Ekonomik Kalkınma Teorisi ile Muhasebedeki Paradigma Kayması Arasındaki Etkileşim: Saptanan Ayak İzleri ve Çıkarımlar

Kurumların önceliği ve insan sermayesinin önceliği hipotezleri, ekonomik kalkınmanın kurumsal kalite ve insan sermayesi birikimi artışına dayalı olarak oluştuğunu iddia eden günümüz ekonomik kalkınma görüşünün temellerini oluşturmaktadır. Bu bağlamda siyasi haklar, insan hakları, demokrasi düzeyi, hukukun üstünlüğü, politik risk (denge ve kontrol), eğitim, sağlık, girişimcilik iklimi, işçi başına sermaye ve AR&GE harcaması ilgili literatür çerçevesinde ekonomik kalkınmanın bileşenleri olarak ifade edilebilir. Nitekim günümüzde paydaşlar, karar alma süreçlerinde kullanmak üzere bu bileşenlere ilişkin bilgi talep etmeye başlamışlardır. Bu durum, muhasebenin odağını finansal bilgiden bilgiye dönüştüren bir paradigma kaymasına neden olmuştur. Diğer bir deyişle muhasebe hem finansal hem de finansal olmayan bilgileri içermeye başlamıştır. Bu çalışmada ekonomik kalkınma teorisindeki gelişmelerin muhasebedeki paradigma kayması üzerindeki etkisi kanıtlanmaya çalışılmıştır. Bu bağlamda ekonomik kalkınma bileşenlerinin güncel raporlama yaklaşımlarındaki ayak izleri takip edilmiştir. Sürdürülebilirlik raporlaması ve entegre raporlama muhasebedeki paradigma kaymasına işaret eden temel yapı taşlarıdır. Ekonomik kalkınma bileşenleri GRI 102, 200’lü ve 400’lü serilere ait standartlar ve uluslararası entegre raporlama çerçevesinde yer alan sermaye unsurları ile eşleştirilmiştir. 36 adet GRI Standardı içerisinde yer alan 12 Standart ve 6 tür sermaye unsurunda 4’ü doğrudan ekonomik kalkınma bileşenleriyle eşleşmektedir. Dolayısıyla ekonomik kalkınma bileşenlerinin tümü, entegre raporlama metodolojisi çerçevesinde muhasebenin ve kurumsal raporlamanın konusu içerisine girmektedir. Kronolojik olarak, iktisadi yaklaşımlar ve kabuller hızlıca muhasebeyi etkilemekte ve paradigma kaymasına neden olmaktadır.

Interaction between Economic Development Theory and Paradigm Shift in Accounting: Detected Footprints and Inferences

Primacy of institutions and primacy of human capital are the fundamental hypotheses that shape the recent view on economic development which asserts that increase in institutional quality and human capital accumulation causes economic development. In this sense, it is fair to say that political rights, civil liberties, democracy, rule of law, political risk (check and balance), education, health, entrepreneurial climate, capital per worker and R&D expenditure are the components of economic development according to related literature. Thus today, stakeholders have begun to demand information on these components to use them in their decision making processes. This has led to a paradigm shift in accounting which changes the focus from financial information to information. In other words, accounting has begun to include both financial and non-financial information. In this study, the effects of the improvements in economic development theory on the paradigm shift in accounting is being tried to be proven. In this context, footprints of economic development components in current reporting approaches were followed. Sustainability reporting and integrated reporting are the building blocks that point to the paradigm shift in accounting. Economic development components are paired with GRI 102, standards of 200 and 400 series and capitals mentioned in international integrated reporting framework. 12 standards in 36 GRI standards and 4 in 6 types of capitals are directly matched with economic development components. Therefore, all of the components of economic development fall within the context of accounting and corporate reporting within the framework of integrated reporting methodology. Chronologically, economic approaches and assumptions quickly affect accounting and cause paradigm shift.

___

  • Acemoglu, D., & Dell, M. (2010). Productivity differences between and within countries. American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, 2(1), 169-88.
  • Acemoglu, D., & Johnson, S. (2005). Unbundling institutions. Journal of political Economy, 113(5), 949-995.
  • Acemoglu, D., Aghion, P., & Zilibotti, F. (2006). Distance to frontier, selection, and economic growth. Journal of the European Economic association, 4(1), 37-74.
  • Acemoglu, D., Johnson, S., & Robinson, J. (2005). The rise of Europe: Atlantic trade, institutional change, and economic growth. American economic review, 95(3), 546-579.
  • Acemoglu, D., Johnson, S., & Robinson, J. A. (2001). The colonial origins of comparative development: An empirical investigation. American economic review, 91(5), 1369-1401.
  • Acemoglu, D., Johnson, S., & Robinson, J. A. (2002). Reversal of fortune: Geography and institutions in the making of the modern world income distribution. The Quarterly journal of economics, 117(4), 1231-1294.
  • Alesina, A., & Perotti, R. (1996). Income distribution, political instability, and investment. European economic review, 40(6), 1203-1228.
  • Ang, J. B. (2013). Institutions and the long-run impact of early development. Journal of Development Economics, 105, 1-18.
  • Azariadis, C., & Drazen, A. (1990). Threshold Externalities in Economic Development. Quarterly Journal of Economics. 105(2), 501–526.
  • Barro, R. J. (1999). Determinants of democracy. Journal of Political economy, 107(S6), S158-S183.
  • Barro, R.J., & Lee, J. W. (1993). International comparisons of educational attainment. Journal of monetary economics, 32(3), 363-394.
  • Barro, R.J. (1991). Economic Growth in a Cross Section of Countries. Quarterly Journal of Economics. 106(2), 407–443.
  • Barro, R.J. (2000). Rule of Law, Democracy, and Economic Performance. 2000 Index of Economic Freedom, Washington, DC: Heritage Foundation, 31–49.
  • Barro, R.J. (2001). Human Capital and Growth. American Economic Review. 91(2), 12–17.
  • Becker, G.S. (1964). Human Capital. Columbia University Press, New York.
  • Benhabib, J., & Spiegel, M. M. (1994). The role of human capital in economic development evidence from aggregate cross-country data. Journal of Monetary economics, 34(2), 143-173.
  • Bloom, N., & Van Reenen, J. (2007). Measuring and explaining management practices across firms and countries. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 122(4), 1351- 1408.
  • Bloom, N., & Van Reenen, J. (2010). Why do management practices differ across firms and countries? The Journal of Economic Perspectives. 24(1), 203-224.
  • Breton, T.R. (2013). Were Mankiw, Romer, and Weil right? A reconciliation of the micro and macro effects of schooling on income. Macroeconomic Dynamics, 17(5), 1023-1054.
  • Brunetti, A. (1997). Political variables in cross-country growth analysis. Journal of Economic Surveys, 11(2), 163-190.
  • Butler, K. C., & Joaquin, D. C. (1998). A note on political risk and the required return on foreign direct investment. Journal of International Business Studies, 29(3), 599-607.
  • Chen, B., & Feng, Y. (1996). Some political determinants of economic growth: Theory and empirical implications. European Journal of Political Economy, 12(4), 609- 627.
  • Cinnirella, F., & Streb, J. (2017). The role of human capital and innovation in economic development: evidence from post-Malthusian Prussia. Journal of economic growth, 22(2), 193-227.
  • Cohen, D., & Soto, M. (2007). Growth and human capital: good data, good results. Journal of economic growth, 12(1), 51-76.
  • De Long, J. B., & Shleifer, A. (1993). Princes and merchants: European city growth before the industrial revolution. The Journal of Law and Economics, 36(2), 671- 702.
  • Djankov, S., Glaeser, E., La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., & Shleifer, A. (2003). The new comparative economics. Journal of comparative economics, 31(4), 595-619.
  • Dollar, D., & Kraay, A. (2003). Institutions, trade, and growth. Journal of monetary economics, 50(1), 133-162.
  • Doménech, R. (2006). Human capital in growth regressions: how much difference does data quality make? Journal of the European Economic Association. 4(1), 1-36.
  • Douglass, C. (1990). North, Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge University Press, New York.
  • Easterly, W., & Levine, R. (2003). Tropics, germs, and crops: how endowments influence economic development. Journal of monetary economics, 50(1), 3-39.
  • Faria, H. J., Montesinos-Yufa, H. M., Morales, D. R., & Navarro, C. E. (2016). Unbundling the roles of human capital and institutions in economic development. European Journal of Political Economy, 45, 108-128.
  • Feltham, G. A., & Ohlson, J. A. (1995). Valuation and clean surplus accounting for operating and financial activities. Contemporary accounting research, 11(2), 689- 731.
  • Gennaioli, N., La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., & Shleifer, A. (2012). Human capital and regional development. The Quarterly journal of economics, 128(1), 105-164.
  • Glaeser, E. L., La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., & Shleifer, A. (2004). Do institutions cause growth?. Journal of economic Growth, 9(3), 271-303.
  • Gokten, S., & Gokten, P. O. (2017). Value Creation Reporting: Answering the Question „Value to Whom” according to the International Integrated Reporting Framework. Zeszyty Teoretyczne Rachunkowości, (91 (147)), 145-169.
  • Gökten, P.O. (2017). Su Muhasebesi ve GRI 303 Su 2016 Sürdürülebilirlik Raporlaması Standardı. Muhasebe Bilim Dünyası Dergisi, 19(4), 957-980.
  • Gökten, P.O., & Marşap, B. (2017). Paradigm Shift in Corporate Reporting. In Accounting and Corporate Reporting-Today and Tomorrow. Crotia, InTech.
  • GRI 101. (2016). GRI Standards, GRI 101: Foundation 2016. Global Sustainability Standards Board (GSSB).
  • Griffith, R., Redding, S., & Reenen, J. V. (2004). Mapping the two faces of R&D: Productivity growth in a panel of OECD industries. Review of economics and statistics, 86(4), 883-895.
  • Gundlach, E. (1995). The role of human capital in economic growth: new results and alternative interpretations. Review of World Economics. 131(2), 383-402.
  • Hall, R. E., & Jones, C. I. (1999). Why do some countries produce so much more output per worker than others?. The quarterly journal of economics, 114(1), 83-116.
  • Hanushek, E. A., & Woessmann, L. (2008). The role of cognitive skills in economic development. Journal of economic literature, 46(3), 607-68.
  • Hanushek, E. A., & Woessmann, L. (2012a). Schooling, educational achievement, and the Latin American growth puzzle. Journal of Development Economics, 99(2), 497-512.
  • Hanushek, E. A., & Woessmann, L. (2012b). Do better schools lead to more growth? Cognitive skills, economic outcomes, and causation. Journal of economic growth, 17(4), 267-321.
  • Henisz, W.J. (2000a). The institutional environment for economic growth. Economics and Politics. 12(1), 1-31.
  • Henisz, W.J. (2000b). The institutional environment for multinational investment. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization. 16(2), 334-364
  • Henisz, W.J. (2002). The institutional environment for infrastructure investment. Industrial and Corporate Change. 11(2), 355-389.
  • IIRF. (2013). International Integrated Reporting Framework. The International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC). http://integratedreporting.org/wpcontent/ uploads/2015/03/13-12-08-THE-INTERNATIONAL-IR-FRAMEWORK- 2-1.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 07.08.2018).
  • Islam, N. (1995). Growth Empirics: A Panel Data Approach. Quarterly Journal of Economics. 110(4), 1127–1170.
  • Iyigun, M. F., & Owen, A. L. (1998). Risk, entrepreneurship, and human-capital accumulation. The American Economic Review, 88(2), 454-457.
  • Jaggers, K. & Marshall, M.G. (2000). Polity IV project. Center for International Development and Conflict Management, University of Maryland, 174.
  • Jong-A-Pin, R. (2009). On the measurement of political instability and its impact on economic growth. European Journal of Political Economy, 25(1), 15-29.
  • Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., & Mastruzzi, M. (2011). The worldwide governance indicators: methodology and analytical issues. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 3(2), 220-246.
  • Knack, S., & Keefer, P. (1995). Institutions and economic performance: cross?country tests using alternative institutional measures. Economics & Politics, 7(3), 207- 227.
  • Krueger, A.B., & Lindahl, M. (2001). Education for Growth: Why and For Whom? Journal of Economic Literature. 39(4), 1101–1136.
  • Legatum Institute. (2016). The Legatum Prosperity Index 2016 - Methodology Review. London: Legatum Institute.
  • Levine, R., & Renelt, D. (1992). A sensitivity analysis of cross-country growth regressions. The American economic review, 942-963.
  • Lipset, S. M. (1959). Some social requisites of democracy: Economic development and political legitimacy. American political science review, 53(1), 69-105.
  • Lipset, S. M. (1960). Political Man: The Social Bases of Politics. Anchor Book, New York.
  • Liu, G., & Fraumeni, B.M. (2014). Human capital measurement: country experiences and international initiatives. Harvard Paper.
  • Lucas, R.E. (1988). On the Mechanics of Economic Development. Econometric Society Monographs. 29, 61-70.
  • Mankiw, N. G., Romer, D., & Weil, D. N. (1992). A contribution to the empirics of economic growth. The quarterly journal of economics, 107(2), 407-437.
  • Mauro, P. (1995). Corruption and growth: The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110(3), 681-712.
  • Mincer, J. (1974). Schooling, Experience and Earnings, Columbia University Press, New York.
  • Murthy, N. V., & Chien, I. S. (1997). The empirics of economic growth for OECD countries: some new findings. Economics Letters, 55(3), 425-429.
  • North, D. C. (1981). Structure and change in economic history. W.W. Norton & Co, New York.
  • North, D.C., & Thomas, R. P. (1973). The rise of the western world: A new economic history. Cambridge University Press.
  • O’Neill, D. (1995). Education and Income Growth: Implications for Cross-Country Inequality. Journal of Political Economy. 103(6), 1289–1301.
  • OECD. (2001). The Well-being of Nations: The Role of Human and Social Capital, OECD Publishing, Paris.
  • Ohlson, J. A. (1991). The theory of value and earnings, and an introduction to the Ball- Brown analysis. Contemporary Accounting Research, 8(1), 1-19.
  • Ohlson, J.A. (1995). Earnings, book values, and dividends in equity valuation. Contemporary accounting research, 11(2), 661-687.
  • Porta, R L., & Shleifer, A. (2008). The unofficial economy and economic development. (No. w14520). National Bureau of Economic Research.
  • Przeworski, A. (2004). The last instance: Are institutions the primary cause of economic development?. European Journal of Sociology/Archives Européennes de Sociologie, 45(2), 165-188.
  • Rodrik, D., Subramanian, A., & Trebbi, F. (2004). Institutions rule: the primacy of institutions over geography and integration in economic development. Journal of economic growth, 9(2), 131-165.
  • Romer, P.M. (1990). Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy. 98(5, Part 2), S71–S102.
  • Shultz, T.W. (1961). Investment in human capital. American Economic Review. 51(1), 1-17.
  • Syverson, C. (2011). What determines productivity? Journal of Economic literature. 49(2), 326-365.
  • Temple, J. (1999). A Positive Effect of Human Capital on Growth. Economics Letters. 65(1), 131–134.
  • UNECE. (2009). Measuring Sustainable Development. Report of the Joint
  • UNECE/OECD/Eurostat Working Group on Statistics for Sustainable Development (WGSSD), New York and Geneva.
  • Vogel, J. (2015). The two faces of R&D and human capital: Evidence from Western European regions. Papers in Regional Science, 94(3), 525-551
İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi-Cover
  • ISSN: 1309-0712
  • Yayın Aralığı: Yılda 4 Sayı
  • Başlangıç: 2009
  • Yayıncı: Melih Topaloğlu