【正文】 economic environment like India, where interest rates fluctuate frequently, the capital market is volatile and the regulators are yet to have a plete grip on the capital market to enhance its efficiency. Empirical studies show that the volatility in the Indian capital markets, like capital markets in other developing economies, is higher than capital markets in developed economies (Tushar Waghmare 2020). Similarly studies show that beta for panies listed in Indian capital markets is not stable (Sanyal, Guha Roy and Sanyal 2020). It is difficult to ascertain the market premium because of the short history of the Indian capital market, which has bee active only in the last 12 decade and also because of its high volatility. Therefore even if for the sake of argument it can be said that the potential of EVA as a measure of performance can be realized fully in an advanced economy, the argument that EVA is a better measure is not tenable in the Indian context. In India EVA is being used with impunity. A case at point is the study published by Economic times (11th December 2020), on corporate performance. While puting EVA it used a flat rate of 13 percent as the cost of capital of all the enterprises included in the study. The study explains that an average 13 percent interest for both the years covered by the study is used as it is almost equal to the primelending rate of the mercial bank and financial institution. It is a basic principle of economics that‘ higher the risk higher is the expected return’. By estimating WACC at 13% this basic principle is violated. It may be argued that cost of debt should be taken posttax and therefore effective cost of equity incorporated in the calculation is higher than 13 percent. Even if this argument is accepted the putation cannot be defended because the cost of capital is estimated without using any accepted economic model. Moreover by using a flat rate, variation in risk profiles of firms have been ignored. This shows both the popularity of EVA in India and difficulties in measuring the same. The study has also ignored adjustments in capital and operating ine suggested by proponents of EVA. Source: Asish K. Bhattacharyya , B. V. Phani,2020. “Economic Value Added A General Perspective”.Indian Institute of Management (IIM), Calcutta and Indian Institute of Techonology Kanpur. Working Paper Series. 譯文 ： 從一般角度看 經(jīng)濟(jì)增值 業(yè)績評價指標(biāo) 投資者評價一家公司的整體業(yè)績，來決定是否繼續(xù)投資這家公司或者是從這家公司中撤出投資。本科畢業(yè)論文（設(shè)計(jì)） 外 文 翻 譯 原文 ： Economic Value Added A General Perspective Performance Measurement Investors measure overall performance of a firm as a whole to decide whether to invest in the firm or to continue with the firm or to exit from it. In order to achieve goal congruence, managers’ pensation is often linked with the performance of the responsibility centers and also with firmperformance. Therefore selection of the right measure is critical to the success of a firm. To measure performance of a firm we need a simple method for correctly measuring value created/ enhanced by it in a given time frame. All the current metrics trade off between the precision in measuring the value and its cost of measurement. In other words, each method takes into consideration the degree of plexities in quantifying the underlying measure. The more plex is the process, the more is the level of subjectivity and cost in measuring the performance of the firm. There is a continuous endeavor to develop a single measure that captures the overall performance, yet it is easy to calculate. Each metric of performance claims its superiority over others. Performance of a firm is usually measured with reference to its past record and the performance of other firms with parable risk profile. The various performance metrics currently in use are based on the returns on investment generated by the business entity . Therefore to reach a meaningful conclusion, returns generated by the firm in a particular year should be par