Nuvarande Financial Accounting Standard Board (FASB) och International Accounting Standard Board (IASB) har gemensamt utvecklat en ny leasingstandard. Syftet är att skapa konvergens på en internationell nivå samt förbättra finansiella rapporter som ska underlätta användarnas ekonomiska beslut. Tidigare studier visar att den nya leasingstandarden medför effekter på företagens redovisningen och finansiella nyckeltal. Emellertid finns lite kunskap om hur företagen på Large Cap förbereder sina investerare på en ny leasingstandard. Följaktligen är syftet med studien att beskriva hur svenska Large Cap företag väljer att förbereda sina investerare med upplysningar om IFRS 16 i sina finansiella rapporter. Vidare syftar studien till att förklara hur graden av förberedelse påverkas av leasingintensitet, antal bevakande analytiker och vilken implementeringsmetod företagen väljer vid införandet IFRS 16. För att satisfiera syftet användes agentteorin och teorin om frivilliga upplysningar för att analysera och förklara företagens val att lämna förberedande upplysningar. Upplysningarna kvantifierades genom att upplysningarna i företagens fjärde kvartalsrapport och årsredovisning 2018 kodades med en diskret variabel. Resultatet visar att företagen på Large Cap förbereder sina investerare med mer omfattande upplysningar i årsredovisningen jämfört med kvartalsrapporten. Företagen bedömer att kvalitativa upplysningar är av mer väsentligt värde för investerare än kvantitativa upplysningar eftersom de kan skapa bättre förståelse för leasingstandardens innebörd hos investerare. Vidare visar studien att varken leasingintensitet, antal bevakande analytiker eller val av implementeringsmetod påverkar företagens förberedande upplysningar. Den rimligaste tolkningen är att leasingintensiva företag inte bedömer att effekterna av leasingstandarden är av mer väsentligt värde för investerare än icke-leasingintensiva företag. En förklaring till att det inte föreligger ett samband mellan antal analytiker och företagens förberedande upplysningar kan förklaras av att företagen inte upplever att upplysningar om leasingstandarden leder till fördelar. Istället kan upplysningarna resultera i negativa marknadsreaktioner. Resultatet visar även att en övervägande andel av företagen på Large Cap föredrar den förenklade metoden till förmån för den retroaktiva metoden vid implementering av leasingstandarden. Författarna kan emellertid inte dra säkra slutsatser om företagen som använder den retroaktiva metoden förbereder sina investerare med mer omfattande upplysningar än företagen som använder den förenklade metoden. / The Financial Accounting Standard Board (FASB) and International Accounting Standard Board (IASB) have jointly developed a new accounting standard for leases. The main objective is to harmonize accounting across international borders with a common new lease standard and to ameliorate financial reporting for users of financial reports. Furthermore, researchers have discovered that the new lease standard has a significant impact on firms accounting and key financial ratios. Meanwhile, there is barley any studies in the field which examines how Swedish Large Cap firms chooses to prepare their investors with substantial disclosures on the new lease standard. Therefore, the main purpose of this study is to describe how Swedish Large Cap firms chooses to prepare their investors with substantial disclosures on the new lease standard in their financial reports. Authors of this study also seek to explain how firms lease intensity, number of analyst followers and their choice of transition approach have an impact on firm’s preparatory disclosures. To satisfy the purpose, the authors of this study choose to deploy agency theory and voluntary disclosure theory in order to analyse and explain how firms choose to prepare their investors with IFRS 16 disclosures. Firms disclosures in their interim report for the fourth quarter 2018 and annual report 2018 were quantified with a discrete variable. Furthermore, it appears that Swedish firms on Large Cap prepare their investors with more extensively disclosures in their annual reports compared to their interim reports. Firms assesses that qualitative disclosures are of more material value to investors than quantitative disclosures. One explanatory factor may be that qualitative disclosures provide investors with better understanding of the new lease standard. Moreover, the study fails to explain the relationship between firms lease intensity, number of analyst followers, and firm’s choice of transition approach with the firm’s preparatory disclosures. One interpretation is that firms with high lease intensity do not assess the impact of the new lease standard to be of more material value for investors decisions than firms with low lease intensity. Since the study fails to explain the relationship between number of analyst followers and firm’s preparatory disclosures, a reasonable interpretation is that firms do not benefit from disclosing information about the new lease standard since the information might result in negative market reactions. Meanwhile, this study also provides evidence that a significant proportion of firms on Large Cap chooses the modified retrospective approach in favour of the full retrospective approach to adopt IFRS 16. Although, there is not enough strong evidence to support the hypothesis that Swedish firms which adopt the full retrospective approach prepare their investors with more extensively disclosures than firms which adopt the modified retrospective approach.

<p>Since the beginning of the 1990s important changes took place, such as the collapse of Communism and the dissolution of Yugoslavia. Consequently, the European Union (EU) has faced a new agenda in SouthEastern Europe. The EU policies towards this region were not very well coordinated in the first half of the 1990s. From the second half of the 1990s onwards, the EU has become more focused in its policies towards South Eastern Europe. Since 1999, the Stabilisation and Association Process is the new institutional framework of the EU towards this region. The main purpose of the Stabilisation and Association Process is to promote peace, prosperity and stability in this region. </p><p>This study aims to explore the EU relations with South Eastern Europe with a single case study of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the implementation of the Stabilisation and Association Process. The main research questions are: What are the main aims and dynamics of the EU’s relations with South Eastern Europe? What are the main problems concerning the implementation of the Stabilisation and Association Process in the case of Bosnia? How do the norms, values and culture of Bosnia affect the implementation of the Stabilisation and Association Process? </p><p>The focus of this study is on democratization as an open- ended process. Thus, it is relevant to apply democratization theories, with a focus on the Transition Approach as a theoretical framework. Democratization theories aim to explain how authoritarian regimes change into liberal democratic ones. The transition approach makes a clear distinction between democratic transition and democratic consolidation phases, and identifies the necessary conditions for the success of each phase. New Institutionalism is another theoretical orientation that will be applied to this study. New Institutionalism is used in this study to discuss the concepts of institutional change and democratic governance, and to further study both the formal and informal institutions in Bosnia and how they limit the implementation of the Stabilisation and Association Process. </p><p>This study comes up with the conclusion that South Eastern Europe remains one of the priority regions for the EU. The dynamics of EU-South Eastern Europe relations is based on a number of different factors, such as political and economic considerations, concerns about peace, prosperity, and stability at the doorstep of the EU. The implementation of EU policies in this region is related to the debate on the future of the EU as well. The conclusions about Bosnia and Herzegovina point out that the country has moved forward a considerable amount after the 1992-95 Bosnian War. Democracy is beginning to emerge in the country. However, the implementation of the Stabilisation and Association Process is constrained by the complex formal institutional structure as laid out in the Dayton Peace Agreement. Moreover, the informal institutions in Bosnia limit the implementation. For instance, the path-dependent authoritarian legacy of former Yugoslavia, exclusive ethnic nationalism, and distrust among the major ethnic groups in Bosnia are obstacles in front of the effective implementation of the Stabilisation and Association Process. The level of international community involvement in the country is still very intensive. Bosnia has not become a self-sustainable democratic state yet. Strengthening the civil society in Bosnia and Herzegovina and promoting an inclusive civic identity that will lead to the enhancement of democratic values in the country can be recommended as solutions for the current problems of the country.</p>

Since the beginning of the 1990s important changes took place, such as the collapse of Communism and the dissolution of Yugoslavia. Consequently, the European Union (EU) has faced a new agenda in SouthEastern Europe. The EU policies towards this region were not very well coordinated in the first half of the 1990s. From the second half of the 1990s onwards, the EU has become more focused in its policies towards South Eastern Europe. Since 1999, the Stabilisation and Association Process is the new institutional framework of the EU towards this region. The main purpose of the Stabilisation and Association Process is to promote peace, prosperity and stability in this region. This study aims to explore the EU relations with South Eastern Europe with a single case study of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the implementation of the Stabilisation and Association Process. The main research questions are: What are the main aims and dynamics of the EU’s relations with South Eastern Europe? What are the main problems concerning the implementation of the Stabilisation and Association Process in the case of Bosnia? How do the norms, values and culture of Bosnia affect the implementation of the Stabilisation and Association Process? The focus of this study is on democratization as an open- ended process. Thus, it is relevant to apply democratization theories, with a focus on the Transition Approach as a theoretical framework. Democratization theories aim to explain how authoritarian regimes change into liberal democratic ones. The transition approach makes a clear distinction between democratic transition and democratic consolidation phases, and identifies the necessary conditions for the success of each phase. New Institutionalism is another theoretical orientation that will be applied to this study. New Institutionalism is used in this study to discuss the concepts of institutional change and democratic governance, and to further study both the formal and informal institutions in Bosnia and how they limit the implementation of the Stabilisation and Association Process. This study comes up with the conclusion that South Eastern Europe remains one of the priority regions for the EU. The dynamics of EU-South Eastern Europe relations is based on a number of different factors, such as political and economic considerations, concerns about peace, prosperity, and stability at the doorstep of the EU. The implementation of EU policies in this region is related to the debate on the future of the EU as well. The conclusions about Bosnia and Herzegovina point out that the country has moved forward a considerable amount after the 1992-95 Bosnian War. Democracy is beginning to emerge in the country. However, the implementation of the Stabilisation and Association Process is constrained by the complex formal institutional structure as laid out in the Dayton Peace Agreement. Moreover, the informal institutions in Bosnia limit the implementation. For instance, the path-dependent authoritarian legacy of former Yugoslavia, exclusive ethnic nationalism, and distrust among the major ethnic groups in Bosnia are obstacles in front of the effective implementation of the Stabilisation and Association Process. The level of international community involvement in the country is still very intensive. Bosnia has not become a self-sustainable democratic state yet. Strengthening the civil society in Bosnia and Herzegovina and promoting an inclusive civic identity that will lead to the enhancement of democratic values in the country can be recommended as solutions for the current problems of the country.