UTILITY COMPANIES ACCOUNTING: ADVANCEMENTS IN THE LITERATURE
CONTABILIDAD DE LAS EMPRESAS DE SERVICIOS PÚBLICOS: AVANCES EN LA LITERATURA
Carlos Augusto Rincón Soto*
Mauricio Gómez Villegas**
*Profesor Asociado de la Universidad del Valle. Doctor en Administración, Maestría en Contabilidad, Maestría en Gestión de Proyectos Universidad del Valle. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4710-5558 Correo electrónico: carlos.augusto.rincon@correounivalle.edu.co
**Profesor Titular de la Universidad Nacional de Colombia. Contador Público y Magíster en Administración de la Universidad Nacional de Colombia. Magíster en Contabilidad, Auditoría y Control de Gestión y Doctor en Contabilidad de la Universidad de Valencia. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9043-6358 Correo electrónico: mgomezv@unal.edu.co
Citar este artículo así:
Rincón, C. A. y Villegas, M. (2024). Utility companies accounting: advancements in the literature. Revista Criterio Libre, 22 (41).
Fecha de recepción: 14 de abril de 2024 Fecha de aprobación: 15 de mayo de 2024
Abstract
Financial information that is homogenized under the endorsement and application of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) does not adequately meet the needs of all contexts and users of financial information. Utility companies possess specific characteristics that necessitate distinct applications of financial accounting, which not only serve to produce reports for investors' decision-making but also inform the setting of fees and facilitate the inspection and monitoring of service provision. This distinction is crucial, as the services provided by these companies are of public interest and essential for societal welfare. This paper conducts a systematic review of the literature to identify and systematize the definitions, users, and topics addressed in research on Utility Companies Accounting (UCA). This inquiry is significant in light of the standardization processes within accounting that cater to the needs of capital market users-an issue that raises dilemmas previously discussed in the literature. The results present a conceptual and interpretative reflection on advancements in UCA research, highlight ongoing discussions, and underscore the importance of accounting in reducing information asymmetry among the various users of utility services. Furthermore, there is a pressing need to disseminate more information tailored to the requirements of utility company management and regulation, as well as to other users, such as citizens, government, and regulatory bodies, which may not align with the standardization processes under IFRS.
Keywords: Regulatory Accounting, Users, Regulatory Companies, Regulatory Commissions.
Code JEL: M41, L97
Resumen
La información financiera homogeneizada bajo la aprobación y aplicación de las Normas Internacionales de Información Financiera no satisface las necesidades de todos los contextos y usuarios de la información financiera. La industria de servicios públicos domiciliarios (ESPD), tiene cualidades particulares que implican ciertos usos de la contabilidad financiera, la cual no solamente sirve para producir informes para la toma de decisiones de los inversionistas, sino, que también es utilizada en el establecimiento de tarifas y en los procesos de inspección y vigilancia en la prestación de los servicios. Esto es clave, pues los servicios que prestan son de interés público, necesarios para el bienestar de la sociedad. Este artículo hace una revisión sistemática de la literatura, para Identificar y sistematizar las definiciones otorgadas, los usuarios identificados y los temas abordados en la investigación sobre la Contabilidad de las Empresas de Servicios Públicos Domiciliarios (CESPD), esto es importante dado los procesos de estandarización de la contabilidad hacia las necesidades de los usuarios del mercado de capitales, cuestión que podría resurgir dilemas que han sido debatidos anteriormente en la literatura. Los resultados muestran una reflexión conceptual e interpretativa sobre los avances de investigación en CESPD, las discusiones inacabadas y la importancia de la contabilidad para la disminución de la asimetría de la información a los distintos usuarios de la industria de los servicios públicos domiciliarios, así como, la necesidad de divulgar más información adecuada a las necesidades particulares de la gestión, de la regulación de las ESPD y de otros usuarios como la ciudadanía, el Estado y los reguladores, lo que puede no estar en consonancia con los procesos de estandarización bajo las NIIF.
Palabras clave: Contabilidad regulatoria, Usuarios, Empresas reguladas, comisiones reguladoras.
Clasificación JEL: M41, L97
1. Introduction
Financial information has largely been reduced to the needs of investors (Rodrigues & Craig, 2007). Some authors contend that the perceived usefulness of financial information for decision-making by accounting standards issuers is overstated, suggesting that capital providers increasingly rely on alternative sources of information (Lev, 2018). Research on the production and usability of accounting and financial information is limited. Additionally, studies identifying the information requirements that adequately address users' needs are also insufficient (Van Helden & Reichard, 2019; Young, 2006).
According to Gómez-Villegas (2004, p. 112), the international accounting approach "takes a limited and very simplified view of the role of information." Consequently, it is essential to identify and reflect on the contexts and users whose needs are not being met by the financial information homogenized under the endorsement and implementation of IFRS (Nobes, 2015).
Utility companies (UCs) possess specific characteristics that necessitate distinct applications of financial accounting, which not only serve to produce reports for investors' decision-making but are also utilized in setting fees and monitoring the provision of services (Galetovic & Sanhueza, 2002). Therefore, it is vital to analyze the use of financial accounting for the control and decision-making of various industry users, as the services they provide are of public interest and essential for societal welfare.
Research on the uses of accounting and financial information predominantly focuses on financial markets, capital providers, and managers' requirements (Rodrigues & Craig, 2007). However, it pays less attention to other contexts and users, such as the public sector, public managers, citizens, customers, and regulators, among others (Giacomini, Sicilia, & Steccolini, 2016). Similarly, there have been few studies addressing the uses of Utility Companies Accounting (UCA) and the needs of its users.
In this context, the objective of this study is to identify and systematize the definitions provided, the users identified, and the topics addressed in the literature on UC accounting research. The methodological approach involves a systematic literature review, followed by a conceptual interpretation and reflection on the results (Siddaway, Wood, & Hedges, 2019; Van Helden & Reichard, 2019).
The document is structured as follows: after this introduction, a discussion of the concept of financial accounting information users will be presented, followed by an outline of the methodology in the third section. The fourth section will detail the bibliographic background of the literature review. Finally, the fifth section will present the results, which describe the concepts used in regulatory accounting, identify the problems addressed in the literature, and characterize the users of UCs. The document will conclude with a discussion and conclusions.
2. The Emergence of the Concept of the User in Financial Accounting
For many years, until the first half of the twentieth century, accounting was primarily tasked with measuring and representing income and corporate wealth. However, as accounting evolved into a science, the increasing utilization of statistics, game theory, and decision theories led to the development of multiple methods for measuring and representing the same facts. This shift prompted discussions surrounding the issue of uniformity, a concern emphasized by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) due to the potential lack of reliability stemming from the plurality of accounting policies and representations. Consequently, efforts were made to reduce the diversity of accounting processes. Several professionals argued that a significant problem was the absence of clear accounting objectives and purposes, which gradually connected users as a relevant element in the objectives of financial reporting (Young, 2006).
The advisability of aligning financial information with investors' needs has been academically considered since 1961 (Staubus, 1961). In the early 1970s, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) established a working group to specify the objectives of financial statements, comprising several experts and regulatory entities. This group concluded that the objective of financial accounting is to provide useful information for economic decision-making, primarily serving those users who lack the authority or ability to obtain internal information, with a focus on investors and creditors, while placing state managers and regulators in a secondary position. The Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) and other regulatory bodies subsequently adopted this position (Young, 2006).
Young (2006) notes that some academics and entities resolved differences through a needs-equating strategy, arguing that the same information could serve multiple decision-making purposes. In this context, the FASB suggested that information addressing the needs of investors and creditors was generally beneficial to other stakeholders (Young, 2006), a premise that currently underlies the conceptual framework of IFRS as well (Foundation IFRS, 2018). Consequently, the scope of financial statements was narrowed to decision-making, predominantly catering to the needs of investors and creditors.
Young (2006) further argues that in 1978, the Board established that financial information was a tool, thus requiring users to learn how to utilize it. The issue of financial statements being read but not effectively used, or misused, is not an inherent problem of the tool itself. This perspective implies that the usability problem of information arises from users' understanding rather than the nature of accounting as a tool (Van Helden & Reichard, 2019). "Readers who failed to follow the provisions of the model could easily be dismissed as irrational and/or ignorant" (Young, 2006, p. 592). Such an argument effectively silences discussions regarding conflicts and asymmetries caused by accounting standards (Sunder, 2010).
The rationale for comparability and uniformity has justified the homogenization of accounting practices and is frequently invoked to critique accounting practices and specific financial statements, which are required to address the needs of users beyond just investors (Young, 2006). It is suggested that other users should adapt to investor-oriented information, as tailoring information for specific users incurs additional costs for organizations.
In this context, the divergence of particular information needs for other users is overlooked and reduced to the rationality of financial market participants (Biondi, 2018). This issue has been the subject of discussion in recent years, as some authors assert that it exacerbates information asymmetries among neglected users and generates challenges across industries and sectors that require specific information (Biondi, 2018; Gómez-Villegas, 2004).
3. Methodology
Among the existing literature reviews on Utility Companies Accounting (UCA), Mason's (1936) review stands out; it examined US Supreme Court cases pertaining to UCA discussions from 1878 to 1934. A more recent work is Cooper's (1998), which provided an overview of the privatization and regulation of utilities in the UK, including several publications on the regulatory accounting debate in England. No further recent literature review research on UCA was identified.
The topic of UCA encompasses a highly specialized area of accounting knowledge, focusing on an economic sector composed of a limited number of generally large companies characterized by high complexity. Despite its economic significance, scientific output in this field remains restricted, as its monopolistic nature limits both the number of companies involved and the number of professionals dedicated to its study, further constraining the publication of specialized scientific articles.
The literature review conducted on this topic, given its economic importance and specialized nature, revealed limited scientific output in academic journals across various levels. While the methodology applied adhered to the principles of a systematic literature review, it differed slightly as the context necessitated a more exhaustive and detailed search, requiring an expansion of the databases utilized and an extended analysis period. The rigor and time invested in data extraction, review, and analysis were essential for identifying relevant scientific studies in this area; however, it is possible that some studies may have been overlooked.
According to Stechemesser and Guenther (2012) and Siddaway et al. (2019), the purpose of a systematic review is to comprehensively locate and synthesize research developed on a specific topic to understand the discussion, systematize findings, and identify consensus in the literature.
The systematic review was conducted in four stages (Stechemesser & Guenther, 2012). Firstly, research questions, search functions, and databases were selected. The criteria for literature inclusion and exclusion were established. The guiding questions for the systematic review were: What is meant by UCA? And what are the most relevant UCA users identified in the literature?
The search for accounting in the public utilities industry specifically relates to water, energy, gas, and telecommunications companies; therefore, the search terms included: "utilities accounting," "regulatory accounting," "water company accounting," "energy company accounting," "gas company accounting," and "telecommunications company accounting." Papers related to these terms in their titles, abstracts, or keywords were selected. These terms were searched in three languages (English, Spanish, and Portuguese) across the following databases: JSTOR, Scopus, EBSCO, WoS, ScienceDirect, SciELO, and Redalyc.
Secondly, the criteria for reviewing, extracting, including, and excluding documents were outlined, ensuring that the subject matter primarily focused on accounting. Thirdly, the selected documents were thoroughly analyzed to extract relevant data, identify the concept of UCA, systematize the issues addressed, and characterize the relevant users. Finally, the findings were synthesized.
4. Results
4.1 Bibliometric Analysis
Eighty-eight papers were retrieved, of which 16 focused on Activity-Based Costing (ABC), cost accounting, and regulation and privatization were excluded due to their failure to provide any conceptual discussion on UCA or to establish a position on information users, thus not addressing the inquiries of this study. This left a total of 72 papers, 69% of which were in English, 26% in Spanish, and 7% in Portuguese. Among these papers, 24% employed a quantitative methodology, while 77.1% utilized a qualitative approach.
The retrieved papers addressed various services within the utilities industry (see Figure 1).
Some focused on the accounting practices of regulated companies in general, including the railway sector and utility companies, while others specifically addressed the utility company sector, with particular emphasis on those providing water and sewerage, energy, gas, or telecommunications services.
4.2 Background of UCA publications
Of the 72 selected papers, the oldest source dates back to 1919, while the most recent was published in 2021, indicating that the literature review spans a century. This extensive timeframe allowed for the observation of several historical elements regarding how UCA has been shaped, the challenges faced during each period, and the regions of origin of the publications.
As illustrated in Figure 2, two distinct trends emerge in the publications: the first trend occurs between 1919 and 1944. Subsequently, there is a notable lack of interest in UCA until it regained prominence after
The interest in UCA studies during the first publication trend is notably concentrated in the United States (see Figure 3), largely due to the legal disputes between regulatory committees and regulated companies. The Smyth v. Ames case in 1898 established that rates should be based on the fair value of the property, which initiated a heated legal confrontation where discussions surrounding accounting techniques played a significant role (Grout, Jenkins, & Zalewska, 2014; Jarrell, 1979; Preston & Vesey, 2008).
Legal debates took place in court, adding a new perspective to accounting matters and fostering disputes among regulators, regulated companies, experts, analysts, academics, and judges. These debates centered around the methodologies for asset measurement, expenditure and income classification, account segregation, accounting uniformity, asset impairment, and other issues affecting fee-setting (Cooper, 1998; Mason, 1936).
After 1944, the U.S. Supreme Court assigned the responsibility of fee setting to regulatory committees, which shifted the focus of the debate from valuation and accounting to the calculation of fees. This issue was subsequently addressed by economists, leading to the emergence of theories and research within the context of utilities companies (Grout et al., 2014; Preston & Vesey, 2008).
Following the ascendance of the Conservative Party in the UK in 1979, a privatization proposal was introduced, with utilities companies playing a prominent role. This proposal expanded to various countries around the world (Castaño Guillén, 2006, p. 84). In response to bureaucratization and managerial challenges within public administration, privatization promised increased competitiveness, which was expected to result in improvements in quality, technology, and lower tariffs.
Following the wave of privatization between 1980 and 1990, issues related to increased fees and quality problems emerged concerning private utility monopolies or oligopolies.
Economic theory attributed these problems to information asymmetries faced by regulators, agency theory, state capture, and asset measurement challenges (Laffont & Tirole, 2001). This context once again highlighted the relevance of accounting in explaining the failures of utilities companies, thereby encouraging further research in the field.
Since 1990, publications on UCA have predominantly originated from the United Kingdom and subsequently from other countries worldwide. Table 1 provides a classification by journal, country of origin, number of publications per journal, and the decade in which each article was published. The affiliation and country of origin of the journals indicate that the publication trend initially stemmed from the U.S., before shifting to the UK and other countries. In 1993, the journal "Financial Accountability & Management" published a special issue on "UC Accounting, Finance and Auditing" (Vol. 9, No. 2), which featured five papers, three of which were focused on UCA.
The earliest papers published between 1919 and 1944 demonstrate a notable trend of referencing U.S. Supreme Court cases (see Table 2). Subsequently, this trend has been characterized by an emphasis on the literature and economic theories.
Jarrell's 1979 publication, which examined the impact of regulation on UCA between 1917 and 1922 in the U.S. and its effect on fee increases in the energy services industry, was revisited in the 1990s. It argued that the regulatory process could lead to the manipulation of accounting measurements to influence shareholder profit rates (Arthur, 1990; McInnes, 1990).
UK authors such as McInnes (1990), Vass (1992), Thomson (1993), and Whittington (1994) reinstated the debate on asset accounting measurement, its implications for impairment, and, consequently, its impact on fees.
Additionally, scholars from other countries, including Japan's Yamamoto (1993) and Russia's MGee (2005), contributed to this discourse.
The debate surrounding UCA measurement problems emerged during the first decade of the 21st century in Latin America, where the works of Galetovic & Sanhueza (2002) and documents from the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) have played a crucial role. By the second decade of the 21st century, the controversy regarding accounting standardization under IFRS gained traction, particularly in Brazil, where the energy regulatory commission did not accept the terms outlined in IFRIC 12. Publications by Brugni et al. (2012) and Cruz et al. (2009) are particularly relevant to this issue.
4.3 Topics addressed in UCA literature
UCA literature has provided discussions on various topics relevant to accounting practices, including the fair value debate, fair value measurement rates, the necessity of depreciation to recognize asset usage, the need for an accounting information system, and the establishment of a uniform chart of accounts specific to this industry. Additional subjects are detailed in Tables 3 and 4.
Fair value measurement, impairment, valuation, uniformity, and account segregation are cross-cutting topics that emerged in the initial stage of the literature and continue to be relevant in contemporary debates. The issue of company valuation, where the strategy involved selling the company at a higher price to subsequently increase fees, was prohibited under regulations (Jarrell, 1979). However, topics such as the comparability of financial statements and the impact of inflation remain inadequately addressed in the UCA literature (Vass, 1993; Whittington, 1994).
The most debated topics in the literature, particularly following the 1990s, include the impact of political costs on accounting measurement and the potential influence on fees, which implies a transfer of wealth from consumers to shareholders. This discussion is directly connected to the necessity for specialized accounting practices for utilities companies that aim to reduce information asymmetry between the company and the regulator. It is also related to the accounting changes resulting from privatization. Consequently, there has been an increasing demand for accounting disclosures that encompass not only financial information but also details on quality, performance, environmental impact, and costs, which can illuminate the managerial and social outcomes of utilities companies.
By the late 1990s, the literature recognized the need for a cost and budget structure capable of providing regulators with improved information to reduce information asymmetry, enhance comparability among companies, and establish equitable rates. Additionally, discussions emerged regarding the impact of International Accounting Standards (IAS) and International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) on UCA, paving the way for debates on accounting and measurement of concession contracts.
This discourse highlighted the need to disseminate more information tailored to the specific requirements of utilities companies' management and regulation, as well as for other users, such as citizens, which may not align with the standardization processes under IFRS.
4.4 UCA definitions in academic literature
The accounting requirements and criteria mandated by regulatory and supervisory entities for utilities companies (UCs) are referred to in the literature as "public service accounting," "accounting for regulated industries," and frequently as "regulatory accounting." The first industry to be regulated in the United States was the rail transport service, which began in 1844. In 1876, Massachusetts took the initial steps toward the uniformity of utilities accounting records, as ordered by the Board of Railway Commissioners (Price, 1965).
UCA initially operated under the same accounting regulations that applied to railway companies. In 1889, the commission was renamed the National Association of Railroad and Utility Commissioners (NARUC). Beginning in 1905, following the establishment of regulatory committees for utilities companies, the necessity for a specific accounting system for this industry gained prominence. This was further reinforced when the U.S. Supreme Court granted utilities companies the right to establish their own accounting systems in 1912 (Preston, 2008).
Regulatory accounting emerges as a unique form of accounting that differs from capital markets financial accounting, requiring a more substantial amount of specific data. While International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) are designed to meet the reporting requirements of investors, capital providers, and creditors, regulatory accounting encompasses the needs of other users, who should be regarded as the primary users of this information.
Moreover, it is essential to recognize that users such as the government not only utilize financial reports but also need to establish accounting criteria and assess financial results. These elements are vital for regulating, monitoring, overseeing, and comparing the public policies developed by regulatory commissions and supervisory entities.
Therefore, it is important to consider the accounting information needs of all stakeholders involved in utilities companies (UCs). This inclusive approach could serve as a strategy to reduce information asymmetry and mitigate moral hazard in the establishment, inspection, and monitoring processes, as well as in the government's role as regulator and supervisor, alongside regulated companies, and other involved parties.
4.5 Characterization of UCA Users
Utilities companies (UCs) are generally regulated due to their monopoly or oligopoly status. Consequently, the state typically assumes the roles of regulator, supervisor, and assessor through regulatory committees, control bodies, and, in some cases, through the courts as a last resort to mediate conflicts between users.
The state acts as an intermediary, seeking fairness and justice among the parties involved. As such, while companies may exert pressure on the state to increase fees and reduce oversight, consumer communities can also influence the process, advocating for lower fees and improved quality of service.
The literature on UCA addresses the interests of various parties; some focus on the financial needs of companies and their shareholders, while others examine the relationships between regulators, regulated entities, and consumers. Furthermore, certain works have included additional stakeholders relevant to conflict mediation within these relationships.
This study characterizes the users identified in the UCA literature using a two-by-two matrix, which facilitates user classification into four categories. The horizontal axis represents the relationship between companies and consumers, while the vertical axis delineates the influence of institutional entities versus social entities. Users are classified based on their closest affiliation. The first category encompasses users under the institutional-enterprise influence (IE), the second includes those under institutional-consumer influence (CI), the third involves consumer-social influence (CS), and the fourth pertains to enterprise-social influence (ES) (see Table 6). This characterization simplifies the accounting of users and clarifies the interests that each article has directed towards UCA (see Table 7).
4.6 IE User Category
The requirements and needs of investors and creditors indicate their interest in obtaining useful information to assess future cash flows. Consequently, information regarding risks, performance, and financial position is of paramount importance.
The UCA literature pertaining to the IE category also encompasses other stakeholders, such as managers, who typically select accounting policies for recognition and measurement based on strategies that benefit shareholders (McGee, 2007). Additionally, managers often engage auditors, financial analysts, and other experts to support their decision-making processes (Loudder, Khurana, & Boatsman, 1996).
4.7 IC User Category
The state should exercise control through regulatory committees and government inspection and oversight entities, acting as mediators between utilities companies (UCs) and consumers. This involves establishing methodologies for setting fees and ensuring quality in service provision, which requires the identification of the information needed from UCs and the provision of guidelines for the preparation of such information. The regulator establishes accounting policies related to the recognition, measurement, and disclosure of the information that the regulated entity must submit, based on the necessity for uniformity in accounts, as well as the recognition and measurement of assets, expenses, and costs. This also includes the segregation of assets, revenues, and expenses associated with regulated and non-regulated activities, as well as accounting for contracts and intangibles, among other considerations (Yamamoto, 1993).
However, accounting standardization institutions are currently promoting the standardization of the accounting policies utilized by UC industry regulators, implicitly adopting the needs of capital market stakeholders. This situation has led to varying debates and conflicts, depending on the positions of domestic regulatory bodies and the influence exerted by different stakeholders promoting accounting standardization (Vianna Brugni et al., 2012).
Politicians are critical actors in enacting laws and regulations that determine the independence or dependence of regulatory committees from executive and government administrative decisions, which may be influenced by companies or voters (Helden & Reichard, 2019). Politicians require information and statistics provided by both companies and regulatory committees to exercise political control. Moreover, accounting information can be instrumental in (de)legitimizing political positions and decisions (Giacomini et al., 2016, p. 484).
When disputes arise between consumers and UCs that are not diligently addressed by regulatory or supervisory entities, the parties may escalate their complaints to the courts, where judges are responsible for resolving the disputes (Mason, 1936).
4.8 CS User Category
Consumers are the users most adversely affected by fees, quality, and customer service. Individually, they exert minimal influence on UCA policy-making and generally lack the knowledge to fully understand accounting disclosures. Nevertheless, the media plays a crucial role in reporting on UCA actions, significantly impacting public opinion.
It has facilitated consumer mobilization and influenced voters' decisions to demand better performance from utilities companies (UCs) and adjustments to government regulations (Beekes, 2003; Cooper, 1998).
In some countries, consumer representatives are appointed to advocate for consumers before regulatory committees, mediating to ensure that state regulations and oversight benefit those they represent (Scott, 1947).
Shaoul (1997) argues that academic researchers play a vital role in disclosing and exposing the social situations of organizations; however, in the context of UCA, this type of user has primarily focused on analyzing problems and technical issues, without critically questioning accounting practices and business conduct. Shaoul contends that it is feasible to utilize the information disclosed by companies in their financial statements to report on inappropriate events and unfair or socially irresponsible outcomes.
Furthermore, other users, such as auditors and environmental and social activists, engage in critical work concerning corporations' irresponsible actions. These users seek accounting information that enables them to demonstrate misleading actions or omissions in disclosures (Osorio-Agudelo et al., 2020).
4.9 EN category users
Workers, trade unions, and labor leaders of utilities companies (UCs) are also users of the accounting information produced by these organizations, as they negotiate rights and obligations with management (Scott, 1947). Companies are not only financially accountable to their shareholders; they also bear a social responsibility and obligations to their workers and society at large. UCA can help define and illustrate the allocation of benefits among the stakeholders involved in the productive and social developments of UCs, given that these services are socially relevant. Thus, the varying benefits derived from UCs' activities should be allocated equitably.
When preparing accounting information that reflects the situation and performance of the UCs, accountants and public auditors should consider not only the interests of shareholders and managers but also those of other third parties involved in these relationships. Consequently, accountants could develop accounting information that is beneficial to a broader range of users (Jarrell, 1975).
The systematic literature review identified a greater interest in information conflicts within the institutional-consumer (IC) category, present in approximately 80% of the documents, compared to about 56% for the institutional-enterprise (IE) category. The consumer-social (CS) category accounted for 38%, while the enterprise-social (ES) category comprised only 10% (see Table 7). The results of our literature review are consistent with those obtained by Shaoul (1997), who argued that academic research on UCA has primarily concentrated on technical and institutional problems rather than on critical and social issues.
The characterization of accounting information users in the context of utilities companies is closely linked to the findings of the bibliometric analysis, which reveals a diversity of actors with specific informational needs. This finding aligns with theoretical frameworks on information asymmetry, suggesting that the lack of adequate data can create imbalances in the relationships between different users and companies, particularly in a monopolistic sector.
The reviewed literature indicates that while investors and regulators are the primary recipients of accounting information, citizens and other stakeholders also require transparent and accessible data to exercise their right to information and participate in the oversight of the services they receive.
This underscores the necessity of developing an accounting approach that not only meets the demands of capital markets but also addresses the needs of underrepresented users, thereby contributing to mitigating the information asymmetry inherent in a monopolized sector. Consequently, it becomes evident that further research is needed to deepen the understanding of the relationship between regulatory accounting and diverse users, promoting a framework that ensures transparency and accountability in the management of utilities companies.
5. Discussion and conclusions
Utility Companies Accounting (UCA) is recognized as a specialized form of accounting that must meet the diverse needs of various users due to conflicts of interest arising from the industry's monopoly or oligopoly status, the necessity for fee regulation, and the significance of the services provided for social welfare. This situation contradicts the standardization process under International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), which promotes the homogenization of financial information across all industries and economic sectors, positioning investors and capital providers as the primary and prototypical users.
The literature on UCA has predominantly focused on technical aspects rather than addressing critical accounting issues or dimensions within the industry. This is evident in the results of this systematic literature review, which indicates that the research and work identified primarily address the information needs of UCs' shareholders and regulators, often neglecting the needs of consumers, workers, and other societal users.
The discussion surrounding users' information needs and the concept of UCA is particularly relevant in our current standardization environment, as it contributes to assessing whether IFRS-based information effectively addresses industry conflicts and mitigates information asymmetry and agency problems among the various stakeholders of UCs, or whether, conversely, IFRS-based information exacerbates accounting non-conformity and widens decoupling gaps.
The findings suggest that regulatory accounting must adapt to the specific characteristics of utility companies, considering the diverse range of information users, which includes not only investors but also citizens, government agencies, and regulatory bodies. This plurality of users underscores the need to develop an accounting framework that minimizes information asymmetry and addresses the specific demands of each group, contrasting with the prevailing trend toward standardization under IFRS.
Despite the crucial importance of the utility companies sector for the economy and the well-being of citizens, there exists a notable scarcity of research and academic publications dedicated to this specific area of regulatory accounting. This lack of attention in the scientific literature is concerning, given that public utilities are fundamental to the functioning of society and the economy, directly impacting citizens' quality of life and community sustainability.
The limited exploration of accounting topics in this sector not only hinders a comprehensive understanding of its dynamics and challenges but also underestimates the necessity of developing accounting frameworks that address the specific needs of information users. Therefore, it is imperative to encourage researchers to delve deeper into this field, promoting studies that address the complexities and specificities of utility companies, in order to contribute to better regulation, transparency, and accountability in a sector that is vital to economic and social development.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Source of Financing
This work was not financed by any entity whats oever.
References
Amador Cabra, L. (2011). Modelo de contabilidad regulatoria y viabilidad financiera en el sector de saneamiento. Apuntes Contables. Vol. 15, p. 43-82. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267408269
Arnold, P. & Cheng, R. (2000). The economic consequences of regulatory accounting in the nuclear power industry: Market reaction to plant abandonments. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy. Vol. 19, No. 2, p. 161-187. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-4254(00)00009-0
Arthur, N. (1990). Financial Reporting to the Industries Assistance Commission: A Study in the Rôle of Accounting Information in Regulatory Decision Making. Australian Journal of Management. Vol. 15. No. 2, p. 217-241. https://doi.org/10.1177/031289629001500201
Bauer, J. (1930). Depreciation and Public Utility Valuation. The Accounting Educators Journal. Vol. 5. No. 2, p. 111-116. http://www.jstor.org/stable/239166
Beekes, W. (2003). Earnings management in response to a Windfall Tax in the water and Sewerage Utility Companies in England and Wales. SSRN. Vol. 10, p. 1-41. http://www.nber.org/papers/w19656
Biondi, Y. (2018). Fair value and the formation of financial market prices through ignorance and hazard. Chapter 16 in The Routledge Companion to Fair Value in Accounting, p. 288-295. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315621876-16
Braunstein, J., & Johnson, M. H. (1939). Public utility depreciaton and the income tax. Harvard Law Review, Vol. 52. No. 7, p. 1077-1104. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1333697
Bustos, Á., & Galetovic, A. (2002). Regulación Por Empresa Eficiente: ¿Quién Es Realmente Usted? Estudios Públicos. Vol. 86, p. 182. https://www.cepchile.cl/cep/site/artic/20160304/asocfile/20160304092949/rev86_bustosgaletovic.pdf
Caridad, J. M., & Moreno Campos, I. (2002). La información contable de las empresas suministradoras de agua. Partida Doble. Vol. 132, p. 16-27. http://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=617729
Carvalho, E. dos S., Wanderley, C. de A., Libonati, J. J., & Silva, A. (2014). Um Estudo Comparativo Entre Indicadores Econômico-Financeiros, Baseados na Contabilidade Regulatória e nas Normas Contábeis Internacionais das Empresas de Distribuição de Energia do Setor Elétrico Brasileiro. Registro Contábil. Vol. 5. No. 3, p. 20-40. https://repositorio.ufpe.br/handle/123456789/11069
Castaño Guillén, J. (2006). La Dirección De Resultados en las empresas privatizadas (Tesis Doctoral). Universidad de Extremadura, España. https://www.eumed.net/tesis-doctorales/2009/jcg/index.htm
Chazeau, M. G. (1937). The Nature of the " Rate Base " in the Regulation of Public Utilities. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. Vol. 51. No. 2, p. 298-316. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1882090
Clader, W. A. (1919). Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without. The Journal of Accountancy. Vol. 28. No. 2, p. 81-94.
Clemens, E. W. (1943). The Critical Issue of Depreciation in Public Utility Valuation. Southern Economic Journal. Vol. 9. No. 3, p. 252-261. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1052547
Conrad, L. (2005). The role of current cost accounting for financial reporting and regulation in utility industries. Public Money and Management. Vol. 25. No. 2, p. 115-122. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9302.2005.00461.x
Cooper, S. (1998). Control, accounting and value-for-money implications of utility regulation: A literature review. Managerial Auditing Journal. Vol. 13. No. 2, p. 117-125. https://doi.org/10.1108/02686909810202818
Cruz, C. F., Silva, A. F., & Rodrigues, A. (2009). Uma Discussão sobre os Efeitos Contábeis da Adoção da Interpretação IFRIC 12 - Contratos de Concessão. Contabilidade Vista & Revista. Vol. 20. No. 4, p. 57-85. https://revistas.face.ufmg.br/index.php/contabilidadevistaerevista/article/view/716
Cuervo Tafur, J., Gómez Montoya, F., & Pulgarín Giraldo, H. (2000). Actualidad y perspectivas de los sistemas de información contable enlas empresasde serviciospúblicos domiciliarios. Contaduría. No. 38, p. 16-40.
Damacena Ribeiro, R., Coutinho e Silva, A. H., & Cosenza, J. P. (2017). Contabilidad regulatoria versus contabilidad financiera: estudio de caso de las diferencias del tratamiento contable en empresas brasileñas del sector eléctrico. Cuadernos de Contabilidad. Vol. 18. No. 46, p. 1-22. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.11144/Javeriana.cc18-46.crvc
Damacena Ribeiro, R., & Silva, A. (2016). O que pensam os reguladores sobre as diferenças da contabilidade societária e regulatória no setor elétrico no brasil após a emissão do OCPC 08. Revista Brasileira de Contabilidade. Vol. 8. No.224, p. 47-61. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316994800
E.C.G. (1923). Public Utility Valuation. Michigan Law Review. Vol. 22. No. 2, p. 147-151. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1277334
Fernandez, D., Jouravlev, A., Lentini, E., & Yurquina, A. (2009). Contabilidad regulatoria, sustentabilidad financiera y gestión mancomunada: temas relevantes en servicios de agua y saneamiento. Recursos Naturales e Infraestructura. Vol. 146, p. 1-74. https://repositorio.cepal.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/f7d017f4-8231-49b9-80d5-60731d4ff424/content
Foundation IFRS. (2018). El marco conceptual para la información financiera. London-United Kingdom: IASB.
Galetovic, A., & Sanhueza, R. (2002). Regulación de servicios públicos: ¿hacia dónde debemos ir? Estudios Públicos. Vol. 85. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/242708404
Giacomini, D., Sicilia, M., & Steccolini, I. (2016). Contextualizing politicians ' uses of accounting information : reassurance and ammunition. Newcastle University EPrints. Vol. 36. No. 7, p. 483-490. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2016.1237128
Gómez Villegas, M. (2004). Una evaluación del enfoque de las normas internacionales de información financierra (NIIF) desde la teoría de la contabilidad y el control. Innovar. No. 24, p. 112-126. http://www.scielo.org.co/pdf/inno/v14n24/v14n24a09.pdf
Grout, P. A., Jenkins, A., & Zalewska, A. (2014). Regulatory valuation of public utilities: A case study of the twentieth century. Business History. Vol. 56. No. 6, p. 936-955. https://doi.org/10.1080/00076791.2013.848340
Haun, R. D. (1939). Inconsistencies in Public Utility Depreciation. Michigan Law Review. Vol. 38. No. 2, p. 160-187. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1282879
Hooks, J., & Tooley, S. (2015). Electricity pricing in New Zealand and the Australian State of Queensland: Accounting for the impact of sector restructuring. Financial Accountability and Management. Vol. 31. No. 4, p. 439-462. https://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12064
Howard, S. E. (1936). the Rate Base and the De preciation Base in Recent Public Utility Cases. American Economic Review. Vol. 26. No. 2, 258-271. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1803006
IASB. (2010). El Marco Conceptual para la Información Financiera - parte A. London-United Kingdom: IASB.
Jara S., L. A., Harold, C. M., & Castro G., B. (2010). Adopción de IFRS en empresas chilenas del sector eléctrico que cotizan en bolsa. Revista Internacional Legis de Contabilidad y Auditoría. Vol. 42, p. 131-163. https://www.observatorioifrs.cl/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Jara_et_al_2010.pdf
Jarrell, G. A. (1979). The Demand for State Regulation of the Electric Utility Industry. The Journal of Law & Economics. Vol. 21. No. 2, p. 269-295. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/725233.pdf
Jollands, S., & Quinn, M. (2017). Politicising the sustaining of water supply in Ireland -the role of accounting concepts. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal. Vol. 30. No. 1, p. 164-190. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-04-2015-2018
Jouravlev, A. (2003). Acceso a la información: una tarea pendiente para la regulación latinoamericana. CEPAL Naciones Unidas. https://repositorio.cepal.org/items/5cda032d-109c-47db-bb19-05dbd1dfac21
Laffont, J. J., & Tirole, J. (2001). Competition in telecommunications. United States of America: CES.
Lapsley, I. (1993). The accounting and organisational consequences of privatisation and regulation. Financial Accountability and Management. Vol. 9. No. 2, p. 69-73. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229470414
León, E. F., & Suárez, J. (2018). Efectos de la implementación de la normativa contable internacional en las empresas públicas del sector eléctrico colombiano. Criterio Libre. Vol. 16. No. 29, p. 87-120. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=6836639
Lev, B. (2018). The deteriorating usefulness of financial report information and how to reverse it. Accounting and Business Research. Vol. 48. No. 5, p. 465-493. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2018.1470138
Loudder, M. L., Khurana, I. K., & Boatsman, J. R. (1996). market valuation of regulatory assets in public utility firms.
Martelleto Silberman, I., Rodrigues, A., Sancovschi, M., & Castro Ferreira, V. A. de. (2013). Efeitos da adoção da ICPC 01 e IFRIC 12 na formação das tarifas de concessionárias do setor de saneamento básico. Advances in Scientific and Applied Accounting. Vol. 6. No. 3, p. 265-293. https://anpcont.org.br/pdf/2013/CUE100.pdf
Mason, P. (1936). The Supreme Court on Public-Utility Depreciation. The Accounting Review. Vol. 11. No. 3, p. 234-270. http://www.jstor.org/stable/238629
McGee, R. W. (2005). Financial Reporting in the Russian Energy Sector. CIS Energy & Min-ning Law Journal, p. 23-28. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.883770
McGee, R. W. (2007). Corporate Governance and the Timeliness of Financial Reporting: A Case Study of the Russian Energy Sector. SSRN Electronic Journal, p. 1-15. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.978114
Mclnnes, W. M. (1990). A Longitudinal Study of Accounting Changes: The UK Gas Industry 1969-1974. Accounting and Business Research. Vol. 20. No. 80, p. 315-327. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.1990.9728890
Morehouse, E. W. (1937). Innovations in Public Utility Accounting Regulation. The Yale Law Journal. Vol. 46. No. 6, p. 955-984. https://doi.org/10.2307/792049
Morehouse, E. W. (1938). Changes in water utility accounting. Journal American Water Works Association. Vol. 30. No. 10, p. 1605-1612. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41231979
Moreira Carvalho Andrade, M. E., & Martins, E. (2017). Challenges with the public policy of measuring assets to set tariffs in the electricity sector: Should someone benefit and someone be sacrificed? Revista Contabilidade e Financas. Vol. m28. No. 75, p. 344-360. https://doi.org/10.1590/1808-057x201703160
Nash, L. R. (1926). Public Utility Depreciation Accounting. The Journal of Land and Public Utility Economics. Vol. 2. No. 4, p. 369-384. https://www.jstor.org/stable/239168
Newbery, D. M. (1997). Determining the regulatory asset base for utility price regulation. Utilities Policy. Vol. 6 No. 1, p. 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0957-1787(96)00015-x
Nobes, C. (2015). International differences in IFRS adoptions and IFRS practices. The Routledge Companion to Financial Accounting Theory. Routledge Taylor And Francis Group. https://api.pageplace.de/preview/DT0400.9781135107260_A29479997/preview-9781135107260_A29479997.pdf
Norby, W. C. (1980). Accounting for Financial Analysis: Application of Inflation Accounting Concepts to Regulated Utility Companies. Financial Analysts Journal. Vol. 36. No. 5, p. 18-19 + p. 74-7. https://doi.org/10.2307/4478379
Ogden, S. G. (1995). Transforming frameworks of accountability: The case of water privatization. Accounting, Organizations and Society Vol. 20. No. 2-3, p. 193-218. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-3682(95)95745-I
Ogden, S. G. (1997). Accounting for organizational performance: The construction of the customer in the privatized water industry. Accounting, Organizations and Society. Vol. 22. No. 6, p.529-556. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-3682(96)00027-X
Orellana Fuentes, C., & Azúa Álvarez, D. (2017). Application of revaluation model of property, plant and equipment in Chilean companies in the energy sector. Estudios Gerenciales. Vol. 33. No. 142, p. 102-111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.estger.2017.01.001
Osorio-Agudelo, J. A., Naranjo-Gil, D., & Ripoll-Feliu, V. (2020). Cost of water use for negotiating rates in energy exchanges: Evidence from the hydroelectric industry. Water (Switzerland). Vol. 12. No. 2, p. 1-19. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12020361
Pawsey, N., Ananda, J., & Hoque, Z. (2017). Rationality, accounting and benchmarking water businesses: An analysis of measurement challenges. International Journal of Public Sector Management. Vol. 31. No. 3, p. 290-315. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-04-2017-0124
Picazo-Tadeo, A. J., González-Gómez, F., & Sáez-Fernández, F. J. (2009). Accounting for operating environments in measuring water utilities' managerial efficiency. Service Industries Journal. Vol. 29. No. 6, p. 761-773. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642060802190300
Pompilio Sartori, J. J., Robles, A. M., & Oviedo, J. M. (2009). Contabilidad regulatoria en empresas reguladas : análisis del caso de la Empresa Provincial de Energía de Córdoba. Realc, p. 0-35. http://www.olade.org/realc/?v=autores&autor=Robles,AnaMaria&page=1%0A
Preston, A. M., & Vesey, A. M. (2008). The construction of US utility accounting: 1882-1944. Accounting, Organizations and Society. Vol. 33. No. 4-5, p. 415-435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2007.03.003
Price, J. H., Walker, R., & Spacek, L. (1965). Accounting Uniformity in the Regulated Industries. Law and Contemporary Problems. Vol. 30. No. 4, p. 824-849. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1190782
Puxty, A. G. (1997). Accounting choice and a theory of crisis: The cases of post-privatization British Telecom and British Gas. Accounting, Organizations and Society. Vol. 22. No. 7, p. 713-735. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-3682(96)00019-0
Ramírez Orellana, A., & Valls Martínez, M. C. (2014). Normas contables para las empresas concesionarias de infraestructuras públicas: comentario y reflexiones sobre la activación de gastos financiero. Revista de Contabilidad, p. 1-18. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=5777951
Rico Iglesias, J., & Moreno Campos, I. (2002). Hacia una mayor transparencia en la información sobre el servicio de abastecimiento de agua. Anales de Estudios Económicos y Empresariales. No. 15, p. 29-46. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=793543
Rincón-Soto, C. A., & Gómez-Villegas, M. (2021). La medición a valor razonable en activos fijos. Caso empresas de servicios públicos domiciliarios cotizadas en Colombia. Vol 22. No. 1, p. 1-18. https://doi.org/10.11144/Javeriana.cc22.mvra
Rodrigues, L. L., & Craig, R. (2007). Assessing international accounting harmonization using Hegelian dialectic, isomorphism and Foucault. Critical Perspectives on Accounting. Vol. 18. No. 6, p. 739-757. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2006.02.007
Ruiz Vásquez, L. (2006). Contabilidad regulatoria: el caso colombiano. Regulación de Agua Potable y Saneamiento Básico. No. 15, p. 64-85. https://vlex.com.co/vid/contabilidad-regulatoria-colombiano-430540490
Scott, D. (1947). Role of accounting in public utility regulation. Review The Accounting. Vol. 22. No. 3, p. 227-240. https://www.jstor.org/stable/240714
Shaoul, J. (1997). The power of accounting: Reflecting on water privatization? Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal. Vol. 10. No. 3, p. 382-405. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513579710178124
Siddaway, A. P., Wood, A. M., & Hedges, L. V. (2019). How to Do a Systematic Review: A Best Practice Guide for Conducting and Reporting Narrative Reviews, Meta-Analyses, and Meta-Syntheses. Annual Review of Psychology. Vol. 70. No. 1, p. 747-770. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-102803
Staubus, G. (1961). A Theory of Accounting to Investors. Berkeley, C.A.; University of California Press.
Stechemesser, K., & Guenther, E. (2012). Carbon accounting: A systematic literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production. Vol. 36, p. 17-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/jjclepro.2012.02.021
Sunder, S. (2010). Adverse effects of uniform written reporting standards on accounting practice, education, and research. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy. Vol. 29. No. 2, p. 99-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2009.10.011
Suzart, J., Rossato de Souza, V., Dalla Riva, E., & Martins, E. (2013). Corporate Information versus Regulatory Information: Relevance of Accounting Information in the Brazilian Electric Sector. International Journal of Business and Social Science. Vol. 4. No. 11, p. 161-175. https://ijbssnet.com/journals/Vol_4_No_11_September_2013/17.pdf
Thomson, L. (1993a). Reporting Changes in the Electricity Supply Industry and Privatisation. Financial Accountability and Management. Vol. 9. No. 2, p. 131-157. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1468-0408.1993.tb00370.x
Thomson, L. (1993b). The financial and accounting implications of the privatization of the regional electricity companies in the UK. Utilities Policy. Vol. 3. No. 1, p. 9-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/0957-1787(93)90028-U
Tiscini, R., & Martiniello, L. (2012). Accounting for Concessions: An Empirical Analysis of Financial Statements of Italian Listed Companies. SSRN Electronic Journal, p. 1-25. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2095198
Troxel, C. E. (1938). Improvements of Public Utility Accounting. Journal of Business of the University of Chicago. Vol. 11. No. 1, p. 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1086/232472
Van Helden, J., & Reichard, C. (2019). Making sense of the users of public sector accounting information and their needs. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting and Financial Management. Vol. 31. No. 4, p. 478-495. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBAFM-10-2018-0124
Vass, P. (1992). Establishing a Conceptual Framework for Regulated Industries' Accounting and Accountability. Financial Accountability and Management. Vol. 8. No. 4, p. 299-315. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0408.1992.tb00445.x
Vass, P. (1993). Water Privatisation and the First Periodic Review. Financial Accountability and Management. Vol. 9. No. 3, p. 209-224. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1468-0408.1993.tb00374.x
Vianna Brugni, T., Rodrigues, A., Ferreira da Cruz, C., & Szuster, N. (2012). IFRIC 12, ICPC 01 e Contabilidade Regulatória: Influências na Formação de Tarifas do Setor de Energia Elétrica. Sociedade, Contabilidade e Gestão. Vol. 7. No. 2, p. 104-119. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/368146612
Vinnari, E. M., & Nösi, S. (2008). Creative Accrual Accounting in the Public Sector: 'Milking' Water Utilities To Balance Municipal Budgets and Accounts. Financial Accountability & Management. Vol. 24. No.2, p. 97-116. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0408.2008.00448.x
Vojáčková, H. (2015). Financial Instruments: Meeting Disclosure Requirements Defined by IFRS 7 in Energy Industry in the Czech Republic. Procedia Economics and Finance. Vol. 25, p. 176-184. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2212-5671(15)00726-1
Whittington, G. (1994). Current Cost Accounting: Its Role in Regulated Utilities. Fiscal Studies. Vol. 15. No. 4, p. 88-101. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-5890.1994.tb00211.x
Yamamoto, K. (1993). Accounting Information and Public Utility Regulation: the Case of a Privatised Telecommunication Corporation in Japan. Financial Accountability and Management. Vol. 9. No. 2, p. 115-130. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1468-0408.1993.tb00369.x
Los contenidos de la Revista Criterio Libre son publicados bajo los términos y condiciones de la Licencia Creative Commons Atribución-No Comercial-SinDerivadas 4.0 Internacional (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0).