Search results

The monetary valuation of cultural heritage of a selection of 16 major public, not-for-profit Australian cultural institutions is examined over a period of almost three decades (1992–2019) to understand how they have responded to the paradoxical tensions of heritage valuation for financial reporting purposes.

Accounting for cultural heritage is an intrinsically paradoxical practice; it involves a conflict of two opposite ways of attributing value: the traditional accounting and the heritage professionals (or curatorial) approaches. In analysing the annual reports and other documentary sources through qualitative content analysis, the study explores how different actors responded to the conceptual and technical contradictions posed by the monetary valuation of “heritage assets”, the accounting phraseology of accounting standards.

Four phases emerge from the analysis undertaken of the empirical material, each characterised by a distinctive nature of the paradox, the institutional responses discerned and the outcomes. Although a persisting heterogeneity in the practice of accounting for cultural heritage is evident, responses by cultural institutions are shown to have minimised, so far, the negative impacts of monetary valuation in terms of commercialisation of deaccessioning decisions and distorted accountability.

In applying the theoretical lens of paradox theory in the context of the financial reporting of heritage, as assets, the study enhances an understanding of the challenges and responses by major public cultural institutions in a country that has led this development globally, providing insights to accounting standard setters arising from the accounting practices observed.

Several tests have been conducted to determine which valuation model best fits stock price data. Given very little success, those studies suggest the need for a clear understanding of the market process of stock price determination. This paper advances the concepts of product costing and product pricing, which pertain to financial accounting valuation and the stock market price determination, respectively. This research effort presents a workable hypothesis of stock price determination.

Although the management and financial literature is replete with much research looking at the impact of downsizing on the financial health and market valuation of companies employing this practice, there has been very little attention paid to the size of the downsizing effort and its impact. The purpose of this paper is to try and address this lack by looking at companies that downsized in 2008, considering the relative size of the downsizing, and the ongoing financial health and market valuation of the companies.

The impact of the size or severity of the downsizing event was assessed using various financial measures as well as a measure of market valuation from one to five years after the downsizing event. A data set of 251 companies that were in the Fortune 500 in 2014 and also in the Fortune 500 in 2008, that either did not change or decreased headcount were assessed longitudinally over a five-year period.

Findings indicate that the size or severity of the downsizing did not impact any measures of profitability or efficiency or market valuation, with one exception. The size of the downsizing event was negatively related to return on investment, one year after the downsizing. On the other hand, the size or severity of the downsizing had a positive relationship on the companies’ ability to have enough cash at hand to cover expenses (current ratio) from one to four years after the downsizing.

This work may provide additional support for the “band-aid solution” theory of downsizing, as suggested by Carriger (2016), downsizing may stop the bleeding but does not address the underlying financial or strategic issue leading to the need to downsize. The hope is that this work will better inform scholars and practitioners, providing a more nuanced picture of the impact of downsizing on corporate financial health and market valuation.

Research has called for increased relevance of business reporting. A step towards that goal is an increased disclosure of non‐financial information. At the present time, non‐financial information is mostly provided on a voluntary basis.

Valuation relevance of non‐financial information is studied by examining the information content of 200 analyst reports written on a respective number of firms listed in the S&P 500 index, while simultaneously performing a disclosure study of non‐financial information by the same 200 firms in their annual reports.

We found the valuation relevance of non‐financial information to be related to the size of the target firm. Further, analysts’ use of non‐financial information is related to the level of non‐financial information in the 10‐k report of the target firm. Finally, analysts tend to rely more heavily on forward‐looking non‐financial information than on historical non‐financial information.

The findings in this paper have implications for policy makers, preparers of business reporting, and others having to make judgments on information usefulness.

This study looks at the valuation relevance of non‐financial information, as opposed to earlier studies that have judged the usefulness of non‐financial information by measuring its value relevance. Information is regarded to have valuation relevance if it is used by analysts in the valuation process. Hence, valuation relevance offers an alternative way of measuring information usefulness.

The purpose of this paper is to theorize the existing idea of subjective probability a la Keynes’s Treatise on Probability Theory. Then to show that, under the especial kind of financial valuation model in the absence of interest rate and speculation, subjective probability is not of a major concern in Islamic financial theory.

The topic is of an epistemological nature premised on the Islamic unity of knowledge and the world-system with special attention given to the formulation of the financial model for evaluation under its unitary characteristic at each time period of financial evaluation. The approach, while being epistemological, is also mathematical in the financial valuation field.

Mathematical calculation of approximate solution using Newton-Raphson method applied to Islamic financial valuation model with yields, evolutionary learning and of the nature of unitary discursive experience at every stage of valuation taken continuously establishes the innovative method approximating subjective probability of events to limiting negligible field.

The nature and importance of Islamic valuation models brings about the implication of diversification of risk and production diversification that altogether underlie the limiting phenomenon of subjective probability in a narrow closure.

The epistemological implication of unity of knowledge and unity of the specific events during the valuation experience causes the socio-economic system to gain increasing levels of stability and certainty while subjective probability narrows down in its small closure.

This paper is boldly original in the light of its methodology that addresses the much pursued topic of subjective probability in the Islamic heterodox economic and financial field.

The purpose of the paper is to investigate issues associated with the application of international and national accounting and valuation standards to owner occupied property for financial reporting purposes.

The regulatory framework and relevant literature are reviewed and analysed in order to hypothesise a theoretical framework, comprising an order of classification and tests for application by valuers to owner occupied property. The hypothesised approach is then tested in principle for the valuation of airports and specifically for the valuation of a part building and underlying land.

While the hypothesised approach requires development through the proposition of further tests, it is found to be supported in application to both a part building, being the retailing area within an international terminal, and to the operational land underlying an airport.

The research provides a theoretical framework for the application of accounting and valuation standards to owner occupied property for financial reporting purposes and highlights limitations therein for further research.

The hypothesised approach provides valuers with a globally consistent theoretical framework for application to the valuation of owner occupied property for financial reporting purposes.

As airports grow and move from government ownership, the measurement of their value for financial statements becomes progressively more important if a robust basis for stakeholder decision making and the optimal allocation of capital is to be provided

The paper seeks to improve property appraisal, finance and investment skills by promoting awareness of new theories, applications and related concepts and their implications to market conditions in the context of airports.

The study aims to measure the fair value (FV) regulation convergence and to present its determinant factors and effects.

An empirical approach is used based on the content analysis of the accounting and valuation referentials, and of the similarity and dissimilarity measures.

The study attests the materialisation of the IASB and FASB objective regarding the FV accounting convergence and underlines certain dissimilarities concerning the guidance quality and the application extent of FV. In comparison with some theses in the literature on the quality of the fair value measurement, it states that certain measurement solutions, especially the focus on exit value and the preference for the seller's perspective, cannot cover all the situations that imply FV accounting and discriminate the users of accounts in favour of the financial statement providers. As to the relation between accounting standards and valuation standards, a smaller convergence degree was determined, namely in the case of IASB FV exposure draft. The main causes of this dissimilarity are related to the insufficient adaptation of IVS to the financial reporting requirements for measurement details and for FV disclosure.

In addition to some recommendations for the accounting standard setters, the paper draws attention to the need to improve the collaboration between IASB and IVSC by developing a joint document regarding technical guidance.

The study undertakes a comparative analysis of the accounting and valuation standards on fair value, based on an empirical approach, discusses the causes and suggests improvement measures for referentials including the atypical cases concerning elements of the financial statements, the market and the economies.

This paper aims to understand how social finance and impact measurement experts include stakeholders' voices in valuations of social and environmental impact.

The paper used the content analysis of an online discussion forum where experts discussed impact valuation approaches.

Many experts seek impact valuations that take into account the experiences of those whose lives are most affected. Ideally, these accounts need to be emic to (in the language of) those stakeholders, and polyvocal (representing many different stakeholders' voices). However, these experts also seek to effect systemic change by encouraging mainstream financial markets to use social and environmental valuations in their decision-making. These experts consider full plurality too complex to be useable by financial markets, so the experts argue in favor of etic valuations (stated in the language of investors), to appeal to mainstream finance, while endeavoring nonetheless to represent multiple stakeholders' voices. The authors identify two discursive strategies used to resolve this tension: effacing of differences between diverse stakeholders, and overstating the universality of money as a common language.

The terms emic and polyvocal provide experts with nuanced ways to understand “stakeholder voice.” The authors hope these nuances inspire new insights and strategies and help the community with their goal of bridging to mainstream finance.

The paper presents a theoretical framework for describing plurality in impact valuations and examines the challenges of bridging from social finance, which seeks to give voice and representation to those whose lives are most affected, to mainstream finance.

The purpose of this paper is to develop an investment valuation model using the mezzanine debt mechanism based on blue bonds that explicitly allude to public–private partnerships (P3s) and project finance (PF). Additionally, this study proposes the financial captured value (FCV) theory for measuring how much financial value lenders may capture by becoming sponsors through financing of sustainable infrastructure systems (SIS).

The investment valuation model was validated through the Aguas Claras wastewater treatment plant as a case study.

The empirical results show that lenders may capture financial value by converting outstanding debt into equity shares throughout the operation and maintenance stage. Furthermore, case study results provide new insights into the implications of the debt–equity conversion ratio on the relationship between the sponsors’ internal rate of return and the FCV.

The most significant limitation is the lack of primary and secondary information on blue bonds. Thus, robust statistical analyses to contrast results were not possible.

Researchers and practising professionals can improve their understanding of how mezzanine debt, P3s and PF into an investment valuation model allows financing SIS using a non-conventional financial mechanism. The recommendations will benefit both the academia as well infrastructure industry in bridging the gap between design theory and practice.

Sustainability components have not been addressed explicitly or combined in the financing’s structuring. Therefore, the investment valuation model could be considered a novel methodology for decision making related to financing and investment of SIS.

The aim of this study is to reflect on how the specific nature of intellectual capital influences the valuation process, in practice, and how it impacts on some of the qualities of its value.

This study is based on a case study (“Ankon”) developed by adopting a modest interventionist approach.

This study highlights the relevance of the intellectual capital valuation process in spite of the intellectual capital value per se. In fact, while intellectual capital value seems to present a limited level of objectivity, consistency, comparability and understandability, its valuation process can be considered an opportunity to visualise and understand intellectual capital and its influence on financial performance. In other words, intellectual capital valuation can be considered as a practice useful to crave the attention of the managers on intellectual capital in action.

The main limitations of this study are related to the particular research methodology adopted (action research case study) and to the size of the case investigated.

The findings provided by this research should be useful to those interested in studying intellectual capital in action and in developing new valuation models or refining existing models. Finally, considering that some of the limitations of intellectual capital value can be related to the absence of generally accepted valuation guidelines (e.g. the absence of a common definition, a single process, etc.), this can represent an incentive for policy makers to draw up useful rules to make intellectual capital value more understandable for an outsider and to identify managerial best practices.

In comparison with previous studies on intellectual capital valuation, this one focuses on an in vivo intellectual capital valuation process. In addition, this research stresses the specificities and criticalities that emerge from a process perspective in which intellectual capital is considered as a conventional object. Moreover, this paper enriches the previous critical discussions on intellectual capital measurement focusing on intellectual capital financial value.