经济增加值（EVA）：理论与实证研究综述外文翻译（可编辑）
documented翻译
经济增加值(EVA):理论与实证研究综述外文翻译
外文翻译
原文
Economic Value Added: A Review of the Theoretical and Empirical Literature
Material Source: Asian Review of Accounting. Volume 9, Number 1, 2001
Author: Andrew C Worthington and Tracey West
Introduction
An accepted financial axiom is that the role of managers is to imise the wealth of shareholders by the efficient allocation of resources. In order to operationalise this objective, shareholder wealth is traditionally proxied by either standard accounting magnitudes such as
profits, earnings, and cash flows from operations or financial statement ratios including earnings per share and the returns on assets, investment, and equity. This financial statement information is then used by managers, shareholders, and other interested parties to assess current firm performance, and is also used by these same stakeholders to predict future performance. Further, under the semi-strong form of the efficient market hypothesis, the publicly available information contained in these
variables is readily interpreted by the market and thereby incorporated into future stock prices Unfortunately, the empirical literature to date suggests that there is no single accounting-based measure upon which one can rely to explain changes in shareholder wealth Chen and Dodd, 1997; Riahi-Belkaoui, 1993; Rogerson, 1997; and Lehn and Makhija, 1997. This is despite the fact that such a measure would prove invaluable to the various parties interested in aspects of firm performance. Lee 1996, p. 32, for example, argues that the search for a superior measure of firm valuation is a, if not the, key feature of contemporary empirical finance.
One professedly recent innovation in the field of internal and external performance measurement is a trade-marked variant of residual income net operating profits less a charge for the opportunity cost of invested capital known as economic value-added EVA. As a starting point its developer and principal advocate, US-based business consultants Stern Stewart and Co Using these findings, Stern Stewart has built a significant presence in the highly competitivevalue-based performance consulting market with "literally hundreds of firms adopting EVA to some degree, among them Coca-Cola Co., Eli Lilly and Co., and the Postal Service in the US" Biddle, et. ah, 1998 EVA figures have also been heavily promoted in the UK, Australia, Canada, Brazil, Germany, Mexico, Turkey, and France, amongst others Stern Stewart, 1999, used to provide published rankings of managerial performance Ferguson, 1997, and several
international companies have adopted EVA for performance measurement and/or incentive compensation packages. For example, in Australia the ANZ Banking Group, Fletcher Challenge Limited, James Hardie Industries, and the Wrightson Group have implemented EVA financial management systems in recent years Rennie, 1997.
Support for EVA has also been forthcoming from other sources. Fortune has called it "today's hottest financial idea", "The Real Key to Creating Wealth" 30 September, 1993 and "A New Way to Find Bargains" 9 December, 1996, and has printed EVA performance rankings since 1993 cited in Stern, Stewart, and Chew, 1995. Peter Drucker 1998 in the Harvard Business Review suggests that EVA's growing popularity reflects, amongst other things, the demands of the information age for a measure of 'total factor productivity'. Finally, there has been widespread adoption of EVA by security analysts since "instead of using a dividend discount approach, these models measure value from the point of the firms' capacity for ongoing wealth creation rather than simply wealth distribution" Herzberg, 1998, p. 45. The purpose of the present paper is to review the theoretical underpinnings of EVA and to reconcile the often competing claims as to its empirical superiority over other accounting-based measures of firm performance.
The remainder of the paper is sub-divided into five main areas.The second section outlines the concept of EVA and other value-based
performance metrics. The third section discusses the calculation of EVA. The accounting adjustments involved in these EVA calculations and their implications are discussed in the fourth section. The fifth section reviews the extant empirical literature within a common framework. The final section contains some brief concluding remarks.
The Concept of Economic Value-Added
Despite the relatively recent adoption of EVA as an internal and external financial performance measure, its conceptual underpinnings derive from a well-established microeconomic literature regarding the link between firm earnings and wealth creation Bell, 1998. For much of this history, at least since Alfred Marshall's Principles of Economics, the focus of analysis has been on adjustments to accounting earnings to reflect the opportunity cost of capital, primarily because the unadjusted measure can be a misleading indicator of performance in both theory and practice.
In the seminal contribution, Marshall 1920, p.504 concluded that "the gross earnings of management which a man is getting can only be found after making up a careful account of
the true profits of his business, and deducting interest on his capital". Later, the desirability of quantifying 'economic profit' as a measure of wealth creation was operationalised by David Solomon 1965 as the difference between two quantities, net earnings and the cost of capital. This measure of residual
income is then defined in terms of after-tax operating profits less a charge for invested capital which reflects the firm's weighted average cost of capital. Close parallels are thereby found in the related nontrademarked concepts of abnormal earning, excess earnings, excess income, excess realisable profits'and superprofits Biddle, et. ah, 1997 Just as EVA bears a close semblance to non-trademarked financial performance measures, it is also closely related to performance metrics offered by other consultants. For example, the Chicago-based Boston Consulting Group, Price Waterhouse and HOLT Value Associates employ variations of Cash Flow Return on Investment or CFROI. CFROI is typically calculated in two steps. First, the inflation-adjusted cash flows available to all capital owners in the firm are measured and compared with the inflation-adjusted gross investment made by the capital owners. Second, the gross cash flow to gross investment is
translated into an internal rate of return by adjusting for the finite economic life of depreciating assets and the residual value of non-depreciating assets such as land and working capital In addition, there are many other value-based metrics that are even more closely related to EVA. In fact, the legal conflict between Stern Stewart's EVA and KPMG's 'Economic Value Management' over the proprietary nature of EVA suggests even closer, less discernible differences in these products Lieber,1998. Myers 1996, p. 45, amongst others, has arrived at this conclusion,arguing that "EVA, CFROI,