Titles on IAS 41 are not very common in the literature and in this sense there is a limited understanding of the standard and the agri-business, especially when connected with accounting and sustainability. Far too many scholars when taking into consideration natural capital, place too much emphasis on abiotic products (wind, solar, etc) which have a different economic behaviour than the biotic ones (biological assets). The topic of IAS 41 is important, as agriculture is one of the strategic sectors for human living and it needs to be accounted for in careful manner. Our article connects accounting with agriculture, sustainability and non-financial reporting for an integrated perspective. There are certain intrinsic challenges that IAS 41 presents, especially when dealing with FVA, but there are also greater needs for materiality in the sustainable agricultural development in the EU legislation. Authors think that there is place for improvement whiten the standards and the future of EU farming should not leave accounting behind, making a call for a more integrated approach and understanding.
Ekins, P., Simon, S., Deutsch, L., Folke, C., De Groot, R. (2003). A framework for the practical application of the concepts of critical natural capital and strong sustainability. Ecological Economics 44 (2003) 165/185.
Gray, R. (1994) Corporate reporting sustainable development, Accounting for sustainability in 2000 AD. Environmental values 3, no. (1) 1994, 17-45.
Hategan C. and Imbresu C., (2017). Ex-ante Study about Disclosure of Non-financial Information by Romanian Companies from Agriculture and Manufacture of Food Products. Journal of Economics and Business Research 23(2):45-58.
Hoinaru, R., et al,. (2019). Driving down greenhouse gases :a roadmap for the Paris Agreement, European Parliament House Publishing, (forthcoming)
Hoinarur., R. (2018). What are the objectives of corporate reporting? Sustainable value for who?, Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 12(1), pages 436-445, May.
Hooks, J. and van Staden, C.J. (2011). Evaluating Environmental Disclosures: The Relationship between Quality and Extent Measures. The British Accounting Review, 43, 200-213.
IAS 41 Standard Agriculture as issued by the IASB
Jones, M. J. (2010). Accounting for the environment: Towards a theoretical perspective for environmental accounting and reporting. Account Forum, 34, 123–138.
Norton, B., (1995). Ecological integrity and social values: at what scale? Ecosyst. Health, vol. 1, pp. 228–241.
Porter, M.E. and Kramer, M.R. (2011) The Big Idea Creating Shared Value. Harvard Business Review, 89, 2-17.
Rambaud, A., and Richard, J. (2015). The Triple Depreciation Line” instead of the “Triple Bottom Line: Towards a genuine integrated reporting, 2015. Critical Perspectives on Accounting 33, Pages 92-116
Sabauri, L., and Kharabadze, E., (2015), Methods of Accounting and Assessment of the Biological Assets and Agricultural Products in the Absence of an Active Market (by the International Accounting Standards). Proceedings of International Academic Conferences 2604496, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences.
Scott, D. et al., (2016). Challenges with the financial reporting of biological assets by public entities in South Africa. South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences
Sedlacek, S., & Gaube, V. (2010). Regions on their way to sustainability: the role of institutions in fostering sustainable development at the regional level. Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 117-134, February.