{"title":"Conceptual shifts in accounting: Transplanting the notion of boundary from financial to non-financial reporting","authors":"Laura Girella, Mario Abela, E. Ferrari","doi":"10.3280/FR2018-001005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In 1998 Miller, in his paper titled \"The margins of accounting\" observed that \"By looking at the margins of accounting, we can understand how this influential body of expertise is formed and transformed\" (Miller, 1998: 618). Drawing on this analogy, the boundaries of reporting and the ways these are defined and re-defined, as a consequence of the relationships organisations form with other entities from time to time, and their substantive nature provide insights about the business and its business model. Accordingly, an examination of reporting boundaries helps to better understand and appreciate the objective of an organisation, the logic that underlies its business model and how that is ‘reflected’ and communicated through the reporting entity’s financial statements - which may or may not align with the boundaries of the ‘organisation’. Despite the relevance of reporting boundaries as a critical aspect of the accounting discipline, it remains a relatively unexplored area in the literature. Accordingly, the aim of this work is to offer an initial overview on how the boundaries of reporting have (not) changed in response to the broadening scope of reporting to address both financial and ‘non-financial’ information (e.g. sustainability, governance and intangibles) and attempts to promote greater integration between both sets of information (IIRC, 2013). In particular, the analysis draws on the interpretative schemes of Zambon (1996) and Zambon and Zan (2000) and is combined with the concept of ‘transplantation’. The manner in which reporting boundaries are defined for both financial and non-financial reporting is investigated and compared. This comparison enables similarities and differences between the definition of the ‘reporting boundary’ to be problematised and explored for both financial and non-financial reporting.","PeriodicalId":42044,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Financial Reporting","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2018-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Financial Reporting","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3280/FR2018-001005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Abstract
In 1998 Miller, in his paper titled "The margins of accounting" observed that "By looking at the margins of accounting, we can understand how this influential body of expertise is formed and transformed" (Miller, 1998: 618). Drawing on this analogy, the boundaries of reporting and the ways these are defined and re-defined, as a consequence of the relationships organisations form with other entities from time to time, and their substantive nature provide insights about the business and its business model. Accordingly, an examination of reporting boundaries helps to better understand and appreciate the objective of an organisation, the logic that underlies its business model and how that is ‘reflected’ and communicated through the reporting entity’s financial statements - which may or may not align with the boundaries of the ‘organisation’. Despite the relevance of reporting boundaries as a critical aspect of the accounting discipline, it remains a relatively unexplored area in the literature. Accordingly, the aim of this work is to offer an initial overview on how the boundaries of reporting have (not) changed in response to the broadening scope of reporting to address both financial and ‘non-financial’ information (e.g. sustainability, governance and intangibles) and attempts to promote greater integration between both sets of information (IIRC, 2013). In particular, the analysis draws on the interpretative schemes of Zambon (1996) and Zambon and Zan (2000) and is combined with the concept of ‘transplantation’. The manner in which reporting boundaries are defined for both financial and non-financial reporting is investigated and compared. This comparison enables similarities and differences between the definition of the ‘reporting boundary’ to be problematised and explored for both financial and non-financial reporting.
1998年,米勒在他题为“会计的边际”的论文中观察到,“通过观察会计的边际,我们可以理解这个有影响力的专业知识是如何形成和转化的”(米勒,1998:618)。根据这个类比,报告的边界以及定义和重新定义这些边界的方式,作为组织与其他实体不时形成的关系的结果,以及它们的实质性性质,提供了对业务及其业务模式的见解。因此,对报告边界的检查有助于更好地理解和欣赏组织的目标,其商业模式背后的逻辑,以及如何通过报告实体的财务报表“反映”和沟通——这些报表可能与“组织”的边界一致,也可能不一致。尽管报告边界的相关性作为会计学科的一个关键方面,它仍然是一个相对未开发的领域在文献中。因此,本工作的目的是初步概述报告的边界如何(未)改变,以应对报告范围的扩大,以解决财务和“非财务”信息(例如可持续性,治理和无形资产),并试图促进两组信息之间的更大整合(IIRC, 2013)。特别是,该分析借鉴了Zambon(1996)和Zambon and Zan(2000)的解释方案,并结合了“移植”的概念。对财务报告和非财务报告界定界限的方式进行调查和比较。这种比较使得“报告边界”定义之间的异同可以在财务报告和非财务报告中被质疑和探索。