A Study of Accounting Standard Setting under Contradictory Information Demands

戴泽伟,西南财经大学会计学院讲师;徐虹玉,西南财经大学会计学院博士研究生。【中文摘要】会计准则制定的难点在于对那些无法满足帕累托最优标准的准则进行选择。无论是基于真实利润的规范研究,还是基于使用者导向的财务会计概念框架研究或者相关经验研究,在导出有效会计准则方面的作用有限。其背后的深层次原因在于:这些研究范式都是基于建构理性主义建立的。建构理性主义的关键点在于能够在整体上对制度实施成本与效益分析。然而,冲突性的财务信息需求,限制了这种功能的发挥。格雷夫开创的历史比较制度分析能够在一定程度上解决此类会计准则的选择问题。 【Abstract】The difficulty of setting accounting standards lies in the choice of accounting standards which cannot meet the Pareto optimality criteria. However, normative research based on real profits and users-oriented research based on financial and accounting conceptual frameworks, as well as empirical research, all play a limited role in deriving effective accounting standards. Because the three types of research paradigms are based on constructivist rationality, which lays emphasis on the cost and benefit analysis. However, it is difficult to implement the cost and benefit analysis of accounting standards, especially conflicting-demand standards. As such, Greif's historical and comparative institutional analysis (HCIA) may provide a solution to the above problems in financial accounting research