English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

After the withdrawal of IFRIC 3: Emission Rights in 2005, members of European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) do not have an authoritative course of action for carbon emission allowances accounting. They are allowed to adopt variant accounting approaches to account for granted and purchased carbon emission allowances which has created multiplicity in accounting practices and questions the comparability of different entities in the scheme. By adopting a content analysis methodology, this research scrutinizes accounting approaches followed by the companies in European Union Emission Trading System (EU ETS), and discloses the practices of accounting adopted by these companies to account for carbon permits without the presence of any precise guidelines by the accounting standard setters. This study also highlights the current accounting approaches used for emissions accounting together with providing an ultimate solution in this regard. Because the accounting treatment followed by an entity will produce effects on its financial statements, the results of this research will probably be of high importance to experts of accounting, standard setters, investors, stakeholders, auditors, and academic audiences.

Analysis of Carbon Emission Accounting Practices of Leading Carbon Emitting European Union Companies