会计电算化下的审计风险与防范措施

会计电算化技术的广泛应用给独立审计工作带来了系统环境风险、系统控制风险、财务数据风险、审计软件风险和人员操作风险。这需采取措施,完善电算化审计标准与准则,开发、应用高效的审计软件,审计会计电算化的信息系统,审计通用数据接口的设计,提高审计人员的计算机素质,运用不同的电算化审计方法,加强对内部控制的审计,防范会计电算化的审计风险。     

试论信息化环境下企业内部审计风险及对策

众所周知,审计风险与审计环境是密不可分的,审计环境改变必然导致审计风险随之变化。由于企业网络信息系统的发展,使得审计环境越来越复杂。这一方面提高了审计工作的效率,另一方面也给内审工作带来了新的挑战。这就要求内审人员应充分了解信息化环境下企业内审风险的成因,采取有效的措施积极应对,不断提高内部审计质量。     

网络环境下审计风险及其防范

本文诠释审计风险的基本含义,考察网络环境下审计风险要素的新特征,阐述防范审计风险的具体策略,以期人们能够对网络环境下审计风险有一个比较清晰的认识。     

浅议会计电算化环境下的审计问题

随着我国的经济不断深入发展，我国会计事业随之走向国际化，与世界接轨。会计电算化现已成为一门主导行业，在会计行业中占有重要的地位。原有的审计技术和审计体系已经不能再满足会计行业发展的需求。本文主要阐述了有关会计电算化环境下审计的相关内容，主要包含以下内容：审计相关概念、会计电算化环境下审计发展现状与面临的问题、如何防范审计风险。     

浅谈现代风险审计模式下的重大错报风险评估

21世纪初,中外发生了一系列重大会计舞弊案件,国际新审计准则和中国新审计准则相继顽布,现代审计风险模型取代了传统审计风险模型.注册会计师执业环境的变化为我们会计业界敲响了警钟:审计风险近在咫尺,注册会计师随时都可能成为社会各界指责的焦点,由此现代风险导向审计应运而生.重大错报风险评估在现代风险导向审计中处于核心地位,其研究具有非常重大的现实意义和理论价值.本文探讨了风险导向审计等相关概念、可能存在重大错报风险的事项以及审计程序等.     

网络视角的审计创新

网络经济时代正已出人意料的速度向我们逼近,导致企业管理思想和会计业务的变革。由此使现代审计面临一系列挑战。本文针对网络经济提出审计创新的相关举措,包括构架网络审计的技术支持、建立网上审计的基本模式和防范、控制网络审计风险。     

浅谈会计电算化下的审计风险及风险应对

随着信息技术的迅猛发展和经济全球化的深入,会计电算化在企业经营管理中得到了广泛的普及和应用。会计电算化的引入可以大大提高工作质量和效率;但同时,它的广泛应用也使得审计对象以及实行内部控制的方式发生了较大变化,使得审计工作无法适应会计电算化快速变化的环境。因此,本文围绕这一问题,对我国会计电算化下审计风险的成因展开分析,并提出了相应的应对措施。     

会计信息系统内部控制创新研究——在互联网络环境下

随着互联网的迅猛发展和普及应用,基于互联网的计算机会计信息系统已成为必然的发展趋势,而互联网系统开放性、共享性、分散性的特点,给计算机会计信息系统的内部控制带来了新的问题和挑战.因此,如何建立有效的计算机会计信息系统内部控制制度来防范、规避网络环境下计算机会计信息系统新的风险十分必要.本文对网络环境下计算机会计信息系统的内部控制制度存在的问题及风险进行深入分析,探讨网络环境下防范风险与创新计算机会计信息系统的内部控制制度的对策.     

现代信息技术环境下的审计风险研究

以计算机技术为主导的现代信息技术对传统审计风险产生了深刻的影响,并赋予了其新的内涵。在新的环境下为了提高审计质量,必须充分认识到审计风险的变化,以完善审计风险理论。本文从探求审计风险的内涵入手,认为审计风险是指整个审计职业面临的风险,由内在风险、外在风险两个有机部分组成。基于现代信息技术环境,重点对审计内在、外在风险的成因进行了分析,并提出相应的控制对策。     

基于控制观的网络会计风险管理研究

网络既带来了会计信息系统本质性的变革,也伴随着风险因素和安全隐患。本文首先探索了网络环境对会计控制的影响以及风险形成的原因,然后引申了现代控制观,立足科学筹划和有效管理视角,提出了构建网络会计风险控制体系的思路和方法。     

Summarizing Risk Using Risk Measures and Risk Indices

Our society is fascinated with risk in many different areas and disciplines. One of the main ways to describe and communicate the level of risk is through risk indices, which summarize risk using numbers or categories such as words, letters, or colors. These indices are used to communicate risks to the public, understand how risk is changing over time, compare among different risks, and support decision making. Given the different methods to construct risk indices, including flawed methods such as risk matrices, this article develops specific steps that analysts can follow to create a risk index. This article emphasizes the importance of describing risk with a probability distribution, developing a numerical risk measure that summarizes the probability distribution, and finally translating the risk measure to an index. Measuring the risk is the most difficult part and requires the analyst to summarize a probability distribution into one or possibly a few numbers. The risk measure can then be transformed to a numerical or categorical index. I apply the method outlined in this article to construct a risk index that compares the risk of fatalities in aviation and highway transportation.     

Probabilistic Risk Analysis and Terrorism Risk

Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and the subsequent establishment of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), considerable efforts have been made to estimate the risks of terrorism and the cost effectiveness of security policies to reduce these risks. DHS, industry, and the academic risk analysis communities have all invested heavily in the development of tools and approaches that can assist decisionmakers in effectively allocating limited resources across the vast array of potential investments that could mitigate risks from terrorism and other threats to the homeland. Decisionmakers demand models, analyses, and decision support that are useful for this task and based on the state of the art. Since terrorism risk analysis is new, no single method is likely to meet this challenge. In this article we explore a number of existing and potential approaches for terrorism risk analysis, focusing particularly on recent discussions regarding the applicability of probabilistic and decision analytic approaches to bioterrorism risks and the Bioterrorism Risk Assessment methodology used by the DHS and criticized by the National Academies and others.     

Characterizing Risk for Cumulative Risk Assessments

In assessing environmental health risks, the risk characterization step synthesizes information gathered in evaluating exposures to stressors together with dose–response relationships, characteristics of the exposed population, and external environmental conditions. This article summarizes key steps of a cumulative risk assessment (CRA) followed by a discussion of considerations for characterizing cumulative risks. Cumulative risk characterizations differ considerably from single chemical‐ or single source‐based risk characterization. CRAs typically focus on a specific population instead of a pollutant or pollutant source and should include an evaluation of all relevant sources contributing to the exposures in the population and other factors that influence dose–response relationships. Second, CRAs may include influential environmental and population‐specific conditions, involving multiple chemical and nonchemical stressors. Third, a CRA could examine multiple health effects, reflecting joint toxicity and the potential for toxicological interactions. Fourth, the complexities often necessitate simplifying methods, including judgment‐based and semi‐quantitative indices that collapse disparate data into numerical scores. Fifth, because of the higher dimensionality and potentially large number of interactions, information needed to quantify risk is typically incomplete, necessitating an uncertainty analysis. Three approaches that could be used for characterizing risks in a CRA are presented: the multiroute hazard index, stressor grouping by exposure and toxicity, and indices for screening multiple factors and conditions. Other key roles of the risk characterization in CRAs are also described, mainly the translational aspect of including a characterization summary for lay readers (in addition to the technical analysis), and placing the results in the context of the likely risk‐based decisions.     

Foundational Issues in Risk Assessment and Risk Management

In spite of the maturity reached by many of the methods used in risk assessment and risk management, broad consensus has not been established on fundamental concepts and principles. The risk fields still suffer from a lack of clarity on many key scientific pillars. The purpose of this article is to point to this situation and through some illustrating examples discuss the challenges that the fields here face. Moreover, the purpose of the article is to reflect on how to improve the present situation and enhance the risk fields. We argue that the establishment of some common scientific pillars as well as a strong and continuous research focus on foundational issues are critical success factors. The article specifically addresses the role of the peer‐reviewed journals and the international standards in the fields. We hope that the article can contribute to a revitalization of the discussion of foundational issues in risk assessment and risk management.     

风险管理的基本技术和负险报酬

本文把风险管理的基本技术概括为分散化和对冲两种,并认为其它的风险管理方法其实是这两种方法派生的.在这两种风险管理技术的基础上,讨论了风险的报酬问题.     

Foundational Issues in Risk Assessment and Risk Management

This is a perspective article on foundational issues in risk assessment and management. The aim is to discuss the needs, obstacles, and challenges for the establishment of a renewed, strong scientific foundation for risk assessment and risk management suited for the current and future technological challenges. The focus is on (i) reviewing and discussing the present situation and (ii) identifying how to best proceed in the future, to develop the risk discipline in the directions needed. The article provides some reflections on the interpretation and understanding of the concept of “foundations of risk assessment and risk management” and the challenges therein. One main recommendation is that different arenas and moments for discussion are needed to specifically address foundational issues in a way that embraces the many disciplinary communities involved (from social scientists to engineers, from behavioral scientists to statisticians, from health physicists to lawyers, etc.). One such opportunity is sought in the constitution of a novel specialty group of the Society of Risk Analysis.     

Risk Perception and Risk Talk: The Case of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Radiation Risk

Individuals’ perceptions and their interpersonal communication about a risk event, or risk talk, can play a significant role in the formation of societal responses to the risk event. As they formulate their risk opinions and speak to others, risk information can circulate through their social networks and contribute to the construction of their risk information environment. In the present study, Japanese citizens’ risk perception and risk talk were examined in the context of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear radiation risk. We hypothesized and found that the risk information environment and risk literacy (i.e., competencies to understand and use risk information) interact to influence their risk perception and risk talk. In particular, risk literacy tends to stabilize people's risk perceptions and their risk communications. Nevertheless, there were some subtle differences between risk perception and communication, suggesting the importance of further examination of interpersonal risk communication and its role in the societal responses to risk events.     

The Dynamics of Risk Perception: How Does Perceived Risk Respond to Risk Events?

This paper examines the relationship between perceived risk and experience. This research addresses the processes by which people learn about risk and choose among real life prospects with associated uncertainties, risks and benefits. By comparing the impact of acute risk events with that of chronic risk events on public perception of risk during and after the events, this research focuses on the learning processes that characterize what kinds of risk events alter the perception of risk. Comparing materialized hazards at existing facilities with the risks associated with potential facilities, this research addresses risk choices among real life prospects. This study uses a classic pre-post quasi-experimental design. Surveys conducted in the Spring of 1992 on perceived and acceptable risk in Odessa and La Porte, Texas were conducted prior to risk events. Respondents from that survey were re-interviewed in the Spring of 1993 after the risk events to form a panel design. This paper analyzes the affect of risk events on perceived risk and the implications of these experiences for public policy concerning technological risk. The empirical results suggest that the social processes that construct and maintain risk in the public eye are at least as important as, if not more important than, the physical and psychological dimensions of risk.     

Risk Analysis and Risk Management: An Historical Perspective

This paper reviews the history of risk analysis and risk management, giving special emphasis to the neglected period prior to the 20th century. The overall objective of the paper is to: (1) dampen the prevailing tendency to view present-day concerns about risk in an ahistorical context; (2) shed light on the intellectual antecedents of current thinking about risk; (3) clarify how contemporary ideas about risk analysis and societal risk management differ significantly from the past; and (4) provide a basis for anticipating future directions in risk analysis and management.