Sürdürülebilir Rekabet Avantajı Bağlamında Yeşil Stratejik Yönetim Muhasebesi: Sorumluluk Muhasebesi Temelli Kavramsal Bir Çerçeve ve Gelecek Projeksiyonu

Öz

İklim krizi son yıllarda derinleşmiş, karbon düzenlemeleri artmış ve sürdürülebilirlik raporlaması belirgin biçimde gelişmiştir. Bu makale, söz konusu gelişmelerin yeşil stratejik yönetim muhasebesi ile sorumluluk muhasebesini nasıl birbirine yaklaştırdığını kavramsal düzeyde ele almakla birlikte, iki alanın kavramsal olarak nasıl buluşturulabileceğini tartışır. Geleneksel muhasebe sistemlerinde giderlerin çevresel boyutu, karbon etkisi ve kaynak israfı çoğu zaman fark edilmediği için firmaların kalıcı bir rekabet üstünlüğü elde etmesi zorlaşmaktadır. Çalışma bu nedenle çevresel maliyetlerin ve sürdürülebilirlik performans ölçütlerinin salt dış raporlamanın konusu olmasını değil, firma içinde karar vermede, stratejik kontrolde ve yönetsel hesap verme sürecinde yararlanılan bilgiler olarak düzenlenmesini önermektedir. Bu amaçla yaşam boyu maliyetleme, çevresel faaliyet tabanlı maliyetleme, malzeme akış maliyet muhasebesi, sürdürülebilir dengeli sonuç kartı ve karbon maliyetleme sorumluluk merkezleriyle ilişkilendirilmiş; ortaya çıkan model sorumluluk muhasebesini yeşil hesap verebilirlik anlayışıyla genişleterek maliyet, gelir, kâr ve yatırım merkezlerini çevresel göstergeleri kapsayan yeşil sorumluluk merkezlerine çevirmiştir. Değerlendirmeye göre bu birleşim; kaynak verimliliği, maliyetlerin denetimi, kurumsal itibar ve karbon yönetimi aracılığıyla kalıcı rekabet üstünlüğüne destek verebilir. Son olarak yapay zekâya dayalı yeşil denetimin ve karbon muhasebesi standartlarının önümüzdeki dönemde bu birleşimi güçlendirmesi muhtemel iki kritik gelişme alanı olduğu belirtilmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Yeşil Stratejik Yönetim Muhasebesi
• Sorumluluk Muhasebesi
• Karbon Muhasebesi
• Sürdürülebilirlik

Destekleyen Kurum

Bu çalışmanın hazırlanması sürecinde doğrudan bilimsel katkı sunan veya dolaylı olarak destek sağlayan herhangi bir kişi, kurum veya kuruluş bulunmamaktadır.

Etik Beyan

Çalışmada etik kurul onayı gerektiren bir husus bulunmamaktadır.

Teşekkür

Makalenin değerlendirme ve yayımlanma sürecindeki katkıları dolayısıyla dergi editörlüğüne ve hakemlere teşekkür ederiz.

Green Strategic Management Accounting in the Context of Sustainable Competitive Advantage: A Conceptual Framework Based on Responsibility Accounting and a Projection for the Future

Öz

In recent years, the climate crisis has deepened, carbon regulations have increased, and sustainability reporting has evolved significantly. This article examines, at a conceptual level, how these developments bring green strategic management accounting and responsibility accounting closer together, while also discussing how the two fields might be conceptually integrated. In traditional accounting systems, the environmental dimension of expenses—such as carbon impact and resource waste—often goes unnoticed, making it difficult for firms to achieve a sustainable competitive advantage. For this reason, the study proposes that environmental costs and sustainability performance metrics should not be treated merely as subjects for external reporting; rather, they should be structured as information utilized within the firm for decision-making, strategic control, and managerial accountability processes. To this end, life-cycle costing, environmental activity-based costing, material flow cost accounting, the sustainable balanced scorecard, and carbon costing have been integrated with responsibility centers; the resulting model expands the concept of responsibility accounting through a framework of "green accountability," transforming cost, revenue, profit, and investment centers into "green responsibility centers" that incorporate environmental indicators. According to the assessment, this combination can support a lasting competitive advantage through resource efficiency, cost control, corporate reputation, and carbon management. Finally, it is noted that AI-driven green auditing and carbon accounting standards are two critical areas of development likely to strengthen this integration in the coming period.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Green Strategic Management Accounting
• Responsibility Accounting
• Carbon Accounting
• Sustainability

Destekleyen Kurum

No individual, institution, or organization directly contributed scientifically or indirectly supported the preparation of this study.

Etik Beyan

There are no aspects of the study that require ethical committee approval.

Teşekkür

We would like to thank the journal editors and reviewers for their contributions to the evaluation and publication process of this article.

Kaynakça

1. Akpınar, A. ve Derya Baskan, T. (2024), “İşletmelerde Yapay Zekâ Uygulamalarının Muhasebe Sürecine Ve Sürdürülebilirlik Amaçlarına Katkılarının İncelenmesi: Sürdürülebilirlik Endeksindeki İşletmelerde Bir Araştırma”, Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 68, ss.107–116. https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.1487898
2. Antle, R. Ve Demski, J. S. (1988), “The Controllability Principle In Responsibility Accounting”, The Accounting Review, 63(4), ss.700–718.
3. Anthony, R. N. ve Govindarajan, V. (2007), Management Control Systems (12th ed.). McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
4. Bromwich, M. (1990), “The Case For Strategic Management Accounting: The Role Of Accounting Information For Strategy In Competitive Markets”, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 15(1–2), ss.27–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-3682(90)90011-I
5. Burgstaller, I. (2022), “ESG Transformation and Transfer Pricing Implications”, International Transfer Pricing Journal, 29(1), ss.3–12. https://doi.org/10.59403/sf1x26 Burritt, R. L.,Schaltegger, S. ve Zvezdov, D. (2011), “Carbon Management Accounting: Explaining Practice In Leading German Companies”, Australian Accounting Review, 21(1), ss.80–98. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1835-2561.2010.00121.x
6. Cengiz, S. (2025), “Çevre Muhasebesi, Çevresel Sürdürülebilirlik ve ÇED Raporlarının İncelenmesi”, Yönetim ve Ekonomi Dergisi, 32(1), ss.147-167. https://doi.org/10.18657/ yonveek.1510202
7. Cooper, R. ve Kaplan, R. S. (1988), “Measure Costs Right: Make The Right Decisions”, Harvard Business Review, 66(5), ss.96–103.
8. COSO, (2023), Achieving Effective Internal Control over Sustainability Reporting (ICSR): Building Trust and Confidence through the COSO Internal Control—Integrated Framework. https://www.coso.org/Shared%20Documents/COSO-ICSR-Report.pdf

9. Dang, L. A. (2024), “Factors Affecting Responsibility Accounting And Its Impact On Management Performance Of Textile And Garment Enterprises In Vietnam”, Cogent Business & Management, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2371067
10. Desjardins, M. ve Sinclair-Desgagné, B. (2025), “Internal Carbon Pricing In The Multidivisional Firm.” Environmental and Resource Economics, 88(8). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4361407 Dierkes, S. Siepelmeyer, D. (2025), “Material Flow Cost Accounting With Multiple Inefficiency Factors and Recycling”, Journal of Business Research, 77, ss. 57-93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41471-024-00197-z.
11. Durmuş, R.ve Kasımoğlu, M. (2025), “İşletmelerde Yeşil Stratejilerin Rekabet Avantajı Üzerindeki Etkisi: Ölçek Geliştirme ve Sektörel Düzeyde Analiz”, Journal of Management Theory and Practices Research, 6(2), ss.489–508. https://doi.org/10.71284/jmtpr.2025617
12. Ekici, H. (2025), “Karbon Muhasebesinin Türkiye’deki Yasal Çerçevesi ve Mesleki Uygulama Boyutu”, International Journal of Arts & Social Studies (ASSTUDIES) Dergisi, 8(15), ss.171-188. https://izlik.org/JA96JR59UZ
13. European Commission. (2023), “Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/2772 of 31 July 2023 supplementing Directive 2013/34/EU as regards sustainability reporting standards” Official Journal of the European Union, https://www.efrag.org/sites/default/files/media/document/2024-08/ESRS%201%20Delegated-act-2023-5303-annex-1_en.pdf
14. European Parliament and Council of the European Union (2022), “Directive (EU) 2022/2464 of 14 December 2022 as regards corporate sustainability reporting”, Official Journal of the European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2022/2464/oj/eng
15. Figge, F., Hahn, T., Schaltegger, S. ve Wagner, M. (2002), “The Sustainability Balanced Scorecard—Linking Sustainability Management To Business Strategy”, Business Strategy and The Environment, 11(5), ss.269–284. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.339
16. Garip, O. (2026), “Karbon Muhasebesi Perspektifinde Karbon Emisyon Açıklamaları ve Finansal Performans İlişkisi”, Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi, 50, ss.237-256, https://doi.org/10.18092/ulikidince.1741305
17. Gipper, B., Seqeira, F. ve Shi, S.X. (2026), “Carbon Accounting Quality: Measurement and The Role Of Assurance”, Journal of Accounting and Economics, 81(2). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco. 2025.101849.
18. Guenther, E., Endrikat, J. ve Guenther, T. W. (2016), “Environmental Management Control Systems: A Conceptualization and A Review Of The Empirical Evidence”, Journal of Cleaner Production, 136, ss.147–171, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.043
19. Hart, S. L. (1995), “A Natural-Resource-Based View Of The Firm”, Academy of Management Review, 20(4), ss.986–1014, https://doi.org/10.2307/258963
20. Hasan, S. A. S., Waghule, S. N., Al Koliby, I. S., Al-Bukhrani, M. A., Al Haifi, M. M. ve Hasan, M. B. (2024), “Innovating For Sustainability: The Role Of Environmental Management Accounting In Driving Environmental Performance”, Discover Sustainability, 5(1), 183, https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s43621-024-00389-x
21. Hennig, J. C., Firk, S., Wolff, M. ve Coskun, H. (2023), “Environmental Management Control Systems: Exploring The Economic Motivation Behind Their Implementation” Journal of Business Research, 169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.114283
22. Horngren, C. T., Datar, S. M. ve Rajan, M. V. (2012), Cost Accounting: A Managerial Emphasis (14th ed.). Pearson.
23. Huynh, Q. L. ve Nguyen, V. K. (2024), “The Role Of Environmental Management Accounting In Sustainability”, Sustainability, 16(17). https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177440
24. IAASB (2024), International Standard On Sustainability Assurance 5000: General Requirements For Sustainability Assurance Engagements. https://ifacweb.blob.core.windows.net/publicfiles/2025-01/IAASB-International-Standard-on-Sustainability-Assurance-ISSA-5000.pdf
25. IFAC (2005), International Guidance Document: Environmental Management Accounting. International Federation Of Accountants. https://www.ifac.org/knowledge-gateway/professional-accountants-business-paib/publications/international-guidance-document-environmental-management-accounting
26. IFRS Foundation (2023a), IFRS S1: General Requirements For Disclosure Of Sustainability-Related Financial İnformation. International Sustainability Standards Board. https://www.ifrs.org/issued-standards/ifrs-sustainability-standards-navigator/ifrs-s1-general-requirements/
27. IFRS Foundation (2023b), IFRS S2: Climate-Related Disclosures. International Sustainability Standards Board. https://www.ifrs.org/issued-standards/ifrs-sustainability-standards-navigator/ ifrs-s2-climate-related-disclosures/
28. ISO (2011), ISO 14051: Environmental management—Material flow cost accounting—General framework. International Organization for Standardization. https://www.iso.org/standard/ 50986.html
29. Jasch, C. (2003), “The Use Of Environmental Management Accounting For Identifying Environmental Costs”, Journal of Cleaner Production, 11(6), ss.667–676, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-6526(02)00107-5
30. Johnson, M. P., Strobel, J. ve Trencher, G. (2024), “Between The Lines: Linking Carbon Management To Carbon Accounting Actions In The Pursuit Of Corporate Decarbonization”, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 38(4), ss.1121-1148. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-01-2024-6822
31. Kaplan, R. S. ve Norton, D. P. (1992), “The Balanced Scorecard—Measures That Drive Performance”, Harvard Business Review, 70(1), ss.71–79.
32. Kazdal, Ö. S., Çelik, D., Tenderis, A. (2025), “Yeşil İnovasyon ve Kurumsal Sürdürülebilirliğin Firma Performansına Etkisi: Örgütsel Değişime Açıklığın Aracılık Rolü”, Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 68, ss.351–380, https://doi.org/10.30794/pausbed.1611291
33. Kurtlu, A. (2017), “Çevresel Maliyetlerin Faaliyet Tabanlı Maliyetleme Yöntemi ile Belirlenmesi ve Bir Uygulama”, Yönetim ve Ekonomi Dergisi, 24(2), ss.309-325, https://doi.org/10.18657/ yonveek.335224
34. Kwon, Y., Jang, Y. ve An, J. (2025), “From Short-Term Profitability To Long-Term Sustainability: Exploring Life Cycle Cost In Chemical Processes”, Cleaner Environmental Systems, 19, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cesys.2025.100358
35. Li, N., Kim, M., Dai, J. ve Vasarhelyi, M. A. (2024), “Using Artificial Intelligence In ESG Assurance”, Journal of Emerging Technologies in Accounting, 21(2), ss. 83–99. https://doi.org/10.2308/ JETA-2022-054
36. Liem, V. T. ve Hien, N. N. (2024), “The Impact Of Managers’ Attitudes Towards Environmental Management Accounting and Green Competitive Advantage In Vietnam Manufacturers”, Heliyon, 10, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e33565
37. Maas, K., Schaltegger, S. ve Crutzen, N. (2016), “Integrating Corporate Sustainability Assessment, Management Accounting, Control and Reporting”, Journal of Cleaner Production, 136, ss.237–248 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.05.008
38. Mio, C., Costantini, A. ve Panfilo, S. (2022), “Performance Measurement Tools For Sustainable Business: A Systematic Literature Review On The Sustainability Balanced Scorecard Use”, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 29(2), ss.367–384, https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2206
39. Nishitani, K., Kokubu, K., Wu, Q., Kitada, H., Guenther, E. ve Guenther, T. (2022), “Material Flow Cost Accounting For The Circular Economy: An Empirical Study Of The Triadic Relationship Between MFCA, Environmental Performance, And Financial Performance”, Journal of Environmental Management, 303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.114219
40. Ok, Ş. (2024), “Malzeme Akış Maliyet Muhasebesi: Bir Üretim İşletmesi Uygulaması”, Uluslararası Finansal Ekonomi ve Bankacılık Uygulamaları Dergisi, 5(2), ss.253-276, https://doi.org/10.57085/ufebud.1605033
41. Ortiz-Cea, V., Dote-Pardo, J., Geldres-Weiss, V. V. ve Peña-Acuña, V. (2025), “The Role Of Activity-Based Costing In Reducing Environmental Impact: A Systematic Literature Review”, Sustainability, 17(3), https://doi.org/10.3390/su17031275
42. Padilla-Rivera, A., Hannouf, M., Assefa, G. ve Gates, I. (2023), “A Systematic Literature Review On Current Application Of Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment: A Focus On Economic Dimension and Emerging Technologies”, Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 103, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2023.107268
43. Porter, M. E. ve van der Linde, C. (1995), “Green and Competitive: Ending The Stalemate”, Harvard Business Review, 73(5), ss.120–134.
44. Quesado, P., Silva, R. ve Oliveira, H. C. (2024), “Management Control Systems and Sustainability: A Bibliometric Analysis”, Sustainability, 16(12, https://doi.org/10.3390/su16125067
45. Rahman, M. M., Saha, S. ve Hoque, M. (2024), “Unveiling The Link Between Environmental Management Accounting, Energy Efficiency, And Accountability In State-Owned Enterprises: An Integrated Analysis Using PLS-SEM And Fsqca”, Environmental Challenges, 14, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envc.2023.100832
46. Schaltegger, S. ve Burritt, R. L. (2010), “Sustainability Accounting For Companies: Catchphrase Or Decision Support For Business Leaders?”, Journal of World Business, 45(4), ss.375–384, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2009.08.002
47. Silva, A., Maldonado, I., da Silva, M. ve Cepeda, C. (2025), “Sustainability Balanced Scorecard: Systematic Literature Review”, Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 18(6), https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm18060324
48. Simmonds, K. (1981), “Strategic Management Accounting”, Management Accounting, 59(4), ss.26–29.
49. Snyder, H. (2019), “Literature Review As A Research Methodology: An Overview and Guidelines”, Journal of Business Research, 104, ss.333–339, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
50. Solovida, G. T., Izzaty, K. N. ve Nugraha, S. I. (2025), “Environmental Management Accounting and Green Practices As Drivers Of SME Performance: Evidence From An Emerging Economy”, JAS (Jurnal Akuntansi Syariah), 9(1), ss.222–243. https://doi.org/10.46367/jas.v9i1.2441
51. TCFD (2017), Recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures, Financial Stability Board, https://www.fsb.org/uploads/P290617-5.pdf
52. Traxler, A. A., Schrack, D., Greiling, D., Feldbauer, J. ve Lautner, M. (2023), “The Interplay Of Sustainability Reporting And Management Control—An Exploration Of Ways For Dovetailing To Develop Reporting Beyond Accountability”, Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 26(6), ss.160–182, https://doi.org/10.1108/JAAR-08-2022-0222
53. Trinks, A., Mulder, M. ve Scholtens, B. (2022), “External Carbon Costs and Internal Carbon Pricing”, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 168, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2022.112780
54. Tsai, W. H., Lin, T. W. ve Chou, W. C. (2010), “Integrating Activity-Based Costing and Environmental Cost Accounting Systems: A Case Study”, International Journal of Business and Systems Research, 4(2), ss.186–208. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJBSR.2010.030774
55. UNFCCC. (2015), The Paris Agreement, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, https://unfccc.int/most-requested/key-aspects-of-the-paris-agreement
56. Veeravel, V., Hiremath, R. B. ve Panda, P. (2025), “Does Internal Carbon Pricing Improve Firm Performance? Evidence From Indian Listed Companies”, Finance Research Letters, 86, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2025.108780
57. Wang, C.-H. ve Juo, W.-J. (2024), “Sustainable Environmental Performance: The Mediating Role Of Green Reputation In The Choice Of Green Marketing or Green Demarketing”, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 31(3), ss.1756–1768, https://doi.org/10.1002/ csr.2658
58. Woodward, D. G. (1997), “Life Cycle Costing—Theory, Information Acquisition and Application”, International Journal of Project Management, 15(6), ss.335–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-7863(96)00089-0