Purpose
This study aims to examine the relationship between accounting measurement method of biological asset and financial reporting quality. Specifically, this study examines whether using fair value method or the historical cost method on biological asset provides different financial reporting quality.
Design/methodology/approach
This study uses data from 38 agricultural companies that are members of the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil. The annual reports of 38 companies from the Palm Oil Growers over a five-year period starting from 2011 to 2014 are analysed.
Findings
This study shows that companies using historical cost measurement produce less reliable and less relevant information compared to the companies that are using fair value measurement.
Research limitations/implications
The results in this study imply that the use of fair value measurement improves the quality of financial information.
Practical implications
This study supports IASB’s justification of developing IAS 41 as the principle-based standard that better represents the financial information related to biological asset and subsequently lead to good accountability and harmonisation practices.
Originality/value
This study provides evidence on the best measurement to be used in agriculture activities using a larger sample size of few countries. In addition, this study contributes to the existing literature on the effect of accounting methods on financial reporting quality.
