The Naturalist's Journals of Gilbert White: exploring the roots of accounting for biodiversity and extinction accounting

1. Introduction

Increasing interest in accounting for sustainability in recent years has been accompanied, to some extent, by historical research into social and environmental accounting with researchers exploring

… how earlier individuals and organisations used accounting to enable, or in some cases ignore, sustainability, and to hold the powerful accountable for their impact on nature (Carnegie and Napier, 2017, p. 85).

Nevertheless, the body of historical social and environmental accounting research remains relatively small, and there have been calls for further exploration of environmental accounting in a historical context (Parker, 2015; Carnegie and Napier, 2017). One avenue taken by accounting history researchers is to adopt a biographical approach, as it is not possible to understand contemporary accounting without examining the key personalities who have contributed to the development of that accounting (Carnegie and Napier, 2017). Indeed, accounting history research has explored a biographical, as well as a prosopographical, approach to researching the role of those providing accounts in a historical context [1]. This paper adopts a biographical research approach in examining Gilbert White, exploring his life, character, surroundings, cultural context and focussing on White's Naturalist's Journals [2] as early illustrations of accounting for biodiversity. These Journals, in our view, represent the roots of accounting for biodiversity. In terms of method, we seek to combine the biographical method applied in accounting history research with a thematic content analysis frequently used in social and environmental accounting research. Specifically, this paper examines the Naturalist's Journals of Gilbert White in the context of his life, his work and the time in which he lived. Specifically, we explore the commonalities between White's Journals as accounts of species, both flora and fauna, and accounting in the more traditional, financial sense. White kept detailed financial accounts throughout his life. We consider how this recording activity paved the way for his later Naturalist's Journals as 18th-century accounts of biodiversity. Therefore, our research contributes to, and extends, existing research in environmental accounting by extending the form of account under study whilst at the same time exploring the historical roots of environmental accounting. More historical research in environmental accounting and the exploration of different forms of accounting have both been called for in the recent accounting literature by Parker (2015) in terms of historical perspectives on social and environmental accounting research and in terms of form, as follows:

Opportunities to broaden an awareness of the tentacles of accounting and forms of accountability in everyday life settings reside in both private and public archives located around the globe (Carnegie and Napier, 2017, p. 85).

White's Naturalist's Journals seem to represent an important “tentacle” stretching towards us from a quarter of a millennium ago and forming the roots of contemporary accounts of biodiversity and species. The narrow and parochial nature of the modern use of accounting has been subject to increasing criticism (Burchell et al., 1980; Carnegie and Napier, 1996; Gallhofer et al., 2015). Carnegie and Napier (1996), for instance, emphasise that there is a need to widen the notion of the “archive” beyond the traditional “obviously accounting-based source materials” (p. 31) such as original accounts, business records and financial statements (see also Napier, 2006). We argue that broadening the definition of “archival evidence” (and the functioning of accounting systems) extends to external data sources dealing with environmental change to reveal, in more detail, exactly how contemporary (and diverse) forms of accounting function (Burchell et al., 1980, p. 23).

Alternate forms of environmental accounting produced by stakeholders, rather than business organisations, have been largely neglected by mainstream accounting researchers (Solomon and Thomson, 2009). This is despite the fact that recordings of environmental metrics by interested parties external to business organisations (and dating to the 1700s, 1800s and modern times) provide important accounts of environmental information and the impact of human and business activity on the natural world (Lewis et al., 1984; Guthrie and Parker, 1989; Unerman, 2003; Maltby, 2004; Solomon and Thomson, 2009). As a result, this external reporting perspective is the locus of this paper, which presents White's Naturalist's Journals as a form of accounting for biodiversity, and more specifically for species of flora and fauna, consistent with the growing literature on accounting for extinction. We see White's Naturalist's Journals, and indeed nature diaries more generally, as a strand of the roots of contemporary biodiversity reporting. Nature diaries, at a fundamental level, are vehicles for data collection, recording and cataloguing species. Like financial accounting, they represent a

… taken for granted, somewhat unexciting and unappealing mechanical practice that records and reports the “facts” that are simply to be recorded and reported, a technical practice that almost just is (Gallhofer and Haslam, 2003, p. 1).

On closer inspection, however, nature diaries represent collections of data, in narrative form and sometimes in pictorial form, that can document nature and mankind's accountability and stewardship for it. A record of nature by an interested observer has been described as

… sending, in a faltering new language, a message in a bottle from a disappearing country (Mabey, 2011, p. 13).

This quotation is especially poignant when we compare White's Naturalist's Journals to current assessments of the state of nature provided by scientists. The WWF's recent “Living Planet Report” demonstrates a cavernous divide between wildlife now and species populations around 40 years ago, documenting a 60% decline in the population size of mammals, birds, fish, reptiles and amphibians (WWF, 2018). The latest scientific assessments show critically significant collapses in species populations in localised ecosystems. For example, arthropod [3] abundance has fallen between 10 and 60 times in a Puerto Rican rainforest over the last 50 years (Lister and Garcia, 2018). For a nature-protected area of Germany, another recent study found a seasonal decline of 76% in flying insect biomass over the last 27 years. The cascading effects of significant insect loss on ecosystems is well documented, due to their critical role in the survival of flora and fauna [4].

White's writings are interpreted as early illustrations of “Chaos Ecology”, as he recognised the way in which fragile natural systems could be completely thrown out of balance by sudden variations in weather patterns or other factors (Scott, 2011). This paper uses White's accounts of species as a comparator with current trends in wildlife populations. A study of British nature diaries more generally identifies them as a literary genre in their own right, a form of “cultural dialogue”, which not only records the changing state of the natural world but also has the potential to encourage biodiversity conservation (Bellanca, 2007). In this way, although nature diaries have not previously been interpreted as formal environmental, or biodiversity “accounts”, Carnegie and Napier (1996, p. 46) suggest that the use of diaries, as well as other sources, represents an extension of traditional accounting and accountability research. This paper's interpretative analysis of White's Journals as a form of biodiversity accounting conforms with calls from the academic literature for

… new visions of accounting, translating into new practices of accounting, [throwing] off the constraints of past accountings in terms of their content, form, aura and usage (Gallhofer and Haslam, 2003, p. 7).

In this paper, we explore several elements of White's Naturalist's Journals as early accounts of biodiversity, recorded by a passionate observer of nature. Our initial, exploratory analysis of his “accounts” involves considering the species he recorded, in detail, in order to provide a series of tables that represent biodiversity in the area he lived at his time of writing. This gives readers a “snapshot” of biodiversity, as well as of abundance of species, and acts as a basis for further discussion of how a biodiversity account should look, as well as of how we may compare abundance then to abundance now. We then proceed with four further research objectives. First, we consider whether White was in any way “called to account”, in other words encouraged to write the journals. Second, we consider his motivation(s) for writing the Naturalist's Journals. Third, we explore other elements and characteristics of these accounts of flora and fauna, such as numerical/quantitative elements, the accuracy of the accounting, emancipatory elements and aesthetic elements. Lastly, we consider for whom the journals were produced, or in accounting terms, who the intended readership was. As well as analysing the accounts, this paper examines White from a biographical perspective in order to understand the person who was providing the account (Carnegie and Napier, 2017), the importance of the accountant himself in order to establish the context, both historical and personal, from which the accounts derived.

The remainder of this paper falls into the following sections. Section 2 reviews existing literature, which explores the roots of environmental accounting from a historical perspective, moving on to discussing the growing literature in accounting for biodiversity and the recent emergence of extinction accounting. In Section 3, we consider the history and development of nature diaries, focussing on Gilbert White and his Naturalist's Journals, as well as reflecting on the ways in which his Journals are similar to financial accounts. We draw on the substantial interdisciplinary literature analysing White's work including studies of his bookkeeping practices as well as his scientific recording of nature and species. Section 4 outlines our research methods. Section 5 presents an analysis of White's Naturalist's Journals as early biodiversity accounts and explores a number of themes arising from the analysis of these accounts. In Section 6, we use the biodiversity accounts constructed from White's Journals as a basis for creating an extinction account of the species he recorded, showing the current conservation status of the species compared with his accounts from 250 years ago. The paper concludes with a discussion and suggestion for future research avenues in this emerging area in Section 7.

2. The evolution of accounting, accounting for biodiversity and extinction accounting

3. Gilbert White and his Naturalist's Journals

Although there are many nature diarists, we decided to focus on Gilbert White, as he is a pioneer, being one of the first naturalists to record detailed observations in journal form, over a long time period. He is also one of the leading people in British history (and around the world) to record and name species. There are many nature diarists whom we could have selected over the last 300 years but White stands out as exceptional in terms of the accuracy of his recording, his focus on species of flora and fauna and his position historically as possibly the first biodiversity accountant. Diaries by Richard Jeffries (see Looker, 1941), (Adams, 1985) and the well-known pictorial Country Diary of an Edwardian Lady (Holden, 1980) may all be interpreted as early forms of biodiversity accounting by an interested party. Kilvert (1977), for example, is far more concerned with the lives of parishioners and with his own life than the life of the surrounding flora and fauna.

The Revd. Gilbert White was born on 18th July 1720 in Selborne, a village in Hampshire, in the United Kingdom. He was educated at Oriel College, Oxford (Clegg, 1975). Throughout his life, White kept records of his financial expenses and recorded daily observations of weather, flora and fauna, gardening-related information and other natural events that interested him. His recordings included his Garden Kalendar, his Flora Selborniensis, his Naturalist's Journals, which are the focus of this paper, and later, his widely celebrated Natural History and Antiquities of Selborne, which used his earlier Naturalist's Journals as source material. Across the centuries, it is possible to glean some sense of White's character, especially in relation to his Journals, through his own writing as well as through others'. He was scientific and objective in approach, and although there are aesthetic elements to his recording, he focussed on providing a “true and fair” view of the nature he observed:

No writer is less self-conscious and individualist, or more objective in the sense that his whole mind, heart and skill were devoted to revealing something quite outside himself … he is a standing example of the truth of the artistic axiom that he who shall lose his personality shall save it (Massingham, 1920, p. 265).

White's meticulous character blended with a love of wildlife and nature, to engender records of scientific importance from a quarter of a millennium ago:

White's approach was a unique combination of beautifully close observations of the natural world around him, and an incisive, enquiring mind (Lawton, 1999, p. 476).

White was essentially a field naturalist and had little patience for contemporary tendencies by naturalists to collect specimens and to rely on others' writings. Rather, his passion was for empirical fieldwork, recording his own first-hand observations in a scientific manner (Mullett, 1969). He was viewed as unusual in the way he combined the character of an “exact scientist” with that of an “imaginative narrator” (Emden, 1948).

There are a number of ways in which White's Naturalist's Journals represent an early form of accounting for biodiversity and we discuss each in turn, specifically: (1) the ways in which his biodiversity accounts seemed to have evolved from his lifelong recording of more traditional financial accounts; (2) the ways in which he was “called to account” for flora and fauna as well as his motivations for accounting; (3) the accuracy of his accounting; and (4) the fact that his accounts were effectively audited: perhaps the first assurance of biodiversity accounting in history.

4. Research method

The Naturalist's Journals of Gilbert White form the basis of our analysis. We analysed the Journals in two different ways. Our first approach involved extracting information relating specifically to species of flora and fauna and collating the frequency of recording, by species, for a period of eight years. This provided a “biodiversity account” from 250 years ago. White recorded the raw data, the transactional events from 1768 until his death in 1792. In Table 1, the frequency of sightings from 1768 to 1775 is recorded. The choice of this time frame for our research is based on the way in which White's Journals evolved over the 24-year period of recording. Until 1776, the Journals were in-keeping with Barrington's instructions and followed the Journal template laid out in a rigorous fashion. During the period from 1768 to 1775, the recording followed this designated format and therefore resembled a formalised accounting, consistent from year to year, and collated in columns, like financial accounting. Throughout this eight-year period of recording, White made around 2,500 entries per year (Foster, 1988). From 1776 onwards, the style of recording changed, with White reducing the data he recorded in the Journals' columns and writing a more narrative discussion on broader topics (Foster, 1988).

We summarised the data from White's diary in terms of frequency of sightings of particular species rather than attempting to account for number of particular flora and fauna sighted. This is chiefly because of recording inconsistency: White sometimes documents, for example, the number of rabbits seen, but, at other times, mentions a flock of birds or a cluster of berries. The aim of producing this data in tables is not to present an accurate scientific account of the number of each species observed but rather to show the extent of species and the frequency of sightings. It also provides insights into White's observational diligence and recording priorities. The records used in compiling this paper are from an edited version of White's Naturalist's Journals, as this is the only available published source, produced in its first edition in 1931. Although the original manuscripts are housed in the British Museum, it would not, in our view, add to the current study if the authors were to analyse the manuscripts as there are around 70,000 entries (Foster, 1988), many unrelated to species [13]. Our aim is to provide an appreciation of the extent of species recorded and to demonstrate the ways in which the journal represents accounting for biodiversity, rather than to count and record every single entry. Further, the editing involved in producing the collection used in our study removed primarily any repetitive meteorological material rather than accounts of species sighted, as explained by Johnson (1970) [14]. However, Johnson does indicate (in the preamble) that he has – in some places – reduced the number of entries relating to sightings of birds. This means that our data summary, in the form of a biodiversity account, is not representative of the entirety of White's entries (implying that we have an illustrative rather than a comprehensive set of data). Rather, it is an attempt to provide an account of the flora and fauna easily observable in his time and place. Such data issues are not unusual in the accounting history literature as primary records are often manipulated into a structured form in archives or even in published volumes. This can lead to data reduction for a number of reasons including, as in this case, the archivist's concern for space (Napier, 2002). In accounting, it is rare for the original transactional data to remain. More common are the bookkeeping records or the final financial statements. Detail may be lost through a process of increasing selectivity and abstraction as, over time, original events are interpreted through historians' narratives.

At a second level, we analysed the content of White's Journals using a narrative approach, involving a meaning-oriented content analysis that led to the drawing out of themes from the text. Our analysis of the accounts presented in the Journals involved a thematic and interpretive analysis, similar in style to the processing of interview data used in interpretive research. The analysis employs a narrative style consistent with a broadened view of accounting which accommodates a “…wide range of modes of calculation, record-keeping and reporting” (Napier, 2006, p. 7). Indeed, Napier (2006) describes a narrative style as follows: first, a general issue is identified at the beginning of the paper, giving rise to questions or puzzles. The body of the paper addresses the puzzles and “closes the loop”. The narrative method is also consistent with a social constructivist perspective of how accounting systems function (Hopwood, 1987) and the possibility of their emancipatory potential (Gallhofer et al., 2015). We apply a similar methodological style to analysing White's Naturalist's Journals. We produce data from the journal as illustrative extracts, summary data and aggregated data. The construction of the narratives, combined with the summary biodiversity accounts, provides a means of analysing the accounts in terms of their underlying motivation (e.g. data collection, aesthetics and social emancipation). As part of this process, the analysis draws on biographies of White, analyses of White's work in the literature and detailed discussion of the Journals from an accounting perspective. As a final stage of analysis, we seek to compare White's account of species to current data on populations and extinction risk.

5. An analysis of White's Naturalist's Journals as early forms of biodiversity accounting

The biodiversity accounts that we present in Table 1 provide a summary of flora and fauna recorded by White in his Naturalist's Journals. We omitted references to garden plants and vegetables (farming produce), as they are cultivated rather than wild species. We omitted trees as their numbers are more stable, focussing our analysis on animals, insects, birds and wild flowers and plants.

We also found a number of themes arising from our analysis of White's Journal, including: the evolution of White's accounting over time; aesthetic elements in White's accounts; and some problematising and emancipatory elements of the accounts, as discussed further.

6. From White's accounting for biodiversity to a Whitean extinction account

White's biodiversity account provides data that lend themselves to comparison with current scientific evidence on species in the British Isles, allowing the creation of a longitudinal extinction account. We do, however, acknowledge problems with this approach, as it may be considered unrealistic to compare one man's recordings of his country rambles in an English county with national and global survey data. There is clearly a mismatch here in terms of scale. However, given the historic nature of his recordings and the lack of any other biodiversity recordings from this period, we feel that this (significant) limitation should not preclude such a comparison. The latest scientific research provides chilling evidence of sharp global declines in species of fauna since the 1970s. Although White obviously could not use similar methods to current scientific researchers and entomologists (as these had not been invented in his time), he provided basic observational data on a daily basis over many years, not in the 1970s but in the 1770s. It is also worth commenting that the type of detailed observation and recording conducted by White 250 years ago is an early precursor to the type of biodiversity surveying carried out by scientists at present. His accounting forms the basis of the historical development of species observation and tracking, making, in our view at least, these diary entries a reasonable – indeed the only – basis for comparison over such a lengthy period of time. The biodiversity account extrapolated from White's Journals in Table 1 allows a species-by-species comparison with current species' status in order to gauge the “health” of species populations. White's accounting for biodiversity provides us with detailed information forming a basis for comparison over a quarter of a century for a corner of the British Isles. Such an interdisciplinary approach shows the importance of recording and accounting for biodiversity across time as an emancipatory call for action.

In Table 2, we present the status of species recorded by White using available sources referenced primarily from web searches [18]. The research was time-consuming as many of the names he used in his Journals differ from the current species names. Where different names (the current name for a species) were found, we added these to White's original names in brackets. For example, the bat described by White as the vespertilio altivolans was identified through careful research as the European vespertilio murinus, a bat that occasionally visits the United Kingdom as a migrant and tends to be seen in the Southern coastal regions, where White lived. This bat is currently listed as “of least concern” by the IUCN [19]. Another salient example is White's recording of “black warty water-efts”, known currently as “great crested newts”. Fortunately, he provided the Latin name, triton cristatus, making identification easier. Where a species was not listed by the IUCN, we searched their status and have entered some information. For example, for the horsefly, the British media reported a dangerous (as they have a nasty bite) surge in their numbers during the heatwave which gripped the United Kingdom in July 2018. Where we found alternative information on specific species, we have identified the source. It is notable how substantially the names of species have altered since the 18th century. Despite careful study, there were some species we were unable to identify with any certainty. The plum weevil, for example, does not seem to be the one White identified as it is only present in North America. Further, there are 83 species of dung beetle (referred to by White as Scarabaeus solstitiales) such that it impossible to identify which ones he observed. There is, however, an ongoing dung beetle mapping exercise in the United Kingdom, given grave concerns over their decline. Where possible we have included information relating to conservation status of species in the United Kingdom as well as at IUCN/global level, to enable a comparison between White's British observations and the species populations in Britain at present. This seems important as many species deemed “of least concern” by the IUCN have a red or amber conservation status in the United Kingdom (e.g. the red-backed shrike).

Among the more harrowing findings from this created extinction account is a comparison of the status of mole crickets and field crickets, observed in abundance 250 years ago, with the current figures:

As mole-crickets often infest gardens by the sides of canals (White, 1788, p. 245).

Another species observed and recorded by White was the great bustard, with three sightings recorded in Table 1. This bird became extinct soon after White's time, as the last individual was shot in 1832. There have been recent attempts to reintroduce the species with around 40 birds on Salisbury Plain [20]. The change in populations of house martins and other members of the swallow family is pertinent given White's research into their habits and life cycle. Between 1970 and 2014, there has been almost a 50% fall in house martin numbers [21]. They currently have Amber conservation status in the United Kingdom. Changes in weather affect house martin populations [22]. Their populations are also affected by loss of habitat, as many barns where they traditionally nested have been converted to dwellings.

Another species used currently as a signifier of extinction threat among British wildlife is the hedgehog, a priority species for the UK's biodiversity action plan (see Table 2). Contrasting the species' current conservation status with White's narrative account of the hedgehog is striking – and sad:

Hedgehogs abound in my gardens and fields (White, 1788, p. 79).

Another illustration of how White's Journals can represent an extinction account arises from his comments on the abundance of grey partridge:

Partridges in vast plenty are bred in good seasons on the edge of this forest (White, 1788, p. 17).

As can be seen from Table 2, partridges are now classified under UK Conservation Status “Red” by the RSPB. Similarly, curlews were observed in abundance by White in 18th-century England, whereas Table 2 shows they are now listed as “Amber” in terms of UK Conservation Status.

I wonder that the stone-curlew, Charadrius oedicnemus, should be mentioned by the writers as a rare bird: it abounds in all the champaign parts of Hampshire and Sussex (White, 1788, pp. 45–46).

This comparative extinction account over a quarter of a millennium emphases further the usefulness of longitudinal accounting for biodiversity as an emancipatory tool that can be operationalised in order to prevent further extinctions and prevent further erosion of biodiversity [23]. Analysing his writings more broadly suggests White was an early extinction accountant, identifying not only the presence but also the absence of species (Scott, 2011). In places, he reported on the disappearance, or local extinction, of certain species, such as the red deer, oaks, turtles, worms, partridges. He talks of declining biodiversity within his own lifetime:

[I] am attended daily by a beautiful spaniel … who amuses me in my walks by sometimes springing a pheasant or partridge, and seldom by flushing a woodcock, of late become with us a very rare bird (Holt-White, 2015, p. 245).

White documents the disappearance, or local extinction, of grouse and red deer, within his lifetime, but also with reference to local people he spoke to:

… there was a nobler species of game in this forest, now extinct, which I have heard old people say abounded much before shooting flying became so common, and that was the heath-cock, black-game, or grouse. When I was a little boy I recollect one coming now and then to my father's table. The last pack remembered was killed about thirty-five years ago; and within these ten years one solitary greyhen was sprung by some beagles in beating for a hare (White, 1788, p. 17).

Nor does the loss of our black game prove the only gap in the Fauna Selborniensis; for another beautiful link in the chain of beings is wanting, I mean the red deer, which toward the beginning of this century amounted to about five hundred head, and made a stately appearance (White, 1788, p. 18).

Sadness in White's narrative is evident here and somewhat prophetic of the current human outpouring of grief at mass extinction we are witnessing some 250 years later. We also identify elements of White's Journal keeping that may be incorporated into an extinction accounting framework, so as to enhance and develop this template further. Table 3 provides an updated version of this extinction accounting framework, with Whitean accounting elements highlighted in bold.

This type of extinction account is consistent with the framework proposed by Atkins and Maroun (2018) and also draws on principles from the guidelines issued by the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI, 2016). This type of reporting may be considered by some as limited to individual organisations. As extinction of species is a cause for global concern, then company-specific reporting should be completed by accounting at the national and ecological level (Cuckston, 2017; Gaia and Jones, 2017; Russell et al., 2017). With this in mind, we modify the extinction accounting framework proposed by Atkins and Maroun (2018) for use at the macro level. For example, local or national governments, conservation bodies or NGOs may find this framework useful for constructing a “consolidated” extinction account, as presented in Table 4.

Consolidated extinction accounting uses ecosystems as the unit of account rather than specific firms. The aim is to provide a detailed account of the total biodiversity under review for the given region, country or biosphere. Drawing on Atkins and Maroun (2018), the GRI (2016) and White's Journals, this would include information on specific species as well as changes in their range and numbers. The accounts could be stratified according to extinction risk per the IUCN and should include measures of how this risk is changing over time (similar to the approach followed in Table 2). As the aim of the extinction account is emancipatory, users should be provided with an explanation of why these ecosystems are important, including economic considerations as well as the importance of flora and fauna at the social, cultural and, most importantly, biological level. In line with existing corporate governance practices, scientific details and the extinction context provide the basis for a comprehensive risk assessment. This includes: (1) an explanation of which ecosystems and species are most at risk of extinction, (2) the impact that this would have from a biological, social and economic perspective and (3) an indication of the likelihood of and time frame associated with each risk. This could be carried out at the national or regional level and would not be specific to a particular company or industry. A company account includes actions taken by the entity to mitigate the risk of extinction. Consolidated extinction accounting takes a broader approach to designing and explaining the response to identified risks. First is an explanation of the different entities (other than the private sector) tasked with risk management. Ideally, each risk would be mapped to the conservation groups, local governments and different parts of national government (as applicable) which are responsible for those risks. The policies and plans developed and actions taken by each responsible party would be articulated. As suggested by Atkins and Maroun (2018), partnerships formed with independent research groups, academics and the private sector would form part of the actions taken to combat extinction. Finally, the consolidated account should provide an aggregated assessment of what the private sector has done to reduce its environmental impact. Actions taken by individual companies contribute to the collective effort to prevent the loss of species and habit destruction. At the same time, the consolidated report provides stakeholders with an understanding of the extent to which the private sector, different levels of government and public benefit organisations are sharing the responsibility for conserving nature. Deficits in the accumulated response to extinction can also be discerned. At each level, an analysis of the steps taken to mitigate biodiversity loss would be provided. For the private sector, this would amount to review of companies' combined efforts, challenges encountered and material successes. To avoid a type of silo-logic, the consolidated account should map total activity to each risk showing which parties have responded to the different risks and whether or not the combined response has been adequate or successful. Deficiencies should be identified and used to inform changes to the risk assessment and/or response. Reflecting on White's accounting and a comparative extinction accounting over time has allowed us to propose tentative practical frameworks.

7. Concluding discussion and suggestions for further research

This paper contributes to the existing literature in a number of ways. The research explores the Naturalist's Journals of Gilbert White as an early illustration of accounting for biodiversity, thereby extending the literature on biodiversity accounting into a historic context. Further, the paper seeks to extend the form of biodiversity accounting from the corporate, public sector sphere into the personal, individual sphere whereby interested parties and naturalists provide accounts of species and biodiversity through the medium of a journal. We are therefore answering calls from the accounting history literature to explore environmental and sustainability accounting from a historical perspective as well as to broaden the forms of account researched. Our research also extends the existing literature on extinction accounting by providing a longitudinal extinction account over a 250-years period, by comparing the biodiversity account derived from White's Naturalist's Journals with an account of the current state of UK (and in some cases global) species he recorded, according to extinction threat. Although there are emerging illustrations of extinction accounting for a variety of species in the literature, there is none that adopts such a longitudinal historical perspective. Here we are seeking to gain a feeling for biodiversity and species losses since the 1770s. From a more interdisciplinary perspective, this paper may be seen as a means of opening up academic debate around chaos ecology, since White's Journals may be interpreted as early examples of this somewhat apocalyptic genre of writing and thought, but also writing which identifies the devastating impact our species is having on nature, on flora and fauna and on biodiversity. The potential impact of comparing White's Journals to the current state of nature has been recognised in literary analyses, and using extinction accounting as a frame is an effective means of operationalising such comparison:

White's daily nature observations constitute a mode of resistance that we can recognize as ideologically significant both to his contemporary period of landscape and agricultural change and to our own moment of ecological crisis (Williams, 2017, p. 436).

Lawton (1999) highlighted the striking difference between White's Selborne and the same region at present, mentioning species he recorded as abundant being now absent or dwindling. We can only hope that this 250-years-old extinction account brings to life White's diligent biodiversity reporting practices in the 21st century, transforming them into a potentially powerful emancipatory mechanism for raising societal awareness around the need for action to preserve species from extinction. It is also worthwhile reflecting on whether White's Naturalist's Journals represent an appropriate model of the types of data that we should be collecting at present: perhaps living in a high octane, “big data” world is contributing to extinction and biodiversity loss, such that the practice of localised biodiversity diaries, collected at a different rhythm and pace, is exactly what the world needs [24]. Indeed, there may be benefit in theorising accounting for biodiversity and extinction using philosophical and theoretical approaches that explore further the relationship between nature and man/woman and how this currently adversarial relationship may be enhanced in the light of ecological crisis. For instance, the varied works of the Scottish poet Kenneth White could offer a framing, as his core concept of “geopoetics” [25], originating from his doctoral thesis on the subject of the “Intellectual Nomad”, focusses on the state of human beings in the universe and their relationship with planet Earth (Bell, 2009) [26].

We also hope that this paper can provide a springboard, a motivation, for researchers to explore the historical roots of ecological accounting and auditing, from multiple perspectives including different forms of accounting for biodiversity and extinction, such as nature diaries and other written media, even artworks or letters. For example, Henry David Thoreau's (Thoreau, 1856–1857) extensive journal-keeping provides an ideal basis for further research along these lines, as his detailed accounts, totalling more than 2m words, describe nature and species he saw in sensitive and artistic terms, such as “…. [T]he banks by retired roadsides are covered with asters, hazels, brakes, and huckleberry bushes, emitting a dry, ripe scent” (p. 450) [27]. Thoreau lived in Massachusetts, practising an ethical form of life and inspiring people through his writings that raise issues around society and the environment. His species data could be compared to the current state of biodiversity in Massachusetts at present to create a US-based extinction account. Further, the artistic accounts included in nature diaries could be analysed as forms of biodiversity account, such as the botanical drawings and paintings included in the Country Diary of an Edwardian Lady (Holden, 1980). Indeed, it would be interesting to explore female nature diarists, as women are represented in this literary genre. For example, Dorothy Wordsworth and Beatrix Potter included detailed nature notes in their journals. Researchers could also potentially explore similar types of biodiversity and extinction accounting in different countries, languages and cultures, extending this work from a purely UK-focussed context. Analysing White's brother's journals recording species in Gibraltar around a quarter of a millennium ago, could engender some useful insights into species change in Southern Europe over this period. This is a potentially fruitful area of research, as understanding historical contexts and frameworks can inform the development of current and future reporting and accounting forms, media and communicative methods.