Sustainable transformation of accounting in agriculture
Purpose. The purpose of the article is to model the paradigm of accounting and reporting development in the context of the sustainable agricultural enterprise.
Methodology / approach. In the process of working on the article, general scientific methods and methodological techniques were used, in particular, monographic and system analysis (formation of accounting information to take into account sustainable development); methods of comparative analysis (when studying the transition from a traditional accounting system to sustainable accounting); grouping (for grouping accounting types by user groups and information); structural-and-logical compilation (when formulating the conceptual foundations of information to take into account sustainable development); modeling (when building a model of the concept of sustainable accounting and a map of internal and external stakeholders of the enterprise in terms of the level of influence, interest and direction of the formation and use of reporting information); process approach (when developing a paradigm for the development of enterprise reporting in the field of sustainable development); abstract-logical (theoretical generalization and formation of conclusions); graphical method (with a visual display of economic phenomena and processes in time and space); system-functional (to generalize the theoretical and methodological aspects of sustainable development accounting). These methods were the methodological basis of the study.
Results. To determine the category of sustainability accounting and the concept of its reporting, the types of entrepreneurial capital were studied, and the characteristics of information that arises as a result of the implementation of economic, social, and environmental activities. In addition, the main users of information, their goals, and their needs were identified. As a result, management and financial accounting for sustainable development were highlighted. The functioning of the institution of sustainable development reporting of agricultural enterprises is based on its "paradigm" as a set of generalized ideas, hypotheses, and methodological approaches shared by the scientific community, acceptable to other institutions, and formalized in the form of scientific theories. In the case when, within the framework of existing theoretical postulates, a scientific institute cannot effectively solve the issues, there is a need to change its paradigm. The proposed paradigm of accounting and reporting will not only orient the development of accounting to the prospects for the transition of mankind to a harmonious economy but also facilitate the acceleration of this transition through the introduction of progressive accounting systems.
Originality / scientific novelty. Due to all findings and conducted research in modeling a new system of accounting and reporting for agricultural enterprises we could generate the definition of “sustainability accounting”, which, on the one hand, the segmental, and on the other – the organic component of the enterprise accounting system and the institution of accounting in socio-economic relations, which is organized at the request of the policy of sustainable development, has a corresponding theoretical, methodological and organizational methodological support and is identified in accounting policy, operational, statistical and financial reporting, which provides an organizational and methodological focus on the construction of such accounting by enterprises.
Practical value / implications. The main provisions of the article are brought to the level of methodological generalizations and applied tools, the use of which allows adopting a new holistic concept for the formation of accounting and analytical support for the sustainable development of the institutional units of the agrarian sector. The recommendations outlined in the article are fully consistent with modern trends in the development of socio-ecological and economic relations in society, therefore, they can be used in the formation of modern institutional accounting methodology in the context of sustainable development.
Zamula, I. (2016). Profitability analysis for eco-friendly products within marketing research. Actual problems of the economy, 8(179), 317–322. Available at: https://eco-science.net/downloads.
Kireitseva, А., & Zamula, І. (2013). Environmental liabilities arising from the transactions with atmospheric air as an accounting object. Economics & Sociology, 6(2), 190–200. Available at: https://www.economics-sociology.eu/files/20_Zamula_Kireitseva%20_3_3.pdf.
Zhuk, V., Kantsurov, O., Sadovska, I., Melnyk, K., Safarova, A., Starenka, O., Nahirska, K., Nuzhna, O., & Tluchkevych, N. (2021). Calculation of the efficiency of involving the institute of audit in sustainable development of rural areas in Ukraine. AD ALTA: Journal of Interdisciplinary Research, 11(2), XXI, 128–135.
Sokil, О. (2018). Taxonomy of agricultural enterprises’ sustainable development reporting. Agricultural and Resource Economics, 4(1), 120–135. https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.270300.
Bulavinova, N., Burdenko, I., Lehenchuk, S., Tsaruk, I., & Ostapchuk, T. (2021). Trends in research of responsible investment in the context of sustainable development: bibliometric analysis. Agricultural and Resource Economics, 7(3), 179–199. https://doi.org/10.51599/are.2021.07.03.11.
Lehenchuk, S., Mostenska, T., Tarasiuk, H., Polishchuk, I., & Gorodysky, M. (2021). Financial statement fraud detection of ukrainian corporations on the basis of beneish model. In B. Alareeni, A. Hamdan, I. Elgedawy (Eds.), The importance of new technologies and entrepreneurship in business development: in the context of economic diversity in developing countries. ICBT 2020. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, 194. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-69221-6_100.
Bennett, M., & James, P. (1998). The Green Bottom Line in Bennett. In M. Bennett, P. James (Eds), The Green Bottom Line. Environmental Accounting for Management. Current Practice and Future Trends (pp. 30–60). Sheffield, Greenleaf Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351283328.
Burritt, R., Hahn, T., & Schaltegger, S. (2002). Towards a comprehensive framework for environmental management accounting. Links between business actors and environmental management accounting tools. Australian Accounting Review, 12(27), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1835-2561.2002.tb00202.x.
Schaltegger, S., Bennett, M., & Burritt, R. (Eds.) (2006). Sustainability Accounting and Reporting. Springer Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-4974-3.
Schaltegger, S., & Burritt, R. L. (2005). Corporate Sustainability. In H. Folmer, Т. Tietenberg (Eds). The International Yearbook of Environmental and Resource Economics 2005/2006 (pp. 185–222). A Survey of Current Issues Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishing. Available at: https://www.e-elgar.com/shop/gbp/the-international-yearbook-of-environmental-and-resource-economics-2005-2006-9781845422066.html.
Schaltegger, S., & Burritt, R. (2000). Contemporary Environmental Accounting. Issues, Concepts and Practice. London, Greenleaf. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351282529.
Sokil, O., Zhuk, V., Holub, N., & Levchenko, O. (2019). Accounting and analytical methods for identifying risks of agricultural enterprises’ sustainable development. In V. Nadykto (Ed.), Modern Development Paths of Agricultural Production: Trends and Innovations (pp. 561–569). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14918-5_55.
Zhuk, V., Vasylishyn, S., Utenkova, K., Kovalova, O., Yarova, V., Skolotiy, I., & Kiryushina, L. (2021). The accounting improvement of ecological activity and agroecosystems conservation. Ukrainian Journal of Ecology, 11(1), 209–217. https://doi.org/10.15421/2021_33.
Pasko, O., Balla, I., Levytska, I., & Semenyshena, N. (2021). Accountability on sustainability in Central and Eastern Europe: an empirical assessment of sustainability-related assurance. Comparative Economic Research. Central and Eastern Europe, 24(3), 27–52. https://doi.org/10.18778/1508-2008.24.20.
Pasko, O., Chen, F., Oriekhova, A., Brychko, A., & Shalyhina, I. (2021). Mapping the literature on sustainability reporting: a bibliometric analysis grounded in Scopus and Web of Science Core Collection. European Journal of Sustainable Development, 10(1), 303–322. https://doi.org/10.14207/ejsd.2021.v10n1p303.
Pasko, O., Chen, F., Tkal, Y., Hordiyenko, M., Nakisko, O., & Horkovenko, I. (2021). Do converged to ifrs national standards and corporate governance attributes affect accounting conservatism? Evidence from China. Scientific Papers of the University of Pardubice, Series D: Faculty of Economics and Administration, 29(2), 1272. https://doi.org/10.46585/sp29021272.
Zamula, I., Prodanchuk, M., Kovalchuk, T., Kolesnikova, O., & Mуhalkiv, A. (2020). Indicators of ecological condition of natural resources in integrated reporting of the enterprise. Naukovyi Visnyk Natsionalnoho Hirnychoho Universytetu, 6, 180–186. https://doi.org/10.33271/nvngu/2020-6/180.
Bahar, A., Yusnaini, Y., & Wahyudi, T. (2021). The effect of corporate social responsibility disclosure on financial performance (empirical study on manufacturing companies cement sector in Indonesia). Oblik i finansi, 2(92), 19–24. https://doi.org/10.33146/2307-9878-2021-2(92)-19-24.
Ballou, B., Heitger, D., & Landes, C. (2006). The future of corporate sustainability reporting: а rapidly growing assurance opportunity. Journal of Accountancy, 12, 1–9. Available at: https://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+future+of+corporate+sustainability+reporting%3A+a+rapidly+growing...-a0155871492.
Sokil, O., Zvezdov, D., Zhuk, V., Kucherkova, S., & Sakhno, L. (2020). Social and environmental costs: the impact of accounting and analytical support on enterprises’ sustainable development in Germany and Ukraine. Economic Annals-XXI, 181(1–2), 124–136. https://doi.org/10.21003/ea.V181-11.
Makarenko, I., Sukhonos, V., Zhuravlyova, I. V., Legenchuk, S., & Szołno, O. (2020). Sustainability reporting assessment for quality and compliance: the case of Ukrainian banks’ management reports. Banks and Bank Systems, 15(2), 117–129. https://doi.org/10.21511/bbs.15(2).2020.11.
Rahman, K. M., & Bremer, M. (2016). Effective corporate governance and financial reporting in Japan. Asian Academy of Management Journal of Accounting and Finance, 12(1), 93–122. https://doi.org/10.21315/aamjaf2016.12.S1.5.
Azam, S. (2014). Perceived environmental factors and the intention to adopt a standard business reporting facility: a survey of Australian corporate CFOs. Asian Academy of Management Journal of Accounting and Finance (AAMJAF), 10(2), 147–173. Available at: http://web.usm.my/journal/aamjaf/vol%2010-2-2014/AAMJAF%2010-2-7%20%28147-173%29.pdf.
Hyk, V. (2021), The enterprise’s integrated reporting: bibliometric analysis. Oblik i fìnansi, 3(93), 5–10. https://doi.org/10.33146/2307-9878-2021-3(93)-5-10.
Adeneye, Y. B., & Chu, E. Y. (2020). Managerial aversion and capital structure: evidence from Southeast Asia. Asian Academy of Management Journal of Accounting and Finance, 16(1), 155–183. https://doi.org/10.21315/aamjaf2020.16.1.8.
Vardon, M., Keith, H., Burnett, P., & Lindenmayer, D. (2021). From natural capital accounting to natural capital banking. Nature Sustainability, 4, 832–834. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-021-00747-x.
Watson, R., & Mathew, S. (2021). Natural Capital. In Capital, systems, and objects. Singapore, Springer Nature Pte Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-6625-1_11.
Baumol, W., Litan, R., & Schramm, C. (2007). Sustaining Entrepreneurial Capitalism. Capitalism and Society, 2(2). https://doi.org/10.2202/1932-0213.1026.
Renaldo, A., Purwohedi, U., & Ahmad, G. (2021). Determinants of the risk-based capital of insurance companies in Indonesia. Oblik i finansi, 3(93), 72–77. https://doi.org/10.33146/2307-9878-2021-3(93)-72-77.
Adler, P. S., & Kwon, S. (2002). Social capital: prospects for a new concept. Academy of Management Review, 27(1), 17–40. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2002.5922314.
Qin, N., & Kong, D. (2021). Human capital and entrepreneurship. Journal of Human Capital, 15(4), 513–553. https://doi.org/10.1086/716344.
Ogilvy, S., & Costanza, R. (2015). Accounting for Ecological Capital. https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780199830060-0106.
Gray, R. (2019). Towards an ecological accounting: tensions and possibilities in social and environmental accounting. In Intrinsic Capability (pp. 53–69). https://doi.org/10.1142/9789813225589_0005.
Pearce, D. (1997). Ecological Accountancy. SCIENCE, 277(5333), 1783a–1783. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.277.5333.1783a.
Xu, L., & Feng, X., (2018). On the Model Setting of an Ecological Accountable Government. Proceedings of the 10th International RAIS Conference on Social Sciences and Humanities, 211, Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3266906.
Laverty, M., & Gregory, M. (2007). Evaluating classroom dialogue. Reconciling internal and external accountability. Theory and Research in Education, 5(3), 281–308. https://doi.org/10.1177/14778785070050030501.
Schaier, S. (2008). Clarification approaches for a convergence of internal and external accounting. BFuP – Betriebswirtschaftliche Forschung und Praxis, 60(2), 122–136. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/291630072_Clarification_approaches_for_a_convergence_of_internal_and_external_accounting.
Wright, R., & Sylla, R. (2020). Corporation Accounting. The History of Corporate Finance. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003074229-16.
Zvezdov, D., & Schaltegger, S. (2013). Sustainability Accounting. In S. O. Idowu, N. Capaldi, L. Zu, A. D. Gupta (Eds), Encyclopedia of Corporate Social Responsibility. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28036-8_743.
Reid, L. C., Carcello, J. V., Li, C., Neal, T. L., & Francis, J. R. (2019). Impact of auditor report changes on financial reporting quality and audit costs: evidence from the United Kingdom. Contemporary Accounting Research, 36(3), 1501–1539. https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12486.
Humphrey, C., Jeppesen, K. K., Loft, A., & Turley, S. (2006). The international federation of accountants: private global governance in the public interest? In G. F. Schuppert (Ed.), Global governance and the role of the non-state actor (pp. 245–273). Baden-Baden, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft.
da Costa Tavares, M. C., & do Carmo Azevedo, G. M. (2021). Society 5.0 as a contribution to the sustainable development report. In J. V. de Carvalho, Á. Rocha, P. Liberato, A. Peña (Eds), Advances in Tourism, Technology and Systems. ICOTTS 2020. Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies, vol. 208. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-4256-9_5.
Lee, S., & Isa, M. (2020). Environmental, social and governance (ESG) practices and performance in Shariah firms: agency or stakeholder theory? Asian Academy of Management Journal of Accounting and Finance, 16(1), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.21315/aamjaf2020.16.1.1.
Ra, Y. (2021). Does corporate ownership enforce sustainable development? An empirical study on Korean companies. Asian Academy of Management Journal of Accounting and Finance, 17(2), 217–245. https://doi.org/10.21315/aamjaf2021.17.2.9.
Zhuk, V., Bezdushna, Yu., & Tyvonchuk, S. (2019). Improvement of IFRS application policy in relation to land assets of agricultural enterprises. Independent Journal of Management & Production. Special Edition PDATU-2019, 10(7), 702–724. https://doi.org/10.14807/ijmp.v10i7.889.
Franke, M. (2020). Network management processes. Managing Airline Networks. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429318795-5.
Abeywardana, E., Azam, S., & Low, K. (2021). Theoretical review on integrated reporting. International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research, 10(05), 99–111. Available at: http://www.ijstr.org/final-print/may2021/Theoretical-Review-On-Integrated-Reporting.pdf.
Koryagin, M. V. & Kutsyk, P. O. (2016). Problemy ta perspektyvy rozvytku bukhhalterskoi zvitnosti [Problems and prospects of development of accounting reporting]. Kyiv, Interservice.
Adams, S., & Simnett, R. (2011). Integrated reporting: an opportunity for Australia’s not‐for‐profit sector. Australian Accounting Review, 21, 292–301. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1835-2561.2011.00143.x.
Donaldson, L., & Davis, J. (1994). Boards and company performance – research challenges the conventional wisdom. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 2(3), 151–160. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8683.1994.tb00071.x.
Haack, P., & Rasche, A. (2021). The legitimacy of sustainability standards: a paradox perspective. Organization Theory, 2(4), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/26317877211049493.
Pattit, K. (2015). Triple Bottom Line. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118785317.weom020216.
Zyznarska-Dworczak, B. (2017). Determinants for the development of non-financial reporting and its external verification in the light of accounting theory and practice. Studia Oeconomica Posnaniensia, 5(6), 136–149. https://doi.org/10.18559/SOEP.2017.6.8.
Zyznarska-Dworczak, B. (2018). Accounting theories towards non-financial reporting. Studia Ekonomiczne, 356, 157–169. Available at: http://cejsh.icm.edu.pl/cejsh/element/bwmeta1.element.cejsh-76688044-fd64-494f-8c67-10e2e9c71b4c.
Dumitru, M., & Raluca, G. (2017). The Legitimacy of the International Integrated Reporting Council. Journal of Accounting and Management Information Systems, 16, 30–58. https://doi.org/10.24818/jamis.2017.01002.
Maama, H., Appiah, K., & Doorasamy, M. (2021). Materiality of environmental and social reporting: insights from minority stakeholders. Social and Environmental Accountability Journal, 1(24), https://doi.org/10.1080/0969160X.2021.2006074.