Possibility of New Accounting Model for Stakeholder Capitalism in East Asia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accounting is often called the language of business.So far, there is no common language in the world of accounting.Now, the IASB and the FASB of U.S are trying to integrate the different language of business and trying to create a globally acceptable conceptual framework of financial accounting.But it is not easy task.Before reaching the goal, the Boards have to choose one "equity theory" which determines the accounting structure in the deep level.Traditional equity theory is called the "proprietary theory (perspective)", which is easily applicable to small and medium size companies.In this accounting model, income and equity of stockholders are the center of the gravity.However, even to the big size companies, where the separation of ownership and managements become clear, this model is still applied in preparing their financial statements.Considering this anomaly, a new accounting model was advocated by Robert Anthony in 1983 which he called the "entity theory".The entity theory calculate the income and equity for the entity itself, by which stockholder's right is restricted and the stakeholders claim will be called attentions.Such an accounting structure is called here as the accounting model for stakeholder capitalism.However, the voices that push to apply old accounting model to contemporary big companies seem still strong.Even if the Boards might choose the accounting model for stockholders capitalism, which may be convenient to Anglo-Saxon countries such as U.S or Canada, possibilities of adopting the new accounting model for stakeholder capitalism should be explored in Asian countries such as Japan and Korea.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".