Search results

The purpose of this paper is to review opportunities for future research about auditing in the public sector.

The paper presents the viewpoints of two researchers, supported by research that is cited in the paper.

Public sector auditing research has grown considerably. The authors expect further growth. The authors debunk some myths about public sector auditing. The authors suggest areas where there are opportunities for research. In particular, researchers can examine a broader range of jurisdictions, investigate differences among countries and develop suggestions about what works best.

The paper presents the views of the authors.

There are opportunities for further research across different jurisdictions.

The paper makes a contribution by outlining research opportunities.

This paper aims at reflecting on the changing boundaries of public sector auditing. In particular the paper focusses on the opportunities and challenges for performance auditing, for sustainable development auditing and digitalised public sector auditing.

Building from the papers in this special issue, the authors draw on the literature on current development of public sector auditing (such as public sector auditing performance auditing, sustainable development auditing and digitalised public sector auditing) and propose a future research agenda.

The “changing boundaries” of public sector auditing may influence the difficulty for public sector organisations to manage the uncertainties and risks not only associated to corruption but also the public governance development (collaborative, digital and emergency governance). The authors speculate on the role that the “changing boundaries” of public sector auditing can play.

The paper contributes by setting new research avenues for future studies on public sector auditing in a post-new public management context.

This paper aims to assess the cumulative evidence on the determinants of sustainability assurance (SA) reports and the choice of assurance provider quality. It addresses the contradictory and inconsistent findings of past studies conducted over the past two decades.

The authors undertake a meta-regression analysis that enables systematic, comparative assessment of the variables associated with the choice of SA and the type of assurance provider. The authors undertake a chronological analysis with the aim of identifying systematic differences in the empirical evidence across distinct time periods.

The results indicate that there is very little evidence to support many of the expected associations between commonly studied predictor variables (namely, measures based on agency and corporate governance conceptions) and the choice of SA and the assurance provider type. As a result, research on this topic does not make as effective a contribution as might be expected. There is, however, a time period difference. The authors find results from studies using company data prior to 2010 are significantly different from those using post-2010 data. The results indicate the decision to publish SA to be significantly associated with companies in the oil industry and utilities, and larger organisations where agency costs tend to be higher. Obtaining assurance from a higher-quality provider is found to be associated with companies in environmentally sensitive industries and in stakeholder-oriented countries.

The study shows that as yet there is not sufficient evidence to support expected results. Users of the research should be aware of this, and researchers should know that more work is needed. The authors suggest researchers take greater care in the choice and comparability of variable measurement and expand the conceptual base when selecting predictor variables.

Companies need to be more transparent and accountable to critical stakeholders such as report users and regulators, and the latter should be more aware that the organisational practice of SA and choice of service provider have changed over time and are increasingly open to agency and other cultural biases.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to apply meta-regression techniques for understanding the body of literature on SA and provider choice.

The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between going-concern (GC) opinions issued by the Big 4 audit firms and adverse credit ratings from the two largest credit rating agencies (CRAs) – Standard & Poor’s (S&P) and Moody’s. This question is relevant because there have been suggestions that auditors and CRAs should become more similar to each other, and because the two largest CRAs have different ownership structures that could affect their ratings.

Univariate and multivariate analyses are performed using a sample of firms that filed for bankruptcy between January 1, 2002 and December 31, 2013 that also had an audit opinion signed during the 12 months prior to bankruptcy, along with a credit rating issued by either or both S&P and Moody’s. Both influence each other. The likelihood of an auditor issuing a GC opinion is related to the credit rating issued by both S&P and Moody’s in the month prior to the audit report signing. The results also show differences between the CRAs. S&P reacted in the month after an auditor issued a GC opinion by downgrading its ratings 68% of the time. However, Moody’s did not react as strongly as S&P, downgrading its ratings only 24% of the time.

Both audit reports and credit ratings influence each other. The likelihood of an auditor issuing a GC opinion is related to the credit rating issued by both S&P and Moody’s in the month prior to the audit report signing. The results also show differences between the CRAs. S&P reacted in the month after an auditor issued a GC opinion by downgrading its ratings 68% of the time. However, Moody’s did not react as strongly as S&P, downgrading its ratings only 24% of the time.

Auditors are more likely to issue GC opinions when there is a downgrade to the credit rating, and CRAs are more likely to downgrade their ratings when there is a GC opinion. The study highlights that CRAs with different ownership structures provide different credit rating outcomes.

The initial rationale for developing integrated reporting included addressing the failures of traditional reporting to address sustainability issues. Subsequently, the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) modified its stated objectives to emphasise integrated thinking and value creation. There has been debate on whether the IIRC’s process for developing its integrated reporting framework was subject to regulatory capture by the accounting profession (Flower, 2015; Adams, 2015; Thomson, 2015). This paper aims to provide additional evidence on the extent to which this regulatory capture occurred, with an update on current developments.

Data from interviews with key participants in the integrated reporting framework’s development and the IIRC’s Council and Working Group meeting minutes were analysed to identify to what extent the change in the IIRC’s focus can be explained by regulatory capture theory.

The findings show that the integrated reporting framework’s development was subject to regulatory capture by accountants. However, the extent of capture was mitigated to some extent by processes adopted in its development. This is consistent with regulatory capture theory.

This paper critically examines the debate on the extent to which the sustainability message has been lost as a result of regulatory capture. It provides an in-depth analysis of the IIRC’s treatment of sustainability which explores the application of regulatory capture theory and examines evidence not considered in previous studies.

This paper explores the value of financial statement auditing in the public sector. The study applies theory about auditing from the private sector as well as the public sector to explore ways in which public sector auditing can be expected to be valuable. It shows that there are a number of complementary explanations that can be applied to examine the value of public audit, including agency, signaling, insurance, management control, governance and confirmation explanations. The evidence from research and history is generally consistent with the agency and management control explanations. There is some support for the signaling and insurance explanations, while research evidence suggests that governance has differing impact in the public sector compared to the private. The confirmation hypothesis is also potentially relevant. Reviewing the history of the development of public sector auditing functions shows that at least some developments were consistent with explanations such as agency theory and management control. Auditing in the public sector is an area where more research is valuable. The paper concludes with a discussion of issues for further investigation.

The purpose of this study is to examine the effect of internal audit function (IAF) use on earnings quality and external audit fees using empirical data collected from the New Zealand (NZ) setting.

Applying institutional theory as the underlying framework, this study examines an IAF’s ability to demonstrate legitimacy, which will shed light to the functions long-term survival. Using a unique data set from the NZ setting, which combines information obtained from “The Institute of Internal Auditors of New Zealand” with empirical firm data collected from publicly available sources, multivariate analysis is performed to test the prediction that IAF use is associated with earnings quality, measured using discretionary accruals, and external audit fees.

There is strong positive association between IAF use and external audit fees, which supports the complementary controls view, where better internal controls increase audit fees by increasing the demand for scope of external audit work. The authors find no significant relationship between IAF use and earnings quality, which is not entirely surprising.

The aim is to empirically test the IAF value proposition and to delve deeper into the black box of IAF value drivers. Given the size of the NZ economy and limitations of data availability, total sample size used in this study is relatively modest. However, the analysis does yield significant results. Apart from academic contribution to knowledge, this study offers a profound list of practical contributions. Practitioners will be interested to learn about the IAF value proposition from an empirical viewpoint. Senior management (SM) will obtain value from the outcomes when contemplating IAF investment and sourcing decisions. Regulators will be inherently interested in whether IAFs should be mandated.

The aim is to empirically test IAF value proposition and to delve deeper into the black box of IAF value drivers. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first NZ-based academic investigation which examines the relationship between IAF use and earnings quality. Apart from academic contribution to knowledge, this study offers a profound list of practical contributions. Practitioners will be interested to learn about the IAF value proposition from an empirical viewpoint. SM will obtain value from the outcomes when contemplating IAF investment and sourcing decisions. Regulators will be inherently interested in whether IAFs should be mandated.

New public management (NPM) has transformed the public sector auditing context, although in quite different ways. Further, investigations into NPM’s impact on public sector auditors and audit institutions have been largely unconnected, with the exception of the critical examination of performance audits. We investigate the question of how public sector auditors’ roles and activities have changed as a result of NPM and later reforms.

We examine and synthesise public sector audit research examining reforms since the year 2000. The research presented considers changes to external and internal public sector audits as well as the development of public sector audit institutions – known as supreme audit institutions (SAIs).

Considerable changes have occurred. Many were influenced by NPM, but others have evolved from the eco-system of accounting, auditing and public sector management. External auditors have responded to an increase in demand for accountability. Additional management and governance techniques have been introduced from the private sector, such as internal auditing and audit committees. NPM has also led to conflicting trends, particularly when governments introduced competition to public sector auditing by contracting out but then chose to centralise to improve accountability. There is also greater international influence now through bodies like the International Organisation of Supreme Audit Institutions (INTOSAI) and similar regional bodies.

NPM reforms and the eco-system have impacted public sector auditing. Sustainability reporting is emerging as an area requiring more auditing attention; auditors also need to continue to develop better ways to communicate with citizens. Further, research into auditing in non-Western nations and emerging technologies is also required, especially where it provides learnings around more valuable audit practices. Empirical evidence is required of the strengths and weaknesses of SAIs’ structural variety.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the increasing potential demand for meta-analysis studies in auditing. The paper includes a review of a new technique and meta-regression analysis, and explains its advantages in comparison to meta-analysis techniques used in prior auditing research. It also discusses opportunities for applying meta-analysis to auditing topics and potential pitfalls.

The paper provides a review and commentary on meta-analysis techniques used in auditing research, especially for meta-analyses of empirical archival studies that use regression models.

There is now considerable potential for meta-analysis to have an impact on auditing policy and regulation. Researchers using meta-analysis should make use of the most current techniques (e.g. meta-regression), which are more reliable and allow researchers to explore more issues about the research.

The paper informs auditing researchers about methods to advance their research and increase its usefulness.

In 2001, the US moved to regulate internal control reporting by management and auditors. While some jurisdictions have followed the lead of the US, many others have not. An important question, therefore, is the relevance of internal control to stakeholders. The more specific issue of the benefits of US-style regulation of internal control reporting is also topical. We review studies on the determinants of internal control quality and its economic consequences for stakeholders including investors, creditors, managers, auditors and financial analysts. We extend previous reviews by focusing on US studies published since 2013 as well as all non-US studies investigating IC quality including countries regulating IC disclosure as well as unregulated settings and both developed and developing economies. In doing so, we identify research questions where evidence remains mixed and new directions in which there are research opportunities.

Three main insights arise from our analysis. First, evidence on the economic consequences of internal control quality suggests that the quality of internal control can have a significant effect on decision making by users of financial information. Second, the results of research on the empirical association between ownership structure, certain board characteristics and internal control quality is generally mixed. Empirical evidence concerning the association between audit committee characteristics and internal control quality generally supports a positive and significant association. Finally, while studies in non-US jurisdictions are increasing, opportunities remain to explore the determinants and consequences of internal control in other jurisdictions. Our review provides evidence for policy makers of whether there are benefits from requiring management and auditors to report on internal control over financial reporting.