Accounting can be defined in different ways, but despite the possible nuances of its potential definitions, it has been established that accounting is a science that sets a system of measurement that could, ideally, be built in several ways (Alexander & Nobes, 1994; Frank, 1979; Schipper & Trombetta, 2010). Examining accounting from a normative point of view, scholars have discussed several important issues, for example how to define the building blocks of a proper measurement system for recording organizational facts by using different sets of evaluation metrics (Mattessich, 1995). In this vein, Mattessich (2002) distinguished between normative and conditional normative accounting approaches, considering the latter able to synthetize the opposing views of the more orthodox normative approach and the positive one. Despite the opposition between the normative and the positive stances (Ball & Brown, 1968; Watts & Zimmerman, 1978; 1990; Kaplan & Ruland, 1991; Milne, 2002), accounting has developed over time both as a normative and as a positive science, depending on the cognitive needs that scholars aim to address. In particular, the normative foundations of accounting determine its features as a measurement system and should not be considered an old-fashioned topic given its importance in influencing all the results on which all theoretical discussions are based (Tinker et al., 1982). In this regard, referring to the normative foundation of accounting, Ahmed and Belkaoui (2004, p. ix) stated: “A single generally accepted accounting theory does not exist. Several attempts have been made to formulate such a theory … the various attempt have resulted in different frameworks for financial reporting standards”. This sentence highlights how the normative approach is not a unified block; it is rather a nuanced set of different approaches. The differentiation among possible accounting approaches comes from the fact that accounting develops “in response to perceived needs … adapting to meet changes in the demands made on it” (Alexander & Nobes, 1994, p. 4). In addition, accounting depends on the value theory adopted, so that “while value theory has traditionally provided the logics for exchange relations, accounting has provided the system for measuring and reporting reciprocity and exchange” (Tinker et al., 1982, p. 174).

AT THE INTERSECTION OF FINANCIAL AND NON-FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING IMPACT MEASUREMENTS / Pesci, Caterina; Girardi, Andrea. - (2021), pp. 153-174.

AT THE INTERSECTION OF FINANCIAL AND NON-FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING IMPACT MEASUREMENTS

Girardi Andrea
2021

Abstract

Accounting can be defined in different ways, but despite the possible nuances of its potential definitions, it has been established that accounting is a science that sets a system of measurement that could, ideally, be built in several ways (Alexander & Nobes, 1994; Frank, 1979; Schipper & Trombetta, 2010). Examining accounting from a normative point of view, scholars have discussed several important issues, for example how to define the building blocks of a proper measurement system for recording organizational facts by using different sets of evaluation metrics (Mattessich, 1995). In this vein, Mattessich (2002) distinguished between normative and conditional normative accounting approaches, considering the latter able to synthetize the opposing views of the more orthodox normative approach and the positive one. Despite the opposition between the normative and the positive stances (Ball & Brown, 1968; Watts & Zimmerman, 1978; 1990; Kaplan & Ruland, 1991; Milne, 2002), accounting has developed over time both as a normative and as a positive science, depending on the cognitive needs that scholars aim to address. In particular, the normative foundations of accounting determine its features as a measurement system and should not be considered an old-fashioned topic given its importance in influencing all the results on which all theoretical discussions are based (Tinker et al., 1982). In this regard, referring to the normative foundation of accounting, Ahmed and Belkaoui (2004, p. ix) stated: “A single generally accepted accounting theory does not exist. Several attempts have been made to formulate such a theory … the various attempt have resulted in different frameworks for financial reporting standards”. This sentence highlights how the normative approach is not a unified block; it is rather a nuanced set of different approaches. The differentiation among possible accounting approaches comes from the fact that accounting develops “in response to perceived needs … adapting to meet changes in the demands made on it” (Alexander & Nobes, 1994, p. 4). In addition, accounting depends on the value theory adopted, so that “while value theory has traditionally provided the logics for exchange relations, accounting has provided the system for measuring and reporting reciprocity and exchange” (Tinker et al., 1982, p. 174).
2021
A Research Agenda for Social Finance
9781789907957
Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.
AT THE INTERSECTION OF FINANCIAL AND NON-FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING IMPACT MEASUREMENTS / Pesci, Caterina; Girardi, Andrea. - (2021), pp. 153-174.
Pesci, Caterina; Girardi, Andrea
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
Pubblicazioni consigliate

Licenza Creative Commons
I metadati presenti in IRIS UNIMORE sono rilasciati con licenza Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal, mentre i file delle pubblicazioni sono rilasciati con licenza Attribuzione 4.0 Internazionale (CC BY 4.0), salvo diversa indicazione.
In caso di violazione di copyright, contattare Supporto Iris

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11380/1243446
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 1
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact