Recursos Minerales
En esta sección se presentan diversos estudios relacionados con los múltiples temas que se desprenden del tratamiento que las Normas Internacionales de Información Financiera (IFRS por su sigla en inglés) le otorgan a las actividades relacionadas con “Recursos Minerales”. La presentación de los estudios se estructura en dos categorías. La primera comprende trabajos realizados por Observatorio IFRS, mientras que la segunda categoría se centra en proporcionar bibliografía de interés.
|
Normas Internacionales de Contabilidad e Información Financiera e Interpretaciones que regulan esta área de información: |
||
| IFRS 6: Exploración y Evaluación de Recursos Minerales |
Referencias bibliográficas de interés:
CÓDIGO: BRM - 001
Cortese, C. y Helen, I. (2010). Investigating international accounting standard setting: The black box of IFRS 6. Research in Accounting Regulation. Volume 22, Issue 2, pp. 87–95.
Abstract
This paper examines the role of powerful entities and coalitions in shaping international accounting standards. Specifically, the focus is on the process by which the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) developed IFRS 6, Exploration for and Evaluation of Mineral Resources. In its Issues Paper, the IASB recommended that the successful efforts method be mandated for pre-production costs, eliminating the choice previously available between full cost and successful efforts methods. In spite of the endorsement of this view by a majority of the constituents who responded to the Issues Paper, the final outcome changed nothing, with choice being retained. A compelling explanation of this disparity between the visible inputs and outputs of the standard setting process is the existence of a “black box”, in which powerful extractive industries entities and coalitions covertly influenced the IASB to secure their own ends and ensure that the status quo was maintained.
Disponible en:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1052045710000214
CÓDIGO: BRM - 002
Cortese, C., Helen, I., y Kaidonis, M. (2010). Powerful players: How constituents captured the setting of IFRS 6, an accounting standard for the extractive industries. Accounting Forum. Volume 34, Issue 2, pp. 76–88.
Abstract
This paper illustrates the influence of powerful players in the setting of IFRS 6, a new International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS) for the extractive industries. A critical investigative inquiry of the international accounting standard setting process, using Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), reveals some of the key players, analyses the surrounding discourse and its implications, and assesses the outcomes. An analysis of small cross-section of comment letters submitted to the International Accounting Standards Committee (IASC) by one international accounting firm, one global mining corporation and one industry group reveal the hidden coalitions between powerful players. These coalitions indicate that the regulatory process of setting IFRS 6 has been captured by powerful extractive industries constituents so that it merely codifies existing industry practice.
Disponible en:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S015599820800077X
CÓDIGO: BRM - 003
Cortese, C., Helen, I., y Kaidonis, M. (2009). Extractive industries accounting and economic consequences: Past, present and future. Accounting Forum. Volume 33, Issue 1, pp. 27–37
Abstract
Accounting for the extractive industries has been a contested issue for decades as a result of a choice of different methods of costing available and the economic impacts of these methods on companies’ financial results. When the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) embarked on its extractive industries project in 1998, it attempted to create uniform accounting practices. An archival study of constituent responses to the IASB's Issues Paper revealed that the economic consequences argument was relied upon again to argue for retaining choice. The IASB's international accounting standard, IFRS 6, issued in 2004, once again permitted choice between methods, illustrating the effectiveness of the economic consequences argument in perpetuating past practice.
Disponible en:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S015599820800046X