【作者】 李晖；

【导师】 刘鸿渭；

【作者基本信息】 山东大学 ， 会计学， 2007， 硕士

【摘要】 刘峰在《会计准则变迁》中提到，“中国的会计制度变迁，有待研究和解释的问题非常多”。由于我国正处在经济体制转型的过渡时期，我国的会计准则体系建设仍处在不断完善的变迁过程中，为提高我国会计准则的质量，使之更好地适应并促进经济的发展，加强对会计准则的理论研究是非常必要的。本文尝试在借鉴新制度经济学相关理论和博弈理论的基础上，结合会计准则的变迁轨迹，从新制度经济学和博弈论的角度对我国会计准则变迁的若干问题进行分析，并对我国会计准则未来的发展趋势和建设进行展望。新制度学派认为，制度是一种行为规则，它涉及社会、政治及经济行为(舒尔茨，1968)。按照这种界定，会计准则——约束企业会计信息生成过程的规范——就是一种经济制度。从博弈论的角度看，制度是博弈的结果，制度的演进过程正是现实中的所有利益相关者不断分割利益的博弈过程。由于会计准则是一种具有经济后果的制度，所以它的制定过程必然为各利益集团所关注和参与，导致会计准则不可避免地成为一种政治结果——各方利益斗争与妥协的结果。因此，可以从博弈论的角度来研究会计准则的若干问题。本文将会计准则纳入制度的研究范畴，回顾了会计准则产生的产权动因及变迁历程，尝试利用新制度经济学的相关理论和博弈论的研究方法，对会计准则的变迁进行系统研究。从新制度经济学的角度看，会计准则是降低交易费用的安排，其变迁的本质是降低交易费用的要求，会计准则国际化变迁属于需求诱致性制度变迁；从变迁主体、变迁方式、变迁动机及变迁方向等方面对我国会计准则的变迁进行了新制度经济学的研究分析。从博弈论的角度看，会计准则的经济后果使得会计准则的制定成为动态的不完全信息博弈的过程，通过对会计准则制定过程的博弈参与者及其行为特征的分析，得出会计准则的变迁过程是“纳什均衡”点不断地由低层次向高境界逼近，最终达到帕累托最优状态的过程。最后，结合对我国会计准则变迁的新制度经济学和博弈论的分析研究，对我国会计准则未来的建设发展提出相关建议。迄今为止关于会计准则的讨论很多，但最常见的是对准则制订过程或具体准则的某一方面的论述。本文力图尝试运用新制度经济学和博弈论的相关理论方法，分析会计准则变迁的相关问题，以期从新的视角对我国会计准则体系未来的建设提出建议。更多还原

【Abstract】 In the Accounting standards Change, Liu Feng has mentioned "there remains a lot of questions to study and explain in China’s accountant institution change". Therefore, in this dissertation, some questions on China’s accounting standards change will be discussed on the basis of neo-institutional economics and Game Theory together with the transition track of accounting standards. At the same time, a prospect will be made as well to see the trend of accounting standards development in China in the future.According to the Neo-institutional school, institution is a kind of behavioral regulation, which includes social, political and economic behaviors. (Schultz, 1968). Consequently, accounting standards—rules regulating the process of enterprise accountant information’s formation - is an economical institutionIn the respect of Game Theory, institution could be understood as a social contract, which is formed gradually after the "repeated gaming" and help to understand each other’s behaviors with comparative certainty in communication. Institution is the result of gaming while the process of institutional evolution is the very process of gaming in which the division of interests is continuously going on among the interests related. As the accounting standards is a institution with economical results, interests groups are inevitably pay close attention to as well as participate in its establishment process, which unavoidably leads to a political result—a result of struggle and compromise among different interests parties. Therefore, Game Theory could be used to study certain questions of accounting standards.In this dissertation, accounting standards will be considered in the respect of institutional study and the property-rights motive of its birth and its history of transition will be also reviewed. With the related theories of Neo-institutional economics and Game Theory, a systematical study will be made on the accounting standards change, so as to point out that accounting standards is the arrangement of reducing the exchange fee, the nature of transition is the requirement of reducing the exchange fee and the international change of accounting standards is a requirements-induced institutional change. And finally, the accounting standards change in China will be examined in the respects of subjects, means, motives and goals of change separately.The economical result of accounting standards will cause the politicalization of its establishment, so as to make it a process of dynamic and incomplete information gaming. Through the analysis on the game participant as well as its behavioral characteristics in the process of accounting standards establishment, we will get the conclusion that the accounting standards change is a process of social game and the "Nash Equilibrium Point" continuously approaching the high level and finally reach the "Pareto optimal state".In the end, based on the analysis on China’s accounting standards change in the respect of Neo-institutional economics and Game Theory, some advices will be given to the development of our country’s accounting standards in the future.更多还原