Separation – integration – and now …? - An historical perspective on the relationship between German management accounting and financial accounting

German accounting has traditionally followed a dual ledger approach with strictly separated internal cost accounting, as the basis for management information, and external financial accounting focusing on creditor protection and based on the commercial law. However, the increased adoption of integrated accounting system implies a significant change in the relationship between financial and management accounting systems. We use Hegelian dialectic to trace the historical development of German accounting from separated systems towards antithetical propositions of full integration, and the emergence of partial integration as the synthesis of this transformation process. For this reason, our paper provides a comprehensive analysis of the literature on the relationship between financial and management accounting in Germany. On this basis, we elaborate how financial accounting in Germany has been shaped by its economic context and legislation, and how financial accounting – accompanied by institutional pressures – in turn influenced management accounting. We argue that the changing relationship between management and financial accounting in the German context illustrates how current accounting practice is shaped not only by its environment, but also by its historical path. Based on this reasoning, we discuss several avenues for future research

Risk measures for direct real estate investments with non-normal or unknown return distributions

The volatility of returns is probably the most widely used risk measure for real estate. This is rather surprising since a number of studies have cast doubts on the view that volatility can capture the manifold risks attached to properties and corresponds to the risk attitude of investors. A central issue in this discussion is the statistical properties of real estate returns—in contrast to neoclassical capital market theory they are mostly non-normal and often unknown, which render many statistical measures useless. Based on a literature review and an analysis of data from Germany we provide evidence that volatility alone is inappropriate for measuring the risk of direct real estate. We use a unique data sample by IPD, which includes the total returns of 939 properties across different usage types (56% office, 20% retail, 8% others and 16% residential properties) from 1996 to 2009, the German IPD Index, and the German Property Index. The analysis of the distributional characteristics shows that German real estate returns in this period were not normally distributed and that a logistic distribution would have been a better fit. This is in line with most of the current literature on this subject and leads to the question which indicators are more appropriate to measure real estate risks. We suggest that a combination of quantitative and qualitative risk measures more adequately captures real estate risks and conforms better with investor attitudes to risk. Furthermore, we present criteria for the purpose of risk classification