Moderating effect of IFRS adoption on accounting conservatism and cost of equity: evidence from Canadian ESG data
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the moderating effect of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) adoption on the relationship between accounting conservatism and the cost of equity in Canadian environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) firms. Design/methodology/approach Panel data was collected using the Thomson Reuters ASSET4 database on a sample of 284 Canadian ESG companies over the period 2007–2019. Findings The results obtained show a negative relationship between conditional conservatism and the cost of equity. The authors also find a negative relationship between unconditional conservatism and the cost of equity. In addition, IFRS adoption moderates the relationship between accounting conservatism and the cost of equity in Canadian ESG firms. Research limitations/implications Future studies may extend the coverage of the study by including other countries and other sectors. Practical implications The results imply that prudent accounting signals information to investors about the quality of a company’s current and future earnings. The rates of return required by investors may be higher for conservative reporting companies that are more susceptible to opportunistic management discretion. Originality/value Although the previous literature has studied the direct correlation between accounting conservatism and the cost of equity, the present work focuses on examining the direct association between accounting conservatism and the cost of equity through the moderator effect of IFRS, which has not been widely used in studies of accounting conservatism until now.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.077 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it