Search results

This study aims to fill the research gap regarding the usability of group reporting information in the central government. It answers the question of how the consolidated information should be formed to benefit the real needs of governmental information users.

The empirical research is based on a survey and interviews among key internal preparers and users in the central government sector in the case country, Finland.

Results show that the private sector approach regarding consolidation is not appropriately transferable to the central government sector. The key stakeholders identified several economic and financial reporting needs that exceed what formal Consolidated Financial Statement (CFS) can offer. Consolidation is needed but not according to the extensive full control approach, but rather following the budgetary approach consolidating units of the legal person of the government, and further using the partial control approach for consolidating by discretion essential special purpose SOEs.

Respondents and interviewees represented governmental internal organisations, free experts, auditors and financial managers from the group entities. Politicians and citizens were not directly represented.

Research gives applicable insights into central governments planning and developing group reporting for information needs in a favourable cost-benefit ratio. Findings benefit the development of EU's EPSAS (European Public Sector Accounting Standards) project which is still incomplete.

Research recommends governments to make a thorough analysis before deciding on a new financial reporting system. A critical analysis prevents governments to waste money and resources on a reporting system not fulfilling the real needs of information users.

The value of this research is that the private sector approach in consolidation was not taken as granted. This study investigated critically and empirically the real need for consolidated information serving steering and overseeing purposes of the government's group entities.

This paper studies the usability of LG financial statements as perceived by local councillors. By drawing on a comparative view of two countries with different periods of accrual accounting use in the public sector, the authors investigate how local councillors assess the usability of LG financial statements in order to question accounting reform success. Determinants that influence the usability assessment are explored.

Exploratory design: data were collected from questionnaires with 24 local councillors from five Finnish local governments (LGs) and 30 local councillors from six German LGs. An adjusted variant of the system usability scale was analysed with descriptive statistics and non-parametric group comparisons.

In both countries, the usability assessment of financial statements seems to be positive, indicating a successful reform process. In Finland, where the accrual government accounting reform has had a longer time to settle in, councillors seem to assess usability only partially better than German councillors. Several determinants of the usability assessment were detected, such as size and debt level of the LG as well as local councillors' gender, political orientation and education. Generally, councillors need more assistance and training in using financial statements.

The study is the first to conduct a quantitative assessment of the usability of LG financial statements as perceived by councillors. The system usability scale was adjusted to a public sector reporting context. The paper adopts a transnational comparative approach.

By focusing on the perspective of politicians, this paper aims to question the change brought about by local government financial statements for accountability. It applies the Burns and Scapens’ (2000) framework of accounting change to explore politicians’ routines when using the accrual accounting information and which type of change was induced by financial statements on financial accountability to politicians and citizens.

Considering that accounting reforms take time to unfold their effects, this paper studies two countries that have 11 years of difference in the reform implementation and thus a different accounting maturity. A qualitative research approach was used based on 55 semistructured interviews in five Finnish and six German municipalities with 25 councilors from Finland and 30 from Germany.

Councilors with a longer period of time to adjust to the accounting reforms seem to have developed more routines in using financial statements to assess the financial situation and performance. The change induced in accountability to politicians is partly formal and more evolutionary than revolutionary. The complexity of financial statements can lead to regressive change, especially in financially distressed local governments. As for accountability to citizens, a real change is not observed, reflecting a regressive type of change.

The study contributes to the empirical studies on financial accountability in the public sector context by analyzing the use of financial statements in two-way accountability relations from the perspective of politicians. Thereby, the paper adopts a transnational comparative approach and draws on old institutional economics.