Environmental Management Accounting as a Solution to Traditional Financial Accounting Deficiencies

Conventional financial accounting (FA) obscures environmental expenditures by aggregating them within overhead, limiting managers’ ability to identify pollution-related costs and resource inefficiencies in Zimbabwe’s mining sector. Addressing this gap, this study examines whether Environmental Management Accounting (EMA) offers a superior decision-support alternative for mining firms in the Great Dyke region. Using a qualitative, interpretivist case-study design, we conducted 32 semi-structured interviews with mining executives, environmental officers, and community representatives, supplemented by documentary review. Reflexive thematic analysis shows that traditional FA provides limited cost visibility for waste, remediation, and compliance activities, whereas EMA, particularly tools aligned with material and energy flows, enables granular tracing of negative-product (waste) costs, enhances transparency, and supports targeted efficiency improvements. Adoption is propelled mainly by external stakeholder pressures (regulators, environmental organizations, and affected communities) and by firms’ pursuit of cost control and compliance risk reduction. The study contributes context-specific evidence from Zimbabwe by demonstrating how EMA addresses FA deficiencies and strengthens environmental accountability. Practical implications include prioritizing EMA capacity building and systems integration; policy implications include aligning disclosure requirements with EMA-based metrics to incentivize continuous improvement.