essay代寫,The relevance of carbon accounting to financial

發布時間:2019-10-19 16:46
[摘 要]:The relevance of carbon accounting to financial accounting Background According to UNFCCC, The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The Kyoto Protocol was adopted..The relevance of carbon accounting to financial accounting Background According to UNFCCC, “The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The Kyoto Protocol was adopted in Kyoto, Japan, on 11 December 1997 and entered into force on 16 February 2005.” “Under Kyoto Protocol, many industrialized nations made binding commitments to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to 5.2 percent below their 1990 levels during the 2008-2012 timeframe” (Dutta & Lawson, 2008).Redefining Progress-The Nature of Economics asserted, Carbon emissions accounting has played a very important role in international activity, as it is the way by which nations comply with the Kyoto Protocol. Besides, carbon accounting also is a means to better measure an organisation’s environmental impacts as well as opportunity costs related to the depletion of natural resources and the effects of pollution (Dutta & Lawson, 2008).Having ratified the Kyoto Protocol, the EU adopted a cap-and-trade trading system by which carbon emission allowances are traded in free market (Dutta & Lawson, 2008). Carbon emission then becomes a financially material commodity which can be traded in the carbon market, so there is a stronger need to properly define, measure, account for, audit and report its value in the consistent way similar to the other physical commodities and financial instruments (Aldersgate Group, 2007).The IASB issued IFRIC 3 on ‘Emission Rights’ in December 2004, but then it was withdrawn in June 2005. The main reason for withdrawal was the application of IFRIC 3 created measurement mismatches between assets (Emission Allowance) and liabilities (Provision for Emission) (NZICA, 2005). Though the IASB and the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) have launched a joint project on carbon reporting and carbon emission accounting models, they have not published a conclusion so far (KPMG, 2008). IASB (2010) noted that, following the withdrawal of IFRIC 3 on Emission Rights, there was a risk of various accounting practices for emission trade scheme that would weaken the comparability and usefulness of financial statements. ACCA (2009) also pointed out that, a number of different methodologies and approaches to measure and account for carbon emission are used by different disclosing companies because of no specific or common carbon reporting or accounting standards, so comparability of carbon disclosure among data setters is difficult. Besides, the current carbon reporting is made on a voluntary basis without uniform standards (Dutta & Lawson, 2008). Consequently, many companies still are confused about the appropriate accounting treatment complying with both International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) and generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). Therefore, accounting for GHG remains a challenge, in which market participants are going to wait for a clear guidance from accounting standards bodies (Deloitte, 2007). Though accounting standards bodies have not provided generally accepted protocols for carbon emission or emission trading, ISO launched ISO 14064 – greenhouse gases standard in 2002 and published it in 2006 as a solution to address the above problems (ISO, 2006).ISO 14064 consists of three standards, as an integrated set of tools aimed at reducing GHG emission and guidance for quantifying, reporting, monitoring and verification of GHG 

[摘要]:碳會計財務會計背景,根據“聯合國氣候變化框架公約”的相關性,與聯合國氣候變化框架公約“”京都議定書“是一項國際協議。 “京都議定書”采納..相關的碳會計財務會計背景,根據“聯合國氣候變化框架公約”,“京都議定書”是一項國際協議,向聯合國氣候變化框架公約“。 1997年12月11日在日本京都通過了“京都議定書”,并于2005年2月16日生效。“根據”京都議定書“,許多工業化國家作出有約束力的承諾,減少溫室氣體(GHG)排放量的5.2%,低于1990年的水平在2008-2012年的時間內“(杜塔和勞森,2008)。重新界定進步經濟學的本質斷言,碳排放核算,在國際活動中發揮了非常重要的作用,因為它是通過何種方式與”京都議定書“的國家遵守。此外,碳核算,也就是更好地衡量一個組織的環境影響,以及機會成本的耗竭自然資源和污染(杜塔和勞森,2008)的影響有關的手段,經批準“京都議定書”,歐盟通過了一個在自由市場買賣碳排放限額的上限和貿易交易系統(杜塔勞森,2008)。碳排放量,然后成為一個財政材質的商品,可以在碳市場交易,所以需要正確地定義,衡量,帳戶,審計和報告其價值一致的方式類似于其他實物商品和金融工具(集團Aldersgate,2007年)。國際會計準則委員會頒布的國際財務報告詮釋委員會3“排放權”于2004年12月,但隨后在2005年6月被撤銷。撤出的主要原因是應用國際財務報告詮釋委員會第3號資產(發射津貼)及負債(排放撥備)(NZICA,2005年)創建的測量之間的不匹配。雖然國際會計準則理事會和美國財務會計準則委員會(FASB)聯合推出了碳排放報告和碳排放會計模式的項目,他們已經發表了結論到目前為止(畢馬威會計師事務所,2008年)。國際會計準則委員會(2010)指出,國際財務報告詮釋委員會3排放權退出后,有一個風險的排放權交易計劃,將削弱財務報表的可比性和實用性的各種會計實務。 ACCA(2009)也指出,一些碳排放量來衡量和考慮不同的方法和途徑,因為沒有特定的或通用的碳排放報告或會計準則,所以碳信息披露的可比性數​​據制定者之間的不同的披露公司所使用的是困難。此外,目前的碳排放報告是由無統一標準(2008)杜塔勞森,在自愿基礎上。因此,許多公司仍然感到困惑的適當會計處理符合兩個國際財務報告準則(IFRS)及一般公認會計原則(GAAP)。因此,占溫室氣體排放仍然是一個挑戰,市場參與者要等待一個明確的指導,從會計標準制定機構(德勤,2007年)。雖然沒有普遍接受的會計標準制定機構的碳排放量或排放交易協議,ISO推出了ISO 14064 - 在2002年的溫室氣體排放標準,并在2006年出版,作為一個解決方案來解決上述問題(ISO 2006)。由ISO 14064三個標準,作為一套集成的工具,旨在減少溫室氣體排放的量化和指導,報告,監測和核查溫室氣體