制度演化视角下的会计稳健性问题研究

发布时间：2018-04-24 20:20

本文选题：会计稳健性 + 制度　；参考：《南京大学》2013年博士论文

【摘要】：不确定性是会计稳健性的前提,而天下最为确定的就是存在不确定性。FASB以西方财务会计理论集大成者和会计准则建设者合二为一的身份,在1983年颁布的第2号财务会计概念框架中明确提出对会计稳健性的认可,指出财务会计和报告领域里,像对计量上可能的误差,宁愿少计资产和收益而不愿多记的会计稳健性(意为审慎性)这样的惯例是有地位的,因为企业和经济活动在到处都有不肯定因素的环境中进行,但是近30年来,以投资者利益导向为首要指向的FASB一直认为,会计稳健性虽然具有根深蒂固的历史地位,但是编制财务报表的会计稳健性,应不含有蓄意地、一贯地少计净资产和净利之意,否则有违中立性。2008年,FASB在其和IASB颁布的联合概念框架的征求意见稿中最终决定将会计稳健性(包括会计审慎性)彻底清除,但是争议并未因此而停止,因为会计稳健性悠久的历史说明,其并非因为正式制度的认可而出现,也就不会因为正式制度的否定而消失。当前有关会计稳健性话题是针对以资本市场为主要服务对象的财务会计而言,主要的研究成果来自美国这样一个尽管具有难以撼动的经济地位但是会计历史却极为短暂的国家。从演化进程来看,美国的会计源自英国,而英国会计又可依次向前溯至荷兰、意大利会计,而这仅仅涉及复式会计的发展脉络,在复式簿记之前还有中世纪欧洲会计、四大文明古国会计、甚至会计的源头即原始计量记录。历史中的会计稳健性是经过上述这样一个发展脉络产生并演化至今,当前作为主流的英美会计理论所论及的会计稳健性仅仅是一个复杂制度现象的冰山一角。对于中国而言,会计稳健性一词完全是从西方移植而来的概念,了解会计稳健性究竟为何产生,又是如何演化至当前的状态极为迫切。中国自20世纪80年代开始建立会计制度以来,被动地经历了会计稳健性从无到有(1983-1997年)、从弱到强(1998-2005)、从全面到适度(2006-至今)三个阶段。每一次的调整都是因为旧制度产生的负面影响,这种被动调整的代价极为巨大,中国不同于美国,后者是普通法系国家,其制度源自市场中的习俗与惯例,因此会计稳健性的制度化实质上是市场运行中的内部规则自发外化的结果,其制度调整所产生的后果完全由系统内部消化。但是中国不同,作为一种制定法国家,每一次制度的制定或者调整都会发生巨大的社会成本。因此我国在移植会计稳健性制度时需要采取三思而后行的态度。但是事实上并非如此,会计稳健性原则最初的运用完全是我国会计改革与国际接轨的显著表现,制度建设者并未从历史的视角关注会计稳健性的来龙去脉。被移植的制度以是否适用作为接受标准,上述三个发展阶段就是我国制度建设被动适应结果。在中国,会计稳健性制度频频变动调整之际,FASB和IASB又作出其会计信息质量框架中彻底清除会计稳健性的决策,在会计准则国际化趋同的大环境下,我国会计制度建设者又一次面临是否跟从的挑战。会计稳健性究竟是什么?中西方迄今并无统一认识。在美国会计理论独步天下的今天,其观点对于各国会计界的影响颇深。在FASB的“目标-准则-实务”理论逻辑指引下的会计稳健性理论很难深入,因为目标是纯主观的产物,缺乏一个客观见之主观的逻辑起点来统领理论的发展,必然会产生目标与实务之间的分歧。会计稳健性在实务中的普遍性和多样性及其对准则制定目的的偏离,促使理论研究的不足亟待解决。多样性是演化的动力,故而从制度演化视角对会计稳健性理论研究成为一个重要而又迫切的研究课题。本文基于制度演化视角对会计稳健性问题进行研究,试图重点解决三个基本问题,一是为什么需要从制度演化视角进行会计稳健性问题的研究,二是如何进行演化分析,三是本研究成果如何弥补当前会计稳健性理论的不足。在回答这三个问题之前,首先需要借助于会计与经济学的理论基础。从会计研究文献来看,自现代会计理论产生伊始,演化思想就出现端倪,主要表现在早期会计研究者均试图从历史中寻找会计稳健性惯例的不同原因,采用“存在的就是适合的”标准完成准则构建,这种基于因果追溯的演化研究在新古典均衡范式占据会计研究阵地后就不复存在,将根本上是异质的、不可逆的会计稳健性惯例纳入统一的主观目的导向下的会计准则范畴,混乱的结果不言而喻。不同于制度均衡观所持的经验实在论的本体论和个体主义的认识论,制度演化观坚持批判实在论的本体论和个体群主义,假设制度主体具有认知理性、强调制度的累积因果和回溯法的运用。基于制度演化观,本文将会计稳健性的历史沿革置于“本能-行为-习惯-习俗-惯例-制度”的制度演化路径之中,向上因果探讨得出会计稳健性的终极原因是“至善”,向下因果探讨得出会计稳健性的多样性源自异质的能动主体与其所在社会结构间互动。当前会计准则制定者认为会计稳健性惯例是一种自动的、重复的、缄默的,“时间无涉”的“实在”,在这种均衡观指导下构建的会计准则无法完成链接主观会计目标和客观会计实务的任务。要解决这一问题就需要研究者将视角从制度均衡走向制度演化：首先,将研究关注点从均衡观下的“会计秩序”转向演化观下的“因果机制”,通过向上溯因分析制度形成的终极原因,向下溯因分析制度如何制约个体行为,实现因果累积链条在逻辑上的完整性。其次,重构会计稳健性理念,在当前“目标-准则-实务”的理论逻辑顺序中添加一个客观见之主观的“本质”起点,使主观的“目标”更具有客观的立论基础,从而不再游离于客观需要之外。第三,本文指出会计的发展必须适应社会需要,因此权变地适应社会需要是会计稳健性的发展方向。
[Abstract]:Uncertainty is the precondition of accounting conservatism, and the world's most determinant is the identity of the existence of uncertainty.FASB, with the integration of western financial accounting theories and accounting standards builders. In the second financial accounting concept framework promulgated in 1983, the recognition of the conservatism of the financial accounting and the reporting of financial accounting and reporting is clearly pointed out. In the field, the practice of accounting conservatism, which would rather be measured than the measurement of possible errors, preferring less assets and earnings rather than remembering the accounting conservatism (meaning prudence) is status, because the business and economic activities are carried out in an environment of uncertainty everywhere, but in the past 30 years, FASB has been recognized as the principal point directed by investor interest. For, although accounting conservatism has a deep-rooted historical position, the accounting conservatism of financial statements should not contain deliberately, consistently less net assets and net benefits, otherwise it is contrary to neutrality in.2008, and FASB finally decided to make accounting conservatism in the draft of the joint conceptual framework promulgated by IASB and the meeting. Prudence) thoroughly cleared, but the dispute has not stopped because of the long history of the accounting conservatism that is not due to the approval of the formal system, and it will not be disappearing because of the denial of the formal system.
The current topic of accounting conservatism is aimed at financial accounting for the main object of the capital market. The main research results are from the United States, a country with an unshaken economic status but a very short accounting history. From the evolutionary process, American accounting comes from Britain, and British accountants are available. In turn, it goes back to Holland and Italy accounting, which only involves the development of the compound accounting. Before the double entry, there are medieval European accountants, accounting of the four ancient civilizations and even the source of the accounting. Accounting conservatism as the mainstream British and American accounting theory is just the tip of the iceberg of a complex institutional phenomenon.
For China, the term "accounting conservatism" is entirely a concept transplanted from the West. It is very urgent to understand why accounting conservatism has come into being and how to evolve to the current state. Since China began to establish the accounting system in 1980s, China has passively experienced the ability to measure conservatism from scratch (1), from weak to strong (1983-1997 years). 998-2005), from the three stages of the overall to the moderate (2006-). Each adjustment is due to the negative effects of the old system. The price of this passive adjustment is extremely large. China is different from the United States and the latter is the common law country. The system derives from the custom and Practice in the market. Therefore, the institutionalization of accounting conservatism is essentially the market. As a result of the spontaneous externalization of the internal rules in the operation, the consequences of the system adjustment are completely digested by the internal system. However, China is different. As a country of law making, the establishment or adjustment of each system will have a huge social cost. But in fact, it is not so. The initial application of the principle of accounting conservatism is the remarkable performance of China's accounting reform and international integration. The institutional builders did not pay attention to the background of the accounting conservatism from the historical perspective. The three development stages mentioned above are the system of our country. Build the result of passive adaptation.
In China, when the accounting conservatism system is changing frequently, FASB and IASB make the decision to completely eliminate accounting conservatism in the framework of accounting information quality. Under the international convergence of accounting standards, China's accounting system builders face the challenge again. What is the accounting conservatism? China and the West have so far There is no unified understanding. Today, in the world of American accounting theory, its views have a profound influence on the accounting circle of various countries. The theory of accounting conservatism guided by the theory of "goal criterion practice" in FASB is difficult to go deep in, because the goal is a purely subjective product, and it lacks an objective subjective logical starting point to command the theory. Development will inevitably lead to differences between goals and practices. The universality and diversity of accounting conservatism in practice and its deviation to the purpose of formulating principles urge the shortage of theoretical research to be solved urgently. Diversity is the motive force of evolution. Therefore, it is an important and urgent study of the theory of stability of accounting from the perspective of institutional evolution. Research topic.
This paper studies the accounting conservatism from the perspective of institutional evolution, and attempts to focus on three basic problems. One is why we need to study the accounting conservatism from the perspective of institutional evolution, the two is how to carry out the evolutionary analysis, and the three is how to make up for the deficiency of the current accounting conservatism theory.
Before answering these three questions, first of all, we need the help of the theoretical basis of accounting and economics. From the literature of accounting research, from the beginning of the emergence of modern accounting theory, evolution ideas appear. The main manifestation is that early accounting researchers are trying to find out the different reasons for Accounting Conservatism from the history, and adopt the "existence" It is suitable for the construction of standard completion criteria, and this evolutionary study based on causal traceability will not exist after the new classical equilibrium paradigm occupies the position of accounting research. It is fundamentally heterogeneous and irreversible accounting conservatism into the unified subjective goal oriented category of accounting standards, and the chaotic results are self-evident.
Different from the ontological theory of empirical realism and individualist epistemology held by institutional equilibrium, the concept of institutional evolution adheres to the ontological and individual groups of critical realism, assuming that the institutional subject has cognitive rationality, emphasizes the cumulative cause and effect of the system and the application of backtracking. In the evolutionary path of "instinct behavior habit custom custom practice system", the ultimate cause of accounting conservatism is the "best good". Downward causal discussion shows that the diversity of accounting conservatism derives from the interaction between the heterogeneous active body and its social structure.
The current accounting standards makers believe that accounting conservatism is an automatic, repetitive, silent, "time no" "reality". The accounting standards constructed under the guidance of this equilibrium cannot complete the task of linking subjective accounting goals and objective accounting practices. The equilibrium trend towards the evolution of the system: first, the focus of the study is shifted from the "accounting order" under the equilibrium view to the "causal mechanism" under the evolution view. Through the ultimate cause of the analysis of the system, it is traced back to the analysis system how to restrict the individual behavior and realize the logical integrity of the chain of causal accumulation. Secondly, reconstructing the accounting system. The concept of conservatism is to add an objective "essential" starting point in the theoretical logical sequence of the current "objective - Criterion - practice", which makes the subjective "goal" more objective and not free from the objective needs. Third, this paper points out that the development of accounting must adapt to the social needs and therefore adaptative. Social needs are the development direction of accounting conservatism.

【学位授予单位】：南京大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：F233

【参考文献】