El compromiso general de la comunidad internacional de apoyar el desarrollo de la contabilidad del capital natural fue motivado por primera vez por el Informe Brundtland en 1987 y la Cumbre de la Tierra de Río de Janeiro (1992). En esta cumbre se adoptó la Agenda 21, en cuyo capítulo 40 se instaba a los signatarios a desarrollar información cuantitativa sobre sus actividades.[2]​.

Environmental-economic accounting system

In September 1992, the Environment Commission of the Permanent Council of the Organization of American States (OAS) held a seminar on environmental and natural resource accounts for development policies.[8] Many of the participating countries expressed interest in developing accounting capabilities for natural resources.[8] It was then proposed to create a program to coordinate and strengthen the efforts of countries and institutions undertaking such initiatives.[8]​.

The development of the first System of Integrated Environmental and Economic Accounting (SEEA) in 1993 represented a fundamental step forward towards establishing standards for the integration of the environment into national accounts and, subsequently, the greening of macroeconomic indicators such as GDP.

While the SEEA and its subsequent revisions have expanded the range of analyzes within the framework, its purpose has remained. It is an accounting framework that records stocks and flows relevant to both the environment and the economy. The SEEA core framework comprises 3 main accounts that can be integrated with the United Nations System of National Accounts (SNA), each focusing on a different aspect of the interaction between the economy and the environment: physical flow accounts, functional accounts for environmental transactions, and asset accounts in physical and monetary terms.

The SEEA version of the third quarter of 2012 consists of 2 additional parts to the central framework: the experimental ecosystem accounts and the extensions.[9]​.

Experimental ecosystem accounts introduce an accounting framework for ecosystems, although many of the flows and stocks they describe focus on non-traded assets (in environmental accounting a distinction is made between traded assets, such as extracted oil, and non-market assets, such as air quality).[9]​.

While some of the measurement concepts involved in the accounting process are still evolving, it is possible that the final valuation of ecosystems and their depletion could be included in the calculations of environmentally adjusted macroeconomic indicators.

This has implications for future policies, as the emphasis on certain projects or activities undertaken by governments is likely to change, depending on how these measurements affect their respective accounts and subsequent environmental adjustments to certain indicators.

The London Group on Environmental Accounting and the United Nations Committee of Experts on Environmental and Economic Accounting were created in 1994 and 2005 respectively to assist in the development of the SEEA and its implementation.[10] Additionally, the Working Group on Environmental Auditing, a subgroup of the International Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions, works to improve auditing standards related to environmental issues.

In March 2021, the United Nations Statistical Commission adopted the SEEA Ecosystem Accounting Standard (SEEA EA) at its 52nd session.[11]​ The SEEA EA is a statistical framework that provides a consistent accounting approach to the measurement of ecosystems. Ecosystem accounts allow the presentation of data and indicators of the extent, condition (pristine, altered, degraded) and services of the ecosystem, both in physical and monetary terms, in a spatially explicit manner.[12]​.

Following its adoption, the Statistics Division of the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA), in collaboration with the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) and the Basque Center for Climate Change (BC3), launched ARIES for SEEA Explorer in April 2021,[13]​ an artificial intelligence tool based on the Artificial Intelligence Platform for Environment and Sustainability (ARIES) for natural capital accounting fast, standardized and customizable.[14]​ ARIES for SEEA Explorer was made available on the United Nations Global Platform to accelerate the implementation of SEEA around the world.[15]​.

In May 2025, Fordham University's Gabelli School of Business licensed the green performance reporting framework developed by Intrinsic Exchange Group for the valuation of natural assets.[16] This accounting and reporting framework, based on the SEEA, was developed for natural asset companies in consultation with former chair of the private Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), Robert Herz, accounting firms, and Fordham, in collaboration with Intrinsic Exchange Group. The framework establishes a new independent standards body to develop, maintain and oversee global natural capital accounting and reporting standards.

Association for Wealth Accounting and the Valuation of Ecosystem Services

The capacity of developing countries to account for their natural capital is being significantly improved through the Wealth Accounting and Valuation of Ecosystem Services (WAVES) alliance, by encouraging the development of relevant measurement frameworks.[17]​ WAVES is a global alliance launched in October 2010 by then-World Bank President Robert Zoellick at the COP-10 meeting of the Convention on Biological Diversity in Japan. Its objective is to promote sustainable development by encouraging the inclusion of natural capital in national accounts. Several projects have been initiated in developing countries, such as Botswana, Colombia or Madagascar, to improve their capacity to implement the SEEA, in collaboration with UNEP, the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), the United Nations Statistical Commission and with financial support from NGOs and the governments of Australia, Canada, France, Japan, Norway and the United States.[17]​.

The World Bank then implemented a successor program – the Global Agenda for Sustainability – to improve the measurement and valuation of natural capital and ecosystem services, and to support the integration of natural capital into policy dialogues, economic planning and decision-making.

Ecological footprint accounts

Alternatively, natural capital can also be assessed from a biophysical perspective. Ecological footprint and [biocapacity] accounts, developed by Mathis Wackernagel and William Rees in the early 1990s, and since 2003 further developed by the Global Footprint Network, compare human demand with what the planet or a region's ecosystems can regenerate. They provide an accounting framework that maps human demand from the point of view of biological capital as a limiting factor for human enterprise (for example, the possibility of building or expanding a city in a given location is limited by the availability of water and food).

A general document that includes the accounting method for the 2018 edition of the national footprint accounts was published by David Lin et al.[18]​ This approach is complementary to the proposal of 9 planetary limits within which humans can live with a low probability of catastrophes[19]​ (in September 2023, 6 of them had already been exceeded)[20]​ as proposed by Rockström et al. Both approaches emphasize the need to make the human enterprise compatible with the constraints of a single planet if we are to achieve global sustainability.

While planetary boundaries seek to identify tipping points "Tipping Point (climatology)") in the conditions that allow for inexpensive human existence on Earth (if, for example, the planet's average temperature increased by 5°C, the existence of some humans—many others would die—[21]​ would still be possible, but would cost much more), ecological footprint accounting compares the demand for resources with their natural regeneration.

Inclusive wealth index

The United Nations International Human Dimensions Program has created an inclusive sustainability indicator, the Inclusive Wealth Index (IWI), which measures the productive bases of an economy: produced capital, natural capital and human capital, and based on these 3 assessments, calculates the trajectory of a country's wealth.[22] The calculation of natural capital in the IWI is based on the shadow value (an estimate of the price that could be paid for them if they were commercialized) of the assets of natural capital of an economy.

A similar conceptual framework was adopted in 2008 by the Commission for the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress, under the direction of economists Joseph Stiglitz, Amartya Sen and Jean-Paul Fitoussi, at the behest of former French President Nicolas Sarkozy. The authors concluded that a pragmatic measure of sustainability would combine an indicator based on the extended wealth approach (that is, not only taking into account current GDP, but also natural capital) and a small physical indicator board.

Although their theoretical foundations are different, what these approaches have in common is a recognition of the limitations of traditional indicators for measuring economic performance and social progress (see for example Criticisms of GDP), and the importance of long-term sustainability.

Beyond GDP

There have been several initiatives at the regional level that seek to move away from traditional GDP as the main indicator of wealth and well-being. The first of them is "Beyond GDP", an initiative promoted by the EU in 2007 to develop highly aggregated environmental and social indicators and expand national accounts to environmental and social issues.[23]​.

In May 2012, the Africa Sustainability Summit was held in Gaborone, Botswana. This summit also brought together leaders from 10 African countries to discuss sustainable development planning and, in particular, to commit to a set of objectives of fully accounting for natural capital and its integration into planning, national policies and reporting of actions taken and data collected. This commitment was materialized in the Gaborone Declaration for Sustainability in Africa.[24]​.

Ecosystem and biodiversity economics

At the Tenth Conference of the Parties (COP-10) to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), 4 publications were presented by the Ecosystem Economics and Biodiversity (BSE) initiative: Ecological and economic foundations of BSE, BSE and national and international policy making, BSE in local and regional policies, and BSE in business.[25] These publications, together with an interim report published at the previous meeting (COP-9) of the CBD in Bonn, represent an exhaustive analysis of the economic value of biodiversity and the consequences it has for the different levels of analysis of public and private policies.[25]​.

The EEB also seeks to systematize the role of corporations, through the EEB Coalition for Business (2012), formulating standards and evaluating externalities.[26]​ S.

Since natural capital accounting requires the identification of replacement activities as well as environmental degradation, the inclusion of corporations in the valuation process is key.

Declaration of natural capital

In June 2012, the Rio+20 conference marked a milestone in global interest in natural capital accounting. Ahead of the conference, the Natural Capital Declaration was released, a commitment by financial sector CEOs to integrate ESG (environmental, social and governance) criteria into management and investment activities. Additionally, the World Bank launched the WAVES 50:50 initiative (remember, Wealth Accounting and Valuation of Ecosystem Services) to analyze progress and steps needed to improve natural capital accounting efforts and strengthen countries' capacity for sustainable decision-making.[24] At the time of the conference, 62 countries, 90 companies, and 17 members of civil society had signed on to the initiative. campaign.[24]​.

Muchos países están emprendiendo proyectos para desarrollar cuentas ambientales, integrarlas con las cuentas nacionales o crear indicadores macroeconómicos ajustados al medio ambiente, incluido el PIB verde. Entre los primeros países en adoptar cuentas ambientales y económicas integradas se encuentran los Países Bajos, Francia y Filipinas. Esta sección documenta las iniciativas emprendidas por los países del G20 o relacionadas con ellos.

Argentina

A team of researchers from the University of Buenos Aires and the National Scientific and Technical Research Council "National Scientific and Technical Research Council (Argentina)") (CONICET) organized the ARKLEMS+LAND project. His research, based on the KLEMS (Capital, Labor, Energy, Materials and Services) database, measures and analyzes the sources of economic growth, productivity and competitiveness in the Argentine economy.[27]​ The database includes the contributions of "natural resources as soil and subsoil assets" services to GDP growth.[27]​.

Professor George Santopietro of Radford University in Virginia examined several alternative methods for estimating resource rent and, consequently, the costs of natural capital depletion. The methods it uses are: net price, El Serafy depletion cost, sustainable price, transaction value and replacement cost.[28]​ It obtains data from the privatization of Yacimientos Petrolófilos Fiscales (YPF), the Argentine state oil company, and, using each method, generates estimated values of the resource rent and the cost of depletion of Argentina's oil reserves.[28]​ The results show that the net price and transaction value methods overvalue the rent of the resources of oil reserves. He concludes that income should be calculated using the value of a company's shares.[28]​.

Australia

Several Australian organizations produce national environmental accounts. The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) produces the Australian Water Account and a pilot Land Account for the Great Barrier Reef, both based on the SEEA framework. The Bureau of Meteorology produces a supplementary National Water Account on available water. The Department of Climate Change, Energy, Environment and Water reports on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists has created an experimental environmental accounting model applicable to regions of any size. These regional accounts use a common unit of measurement, allowing comparisons to be made between different natural capital assets. The State of Victoria's Department of Sustainability and Environment has experimented with ecosystem accounts.[29]​.

The energy and water accounts found in the National Balance Sheet are prepared annually.[30]​ Likewise, subsoil assets, timber and soil are valued monetarily and included in this National Balance Sheet as non-produced assets.[30]​ The ABS works with other national bodies on the National Environmental Information Plan, the State of the Environment Report, and the planning of national environmental accounts.

In 2012, following the adoption of the SEEA as an international statistical standard, the ABS also published a report entitled "Complete the picture: environmental accounting in practice", which develops a series of accounting tables based on the SEEA format and explores how they could influence policy decisions.[31]​.

United Kingdom

The United Kingdom produces environmental accounts, in line with the SEEA framework, which are divided into 3 dimensions: natural resource accounts, physical flows and monetary accounts.[32]​ Most data are measured in physical units; Monetary units are used when appropriate and if the necessary data are available.[32]​.

The current environmental asset accounts produced by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) are: oil and gas reserves, forestry and land cover.[33]​ In 2012, the ONS planned to carry out a study on the preparation of a comprehensive ecosystem account, with high priority on physical and monetary forestry accounts.[34]​ It also set a number of objectives to include land use and land cover accounts in the 2013 environmental accounts.[34]​.

The UK National Ecosystem Assessment (NEA) was a 2-year initiative between 2009 and 2011 that assessed the benefits of the environment to society and the economy.[35]​.

The Government has committed to producing full environmental accounts by 2020. This work is being led by the ONS and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). The UK Natural Capital Committee provided advice to assist this project. In December 2012, the ONS published a roadmap for the endeavour. Incorporating natural capital into national accounts, if done correctly, would provide an overview of trends in the state of the country's natural resources over time. This, in turn, would help demonstrate the implications of actions that impact the natural environment and could therefore encourage policy makers to ensure that natural resources are used sustainably in the future.

The Natural Capital Committee also developed a methodology for corporate natural capital accounting. Throughout 2014, it conducted a pilot project with various organizations to test and refine this methodology, and is encouraging land-owning or managing organizations to develop corporate natural capital accounts.

Brazil

Despite reports that Brazil would develop a green GDP in the run-up to Rio+20, there is no known evidence that this process has taken place.[36]​.

Canada

Statistics Canada does not redefine existing national accounts aggregates or supplement them with environmental information. However, it has developed the Canadian System of Environmental and Resource Accounts (CSERA), which provides information to those who wish to calculate such "green aggregates".[37]​ It also includes land estimates in the "tangible non-produced assets" section of the Canadian balance sheet.[38]​.

The CSERA presents 3 dimensions: natural resource stock accounts, material and energy flow accounts, and environmental protection expenditure accounts.[39]​ The former are measured in physical and monetary units.[39]​ They contain estimates of natural resource wealth that are included in the national balance accounts.

In 2005, the Pembina Institute published a report on Canada's Boreal Initiative, which aimed to quantify the total economic value of goods and services in Canada's boreal region. To this end, the Boreal Ecosystem Wealth Accounting System (BEWAS) was created. This system considered the physical conditions of the boreal region using physical inventories and spatial data.[40]​ The 2-year study estimated the 2002 market value of the region's forestry, mining, oil, gas, and hydroelectric generation sectors at $48.9 billion.[40]​ For the same period, it also estimated the net market value of natural capital extraction at $37.8 billion. and the non-market value of ecosystem services at $93.2 billion.[40]​.

Professor Nancy Olewiler of Simon Fraser University conducted several case studies to assess natural capital in populated areas of Canada. They revealed that the total net value of conservation initiatives was approximately $195 per hectare per year ($/ha/year) in the Ontario River Basin, $65/ha/year in the Upper Assiniboine River Basin, and $126/ha/year in the Mill River Basin of Prince Edward Island.[41]​.

China

In 1997, Beijing authorities carried out a project to assess the city's green GDP.[42] This set precedents for environmentally adjusted indicators in the country. Over the following decade, local authorities carried out several regional pilot projects. Between 2001 and 2004, the Chinese authorities collaborated with the Norwegian Bureau of Statistics to conduct an assessment of Chongqing's green GDP.[42]​.

Subsequently, in 2004, China's State Environmental Protection Administration (SEPA) and the National Bureau of Statistics launched the Green GDP Accounting Research Project. The findings, published in 2006 in the China Green National Accounting Survey Report 2004, found that environmental pollution cost the economy 511.8 billion yuan or 3.5% of GDP in 2004.[43] A breakdown of this figure shows that water pollution, air pollution, solid waste and accidents cost 286.28 billion yuan. yuan, 219.8 billion yuan and 5.74 billion yuan, respectively.[43]​ According to the report, only about 10 of the elements that the project aimed to distinguish were accounted for.[43]​ The costs of resource depletion and ecological damage were not included in the calculations due to methodological difficulties, limited technological capabilities, and lack of relevant data.[44]​.

At the same time as the report was released, SEPA Vice Minister Zhu Guangya issued an independent report stating that each year, environmental damage in the country costs approximately 10% of GDP.[44] This estimate was consistent with what scientists, economists, and the World Bank had expected, between 8 and 12% of GDP.

The government withdrew its official support for green GDP in 2007, following early results showing a reduction in growth rates in some provinces to almost zero (if, for example, the classic GDP shows a 3% increase in a region's economic output, but the environmental assessment indicates an almost equivalent decline in its natural resources, the resulting green GDP will be practically zero). It also did not publish an official Green GDP report for 2005, which was scheduled for publication in March 2007.

Reports have periodically emerged about the recalculation of China's green GDP. In 2007, the China National Environment Federation (ACEF) petitioned the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) to implement a national accounting system.[45] The China Daily newspaper reported that the Ministry of Environmental Protection estimated the cost of pollution to the economy at 1.4 trillion yuan in 2009.[46]

Starting in 1998, the National Statistics Office produced basic environmental accounts in forestry and energy. It has since expanded its environmental accounts to include pollution, water and minerals treatment, along with the development of a comprehensive SEEA for China.

European Union

The interaction between Eurostat and the national statistical offices of the EU Member States was formalized in 2011 with the adoption of Regulation No 691 on European Environmental Economic Accounts. This regulation requires countries to submit data and accounts on air emissions, environmentally related taxes and material flows from 2012 onwards.[47] Eurostat is also developing environmental accounts expressed in physical and monetary terms, and asset accounts, as a step towards the development of a regional SEEA.[48]

Creating inclusive wealth indicators is also a recognized EU priority. The EC's proposed 7th Environmental Action Program (EAP) explicitly identifies this issue, calling for further development and integration of economic and environmental indicators. The Shared Environmental Information System (SEIS) proposes to streamline the collection of data necessary for the design of environmental indicators.

The EU also signed the Aichi Agreement at CBD COP-10, in which parties commit to integrating biodiversity into their national accounts.[47] This is in addition to the experimental ecosystem accounting framework that was launched in 2009. The European Environment Agency proposed that, given the compatibility of the design with the System of National Accounts, it would be possible to use a particular indicator, consumption of ecosystem capital (CEC), to adjust national accounts aggregates and create 2 new indicatorsː net domestic product adjusted by CEC and net national income adjusted by CEC.[49]​.

The Ecosystem Capital Communication Roadmap for a Resource Efficient Europe sets 2020 as the year in which companies, together with public authorities, will properly account for natural capital and ecosystem services.[50]​.

France

The Ministry of Sustainable Development prepares economic-environmental satellite accounts annually.[51]​ However, it plans to expand them to coincide with the SEEA (2012).[51]​ The National Institute of Statistics and Economics also includes estimates of land, subsoil assets, and unused biological and water resources in the "tangible non-produced assets" section of the French balance sheet.

Between 2008 and 2010, an exploratory study on ecosystem valuation was carried out. In accordance with the adoption of the aforementioned Aichi Agreement, goal 7 of France's National Biodiversity Strategy was established to "include the preservation of biodiversity in economic decisions".[51]​ The Ministry of Sustainable Development consulted potential stakeholders and refined methodological options for collecting physical assessments of ecosystems.[51]​ This ministry also organizes annual expert workshops on monetary valuation and economic instruments.[51]​.

Germany

The German Environmental Economic Accounts (GEEA) are based on the SEEA framework. The data from these accounts, together with the German Socioeconomic Accounts, are used to calculate a set of indicators, as described in the National Strategy for Sustainable Development (2002).[52]​ Although adjusted macroeconomic aggregates are not estimated in the GEEA, 2 of its indicators are integrated into the National Accounts: energy and raw materials productivity, and transport intensity and the share of rail in transport.[52]​.

India

An expert group, led by Professor Partha Dasgupta, chair of the scientific committee of the International Human Dimensions Program (IHDP), is developing a system to "green" India's national accounts.[53] GDP is planned to be adjusted to take into account environmental costs and impacts from 2015.[53] Some of the issues that this group will address include establishing coordination mechanisms, both within the country and with international partners, and standardization of data collection and assessment methodologies.[54]​.

The Green Accounting Project for Indian States (GAISP) was the first initiative of the Green Partnership of Indian States (GIST), a non-governmental organization (NGO) founded in 2004.[55]​ This project used national databases to measure sustainable development and create state-level green accounts that were consistent with the SEEA-2003 guidelines.[55]​ Subsequently, the GIST calculated a total green GDP that adjusted the Usual GDP for "all major externalities" incurred in order to generate it.[55]​.

The South Asian Network for Development and Environmental Economics (SANDEE) and the Indian Society for Ecological Economics operate in India, although SANDEE is based in Nepal.[56] Both are networks that conduct environmental accounting research and analysis, of interest to teachers, researchers and policymakers.[57]​.

Indonesia

Members of the World Resources Institute, led by David Repetto, integrated environmental effects into the 1990 Indonesian national accounts.[58]​ To find the environmentally adjusted net domestic product, they subtracted from GDP the net depreciation of oil, wood, and land resources.[58]​ They found that estimates of net income and net growth were overestimated when calculated with conventional accounts.

In 1997, the United Nations University Institute for Advanced Studies (UNU-IAS) measured the environmental impact of industrialization and trade in Indonesia (along with China and Japan).[59]​ In its study, UNU-IAS developed an international environmental input-output model for the Asia-Pacific region and, from it, was able to compile a preliminary approximation of SEEA and green GDP.[59]​ In In 1990, environmental costs were equivalent to 4.9% of Indonesia's GDP. Changes in land use and oil exploitation were revealed to be especially important.[59]​.

Since 2002, the Indonesian Bureau of Statistics (BPS) has produced several reports on sustainable development indicators, based on the 134 indicators of the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development prepared by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. The BPS also regularly generates marine and coastal resource and environmental statistics.

Italy

The Italian National Institute of Statistics (ISTAT) currently develops 3 types of environmental accounting modules: material flows (MFA), the environmental account matrix integrated with the national economic account (NAMEA) and the estimation of expenditure for environmental protection (SERIEE-EPEA).[60]​.

In 1999, Silvia Teizzi of the University of Siena applied a monetary valuation method to the externalities arising from agricultural production in Italy.[61] She estimated separately a shadow price and a quantity of externalities, and calculated their values for each year between 1961 and 1991.[61] She subtracted these figures from the value added of the agricultural sector "as a first step towards correcting national accounting aggregates to take into account degradation environmental».[61]​.

In their case study on Trento, professors Andrea Francesconi and Paolo Penasa analyzed the accounting schemes for environmental expenditures developed by local governments in Italy.[62]​ Within the framework of the local Agenda 21 process, Italian municipalities undertook the Local and Urban Environmental Accounting and Reporting (CLEAR) and CONTAROMA projects.[62]​ The CLEAR project was started in 2001 to link the financial statements of municipalities with an environmental report.[62]​ The CLEAR method reclassified such financial statements so that expenditures for environmental purposes could be identified and compiled into separate monetary accounts.[62]​ Similarly, the CONTAROMA project developed an environmental accounting system for the municipal budget of Rome.[62]​.

Japan

In 1995, the Japan Economic Planning Agency made initial estimates of SEEA and green GDP from 1985 to 1990. In 1998 it expanded its estimates from 1970 to 1995.[59]​ According to these calculations, environmental costs in Japan fell from 8% of GDP in 1970 to almost 1% in 1995.[59]​.

The E-10 are the official economic-environmental accounts prepared by the Ministry of Environment of Japan.[63]​ They are based on data collected by 10 ministries and describe the environmental burden of certain natural resources in physical units.[63]​ The E-10 consists of 3 sets of tables: a basic transaction table; resource and environmental load tables; and complementary tables.[63]​.

Japan's Statistics Bureau currently includes land estimates in the "tangible non-produced assets" section of the Japanese balance sheet.

South Korea

In 2001, the Korean Ministry of Environment planned to introduce an environmentally adjusted GDP indicator.[64] It began developing its own environmental and economic assessment system (KORSEEA) in 2002, and in the following years the economy-wide material flow accounts and the matrix of environmental accounts integrated with the national economic account (NAMEA) were developed.[64] Various state agencies provide the necessary economic and environmental data for the KORSEEA. The Korean Bureau of Statistics also includes estimates of non-cultivated land, subsoil assets, and biological and water resources in the “tangible non-produced assets” section of the Korean balance sheet.

The Korea Rural Economic Institute calculated the green GDP of the Korean agricultural sector between 1980 and 1997 using pilot economic-environmental accounts.[65]​ In this study, environmental adjustment is limited to subtracting from the net domestic product (which takes into account the deterioration of productive assets, but not the environment) the "costs of degradation of natural resources."[65]​ The result is that the ratio between the environmentally adjusted gross domestic product (green GDP) and the net domestic product decreases. from 100.6% to 99.5% in the agricultural sector during the specified period.[65]​.

Mexico

In 1985, the United Nations, the World Bank, and the Mexican government ran a joint pilot project using 1985 data to produce 2 environmentally adjusted indicators: resource depletion subtracted from net domestic product and environmental degradation subtracted from net domestic product.[66]​.

The Mexican System of Economic and Ecological Accounts (MSEEA) was initiated in 1988 and has been published annually since 1991. Mexico's National Institute of Statistics and Geography (INEGI) has used these accounts to obtain key information on the country's environmental sustainability. Annual environmental costs are equivalent to 8.5% of GDP. Since 2003, INEGI has calculated an annual aggregate green GDP.[66]​ Between 2003 and 2009, the proportion of this green GDP with respect to GDP increased from 90.4 to 92.1%.[66]​ This indicates that environmental damage is slightly reducing. INEGI reports that, although the scope of action must be expanded, this trend reflects the success of the Government's efforts to reduce impacts that negatively affect the environment.[66]​.

Russia

The Federal State Statistics Service (Rosstat) currently includes estimates of non-cultivated soil and biological and water resources in the “Tangible non-produced assets” section of the Russian balance sheet. Rosstat has defined several priorities for the development of the Russian SEEA. Asset accounts have the highest priority. Then, with regard to the environment, a specific record of environmental protection expenditures.[67]​ After 2015, the basis for integration will emerge with the creation of input-output tables.[67]​ Physical flow accounts have a medium priority; further development will depend on the completion of these input-output tables and the timely introduction of new surveys.[67]​ While accounting for aggregates of the expanded system of national accounts, such as the depletion or degradation of natural capital, is being conceptually considered, it has the lowest Rosstat priority.[67]​.

Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia has not taken any relevant initiative.

South Africa

Statistics South Africa (Stats SA), South Africa's national statistics office, has been involved in natural capital accounting (NCA) since the late 1990s and published South Africa's first water accounts in 2000. Stats SA subsequently published mineral, energy and fisheries accounts under the Compendium of Environmental Economic Accounts reports. More recently, since 2015, South Africa has implemented ecosystem accounting. This is a relatively new area of ​​work within the NCA, and South Africa is at the global forefront in this area.

The ecosystem accounts produced by South Africa have been supported by donor-funded projects that have strengthened the capacity of Stats SA's Environmental and Economic Accounts Directorate. The office has partnered with the South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI) and has worked collaboratively with the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and Environment (DFFE, equivalent to the Ministry of Environment in other countries) and various national and subnational institutions to produce various ecosystem accounts.

South Africa was one of 7 pilot countries participating in a global initiative called Advancing Natural Capital Accounting (ANCA), through which SANBI and Stats SA led the development of national river ecosystem accounts and soil and ecosystem accounting in KwaZulu-Natal.

This was followed by the Natural Capital Accounting and Valuation of Ecosystem Services (NCAVES) Project (2017-2020), in which SANBI and Stats SA, together with the aforementioned DFFE, developed the Terrestrial and Soil Ecosystem Accounts, 1990-2014, published in the first issue of the Stats SA Natural Capital series. Upcoming natural capital accounts to be published in this series include thematic accounts for protected areas, accounts for rhinoceros and cycad species, and updated national water accounts, among others.

The ecosystem accounts use the South African National Ecosystem Classification System (SA-NECS). Stats SA has developed a standard with SANBI experts to standardize the use of SA-NECS, approved in February 2021. This standard is applicable to national accounts, environmental economic accounts prepared by Stats SA and those of any other institution.

Stats SA has published a 10-year strategy to boost natural capital accounting (NCA) in South Africa. The objective of this strategy is to focus the efforts of Stats SA and other institutions on the development of priority natural capital accounts to inform South Africa's sustainable development policy objectives. The National NCA Strategy seeks to ensure that NCA is widely used to provide credible evidence for integrated planning and decision-making that supports the country's development needs.

There is a growing community of practice in natural capital accounting in South Africa, and South Africa is an active participant in the African natural capital accounting community of practice.

Türkiye

The Turkish Statistical Institute produces a series of environmental statistics.[68]​.

USA

In 1992, the Bureau of Economic Analysis of the Department of Commerce began to intensively develop environmental accounting methodologies.[69] However, after the publication of the first Integrated Environmental and Economic Satellite Accounts in the United States, Congress ordered this department (ministry in other countries) in 1994 to suspend all activities in this area.[69] It also ordered an external review of environmental accounting. This review, "Nature's Numbers: Expanding National Economic Accounts to Include the Environment", concluded in 1999.[69]​.

William Nordhaus, who participated in this review, along with Nicholas Muller and Robert Mendelsohn, co-authored a study on the integration of environmental externalities into a system of national accounts. Their model estimates the gross damages caused by air pollution in each industry in the United States. It estimates that the damages caused by activities such as waste combustion, wastewater treatment and the combustion of power plants with oil or coal are greater than their added value.[70]​ The most important externalities, whose damages range between 0.8 and 5.6 times the added value, come from electricity generation from coal.[70]​.

• - Calculation in kind.

• - Ecoinvestment.

• - Ecological economy.

• - Sustainable financing.

• - Environmental financing.

• - Climate financing.

• - Economic value.

El compromiso general de la comunidad internacional de apoyar el desarrollo de la contabilidad del capital natural fue motivado por primera vez por el Informe Brundtland en 1987 y la Cumbre de la Tierra de Río de Janeiro (1992). En esta cumbre se adoptó la Agenda 21, en cuyo capítulo 40 se instaba a los signatarios a desarrollar información cuantitativa sobre sus actividades.[2]​.

Environmental-economic accounting system

In September 1992, the Environment Commission of the Permanent Council of the Organization of American States (OAS) held a seminar on environmental and natural resource accounts for development policies.[8] Many of the participating countries expressed interest in developing accounting capabilities for natural resources.[8] It was then proposed to create a program to coordinate and strengthen the efforts of countries and institutions undertaking such initiatives.[8]​.

The development of the first System of Integrated Environmental and Economic Accounting (SEEA) in 1993 represented a fundamental step forward towards establishing standards for the integration of the environment into national accounts and, subsequently, the greening of macroeconomic indicators such as GDP.

While the SEEA and its subsequent revisions have expanded the range of analyzes within the framework, its purpose has remained. It is an accounting framework that records stocks and flows relevant to both the environment and the economy. The SEEA core framework comprises 3 main accounts that can be integrated with the United Nations System of National Accounts (SNA), each focusing on a different aspect of the interaction between the economy and the environment: physical flow accounts, functional accounts for environmental transactions, and asset accounts in physical and monetary terms.

The SEEA version of the third quarter of 2012 consists of 2 additional parts to the central framework: the experimental ecosystem accounts and the extensions.[9]​.

Experimental ecosystem accounts introduce an accounting framework for ecosystems, although many of the flows and stocks they describe focus on non-traded assets (in environmental accounting a distinction is made between traded assets, such as extracted oil, and non-market assets, such as air quality).[9]​.

While some of the measurement concepts involved in the accounting process are still evolving, it is possible that the final valuation of ecosystems and their depletion could be included in the calculations of environmentally adjusted macroeconomic indicators.

This has implications for future policies, as the emphasis on certain projects or activities undertaken by governments is likely to change, depending on how these measurements affect their respective accounts and subsequent environmental adjustments to certain indicators.

The London Group on Environmental Accounting and the United Nations Committee of Experts on Environmental and Economic Accounting were created in 1994 and 2005 respectively to assist in the development of the SEEA and its implementation.[10] Additionally, the Working Group on Environmental Auditing, a subgroup of the International Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions, works to improve auditing standards related to environmental issues.

In March 2021, the United Nations Statistical Commission adopted the SEEA Ecosystem Accounting Standard (SEEA EA) at its 52nd session.[11]​ The SEEA EA is a statistical framework that provides a consistent accounting approach to the measurement of ecosystems. Ecosystem accounts allow the presentation of data and indicators of the extent, condition (pristine, altered, degraded) and services of the ecosystem, both in physical and monetary terms, in a spatially explicit manner.[12]​.

Following its adoption, the Statistics Division of the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA), in collaboration with the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) and the Basque Center for Climate Change (BC3), launched ARIES for SEEA Explorer in April 2021,[13]​ an artificial intelligence tool based on the Artificial Intelligence Platform for Environment and Sustainability (ARIES) for natural capital accounting fast, standardized and customizable.[14]​ ARIES for SEEA Explorer was made available on the United Nations Global Platform to accelerate the implementation of SEEA around the world.[15]​.

In May 2025, Fordham University's Gabelli School of Business licensed the green performance reporting framework developed by Intrinsic Exchange Group for the valuation of natural assets.[16] This accounting and reporting framework, based on the SEEA, was developed for natural asset companies in consultation with former chair of the private Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), Robert Herz, accounting firms, and Fordham, in collaboration with Intrinsic Exchange Group. The framework establishes a new independent standards body to develop, maintain and oversee global natural capital accounting and reporting standards.

Association for Wealth Accounting and the Valuation of Ecosystem Services

The capacity of developing countries to account for their natural capital is being significantly improved through the Wealth Accounting and Valuation of Ecosystem Services (WAVES) alliance, by encouraging the development of relevant measurement frameworks.[17]​ WAVES is a global alliance launched in October 2010 by then-World Bank President Robert Zoellick at the COP-10 meeting of the Convention on Biological Diversity in Japan. Its objective is to promote sustainable development by encouraging the inclusion of natural capital in national accounts. Several projects have been initiated in developing countries, such as Botswana, Colombia or Madagascar, to improve their capacity to implement the SEEA, in collaboration with UNEP, the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), the United Nations Statistical Commission and with financial support from NGOs and the governments of Australia, Canada, France, Japan, Norway and the United States.[17]​.

The World Bank then implemented a successor program – the Global Agenda for Sustainability – to improve the measurement and valuation of natural capital and ecosystem services, and to support the integration of natural capital into policy dialogues, economic planning and decision-making.

Ecological footprint accounts

Alternatively, natural capital can also be assessed from a biophysical perspective. Ecological footprint and [biocapacity] accounts, developed by Mathis Wackernagel and William Rees in the early 1990s, and since 2003 further developed by the Global Footprint Network, compare human demand with what the planet or a region's ecosystems can regenerate. They provide an accounting framework that maps human demand from the point of view of biological capital as a limiting factor for human enterprise (for example, the possibility of building or expanding a city in a given location is limited by the availability of water and food).

A general document that includes the accounting method for the 2018 edition of the national footprint accounts was published by David Lin et al.[18]​ This approach is complementary to the proposal of 9 planetary limits within which humans can live with a low probability of catastrophes[19]​ (in September 2023, 6 of them had already been exceeded)[20]​ as proposed by Rockström et al. Both approaches emphasize the need to make the human enterprise compatible with the constraints of a single planet if we are to achieve global sustainability.

While planetary boundaries seek to identify tipping points "Tipping Point (climatology)") in the conditions that allow for inexpensive human existence on Earth (if, for example, the planet's average temperature increased by 5°C, the existence of some humans—many others would die—[21]​ would still be possible, but would cost much more), ecological footprint accounting compares the demand for resources with their natural regeneration.

Inclusive wealth index

The United Nations International Human Dimensions Program has created an inclusive sustainability indicator, the Inclusive Wealth Index (IWI), which measures the productive bases of an economy: produced capital, natural capital and human capital, and based on these 3 assessments, calculates the trajectory of a country's wealth.[22] The calculation of natural capital in the IWI is based on the shadow value (an estimate of the price that could be paid for them if they were commercialized) of the assets of natural capital of an economy.

A similar conceptual framework was adopted in 2008 by the Commission for the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress, under the direction of economists Joseph Stiglitz, Amartya Sen and Jean-Paul Fitoussi, at the behest of former French President Nicolas Sarkozy. The authors concluded that a pragmatic measure of sustainability would combine an indicator based on the extended wealth approach (that is, not only taking into account current GDP, but also natural capital) and a small physical indicator board.

Although their theoretical foundations are different, what these approaches have in common is a recognition of the limitations of traditional indicators for measuring economic performance and social progress (see for example Criticisms of GDP), and the importance of long-term sustainability.

Beyond GDP

There have been several initiatives at the regional level that seek to move away from traditional GDP as the main indicator of wealth and well-being. The first of them is "Beyond GDP", an initiative promoted by the EU in 2007 to develop highly aggregated environmental and social indicators and expand national accounts to environmental and social issues.[23]​.

In May 2012, the Africa Sustainability Summit was held in Gaborone, Botswana. This summit also brought together leaders from 10 African countries to discuss sustainable development planning and, in particular, to commit to a set of objectives of fully accounting for natural capital and its integration into planning, national policies and reporting of actions taken and data collected. This commitment was materialized in the Gaborone Declaration for Sustainability in Africa.[24]​.

Ecosystem and biodiversity economics

At the Tenth Conference of the Parties (COP-10) to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), 4 publications were presented by the Ecosystem Economics and Biodiversity (BSE) initiative: Ecological and economic foundations of BSE, BSE and national and international policy making, BSE in local and regional policies, and BSE in business.[25] These publications, together with an interim report published at the previous meeting (COP-9) of the CBD in Bonn, represent an exhaustive analysis of the economic value of biodiversity and the consequences it has for the different levels of analysis of public and private policies.[25]​.

The EEB also seeks to systematize the role of corporations, through the EEB Coalition for Business (2012), formulating standards and evaluating externalities.[26]​ S.

Since natural capital accounting requires the identification of replacement activities as well as environmental degradation, the inclusion of corporations in the valuation process is key.

Declaration of natural capital

In June 2012, the Rio+20 conference marked a milestone in global interest in natural capital accounting. Ahead of the conference, the Natural Capital Declaration was released, a commitment by financial sector CEOs to integrate ESG (environmental, social and governance) criteria into management and investment activities. Additionally, the World Bank launched the WAVES 50:50 initiative (remember, Wealth Accounting and Valuation of Ecosystem Services) to analyze progress and steps needed to improve natural capital accounting efforts and strengthen countries' capacity for sustainable decision-making.[24] At the time of the conference, 62 countries, 90 companies, and 17 members of civil society had signed on to the initiative. campaign.[24]​.

Muchos países están emprendiendo proyectos para desarrollar cuentas ambientales, integrarlas con las cuentas nacionales o crear indicadores macroeconómicos ajustados al medio ambiente, incluido el PIB verde. Entre los primeros países en adoptar cuentas ambientales y económicas integradas se encuentran los Países Bajos, Francia y Filipinas. Esta sección documenta las iniciativas emprendidas por los países del G20 o relacionadas con ellos.

Argentina

A team of researchers from the University of Buenos Aires and the National Scientific and Technical Research Council "National Scientific and Technical Research Council (Argentina)") (CONICET) organized the ARKLEMS+LAND project. His research, based on the KLEMS (Capital, Labor, Energy, Materials and Services) database, measures and analyzes the sources of economic growth, productivity and competitiveness in the Argentine economy.[27]​ The database includes the contributions of "natural resources as soil and subsoil assets" services to GDP growth.[27]​.

Professor George Santopietro of Radford University in Virginia examined several alternative methods for estimating resource rent and, consequently, the costs of natural capital depletion. The methods it uses are: net price, El Serafy depletion cost, sustainable price, transaction value and replacement cost.[28]​ It obtains data from the privatization of Yacimientos Petrolófilos Fiscales (YPF), the Argentine state oil company, and, using each method, generates estimated values of the resource rent and the cost of depletion of Argentina's oil reserves.[28]​ The results show that the net price and transaction value methods overvalue the rent of the resources of oil reserves. He concludes that income should be calculated using the value of a company's shares.[28]​.

Australia

Several Australian organizations produce national environmental accounts. The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) produces the Australian Water Account and a pilot Land Account for the Great Barrier Reef, both based on the SEEA framework. The Bureau of Meteorology produces a supplementary National Water Account on available water. The Department of Climate Change, Energy, Environment and Water reports on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists has created an experimental environmental accounting model applicable to regions of any size. These regional accounts use a common unit of measurement, allowing comparisons to be made between different natural capital assets. The State of Victoria's Department of Sustainability and Environment has experimented with ecosystem accounts.[29]​.

The energy and water accounts found in the National Balance Sheet are prepared annually.[30]​ Likewise, subsoil assets, timber and soil are valued monetarily and included in this National Balance Sheet as non-produced assets.[30]​ The ABS works with other national bodies on the National Environmental Information Plan, the State of the Environment Report, and the planning of national environmental accounts.

In 2012, following the adoption of the SEEA as an international statistical standard, the ABS also published a report entitled "Complete the picture: environmental accounting in practice", which develops a series of accounting tables based on the SEEA format and explores how they could influence policy decisions.[31]​.

United Kingdom

The United Kingdom produces environmental accounts, in line with the SEEA framework, which are divided into 3 dimensions: natural resource accounts, physical flows and monetary accounts.[32]​ Most data are measured in physical units; Monetary units are used when appropriate and if the necessary data are available.[32]​.

The current environmental asset accounts produced by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) are: oil and gas reserves, forestry and land cover.[33]​ In 2012, the ONS planned to carry out a study on the preparation of a comprehensive ecosystem account, with high priority on physical and monetary forestry accounts.[34]​ It also set a number of objectives to include land use and land cover accounts in the 2013 environmental accounts.[34]​.

The UK National Ecosystem Assessment (NEA) was a 2-year initiative between 2009 and 2011 that assessed the benefits of the environment to society and the economy.[35]​.

The Government has committed to producing full environmental accounts by 2020. This work is being led by the ONS and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). The UK Natural Capital Committee provided advice to assist this project. In December 2012, the ONS published a roadmap for the endeavour. Incorporating natural capital into national accounts, if done correctly, would provide an overview of trends in the state of the country's natural resources over time. This, in turn, would help demonstrate the implications of actions that impact the natural environment and could therefore encourage policy makers to ensure that natural resources are used sustainably in the future.

The Natural Capital Committee also developed a methodology for corporate natural capital accounting. Throughout 2014, it conducted a pilot project with various organizations to test and refine this methodology, and is encouraging land-owning or managing organizations to develop corporate natural capital accounts.

Brazil

Despite reports that Brazil would develop a green GDP in the run-up to Rio+20, there is no known evidence that this process has taken place.[36]​.

Canada

Statistics Canada does not redefine existing national accounts aggregates or supplement them with environmental information. However, it has developed the Canadian System of Environmental and Resource Accounts (CSERA), which provides information to those who wish to calculate such "green aggregates".[37]​ It also includes land estimates in the "tangible non-produced assets" section of the Canadian balance sheet.[38]​.

The CSERA presents 3 dimensions: natural resource stock accounts, material and energy flow accounts, and environmental protection expenditure accounts.[39]​ The former are measured in physical and monetary units.[39]​ They contain estimates of natural resource wealth that are included in the national balance accounts.

In 2005, the Pembina Institute published a report on Canada's Boreal Initiative, which aimed to quantify the total economic value of goods and services in Canada's boreal region. To this end, the Boreal Ecosystem Wealth Accounting System (BEWAS) was created. This system considered the physical conditions of the boreal region using physical inventories and spatial data.[40]​ The 2-year study estimated the 2002 market value of the region's forestry, mining, oil, gas, and hydroelectric generation sectors at $48.9 billion.[40]​ For the same period, it also estimated the net market value of natural capital extraction at $37.8 billion. and the non-market value of ecosystem services at $93.2 billion.[40]​.

Professor Nancy Olewiler of Simon Fraser University conducted several case studies to assess natural capital in populated areas of Canada. They revealed that the total net value of conservation initiatives was approximately $195 per hectare per year ($/ha/year) in the Ontario River Basin, $65/ha/year in the Upper Assiniboine River Basin, and $126/ha/year in the Mill River Basin of Prince Edward Island.[41]​.

China

In 1997, Beijing authorities carried out a project to assess the city's green GDP.[42] This set precedents for environmentally adjusted indicators in the country. Over the following decade, local authorities carried out several regional pilot projects. Between 2001 and 2004, the Chinese authorities collaborated with the Norwegian Bureau of Statistics to conduct an assessment of Chongqing's green GDP.[42]​.

Subsequently, in 2004, China's State Environmental Protection Administration (SEPA) and the National Bureau of Statistics launched the Green GDP Accounting Research Project. The findings, published in 2006 in the China Green National Accounting Survey Report 2004, found that environmental pollution cost the economy 511.8 billion yuan or 3.5% of GDP in 2004.[43] A breakdown of this figure shows that water pollution, air pollution, solid waste and accidents cost 286.28 billion yuan. yuan, 219.8 billion yuan and 5.74 billion yuan, respectively.[43]​ According to the report, only about 10 of the elements that the project aimed to distinguish were accounted for.[43]​ The costs of resource depletion and ecological damage were not included in the calculations due to methodological difficulties, limited technological capabilities, and lack of relevant data.[44]​.

At the same time as the report was released, SEPA Vice Minister Zhu Guangya issued an independent report stating that each year, environmental damage in the country costs approximately 10% of GDP.[44] This estimate was consistent with what scientists, economists, and the World Bank had expected, between 8 and 12% of GDP.

The government withdrew its official support for green GDP in 2007, following early results showing a reduction in growth rates in some provinces to almost zero (if, for example, the classic GDP shows a 3% increase in a region's economic output, but the environmental assessment indicates an almost equivalent decline in its natural resources, the resulting green GDP will be practically zero). It also did not publish an official Green GDP report for 2005, which was scheduled for publication in March 2007.

Reports have periodically emerged about the recalculation of China's green GDP. In 2007, the China National Environment Federation (ACEF) petitioned the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) to implement a national accounting system.[45] The China Daily newspaper reported that the Ministry of Environmental Protection estimated the cost of pollution to the economy at 1.4 trillion yuan in 2009.[46]

Starting in 1998, the National Statistics Office produced basic environmental accounts in forestry and energy. It has since expanded its environmental accounts to include pollution, water and minerals treatment, along with the development of a comprehensive SEEA for China.

European Union

The interaction between Eurostat and the national statistical offices of the EU Member States was formalized in 2011 with the adoption of Regulation No 691 on European Environmental Economic Accounts. This regulation requires countries to submit data and accounts on air emissions, environmentally related taxes and material flows from 2012 onwards.[47] Eurostat is also developing environmental accounts expressed in physical and monetary terms, and asset accounts, as a step towards the development of a regional SEEA.[48]

Creating inclusive wealth indicators is also a recognized EU priority. The EC's proposed 7th Environmental Action Program (EAP) explicitly identifies this issue, calling for further development and integration of economic and environmental indicators. The Shared Environmental Information System (SEIS) proposes to streamline the collection of data necessary for the design of environmental indicators.

The EU also signed the Aichi Agreement at CBD COP-10, in which parties commit to integrating biodiversity into their national accounts.[47] This is in addition to the experimental ecosystem accounting framework that was launched in 2009. The European Environment Agency proposed that, given the compatibility of the design with the System of National Accounts, it would be possible to use a particular indicator, consumption of ecosystem capital (CEC), to adjust national accounts aggregates and create 2 new indicatorsː net domestic product adjusted by CEC and net national income adjusted by CEC.[49]​.

The Ecosystem Capital Communication Roadmap for a Resource Efficient Europe sets 2020 as the year in which companies, together with public authorities, will properly account for natural capital and ecosystem services.[50]​.

France

The Ministry of Sustainable Development prepares economic-environmental satellite accounts annually.[51]​ However, it plans to expand them to coincide with the SEEA (2012).[51]​ The National Institute of Statistics and Economics also includes estimates of land, subsoil assets, and unused biological and water resources in the "tangible non-produced assets" section of the French balance sheet.

Between 2008 and 2010, an exploratory study on ecosystem valuation was carried out. In accordance with the adoption of the aforementioned Aichi Agreement, goal 7 of France's National Biodiversity Strategy was established to "include the preservation of biodiversity in economic decisions".[51]​ The Ministry of Sustainable Development consulted potential stakeholders and refined methodological options for collecting physical assessments of ecosystems.[51]​ This ministry also organizes annual expert workshops on monetary valuation and economic instruments.[51]​.

Germany

The German Environmental Economic Accounts (GEEA) are based on the SEEA framework. The data from these accounts, together with the German Socioeconomic Accounts, are used to calculate a set of indicators, as described in the National Strategy for Sustainable Development (2002).[52]​ Although adjusted macroeconomic aggregates are not estimated in the GEEA, 2 of its indicators are integrated into the National Accounts: energy and raw materials productivity, and transport intensity and the share of rail in transport.[52]​.

India

An expert group, led by Professor Partha Dasgupta, chair of the scientific committee of the International Human Dimensions Program (IHDP), is developing a system to "green" India's national accounts.[53] GDP is planned to be adjusted to take into account environmental costs and impacts from 2015.[53] Some of the issues that this group will address include establishing coordination mechanisms, both within the country and with international partners, and standardization of data collection and assessment methodologies.[54]​.

The Green Accounting Project for Indian States (GAISP) was the first initiative of the Green Partnership of Indian States (GIST), a non-governmental organization (NGO) founded in 2004.[55]​ This project used national databases to measure sustainable development and create state-level green accounts that were consistent with the SEEA-2003 guidelines.[55]​ Subsequently, the GIST calculated a total green GDP that adjusted the Usual GDP for "all major externalities" incurred in order to generate it.[55]​.

The South Asian Network for Development and Environmental Economics (SANDEE) and the Indian Society for Ecological Economics operate in India, although SANDEE is based in Nepal.[56] Both are networks that conduct environmental accounting research and analysis, of interest to teachers, researchers and policymakers.[57]​.

Indonesia

Members of the World Resources Institute, led by David Repetto, integrated environmental effects into the 1990 Indonesian national accounts.[58]​ To find the environmentally adjusted net domestic product, they subtracted from GDP the net depreciation of oil, wood, and land resources.[58]​ They found that estimates of net income and net growth were overestimated when calculated with conventional accounts.

In 1997, the United Nations University Institute for Advanced Studies (UNU-IAS) measured the environmental impact of industrialization and trade in Indonesia (along with China and Japan).[59]​ In its study, UNU-IAS developed an international environmental input-output model for the Asia-Pacific region and, from it, was able to compile a preliminary approximation of SEEA and green GDP.[59]​ In In 1990, environmental costs were equivalent to 4.9% of Indonesia's GDP. Changes in land use and oil exploitation were revealed to be especially important.[59]​.

Since 2002, the Indonesian Bureau of Statistics (BPS) has produced several reports on sustainable development indicators, based on the 134 indicators of the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development prepared by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. The BPS also regularly generates marine and coastal resource and environmental statistics.

Italy

The Italian National Institute of Statistics (ISTAT) currently develops 3 types of environmental accounting modules: material flows (MFA), the environmental account matrix integrated with the national economic account (NAMEA) and the estimation of expenditure for environmental protection (SERIEE-EPEA).[60]​.

In 1999, Silvia Teizzi of the University of Siena applied a monetary valuation method to the externalities arising from agricultural production in Italy.[61] She estimated separately a shadow price and a quantity of externalities, and calculated their values for each year between 1961 and 1991.[61] She subtracted these figures from the value added of the agricultural sector "as a first step towards correcting national accounting aggregates to take into account degradation environmental».[61]​.

In their case study on Trento, professors Andrea Francesconi and Paolo Penasa analyzed the accounting schemes for environmental expenditures developed by local governments in Italy.[62]​ Within the framework of the local Agenda 21 process, Italian municipalities undertook the Local and Urban Environmental Accounting and Reporting (CLEAR) and CONTAROMA projects.[62]​ The CLEAR project was started in 2001 to link the financial statements of municipalities with an environmental report.[62]​ The CLEAR method reclassified such financial statements so that expenditures for environmental purposes could be identified and compiled into separate monetary accounts.[62]​ Similarly, the CONTAROMA project developed an environmental accounting system for the municipal budget of Rome.[62]​.

Japan

In 1995, the Japan Economic Planning Agency made initial estimates of SEEA and green GDP from 1985 to 1990. In 1998 it expanded its estimates from 1970 to 1995.[59]​ According to these calculations, environmental costs in Japan fell from 8% of GDP in 1970 to almost 1% in 1995.[59]​.

The E-10 are the official economic-environmental accounts prepared by the Ministry of Environment of Japan.[63]​ They are based on data collected by 10 ministries and describe the environmental burden of certain natural resources in physical units.[63]​ The E-10 consists of 3 sets of tables: a basic transaction table; resource and environmental load tables; and complementary tables.[63]​.

Japan's Statistics Bureau currently includes land estimates in the "tangible non-produced assets" section of the Japanese balance sheet.

South Korea

In 2001, the Korean Ministry of Environment planned to introduce an environmentally adjusted GDP indicator.[64] It began developing its own environmental and economic assessment system (KORSEEA) in 2002, and in the following years the economy-wide material flow accounts and the matrix of environmental accounts integrated with the national economic account (NAMEA) were developed.[64] Various state agencies provide the necessary economic and environmental data for the KORSEEA. The Korean Bureau of Statistics also includes estimates of non-cultivated land, subsoil assets, and biological and water resources in the “tangible non-produced assets” section of the Korean balance sheet.

The Korea Rural Economic Institute calculated the green GDP of the Korean agricultural sector between 1980 and 1997 using pilot economic-environmental accounts.[65]​ In this study, environmental adjustment is limited to subtracting from the net domestic product (which takes into account the deterioration of productive assets, but not the environment) the "costs of degradation of natural resources."[65]​ The result is that the ratio between the environmentally adjusted gross domestic product (green GDP) and the net domestic product decreases. from 100.6% to 99.5% in the agricultural sector during the specified period.[65]​.

Mexico

In 1985, the United Nations, the World Bank, and the Mexican government ran a joint pilot project using 1985 data to produce 2 environmentally adjusted indicators: resource depletion subtracted from net domestic product and environmental degradation subtracted from net domestic product.[66]​.

The Mexican System of Economic and Ecological Accounts (MSEEA) was initiated in 1988 and has been published annually since 1991. Mexico's National Institute of Statistics and Geography (INEGI) has used these accounts to obtain key information on the country's environmental sustainability. Annual environmental costs are equivalent to 8.5% of GDP. Since 2003, INEGI has calculated an annual aggregate green GDP.[66]​ Between 2003 and 2009, the proportion of this green GDP with respect to GDP increased from 90.4 to 92.1%.[66]​ This indicates that environmental damage is slightly reducing. INEGI reports that, although the scope of action must be expanded, this trend reflects the success of the Government's efforts to reduce impacts that negatively affect the environment.[66]​.

Russia

The Federal State Statistics Service (Rosstat) currently includes estimates of non-cultivated soil and biological and water resources in the “Tangible non-produced assets” section of the Russian balance sheet. Rosstat has defined several priorities for the development of the Russian SEEA. Asset accounts have the highest priority. Then, with regard to the environment, a specific record of environmental protection expenditures.[67]​ After 2015, the basis for integration will emerge with the creation of input-output tables.[67]​ Physical flow accounts have a medium priority; further development will depend on the completion of these input-output tables and the timely introduction of new surveys.[67]​ While accounting for aggregates of the expanded system of national accounts, such as the depletion or degradation of natural capital, is being conceptually considered, it has the lowest Rosstat priority.[67]​.

Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia has not taken any relevant initiative.

South Africa

Statistics South Africa (Stats SA), South Africa's national statistics office, has been involved in natural capital accounting (NCA) since the late 1990s and published South Africa's first water accounts in 2000. Stats SA subsequently published mineral, energy and fisheries accounts under the Compendium of Environmental Economic Accounts reports. More recently, since 2015, South Africa has implemented ecosystem accounting. This is a relatively new area of ​​work within the NCA, and South Africa is at the global forefront in this area.

The ecosystem accounts produced by South Africa have been supported by donor-funded projects that have strengthened the capacity of Stats SA's Environmental and Economic Accounts Directorate. The office has partnered with the South African National Biodiversity Institute (SANBI) and has worked collaboratively with the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and Environment (DFFE, equivalent to the Ministry of Environment in other countries) and various national and subnational institutions to produce various ecosystem accounts.

South Africa was one of 7 pilot countries participating in a global initiative called Advancing Natural Capital Accounting (ANCA), through which SANBI and Stats SA led the development of national river ecosystem accounts and soil and ecosystem accounting in KwaZulu-Natal.

This was followed by the Natural Capital Accounting and Valuation of Ecosystem Services (NCAVES) Project (2017-2020), in which SANBI and Stats SA, together with the aforementioned DFFE, developed the Terrestrial and Soil Ecosystem Accounts, 1990-2014, published in the first issue of the Stats SA Natural Capital series. Upcoming natural capital accounts to be published in this series include thematic accounts for protected areas, accounts for rhinoceros and cycad species, and updated national water accounts, among others.

The ecosystem accounts use the South African National Ecosystem Classification System (SA-NECS). Stats SA has developed a standard with SANBI experts to standardize the use of SA-NECS, approved in February 2021. This standard is applicable to national accounts, environmental economic accounts prepared by Stats SA and those of any other institution.

Stats SA has published a 10-year strategy to boost natural capital accounting (NCA) in South Africa. The objective of this strategy is to focus the efforts of Stats SA and other institutions on the development of priority natural capital accounts to inform South Africa's sustainable development policy objectives. The National NCA Strategy seeks to ensure that NCA is widely used to provide credible evidence for integrated planning and decision-making that supports the country's development needs.

There is a growing community of practice in natural capital accounting in South Africa, and South Africa is an active participant in the African natural capital accounting community of practice.

Türkiye

The Turkish Statistical Institute produces a series of environmental statistics.[68]​.

USA

In 1992, the Bureau of Economic Analysis of the Department of Commerce began to intensively develop environmental accounting methodologies.[69] However, after the publication of the first Integrated Environmental and Economic Satellite Accounts in the United States, Congress ordered this department (ministry in other countries) in 1994 to suspend all activities in this area.[69] It also ordered an external review of environmental accounting. This review, "Nature's Numbers: Expanding National Economic Accounts to Include the Environment", concluded in 1999.[69]​.

William Nordhaus, who participated in this review, along with Nicholas Muller and Robert Mendelsohn, co-authored a study on the integration of environmental externalities into a system of national accounts. Their model estimates the gross damages caused by air pollution in each industry in the United States. It estimates that the damages caused by activities such as waste combustion, wastewater treatment and the combustion of power plants with oil or coal are greater than their added value.[70]​ The most important externalities, whose damages range between 0.8 and 5.6 times the added value, come from electricity generation from coal.[70]​.

• - Calculation in kind.

• - Ecoinvestment.

• - Ecological economy.

• - Sustainable financing.

• - Environmental financing.

• - Climate financing.

• - Economic value.