics) was undertaken in
SPSS v20. The following sections will detail the results of the two research phases.
 4. Results Water
In both research phases, sampling was undertaken in all Australian states with the majority accounting
of participants from the Eastern states, namely, New South Wales (37 per cent) and Victoria
(34 per cent) (Table I).
knowledge
About a quarter of respondents are operating in small firms across both samples (24 per pathways
cent), and there was no statistically significant difference between states (Phase 1: X2 = 7.62,
p = 0.47; Phase 2: X2 = 10.17, p = 0.25, Table I). In Phase 1, “manager” was the most
commonly reported position level (83 per cent), and the statistically significant difference 263
between states occurred because of a larger proportion of senior respondents in New South
Wales (X2 = 16.02, p = 0.04, Table I). However, in Phase 2, it was a fairly even three-way
split between manager, director and partner respondents with no statistically significant
difference between states (X2 = 9.28, p = 0.32).
Over half of accountants surveyed (54 per cent) believed accounting to be a core
discipline in water accounting (Table II).
Downloaded by University of Liverpool At 02:12 22 April 2019 (PT)

Whilst nearly two-thirds of accountants surveyed (63 per cent) named engineering as the
specific discipline (Table II), most surveyed (95 per cent) believe that there is a great scope
for transfer of knowledge from different professionals in addressing the issues relating to
water accounting (Table III). However, less than half of those surveyed (49 per cent) think
water accounting knowledge will be able to be generated from within accounting practice
alone, and many envisage problems with water accounting in practice 81 per cent (Table III).
Open-ended comments indicate that, whilst water accounting can:
[. . .] fit in with current reporting practices but I am concerned about how to make it tangible and
make sure it relates to how they are looking at the carbon footprint as well as the financial bottom

Firm size Position level

Small (%) Medium % Large (%) Manager (%) Director (%) Partner (%)

PHASE 1
NSW 5 14 14 23 7 4
QLD 0 0 1 1 0 0
SA 4 6 7 11 1 4
VIC 15 18 12 45 0 0
WA 0 4 0 1 0 1
TAS 0 0 0 0 0 0
ACT 0 0 0 0 0 0
NT 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 24 42 34 83 8 9
Chi2 X2 = 7.62 (p = 0.47) X2 = 16.02 (p = 0.04)
PHASE 2
NSW 12 8 15 13 8 15
QLD 0 2 2 2 0 2
SA 2 0 5 10 10 0
VIC 8 2 15 8 12 5
WA 2 0 8 0 5 5
TAS 0 0 0 0 0 0
ACT 0 0 0 0 0 0 Table I.
NT 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 24 14 45 33 35 27
Phases 1 and 2
Chi2 X2 = 10.17 (p = 0.25) X2 = 9.28 (p = 0.32) sample
characteristics
Notes:  p-value < 0.05;  p-value < 0.01;  p-value < 0.001 mapped to location
 PAR Discipline (%)
31,2
Accounting and assurance 54
Engineering 63
Hydrology 20
Science/environmental science 17
Management accounting 7
264 Property/construction 7
Environmental engineering 5
Law 3
Single discipline solution (“Engineering”) 3
Management 3
Table II. Statistics 1
Specific disciplines Banking 1
identified for

water
accounting (n = 57) Note:  Respondents could choose more than one discipline for involvement in water accounting
Downloaded by University of Liverpool At 02:12 22 April 2019 (PT)

Disagree (%) Neutral (%) Agree (%)

Knowledge generation
I think the knowledge required for water accounting will be able
to be generated within accounting practice 49 9 42
Knowledge application
I think water accounting will work in practice for clients 91 3 6
I have clients who estimate and report water accounting data
Table III. already 33 9 58
Perceptions of water
Knowledge transfer
accounting
I think it is possible to transfer knowledge between different
knowledge professions involved in water accounting 1 4 95
generation, I envisage problems with water accounting 16 3 81
application and I am in favour of mandatory water accounting/assurance
transfer (n = 57) standards 24 18 58

line, and [. . .] I know what an important resource it (water) is in Australia so it has to work but I
don’t know how. It will have to fit in with economic practices.
There was an indication that water accounting knowledge could be applied now, with the
right support frameworks that are already in place for some clients: “Yes it will fit in with
current reporting practices because it has to – companies already doing sustainability
reporting through GRI3, carbon reporting, energy reporting [. . .]”; “Anyone with
sustainability frameworks already reports on water use”; “In line with other climate change
initiatives anyway”. Over half of respondents (58 per cent, Table III) were confident that the
knowledge could be applied with a multidisciplinary approach: “I can’t think of anyone
except medical who doesn’t need to be involved”.
Many accountants surveyed (58 per cent) are in favour of mandatory water accounting/
assurance standards to guide their practices within the area of water accounting. Without
regulatory frameworks, and in light of other knowledge transfer barriers, a large majority of
the accountants (91 per cent) do not think water accounting will work in practice for clients
(Table III).
 Whilst some accountants surveyed believed that, to develop knowledge for water Water
accounting will require additional support from engineering disciplines (19 per cent) and accounting
additional training from professional accounting bodies (17 per cent), some others (14 per
cent) believed that accountants already have the skills to generate new knowledge
knowledge
(Table IV): “If there is a dollar in it they [accountants] will work out how to do it”. pathways
Some participants also recognised that such knowledge can be generated by recruiting
specialists from other disciplines: “Mix of dyadic and on-the-job training, just like other
accounting skills”, and like for carbon they will have “[. . .] specialists recruited to our firm
265
but other firms will probably just use expert consultants”.
In terms of knowledge transfer, over a quarter of the participants (27 per cent) believed that
professional body workshops and training could be a successful mechanism for water accounting
knowledge transfer (Table V). However, there was some level of scepticism due to the issues
inherent in water measurement: “It is almost insurmountable how to measure at the appropriate
scale”, and the fact that there are no firm rules or regulation guiding water accounting currently.
Downloaded by University of Liverpool At 02:12 22 April 2019 (PT)

Open-ended comments demonstrated that the lack of regulation is related to irregular practices
and therefore, a gap in the knowledge transfer relating to water accounting:
Knowledge won’t be transferred until there are laws demanding it to be transferred and until such
time as the penalties are such that we can ill afford to avoid it.
However, comments also indicated that the imposition of top-down standards could also be
problematic: “I don’t take kindly to the government sitting judgement of the parameters/
rules that should be enforced because they seldom get it right”.

Mechanism for knowledge generation (%)

Within accounting practice with help from other disciplines 46

Within engineering discipline 19
Accountancy professional body training 17
Accountants already have the skills to generate new knowledge 14
University and professional body combined training 7 Table IV.
Recruit specialists to accounting practice 5
From standard setters and their training 5
Mechanisms for
From the Big 4 1 water accounting
knowledge
Note:  Respondents could choose more than one mechanism for knowledge generation generation (n = 57)

Mechanism for knowledge transfer (%)

Professional body workshops and training 27

Collaborative teams of engineers and accountants 18
Joint venture projects 16
Professional body seminars, conferences 13
University education and training 7
Employ engineers in accounting firms 7 Table V.
Use engineering consultants in accounting firms 4
Accountants can do it alone 2
Mechanisms for
Do not know 2 water accounting
knowledge transfer
Note:  Respondents could choose more than one mechanism for knowledge transfer (n = 57)
 PAR Few accountants surveyed (7 per cent) believed that university education and training is the
31,2 best way to transfer water accounting knowledge, but open-ended comments indicated that
university education or professional accounting bodies education is required due to
insufficient current awareness and training: “Insufficient knowledge will be the problem.
People just don’t know about this and will need to be educated” and “More guidance will be
required to ensure there is consistency across disciplines”.
266 The findings suggest a need for water accounting knowledge generation, application and
transfer, likely from within accounting firms; however, there is a clear message that there is a
perceived lack of pathways for transfer. This is particularly the case in the face of seemingly
unresolvable issues of uniform scale of measurement and a lack of a regulatory framework
based on useful mandatory standards. Therefore, the purpose of the second phase of the
research was to explore alternative and complimentary pathways to the profession to help
develop a framework for sustainability and water accounting knowledge transfer.
To overcome barriers to any type of sustainability accounting, knowledge pathways are
Downloaded by University of Liverpool At 02:12 22 April 2019 (PT)

required. However, the social network theory indicates that any new knowledge needs to be:
 standardised or “codified” in a manner that is easily read and understood by a
greater population; and
 supported by strong relationships or “ties” between those in the knowledge network
(Reagans and McEvily, 2003).

The survey found that a majority of accountants surveyed disagreed that knowledge
relating to water accounting can be easily codified by accountants (66 per cent) or exists
currently (59 per cent) (Table VI). In contrast to knowledge codifiability, many accountants
surveyed believed that engineering knowledge could be easily transferred and explained
within the accounting field. For instance, many accountants (74 per cent) believed that
engineering knowledge makes it easier for them to explain sustainability concepts in
accounting (Table VI).
At present, there were only a few accountants surveyed (22 per cent) who reported that
they felt extremely close and had the “tie” or relationship strength to engineers to create a
water or sustainability accounting knowledge pathway (Table VII). This could partially be
because of limited communication between engineers and accountants relating to
sustainability problems within professional service firms: only about 20 per cent of
surveyed accountants reported that they hold daily communications with engineers, whilst
almost 38 per cent reported that they interact with engineers less frequently (Table VII).
In terms of actual pathways for the knowledge transfer, when practitioners were asked
whether there was adequate supply of graduates with engineering skill required for water
accounting, over half indicated that supply was inadequate (51 per cent) (Table VIII). Yet,
over a third of accountants are currently employing graduates with engineering expertise
(38 per cent) and over half find engineering qualifications highly desirable (55 per cent)
(Table VIII).
A statistically significant difference of opinion between states exists (X2 = 64.57, p =
0.00), with South Australian’s seemingly most dissatisfied with supply of graduates capable
to undertake water or sustainability accounting, followed closely by Western Australia.
When asked about specific educational pathways for engineering and other knowledge that
might be required, less respondents indicated that the universities were responsible (25 per
cent), but rather the professional accounting bodies had a role to play (38 per cent) in
providing the engineering knowledge required for water accounting. The following section
will discuss the results from Phases 1 and 2 in more detail.
 Disagree (%) Neutral (%) Agree (%)
Water
accounting
Knowledge codifiability knowledge
A useful manual or document describing engineering pathways
concepts for sustainability accounting could easily be written
by accountants 66 13 21
Extensive documentation describing critical parts of
engineering concepts for sustainability accounting exist in 267
our firm 59 10 31
Standardised procedures for applying engineering concepts
to address sustainability accounting problems could easily be
developed by accountants 58 15 27
Extensive documentation describing how to apply
engineering expertise to sustainability accounting problems
exists in my firm 57 13 30
Downloaded by University of Liverpool At 02:12 22 April 2019 (PT)

Extensive documentation describing how to apply

engineering expertise to sustainability accounting problems
exists for the accounting profession 65 13 22
Sustainability accounting expertise is easily replicated in our
firm 40 20 40
Ease of knowledge transfer
Engineering concepts related to sustainability accounting
could easily be explained to someone in my area 30 15 55
Engineering knowledge makes it easy for me to explain key
concepts in sustainability accounting 18 8 74
Anyone in my area can easily explain an engineering idea or
Table VI.
concept to do with sustainability accounting 71 5 24
I can easily explain an engineering idea or concept to do with Perceptions of
sustainability accounting 43 8 49 knowledge
It would be easy for me to explain to a new client, new codifiability and ease
developments in sustainability accounting expertise 39 8 53 of transfer (n = 40)

Tie content Disagree (%) Neutral (%) Agree (%)

I have friends who are engineers 16 – 84

I would go to an engineer for advice or help if I 28 15 57
had a sustainability accounting problem

Distant Less than Close Especially

Tie strength – closeness (%) close (%) (%) close (%)
How close are you with the engineers you
work with on sustainability accounting problems? 13 22 43 22
Table VII.
Less often Monthly Weekly Daily Perceptions of
Tie strength – communication (%) (%) % (%)
necessary
On average, how often do you talk to engineers about
sustainability accounting (any social or business relationship strength
discussion)? 38 22 20 20 (n = 40)

5. Discussion
Answering RQ1, How can water accounting knowledge be generated by professional
accountants?, highlighted the importance of water accounting education for knowledge
generation. The findings suggest accountants are and will be central to water accounting,
 PAR Disagree (%) Neutral (%) Agree (%) X2
31,2
Graduate knowledge demand
This firm currently seeks accounting graduates 32 30 38
with an engineering background
This firm currently seeks engineering graduates 45 20 35 Firm size:
with an accounting background X2 = 19.46, p = 0
268
Graduate knowledge desirability
A graduate with university-level engineering 43 2 55
and accounting qualifications (for example, a
double-degree, an engineering degree plus MBA,
etc.) is highly desirable to this firm
A graduate with specialised engineering 45 2 53
accounting qualifications through a tailored
engineering accounting degree is highly
Downloaded by University of Liverpool At 02:12 22 April 2019 (PT)

desirable to this firm

An engineering graduate who has been trained 55 2 43
by the accounting professional bodies in
accounting is highly desirable to this firm
Graduate knowledge supply
Do you agree that there is adequate supply of 51 30 19 State:
graduates with the skills to undertake X2 = 64.57, p = 0.00
engineering accounting?
Table VIII.
Practitioner knowledge supply
Summary responses
Do you agree that accountancy professional 50 12 38 State:
for all categories and bodies should provide accountants with X2 = 41.60, p = 0.001
statistical differences engineering knowledge?
between groups Do you agree that universities should provide 60 15 25
(n = 40) accountants with engineering knowledge?

but that engineers are also core to knowledge generation, potentially more so than
accountants. However, accounting faces the real-world dilemma of how water accounting
practice will fit with current reporting and economic practices. This is a current gap in
knowledge probably more so for smaller firms – the findings indicate that, for firms with
clients reporting under the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) and other climate accounting
standards, the fit for water accounting will not be too challenging. It is likely that these are
larger firms with large clients (GRI, 2015).
Secondly, answering RQ2, How can water accounting knowledge be applied in
professional accounting practice?, provided the importance of clearly defined measurement
systems and fit with current reporting practices for water accounting application. The
disparity of measurement systems emerged as a large barrier to application, and it was
noted the professional accountancy bodies had a role to play in overcoming. However,
education at both universities and through the professional bodies emerged as a solution to
allow for development of a new water accounting discipline within professional accounting
firms, limiting the costs involved in an outsourcing relationship or even hiring engineers to
work on limited assignments, with the benefit of also strengthening links between the
disciplines (Parker, 2003).
In addition, water accounting standards emerged as a potential barrier to water
accounting knowledge application. Even though accountants would prefer less not more
regulation (Laughlin, 2011), they are used to working under regulation and compliance, as
 they traditionally rely on rules and principles to guide their practices (Cole et al., 2012). So, it Water
is unsurprising that working under mandatory water accounting regulation will be critical accounting
for serious moves towards accountants adding value to clients’ water accounting services –
that is, applying the correct information to better inform decision-making (D’Amour et al.,
knowledge
2005) and also to meet increasing demands of society and stakeholders for water pathways
management accountability (CPA, 2013; 2015). However, such regulation is undesirable as a
top-down command and control mechanism from government and so potentially here too,
the professional accountancy bodies could be involved in bottom-up framework 269
development that includes knowledge transfer support structures aligned to existing
standards or guidelines, such as those provided by GPWA.
Thirdly, in answering RQ3, How can water accounting knowledge be transferred between
the disciplines required?, the difficulty in standardising or codifying water accounting
knowledge from within the discipline was acknowledged, linking back to issues of
measurement raised when considering knowledge application (Reagans and McEvily, 2003).
Downloaded by University of Liverpool At 02:12 22 April 2019 (PT)

Furthermore, strong ties and relationships were not reported between accountants and
engineers which could further limit knowledge transfer. Again, the importance of
professional bodies as a key knowledge network actor was apparent. In this case, this could
be through creating a platform for accountants and engineers to create, standardise and
share knowledge and frameworks through events and seminars.
Answering RQ4, What are the pathways that can support water accounting knowledge,
application and transfer?, revealed preliminary understanding of how the knowledge
network for water accounting could evolve with new and alternative pathways in times of
increased demand for these services and decreased relevant skills of practitioners. Dual
disciplinary qualifications are highly desirable, and many firms are actively seeking
graduates who have the dual skills to account for water. The findings indicate a preference
for technical engineering knowledge as a basis for expertise and for this to be built upon by
university/professional body education in accounting. Professional bodies again emerge as a
key player in the knowledge network, potentially even more so than universities in
combining the necessary skills sets. There is significant dissatisfaction with current
university graduate supply, especially in South Australia and Western Australia. This is
probably more likely because of the high proportion of high natural resource-using
companies in these states in sectors such as mining and agriculture[1].

6. Conclusions
Through surveys of practicing accountants in professional firms, the research provides
Australian evidence of the current perceptions of water accounting knowledge generation,
application and transfer and illuminates some of the pathways that could meet the skill
requirements. The study is limited by findings based on analysis of perception-based data
which requires caution when generalising broadly to real-world problems. Furthermore, the
limitations of generalisability of low volume survey data are well known. The study also
focused on a target population of professional accounting firm managers that already had
some sustainability/water accounting awareness which generates an element of bias
limiting generalizability of results to the population of all professional accountants. The
participants also only represented professional accountants in practice – the views of other
disciplines, especially engineers, are the essential scope of future research. Furthermore, the
findings centre on two distinct accountant surveys with a one-year time lag that were
essentially cross-sectional in character and as such without analysis of individual
consistencies or inconsistencies. These limitations of the study must be taken into
consideration when interpreting the findings.
 PAR However, the study does highlight the need for:
31,2 (1) water accounting knowledge to be generated against frameworks that:
 can be applied at the client level;
 offer more in terms of standardisation across scales; and
 link to current economic and reporting practices of water consuming clients;

270 (2) these new knowledge frameworks need to be able to be nested into strong team
structures:
 interdisciplinary team arrangements based out of professional accounting
firms need to be clear and cohesive ties between members encouraged as a
priority; and
 graduates with the skills required for water accounting need to be trained in the
skills needed to participate (and even create) more cohesive water accounting
teams. Prospective employers of accountants are already seeking skills that
Downloaded by University of Liverpool At 02:12 22 April 2019 (PT)

will fit into this agenda and many business schools at universities (such as
University of South Australia, UniSA, 2018) are already providing team
training which can be tailored to suit in a water accounting context.
(3) accountancy professional bodies to play a leadership role in the knowledge
regulatory framework and network development to help to implement the
knowledge and pathways necessary for successful water accounting.

Problems of increasing natural resource costs to business, combined with their increasingly
visible impact on the environment, mean that trying to find solutions as individual
disciplines will no longer be adequate. Lessons from this research can better help accounting
practitioners better understand the types of structures and requirements that are needed to
allow individuals from very different functions come together and efficiently and effectively
share their different disciplinary skills for the water accounting and reporting solutions
required for the future.

Note
1. For example, Western Australia currently has the largest concentration of mines in Australia
with 202 mines in operation at January 2014 (Mining Australia, 2014), and both states have large
intensive agricultural regions, with agriculture the single largest water-consuming industry in
Australia, accounting for some 9,400-12,800 GL per year (ABS, 2015).

References
Aldaya, M.M., Chapagain, A.K., Hoekstra, A.Y. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2012), The Water Footprint
Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Routledge, London.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) (2011), “2011 Census”, Australian Government, Canberra.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) (2015), “Water account”, Australia, 2013-2014, cat. no. 4610.0,
ABS, Canberra, available at: www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/4610.0 (accessed 6
December 2018).
Baum, J.A. and Ingram, P. (1998), “Survival-enhancing learning in the Manhattan hotel industry, 1898-
1980”, Management Science, Vol. 44 No. 7, pp. 996-1016.
Brito, L.A.L., Brito, E.P.Z. and Hashiba, L.H. (2014), “What type of cooperation with suppliers and
customers leads to superior performance?”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 67 No. 5,
pp. 952-959.
 Cawood, M. (2015), “Benefits to eco business model”, Stock Journal, available at: www.stockjournal. Water
com.au (accessed 12 December 2016).
accounting
CEO Water Mandate (2018), “Corporate water accounting”, CEO Water Mandate, available at: https://
ceowatermandate.org/accounting/accounting-basics/needs-mechanisms/ (accessed 4 December
knowledge
2018). pathways
Chalmers, K., Godfrey, J.M. and Lynch, B. (2012), “Regulatory theory insights into the past, present and
future of general purpose water accounting standard setting”, Accounting, Auditing and
Accountability Journal, Vol. 25 No. 6, pp. 1001-1024. 271
Clark, P. (2014), “Nestle warns water scarcity ‘more urgent’ than climate change”, Financial Times, 15
July, available at: www.ft.com/content/c8d19bc6-0b49-11e4-ae6b-00144feabdc0 (accessed 5
December 2018).
Cole, V., Branson, J. and Breesch, D. (2012), “The uniformity-flexibility dilemma when comparing
financial statements: views of auditors, analysts and other users”, International Journal of
Accounting and Information Management, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 114-141. VolNo
Downloaded by University of Liverpool At 02:12 22 April 2019 (PT)

D’Amour, D., Ferrada-Videla, M., San Martin Rodriguez, L. and Beaulieu, M.-D. (2005), “The conceptual
basis for interprofessional collaboration: core concepts and theoretical frameworks”, Journal of
Interprofessional Care, Vol. 19 No. S1, pp. 116-131.
Dillman, D.A. (2000), Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method, Vol. 2, Wiley, New York,
NY.
Dillman, D.A., Smyth, J.D. and Christian, L.M. (2014), Internet, phone, mail and Mixed-mode Surveys:
the Tailored Design Method, John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY.
Dougherty, D. (1992), “A practice-centered model of organizational renewal through product
innovation”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 13 No. S1, pp. 77-92.
Egan, M. (2014a), “Progress towards institutionalising field-wide water efficiency change”, Accounting,
Auditing and Accountability Journal, Vol. 27 No. 5, pp. 809-833.
Egan, M. (2014b), “Driving water management change where economic incentive is limited”, Journal of
Business Ethics, Vol. 132 No. 1, pp. 73-90.
Egan, M., Frost, G. and Andreeva, Z. (2015), Eroding Corporate Water Reporting? A Study of the
Australian Food, beverage and Tobacco Sector, CPA Australia, Sydney, available at: www.
cpaaustralia.com.au//media/corporate/allfiles/document/professional-resources/sustainability/
eroding-corporate-water-reporting.pdf?la=en (accessed 10 September 2017).
European Commission (EC) (2000), “Directive 2000/60/EC of the European parliament and of the council
of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for the community action in the field of water
policy”, Official Journal, Vol. 327, OJ L, 22 December.
European Environment Agency (EEA) (2008), “Policies and measures to remote sustainable water use”,
European Environment Agency, 18th February, available at: www.eea.europa.eu/themes/water/
water-resources/policies-and-measures-to-promote-sustainable-water-use (accessed 12 December
2016).
Galende, J. (2006), “Analysis of technological innovation from business economics and management”,
Technovation, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 300-311.
Gardner, H. (2016), Smart Collaboration: How Professionals and Their Firms Succeed by Breaking down
Silos, Harvard Business Review Press.
Garstone, R.A., Gill, C., Moliere, D., Yang, D., Bende-Michl, U. and Fiddes, P. (2017), “Accounting for
water in the minerals industry: capitalising on regulatory reporting”, Water Resources and
Industry, Vol. 18, pp. 51-59.
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) (2015), “Sustainability and reporting trends in 2025: preparing for the
future”, GRI, available at: www.globalreporting.org/resourcelibrary/Sustainability-and-
Reporting-Trends-in-2025-1.pdf (accessed 6 December 2018).
 PAR Godfrey, J. and Chalmers, K. (2012), Water Accounting: International Approaches to Policy and Decision-
Making, Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Gloucester.
31,2
Groves, R.M., Fowler, F.J., Couper, M.P., Lepkowski, J.M., Singer, E. and Tourangeau, R. (2009), Survey
Methodology, John Wiley and Sons, NJ.
Gutiérrez-Martín, C., Borrego-Marín, M.M. and Berbel, J. (2017), “The economic analysis of water use in
the water framework directive based on the system of environmental-economic accounting for
water: a case study of the Guadalquivir river basin”, Water, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 180.
272
Hargadon, A. and Sutton, R.I. (1997), “Technology brokering and innovation in a product development
firm”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 41 No. 4, pp. 716-749.
Hansen, M.T. (1999), “The search-transfer problem: the role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across
organization subunits”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 82-111.
Hazleton, J., Cummings, L., Leung, P., and Wang. and F, (2011), Standardised Water Accounting: Effects
Analysis, BoM with Macquarie University, Sydney.
Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011), The Water Footprint
Downloaded by University of Liverpool At 02:12 22 April 2019 (PT)

Accounting Manual: setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London.

Horton, J., Macve, R. and Struyven, G. (2004), “Qualitative research: experiences in using semi-
structured interviews”, in Humphrey, C. and Lee, B.H.K. (Eds), The Real Life Guide to
Accounting Research, Elsevier, Oxford, pp. 339-357.
Kankanhalli, A., Tan, B.C.Y. and Wei, K.K. (2005), “Contributing knowledge to electronic knowledge
repositories: an empirical investigation”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 113-113.
Labuschagne, C., Brent, A.C. and van Erck, R.P.G. (2004), “Assessing the sustainability performances of
industries”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 373-385.
Lamastra, L., Suciu, N.A., Novelli, E. and Trevison, M. (2014), “A new approach to assessing the water
footprint of wine: an Italian case study”, The Science of the Total Environment, Vol. 490,
pp. 748-756.
Laughlin, R. (2011), “Accounting research, policy and practice: worlds together or worlds apart?”,
Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand Academic Leadership Series, Vol. 2, pp. 21-32.
Loucks, D.P. (2000), “Sustainable water resources management”, Water International, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 3-10.
Lowe, L., Etchells, T., Nathan, R., Potter, B. and Malano, H. (2006), “Robust water accounting: what is it?”,
30th Hydrology and Water Resources Symposium: Past, Present and Future, Tas, Sandy Bay,
pp. 382-389, available at: http://search.informit.com.au/documentSummary;dn=502077764546488;
res=IELENG (accessed 5 May 2017).
Miller, P. (1998), “The margins of accounting”, European Accounting Review, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 605-621.
Mining Australia (2014), “Mines around Australia”, available at: www.miningaustralia.com.au/
australian-mine-map (accessed 14 April 2017).
Moroncini, A.T. (1993), “Belgian natural resource accounting”, European Accounting Review, Vol. 2
No. 3, pp. 637-638.
Morrison, J. and Schulte, P. (2009), “Water disclosure 2.0 – assessment and emerging practice in
corporate water reporting”, UN Global Compact, available at: www.unglobalcompact.org/docs/
news_events/9.1_news_archives/2009_03_11/Water_Disclosure.pdf (accessed 14 April 2017).
Parker, G.M. (2003), Cross-functional Teams: Working with Allies, enemies and Other Strangers, John
Wiley and Sons, CA.
Pepsico (2018), “Planet”, Pepsico”, available at: atwww.pepsico.com/planet (accessed 11 September 2018).
Podsakoff, P., Mackenzie, S., Lee, J. and Podsakoff, N. (2003), “Common method biases in behavioural
research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 879-903.
Reagans, R. and McEvily, B. (2003), “Network structure and knowledge transfer: the effects of cohesion
and range”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 48 No. 2, pp. 240-267.
 Szulanski, G. (1996), “Exploring internal stickiness: impediments to the transfer of best practice within Water
the firm”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 17 No. S2, pp. 27-43.
accounting
Tello, E., Hazelton, J. and Cummings, L. (2016), “Potential users’ perceptions of general purpose
water accounting reports”, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, Vol. 29
knowledge
No. 1, pp. 80-11. pathways
Tingey-Holyoak, J. (2014), “Sustainable water storage by agricultural businesses: strategic responses to
institutional pressures”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 67 No. 12, pp. 2590-2602.
273
Tingey-Holyoak, J. and Pisaniello, J.D. (2015), “The challenge of balanced policy and law for socially
responsible water storage management”, Social Responsibility Journal, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 764-779.
Tongco, M.D.C. (2007), “Purposive sampling as a tool for informant selection”, Ethnobotany Research
and Applications, Vol. 5, pp. 147-158.
Tucker, B. (2013), “Environmental disturbances, organizational transitions and transformations: a view
from the dark side”, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 242-259.
United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD) (2018), System of Environmental-Economic Accounting for
Downloaded by University of Liverpool At 02:12 22 April 2019 (PT)

Water (SEEA-Water), Department of Economic and Social Affairs Statistics Division, available
at: https://unstats.un.org/unsd/envaccounting/seeaw/ (accessed 10 October 2018).
USA Environmental Protection Association (USA EPA) (2018), “Using professional judgement to
develop a sampling design”, EPA, available at: www.epa.gov/quality/using-professional-
judgment-develop-sampling-design (accessed 11 October 2018).
WASB (2009), “Water accounting conceptual framework for the preparation and presentation of general
purpose water accounting reports”, Water Accounting Standards Board, Commonwealth of Australia,
Canberra.
WASB (2012), “Australian water accounting standard 1: preparation and presentation of general
purpose water accounting reports”, Water Accounting Standards Board, Commonwealth of
Australia, Canberra.
Watts, D.J., Dodds, P.S. and Newman, M.E.J. (2002), “Identity and search in social networks”, Science
(New York, N.Y.), Vol. 296 No. 5571, pp. 1302-1305.
Xeros (2015), “17 Organisations addressing the world’s water issues”, 7 January, Xeros, available at: www.
xeroscleaning.com/blog/17-organizations-addressing-the-worlds-water-issues (accessed 9 September
2017).
Yeates, C. (2015), “Natural Capital set to impact farm credit”, Stock Journal, 28 January, available at:
www.stockjournal.com.au (accessed 14 April 2017).

Further reading
Bruns, H.C. (2013), “Working alone together: Coordination in collaboration across domains of
expertise”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 56 No. 1, pp. 62-83.
CPA Australia (2013), “Submission to assurance engagements on general purpose water accounting
reports”, CPA, Sydney, available at: www.cpaaustralia.com.au//media/corporate/allfiles/
document/professional-resources/auditing-assurance/submission-water-accounting-reports.pdf?
la=en (accessed 10 July 2015).
CPA Australia (2015), “Shaping the future of accounting in business education in Australia”, CPA, Sydney,
available at: www.cpaaustralia.com.au//media/corporate/allfiles/document/professional-resources/
education/shaping-the-future-final-report.pdf?la=en (accessed 4 January 2018).
Fernandez-Feijoo, B., Romero, S. and Ruiz, S. (2016), “The assurance market of sustainability reports:
What do accounting firms do?”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 139, pp. 1128-1137.
Fong, P. (2003), “Knowledge creation in multidisciplinary project teams: an empirical study of the
processes and their dynamic interrelationships”, International Journal of Project Management,
Vol. 21 No. 7, pp. 479-486.
 PAR Gardner, H. (2015), “When senior management won’t collaborate”, Harvard Business Review, March,
pp. 1-15.
31,2
Hazelton, J. (2013), “Accounting as a human right: the case of water information”, Accounting, Auditing
and Accountability Journal, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 267-311.
Hazelton, J. (2014), “Corporate water accountability – the role of water labels given non-fungible
extractions”, Pacific Accounting Review, Vol. 26 Nos 1/2, pp. 8-27.
274 Jeffery, I. (2017), “Winery sustainability: huge water, chemical and waste water savings are possible,
Australian and New Zealand grape grower and winemaker”, Vol. 637, February.
Junior, R.M., Best, P.J. and Cotter, J. (2014), “Sustainability reporting and assurance: a historical analysis
on a world-wide phenomenon’”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 120 No. 1, pp. 1-11.
Kraatz, M.S. (1998), “Learning by association? Interorganizational networks and adaptation to
environmental change”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 41 No. 6, pp. 621-643.
McEvily, B., Perrone, V. and Zaheer, A. (2003), “Trust as an organizing principle”, Organization Science,
Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 91-103.
Downloaded by University of Liverpool At 02:12 22 April 2019 (PT)

Morillo, J.G., Díaz, J.A.R., Camacho, E. and Montesinos, P. (2015), “Linking water footprint accounting
with irrigation management in high value crops”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 87,
pp. 594-602.
Perry, C. (2011), “Accounting for water use: terminology and implications for saving water and
increasing production”, Agricultural Water Management, Vol. 98 No. 12, pp. 1840-1846.
Ratnatunga, J.T.D. and Balachandran, K.R. (2009), “Carbon business accounting: the impact of global
warming on the cost and management accounting profession”, Journal of Accounting, Auditing
and Finance, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 333-355.
Reimsbach, D., Hahn, R. and Gürtürk, A. (2017), “Integrated reporting and assurance of sustainability
information: an experimental study on professional investors’ information processing”,
European Accounting Review, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 559-581.
SKM (2006), “Stocktake and analysis of Australia’s water accounting practice”, Final Report, Tatura,
available at: www.bom.gov.au/water/about/consultation/document/SKM_Stocktake_Report_2006.
pdf (accessed 10 September 2017).
Tingey-Holyoak, J.L. and Pisaniello, J.D. (2016), “CIMA research executive summary: water
management accounting in the agrifood sector”, Chartered Institute of Management
Accountants Research Executive Summary Series.
University of South Australia (2018), “Bachelor of commerce (Accounting)”, available at: http://study.
unisa.edu.au/degrees/bachelor-of-commerce-accounting (accessed 11 October 2018).
Zenger, J. and Folkman, J. (2012), Review, “Are women better leaders than men?” Harvard Business
available at: https://hbr.org/2012/03/a-study-in-leadership-women-do (accessed 12 December
2016).

Corresponding author
Joanne Tingey-Holyoak can be contacted at: joanne.tingey@unisa.edu.au

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com