Assessing national and regional value creation

Edvinsson, Leif; Bounfour, Ahmed

doi:10.1108/13683040410524748

Cited by 21 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since the formulation of the ground-breaking corporate report concept in 1975concept in (ASSC, 1975, the Jenkins Report (AICPA, 1994) and subsequently intellectual capital statements have advanced this movement (Mouritsen et al, 2003;Meritum, 2001;Edvinsson and Bounfour, 2004), as well as encouraged the advent of a series of sustainability guidelines (Heemskerk et al, 2003;GRI, 2003;Oliveira et al, 2010). Finally, in the most recent developments, we have witnessed the IR movement (Eccles and Kruz, 2010;IIRC, 2013).…”

Section: Reporting Trends and The Integration Movementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Moving from irrelevant intellectual capital (IC) reporting to value-relevant IC disclosures

Schaper

Nielsen

Roslender

2017

JIC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Purpose -Informed by the findings of a follow-up research study of companies originally involved in the Danish Guideline Project for Intellectual Capital Statements, this paper provides valuable insights for a potential shift from IC reporting, largely informed by an accounting perspective, towards IC-related disclosures.Design/methodology/approach -The paper draws on data obtained from 21 semi-structured interviews with respondents in 16 companies. The respondents were contacted following a genealogical exercise carried out on the 102 companies involved in the Danish Guideline Project between 1999 and 2003.Findings -The interviews suggested a rather critical perspective towards IC reporting using the intellectual capital statement framework. Despite the attempt of the Danish Guideline Project to establish a reporting standard, a range of experiments resulted in changes to the framework's original structure. Overall, a trend towards more integrated forms of reporting was discernible, in some part being motivated by the need to reduce the levels of reporting overload. Examples of integration designed to legitimise intellectual capital or corporate social responsibility reports, involving issuing them in tandem with a recognised reporting vehicle such as the annual report, were also encountered.Research limitations/implications -The implications of this study are that timely, value-relevant IC disclosures and compliant reporting, primarily for accountability purposes, have the potential to coexist. In addition to the usual limitations of a semi-structured interview research design, respondents' difficulties in clearly recalling events during the project after some 10-12 years is a further potential limitation. Additionally, the use of Internet-based communication channels for disclosure purposes was in its infancy at the time of the Danish Guideline Project.Originality/value -The paper provides important insights into the mechanisms of intellectual capital disclosure and intellectual capital reporting as seen from a practitioner perspective. Implications relevant to the continued development of integrated reporting are also identified.

show abstract

Section: Reporting Trends and The Integration Movementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Moving from irrelevant intellectual capital (IC) reporting to value-relevant IC disclosures

Schaper

Nielsen

Roslender

2017

JIC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This could further lead to threaten the development and sustainable development of the sectors and in extension of the economy in the long run. Also, going by the work of Edvinsson and Bounfour [38], Nigeria would be said to have a lower value at the global development levels because of the fact that its intellectual capital has not create an impetus on the economic development. Hence, the development in Nigeria is questionable as confirmed by the work of Mercier-Laurent [41], and there may be no structural and economic development as affirmed by Pachura [42], and hence, the sustainability of the economy would be a major problem as attested by Makarov [43].…”

Section: Discussion Of Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In recent information and knowledge economy, the value of any country is a function of their knowledge and intellectual capital [38]. Marcin [39] and Rusu-Tanasa [40] noted that intellectual capital is a major key factor of socioeconomic development of regions and countries.…”

Section: Previous Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intellectual Capital Management and Economic Development in a Quasi-Information Society

Omiunu¹

2020

Strategy and Behaviors in the Digital Economy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study investigates intellectual capital management (ICM) and economic development in a quasi-information society such as Nigeria: a macro perspective. The study adopts the correlational research and secondary data were used. From a macro perspective, data used for the human capital development are literacy level, human development index, and Gini coefficient, among others. Structural capital include telecom rate to GDP, mobile cellular subscriptions, mobile cellular subscriptions (per 100 people), and Internet penetration and use rate. Also, economic development as the dependent variable represents the GDP. Data within the periods of 2005 and 2015 were used, and regression analysis and ANOVA were used to explain the relationships between variables of interest of the study. The findings showed that there was no significant increase in the development of the Nigeria economy in the periods of 2005-2015 and the ICM of the nation does not have significant impetus on the economy. The study recommends that for the level of development to increase in Nigeria, governments and policy makers should concentrate and seek strategies to provide policies that would enhance the IC of the nation such as the level of literacy, innovative research, and development, among others.

show abstract

“…After that numerous studies have been conducted in different countries and regions. Some of them are: Bontis (2004) for the Arab region; Bounfour (2003), Edvinsson and Bounfour (2004), Andriessen and Stam (2004), Pulic (2005), Weziak (2007) for the EU countries; Lin ©Друштво економиста "Економика" Ниш http://www.ekonomika.org.rs and Edvinsson (2008) for the Nordic countries; Lin and Edvinsson (2011) for 40 countries; Pöyhönen and Smedlund (2004) for a cluster in the eastern part of Finland; Schiuma et al (2008) for the Italian regions; Huggins et al (2014) for 546 regions; etc.…”

Section: Measurement Methodologies At Macro Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring intellectual capital of national economies

Rađenović¹,

Krstić²

2017

Ekonomika

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The importance of intellectual capital for creating and sustaining competitive advantage of firms has been well established and confirmed in theory and practice. Intellectual resources proved to be the most valuable resources in the process of value creation for various stakeholders. Starting from 1980s onwards, both researchers and practitioners have focused on finding the best solution for measuring intellectual capital in order to enable efficient management and reporting on intellectual capital. Soon after that, their attention switched from an organisational level to the level of cities, regions and national economies. The intellectual capital of a nation has become the most important driver of national wealth. Therefore, the aim of the paper is to examine the concept of national intellectual capital, as well as various measurement methodologies available for valuing the intangible resources of nations. Critical assessment of presented methodologies will give an overview to the policy makers how to identify and value the national intellectual capital in order to increase their national wealth and improve the well-being of their citizens.

show abstract

Assessing national and regional value creation

Cited by 21 publications

References 8 publications

Moving from irrelevant intellectual capital (IC) reporting to value-relevant IC disclosures

Moving from irrelevant intellectual capital (IC) reporting to value-relevant IC disclosures

Intellectual Capital Management and Economic Development in a Quasi-Information Society

Measuring intellectual capital of national economies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About