Einzelbesprechungen

Ohne Zusammenfassung     

User Requirements for Not-For-Profit Entity Financial Reporting: An International Comparison

This study investigates the not-for-profit (NFP) external financial reporting regulatory environments of the US, the UK, Canada and New Zealand and compares them with that of Australia. It finds a lack of clarity in the definition of a NFP entity under Australian accounting standards. The study also identifies various types of information that earlier research and the guidance in other countries suggest are useful to the users of NFP entities' financial statements. This information is not currently required under Australian accounting standards.     

An Error Component Logit Analysis of Corporate Bankruptcy and Insolvency Risk in Australia

This paper introduces a four-state failure model to depict a wider range of distress scenarios that public companies typically face in the real world. We use a multinomial error component logit model to analyse firm failure, a major advance on the modelling techniques used in previous research. The error component logit model, being an extension of the more familiar mixed logit model, relaxes several questionable statistical assumptions associated with standard models. Using a sample of Australian firms we provide an interpretative illustration of the error component logit model and contrast its behavioural performance with the standard logit model widely used in previous research.     

A resilience perspective of the SEEA

While the SEEA is an important advance in national accounting it remains deficient in a number of ways in regard to natural resources. The dynamic and interactive nature of ecosystems means that any linear, compartmentalised system of accounting will miss significant changes that influence human wellbeing. In particular, losses in resilience of critical capital stocks (through changes in underlying ecosystem variables that do not contribute directly to valued flows, and are therefore not included in the accounts) means that the accounts will not recognise that such stocks are becoming riskier, likely to collapse, and are therefore over‐valued. We present a stock‐based approach to measuring sustainable development (the Inclusive Wealth Approach of [Arrow KJ, Dasgupta P and Maler K‐G. (2003) Evaluating projects and assessing sustainable development in imperfect economies, Environmental and Resource Economics, 26:647-685]) at a regional scale, using an example from South East Australia, which includes an assessment of the resilience of critical capital stocks.     

De Nederlandsch-Indische crisismaatregelen

Dit artikel vormt het slot op de beide reeds eerder in de afleveringen 6, 7 en 8 van dezen jaargang verschenen artikelen.     

Do Foreign Greenfields Outperform Foreign Acquisitions or Vice Versa? An Institutional Perspective

abstract Prior studies of the comparative performance of greenfields and acquisitions have advanced competing arguments, with some arguing that greenfields should outperform acquisitions because acquisitions are costlier to integrate, and others that acquisitions should outperform greenfields because greenfields suffer from a liability of newness. Moreover, while the costs of integration and the liability of newness are at their greatest during a subsidiary's first years, prior studies have tested their competing arguments on samples containing older subsidiaries. We extend these prior studies by (1) developing an institutional theory‐based framework that simultaneously considers the costs of integration and the liability of newness, (2) recognizing that both types of costs vary with the level of subsidiary integration, and (3) focusing on the stage of their life during which subsidiaries predominantly incur these costs. To measure subsidiary performance, we ask managers of Dutch multinationals how their ex ante performance expectations compare to the subsidiary's ex post performance during its first two years. Analysing a sample of 191 foreign subsidiaries and controlling for entry mode self‐selection and other factors, we find that acquisitions outperform greenfields at low and intermediate levels of subsidiary integration, but that greenfields outperform acquisitions at higher integration levels.