scholarly journals Linking standard Economic Account for Forestry and ecosystem accounting: Total forest incomes and environmental assets in publicly-owned conifer farms in Andalusia-Spain

2021 ◽  
Vol 128 ◽  
pp. 102482
Author(s):  
Pablo Campos ◽  
Alejandro Álvarez ◽  
Bruno Mesa ◽  
José L. Oviedo ◽  
Alejandro Caparrós
1969 ◽  
Vol 25 (6) ◽  
pp. 104A-104D
Author(s):  
Charles E. Youngblood

2021 ◽  
Vol 99 ◽  
pp. 167-176
Author(s):  
Pascal Marichalar ◽  
Gerald Markowitz ◽  
David Rosner

On February 4, 1970, in the Fouquières-lès-Lens coal mine in northern France, sixteen miners were killed in a gas explosion (“firedamp,” grisou in French). This was an accident like many others before it, yet with a relatively high number of fatalities. The public prosecutor concluded, as usual, that there was no case against the publicly owned mine. No investigation was to be carried out. The accident had been the work of fate, of bad luck.


1967 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 347-351
Author(s):  
R. BRUCE RICKS
Keyword(s):  

2015 ◽  
Vol 36 (6) ◽  
pp. 779-807 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark E. Pickering

There has been a trend of large professional service firms (PSFs) to move from the partnership form of ownership to alternative ownership forms. As part of this trend large, publicly-quoted accounting companies have emerged in Australia, the US and the UK. Research on how publicly-owned PSFs, including accounting companies, are governed, whether aspects of the governance of partnership persist, why particular governance interpretive schemes and associated structures and systems are implemented and implications for performance is sparse. This study explores the interpretive scheme of governance in two Australian publicly-quoted accounting companies and finds one of the companies to have mimicked the major attributes of the partnership interpretive scheme while the other company moved to a corporate form of governance eliminating all vestiges of the partnership interpretive scheme. Governance was found to have significant implications for the performance of the companies with moving from a partnership interpretive scheme contributing to the ultimate failure of one of the companies. The cases suggest that failed experiments in the governance of publicly-owned PSFs, a relatively recently emerged ownership form in some professions, may contribute to conflicting prior findings on the implications of ownership form for the performance of PSFs. Two alternative approaches to the introduction of corporate style governance structures and systems were identified with the findings suggesting potential benefits of evolution rather than revolution. Based on the findings, a theoretical model of the interpretive scheme of governance of publicly-traded PSFs is developed including factors affecting the interpretive scheme implemented and the introduction of more corporate-like governance structures and systems, potential performance implications of PSFs moving away from a partnership interpretive scheme and the conditions and contingencies under which the relationship may hold. The paper also extends the application of agency theory to publicly-owned PSFs.


2005 ◽  
Vol 8 (06) ◽  
pp. 520-527 ◽  
Author(s):  
D.R. Harrell ◽  
Thomas L. Gardner

Summary A casual reading of the SPE/WPC (World Petroleum Congresses) Petroleum Reserves Definitions (1997) and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission(SEC) definitions (1978) would suggest very little, if any, difference in the quantities of proved hydrocarbon reserves estimated under those two classification systems. The differences in many circumstances for both volumetric and performance-based estimates may be small. In 1999, the SEC began to increase its review process, seeking greater understanding and compliance with its oil and gas reserves reporting requirements. The agency's definitions had been promulgated in 1978 in connection with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 and at a time when most publicly owned oil and gas companies and their reserves were located in the United States. Oil and gas prices were relatively stable, and virtually all natural gas was marketed through long-term contracts at fixed or determinable prices. Development drilling was subject to well-spacing regulations as established through field rules set by state agencies. Reservoir-evaluation technology has advanced far beyond that used in 1978;production-sharing contracts were uncommon then, and probabilistic reserves assessment was not widely recognized or appreciated in the U.S. These changes in industry practice plus many other considerations have created problems in adapting the 1978 vintage definitions to the technical and commercial realities of the 21st century. This paper presents several real-world examples of how the SEC engineering staff has updated its approach to reserves assessment as well as numerous remaining unresolved areas of concern. These remaining issues are important, can lead to significant differences in reported quantities and values, and may result in questions about the "full disclosure" obligations to the SEC. Introduction For virtually all oil and gas producers, their company assets are the hydrocarbon reserves that they own through various forms of mineral interests, licensing agreements, or other contracts and that produce revenues from production and sale. Reserves are almost always reported as static quantities as of a specific date and classified into one or more categories to describe the uncertainty and production status associated with each category. The economic value of these reserves is a direct function of how the quantities are to be produced and sold over the physical or contract lives of the properties. Reserves owned by private and publicly owned companies are always assumed to be those quantities of oil and gas that can be produced and sold at a profit under assumed future prices and costs. Reserves under the control of state-owned or national oil companies may reflect quantities that exceed those deemed profitable under the commercial terms typically imposed on private or publicly owned companies.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document