{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018949181739879414, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0068906115417743325, 'mean_word_length': 6.172839506172839, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Rhetoric or Reality? Do Accounting Education and Experience Increase Weighting on Environmental Performance in a Balanced Scorecard?

We are nearing the end of the United Nations' Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2005–2014). There has been substantial rhetoric in education and business forums, and many universities have integrated sustainability into their accounting curricula, but what effect is accounting education having? This study considers whether the rhetoric of sustainability is manifest in a greater emphasis on environmental performance by students and practitioners. In an evaluation task using a balanced scorecard we found that third-year accounting students in Australia and Germany recognised lead performance indicators, and penalised poor environmental performance, more than did first-year students. Experienced accounting controllers, however, placed less emphasis on environmental performance than did third-year accounting students. This suggests that the rhetoric taught in universities regarding the strategic importance of environmental performance exceeds the reality of organisational priorities, at least for now.