Accounting for the value of time passing and the depletion of natural resources Reconsideration and some suggestions Ole Gravgård Pedersen Statistics Denmark.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Integration of natural resource wealth in the Canadian National Balance Sheet Accounts Implementation challenges Note by Canada.
Advertisements

Depletion of renewable resources London Group Meeting, December 2007.
Granting and activation of guarantees in an updated SNA.
Renewable energy resources in the SEEA Are renewable energy resources assets in the SNA and SEEA or not? Maarten van Rossum, Mark de Haan, and Sjoerd Schenau.
Time passing and measuring depletion London Group Brussels, September/October 2008 Peter Comisari Australian Bureau of Statistics.
Allocating mineral valuations using unit record data Statistics New Zealand.
Fisheries accounts, a summary of current work in New Zealand and Australia Paper for 12 th Meeting of the London group on Environmental Accounting Rome,
Types of assets and the treatment of emission permits Ole Gravgård Statistics Denmark
SEEA classifications of energy resources Ole Gravgård Pedersen Statistics Denmark Sejrøgade 11 DK 2100 Ø th London Group Meeting.
Mineral exploration and mineral deposits Issues under discussion by the Canberra II Group on non- financial assets.
Regional Seminar on Developing a Programme for the Implementation of the 2008 SNA and Supporting Statistics January 30-February 1, 2013 Kingston, Jamaica.
System of Environmental and Economic Accounts The SEEA 2003 Revision Mark de Haan Statistics Netherlands London Group WIOD Conference Vienna 26 May 2010.
Emission boundary and bridge tables for emissions Ole Gravgård Statistics Denmark
A Suggestion for SEEA Standard Tables on Energy Ole Gravgård Pedersen Statistics Denmark Sejrøgade 11 DK 2100 Ø
Overview 2008 SNA (cont’d) Training Workshop on System of National Accounts for ECO Member Countries October 2012, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran.
Chapter 4: CONTINUED INCOME STATEMENT AND RELATED INFORMATION Sommers – ACCT 3311 Chapter 1: Environment and Theoretical Structure of Financial Accounting.
Depletion of Non-Renewable Resources Report on London Group outcomes UNCEEA meeting, New York, July 2007 Peter Comisari Gemma Van Halderen Australian Bureau.
Recording the ownership of mineral-related assets London Group Rome, December 2007 Peter Comisari Australian Bureau of Statistics.
Session 10: Sequence of the accounts; aggregation and integration Expert Group meeting on Ecosystem Accounts, Melbourne, 18 May 2012.
Treatment of Emission Permits - Implications for the SEEA Sylvie Le Laidier, INSEE Thomas Olsen, Statistics Denmark Prepared for the 14th London Group.
Varying the User Cost: A New Zealand Perspective Joel Cook December 2006.
1 Seminar on Developing a Programme for the Implementation of 2008 SNA and Supporting Statistics October 2012 Pretoria, South Africa.
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Statistical Division UNECE Workshop on Consumer Price Indices Istanbul, Turkey,10-13 October 2011 Session.
SA’s EXPERIENCE IN THE COMPILATION OF MINERAL ACCOUNTS 9 th London Group Meeting Background Physical accounts Resource rent Monetary accounts Problems.
1 COMMENTS ON THE PAPER “China’s Measure in Real Term for Education” Ramesh Kolli Additional Director General Ministry of Statistics & Programme Implementation.
Discussion paper: On the valuation of renewable energy resources Prepared for London Group meeting by: Maarten van Rossum and Sjoerd Schenau Statistics.
Recording of losses in the physical supply and use tables - Should product output be recorded gross or net of the losses? Ole Gravgård Pedersen Statistics.
Non-life insurance services 1 UN STATISTICS DIVISION Economic Statistics Branch National Accounts Section UNSD/ECA National accounts workshop November.
Draft Handbook on Measuring Intellectual Property Products: Estimating Mineral Exploration Presentation to OECD Working Party on National Accounts, Paris,
1 Selected Issues with Implementation of 2008 SNA (continued) Training Workshop on System of National Accounts for ECO Member Countries October 2012,
Valuation of water resources and water infrastructure assets in Australia 17 th London Group Meeting Stockholm, Sweden September 2011 Peter Comisari,
15th London Group Meeting, Nov 30 - Dec 4, Wiesbaden Balance sheet for land Experiences from the Netherlands Paper has two parts: –Conceptual issues with.
Constant Price Estimates Expert Group Meeting on National Accounts Cairo May 12-14, 2009 Presentation points.
AEG recommendations on Non-life insurance services (Issue 5) Workshop on National Accounts December 2006, Cairo 1 Gulab Singh UN STATISTICS DIVISION.
Energy and mineral asset accounts Background and outline for future work and terms of reference Alessandra Alfieri and Ole Gravgård.
RECORDING LAND IN THE NATIONAL BALANCE SHEET Kirsty Leslie London Group Meeting Wiesbaden, 30 November - 4 December 2009.
Copyright 2010, The World Bank Group. All Rights Reserved. 1 GOVERNMENT FINANCE STATISTICS INTRODUCTION TO GOVERNMENT FINANCE STATISTICS Part 2 This lecture.
UN-ECE/Eurostat/OECD Meeting on National Accounts April 2008 Geneva Measuring Capital Services OECD Agenda item 2a Invited paper 4.
... Issue 13 : Recording of natural resource depletion Report on depletion-related outcomes in the current SEEA update.
Physical Energy Accounts Ole Gravgård SEEA Training Seminar for the ECA Addis Ababa 2-5 February 2015.
Copyright 2010, The World Bank Group. All Rights Reserved. 1 GOVERNMENT FINANCE STATISTICS EXPENSE Part 1 This lecture presents the detailed categories.
System of Environmental-Economic Accounting Sokol Vako United Nations Statistics Division Based on a presentation by Sjoerd Schenau, Statistics Netherlands.
Treatment of Interest on Indexed-Linked Debt Instruments.
AEG recommendations on COST OF CAPITAL SERVICES (Issue 15) Workshop on National Accounts December 2006, Cairo 1 UN STATISTICS DIVISION Economic Statistics.
A suggestion for SEEA energy bridge tables The link between energy statistics, energy balances and energy accounts Ole Gravgård Pedersen Statistics Denmark.
Natural Resource Accounting Session Objectives: l Interpret the results of natural resource accounting l Develop policies based on the results of resource.
IS NPV IS SUPERIOR TO IRR
1 1 R&D in the Norwegian National accounts Presented by Knut Ø. Sørensen Statistics Norway Agenda item 4 Invited paper 14.
Progress Report London Group in its review of 21 revision issues addressing the revised SEEA Volume 1 Mark de Haan.
UNSD/NA/GS1 Mineral Exploration (Issue 17) UNSD/NA/GS1 Gulab Singh UN STATISTICS DIVISION Economic Statistics Branch National Accounts Section.
Cost of capital services and the national accounts 1 UN STATISTICS DIVISION Economic Statistics Branch National Accounts Section UNSD/ECA National accounts.
Emission Permits Thomas Olsen, Statistics Denmark Presented by Ole Gravgård, Statistics Denmark Prepared for the 13th London Group meeting, Brussels, 29.
The SEEA revision Key issues and outcomes Mark de Haan.
Herman Smith UNSD 10 th Meeting of the Advisory Expert Group on National Accounts April 2016, Paris The accrual recording of property income in the.
1 Structure of the revised SEEA-2003 Some issues for discussion Second Meeting of the United Nations Committee of Experts on Environmental-Economic Accounting.
Handbook on Mineral and Energy Asset Accounting A first - very preliminary - outline based on SEEA 2003 and the Eurostat guidelines for presentation at.
Mineral exploration Anne Harrison.
The main orientations, plans and problems when implementing the
Benson Sim United Nations Statistics Division
UNSD SEEA Training of Trainers Seminar
12th London Group Meeting, Rome Italy
The Revised SEEA Draft Chapter 5 Asset accounts Ole Gravgård Statistics Denmark 17th Meeting of the London group on Environmental Accounting.
Combined physical and monetary presentations
General features of the system of the European System of Accounts (ESA 2010) THE CONTRACTOR IS ACTING UNDER A FRAMEWORK CONTRACT CONCLUDED WITH THE COMMISSION.
Extensions to the core system
AEG Recommendations on Mineral Exploration
Overview 2008 SNA (cont’d) Training Workshop on System of National Accounts for ECO Member Countries October 2012, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran.
General features of the system of the European System of Accounts (ESA 2010) THE CONTRACTOR IS ACTING UNDER A FRAMEWORK CONTRACT CONCLUDED WITH THE COMMISSION.
Implementation of SNA2008 in China
Selected Issues with Implementation of 2008 SNA (continued)
Presentation transcript:

Accounting for the value of time passing and the depletion of natural resources Reconsideration and some suggestions Ole Gravgård Pedersen Statistics Denmark Sejrøgade 11 DK 2100 Ø

Main questions ? What should the standard asset accounts for exhaustible natural resources look like? - How do we explain the accounting items of the depletion adjusted flow accounts and interprete the results, especially if we partition the stock value according to economic ownership ? - Adapted form or generic asset account ? - How do we value the effect on the stock value of extracting a natural resource ?

Outline of presentation Background The asset accounts and the measurement of depletion - The agreed approach, some properties and problems - An alternative measurement The depletion adjusted accounts and split ownership –Agreed approach and some questions –An alternative approach Some conclusions Some questions

Background SEEA 2003 asset accounts -several options Decisions taken at the London Group meetings in Johannesburg and Rome 2007 (agreed approach) Suggestion on the recording of split ownership between Government and extractor Decision on the measurement of the value of depletion - Strange results when the principles are actual implemented -Two measures of the effect on the stock value of the extraction -How do we use the generic asset account of the SEEA/SNA But some outstanding issues: ?

The generic SEEA 2003/SNA asset accounts for natural resources Opening stock value (?) … - Depletion = "the reduction in the value as a result of the physical removal and using up of the asset (?) … + Revaluation (?) … = Closing stock value (?) Often all items are non-observable

Using the NPV method when no market values can be observed gives the following: - RR = resource rent = the surplus resulting from extraction of the natural resource assets = the output of the extraction industry minus all costs involved in the extraction, including the costs of using fixed capital = immediate decline in resource rents due to extraction now V1 = opening stock = NPV of all future ressource rents, beginning of period 1 + rV1 = time passing element = effect of the discounting = future ressource rents come closer V2 = closing stock = NPV of all future ressource rents, beginning of period 2

How do we combine the items from the NPV method with the generic asset account items ? Opening stock = NPV of future ressource rents beginning period 1 Closing stock = NPV of future ressource rents beginning period 2 - Depletion (?) + Revaluations (?) -RR, ressource rent/immediate decline in income + rV1, value of time passing (discount element) ? OK Asset accountNPV The links for the change items are undetermined and requires assumptions/decisions

Correspondance in SEEA 2003: The NPV method used on oil and gas assets The value of extractions = RR RR represents here the decline in the value of the natural resource due to the extraction The time passing element = revaluations/holding gains ??? This is an adapted account which do not follow the terminology and form of the generic SEEA 2003/SNA asset account !

But: The SEEA 2003 example and country practices (?) seems to indicate the following link: Opening stock = NPV of future ressource rents, beginning period 1 Closing stock = NPV of future ressource rents, beginning period 2 - Depletion* = - RR + Revaluations = + rV1 -RR, ressource rent -/immediate decline in income due to -the extraction + rV1, value of time passing (discount element) * In SEEA 2003 this item is called extraction instead of depletion in relation to the asset accounts

In contrast, SEEA 2003 and the agreed approach does at the same time define depletion = RR-rV1, which gives the link: Opening stock = NPV of future ressource rents, beginning period 1 Closing stock = NPV of future ressource rents, beginning period 2 - Depletion = -RR + rV1 + Revaluations = 0 -RR, ressource rent /immediate decline in income + rV1, value of time passing (discount element) This accounting approach is, however, not shown in SEEA 2003!

Therefore, for the revised SEEA, we need to improve the clarity of the asset accounts for natural assets: The format, accounting items and terminology of the generic asset accounts should be used - depletion in stead of extraction, avoid return to natural capital In relation to the asset accounts there should only be one value for the depletion, i.e. "the reduction in the value as a result of the physical removal and using up of the asset

How do we measure the reduction in the asset value as a result of the physical removal and using up of the asset ? 1) Agreed approach: d = V1-V2= RR - rV, i.e. the ressource rent minus the time passing element 2) Alternative: d = RR i.e. the ressource rent The value corresponds to the ressource rent which immediately disappears because of the extraction Depletion is the total change in the stock value, including the effect on stock value due to the fact that future ressource rents come closer and the time preference. or

Agreed approach: Depletion = RR-rV1 Background/rationale: - The role of a natural ressource is the same as that of fixed capital, and depletion is therefore defined in parallel to the definition of fixed capital (change in NPV) leading to the formula RR- rV1 - Instrumental for the adjusted income accounts

Agreed approach: Depletion = RR-rV1 Depletion is determined by factors which are unrelated to the current extraction ( future extraction, extraction profile, and discoveries). Therefore an increase in the natural capital stock reduces the depletion. Depletion is negative if RR<rV1 i.e. the result of the physical removal and using up of the asset is that the stock value increases ! The calculation of d = V1-V2 (= RR-rV1) must always be based on constant price calculations of V1 and V2. Although in principle measured the same way as fixed capital (NPV), this does seldom hold in practice Some properties:

Alternative approach: depletion = RR (ressource rent) Rationale: RR measures the immediate effect on stock value of the extraction if we didnt extract, the ressource value would be RR higher Under optimal extraction: RR = NPV of loss of future extraction (i.e. RR is a cost of extraction measure) We would probably have to spend RR if we were going to replace the extracted oil The time passing element can be seen as a revaluation of the resource, and has as such nothing to do with the current extraction

Alternative approach depletion = RR (ressource rent) Some properties: Depletion is independent of the total stock value (i.e.of future extraction, extraction profile, and discoveries, etc.). Depletion is never negative i.e. the result of the physical removal and using up of the asset is always a decrease in the stock value The asset accounts can be calculated in current prices, without calculating the constant prices accounts first. No assumption on a correspondence between natural capital and fixed capital is made

Example: What does the agreed and the alternative measure look like: Denmark oil and gas: Ressource rents (RR) and depletion (RR *V1) Negative depletion Discoveries

Can the time passing element (rV) be seen as a revaluation? No: Since the price on oil (and thus the ressource rent) is not changing, the price on the asset must also be the same. Yes: If the same quantity increases in value, a revaluation has taken place. A unit below ground and a unit above ground are different commodities, and have different prices.

Depletion adjusted income accounts – agreed approach Time passing element Depletion Net operating surplus -depletion ( RR-rV ) = Depletion adjusted NOS ( NOS – RR+rV ) Since depletion has been decreased by rV this amount is per definition left as return to capital and included in the adjusted NOS return (rV1) > RR: ???

Depletion adjusted income accounts – split ownership SNA 2008: The asset is attributed to the legal owner SEEA: Split ownership between government and extractor Table 4. Agreed approach: Asset and adjusted income accounts with split ownership and return to natural capital attributed to the extractor Total resource OwnerExtractor (Govern ment) Asset account Opening stock depletion = value of extraction return to income28.90 Closing stock Adjusted income account Net operating surplus79.20 less extraction of natural re­sources Plus returns to natural resources28.90 equals operating surplus adjusted for the depletion of natural resources Rate of return to natural capital (per cent)409.7 Depletion and return to natural resources ??? Asset account Income account

Agreed approach under legal owner or split ownership situation: Charging the full depletion to the extractor and giving him the full return to natural capital seems to lead to strange results: The owners stock value is undetermined and the return to capital is attributed in proportions we would not expect.

Some solutions 1)The extractor gets it all (owner = extractor) 2) The owner gets it all and an annual capital transfer, equal to the depletion, from owner to extractor is recorded. ( However, this does also lead to strange rates of returns to natural capital at the sectoral level). 3) Alternative approach: the depletion (=RR) is charged against the extractor, and the return to capital is taken from the holding gains and allocated in relation to the stock values

Depletion Split returns to natural capital = holding gains Alternative approach: split ownership and split return to capital

The alternative approach Requires a new interpretation of the adjusted income accounts: –The income does not come from production, but from the holding gains, (Hicksian income concept) –We include gains as income because it increases our wealth and consumption possibilities –It opens for inclusion of other gains, such as discoveries and natural growth of uncultivated assets, without including them as production

Some overall conclusions The agreed definition of depletion (RR-rV) leads to inconsistent and strange results, when NPV is used in practice There is a need to streamline the definition and presentation of the depletion and the asset accounts in SEEA There seems to be some unresolved issues with regard to the proposed split-ownership recording

Some overall conclusions, (contd) An alternative definition of depletion (=RR) and accounting approach would remove the strange results Such an alternative approach requires a new approach to the adjusted income accounts based on Hicks income The alternative approach removes the parallel approach to accounting for fixed capital and natural capital The alternative approach is more flexible and does not require changes in the production boundary of the SNA

Questions for the London group Q.1 Do you agree that the reduction in the value of a sub-soil asset as a result of the physical removal and using up of the asset should be unambiguously defined? Q.2 Do you agree that the generic asset accounting format (Table 2) should be used instead of the adapted form (Table 1) when accounting for natural resources? Q.3 Should the value of the reduction in the value of a sub-soil asset as a result of the physical removal and using up of the asset be valued as a) RR resource rent, (and the time passing element as holding gains) or b) Equal to the resource rent minus the time passing element, RR-rV ?

Q.4 What is your view on allocating the time passing element/return to capital in proportion to the the owners share of the natural resource stock value (Table 5) instead of allocating it to the extractor (Table 4)? Q.5 The alternative approach argues that the time passing as a holding gain can be regarded as income because it increases the wealth (Hicks income). Similarly, discoveries and the growth of an uncultivated natural resource can be seen as income because it increases our wealth and consumption possibilities. What is your view on the alternative approach?