Search results

This introductory chapter elaborates on the tricky issue of measurement in public sector financial reporting, which arises due to the particular features of the public sector when compared to the private sector. It provides a summary of the book chapters, highlighting the theoretical/practical frameworks used, methodologies and conclusions. Three themes are identified in the book, namely, (a) frameworks and methodologies; (b) measuring and reporting the elements in financial statements; and (c) heritage. This chapter identifies important avenues for further research.

The study contributes to the literature on public value and performance examining politicians’ and managers’ perspectives by investigating the importance they attach to the different facets of performance information (i.e. budgetary, accrual based- and non-financial information (NFI)).

We survey politicians and managers in all Italian municipalities of at least 80,000 inhabitants.

Overall, NFI is more appreciated than financial information (FI). Moreover, budgetary accounting is preferred to accrual accounting. Politicians’ and managers’ preferences are generally aligned.

NFI as a measure of public value is not alternative, but rather complementary, to FI. The latter remains a fundamental element of public sector accounting due to its role in resource allocation and control.

The preference for NFI over FI and of budgetary over accruals accounting suggests that the current predominant emphasis on (accrual-based) financial reporting might be misplaced.

Public value and performance are multi-faceted concepts. They can be captured by different types of information and evaluated according to different criteria, which will also depend on the category of stakeholders or users who assesses public performance. So far, most literature has considered the financial and non-financial facets of performance as virtually separate. Similarly, in the practice, financial management tends to be decoupled from non-financial performance management. However, this research shows that only by considering their joint interactions we can achieve an accurate representation of what public value really is.

Measurement and evaluation issues have long represented the main criticality of accrual accounting adoption in the public sector. While professional accountants and scholars have mostly focused on the recognition and measurement of typical public assets (e.g. heritage and community assets), the authors contend that more attention should be paid to the equity (net assets). The equity requires additional evaluation criteria that stem from the representation of an accounting aggregate that does not exist per se but rather derives as a residual from all the other items reported in the balance sheet. This chapter proposes an illustrative case study on the evolution of the accrual accounting principle for Italian local governments (LGs). The findings enable the gaining of a deeper understanding of how the equity can be represented and discuss which informative objectives it can address in public administrations. Practical recommendations are delivered for national and international accounting standard setters for the public sector.

Implementation of accrual-based accounting systems and the related preparation of an initial balance sheet are stimulating a debate on valuation and management of fixed assets, emphasising how critical it is to have adequate asset information. This chapter aims to propose a framework to clarify the relationship between the asset inventory and the asset register by examining the objectives and characteristics of asset information systems, drawing from experience regarding the implementation of asset inventories and registers from four countries (Malaysia, South Africa, Switzerland, and Australia – State of Victoria).

Heritage assets (HAs) are important goods or properties that define a country’s culture, history, and identity. Public sector entities are the primary custodians of a nation’s heritage properties; however, many local museums and historic houses are managed by private not-for-profit (NFP) organisations that essentially act to conserve these heritage places.

Through a documentary analysis, this chapter aims to investigate the points of convergence and the differences between accounting policies for governmental heritage and private NFP organisations.

The study demonstrates that even private NFP entities present the same characteristics as public sector ones in the accounting of heritage goods and that there are certain accounting standards being equally applicable; therefore, the accounting policies for governmental heritage are in accordance with the accounting policies for NFP organisations such as museums, art galleries, charities, churches, for their heritage goods.

In recent years, accounting for heritage assets has evolved but continuing the diversity in reporting practices remains problematic. Traditional cash-based budgets are still common in governmental accounting in some countries, but these ignore heritage assets as they are non-realisable and often do not generate revenue. Heritage assets do, however, incur cash outflows. The adoption of accrual accounting for recording heritage assets raises the technical issues of recognition and measurement of such assets, both in the balance sheet and income statements.

This chapter examines the financial reporting environment for heritage assets in New Zealand (NZ). The authors provide evidence on the reporting practices of heritage assets by five of NZ’s significant museums during the period 2011–2020, under IAS 16 and IPSAS 17 requirements. The authors analyse disclosures on heritage assets in the financial reports of these museums, including accounting policies, valuation and measurement, income statement impact, and related notes.

The findings suggest that, despite the existence of the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) (IAS 16) and International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS) (IPSAS 17) reporting standards during this period, a variety of reporting practices exist among NZ museums. For example, heritage assets are recognised either at fair value or historical cost on the balance sheet or not recognised in the financial statements at all. These findings suggest substantial non-uniformity in the actual measurement and reporting of heritage assets. They are of interest to policy-makers and regulators, particularly in countries that are currently considering adoption of IPSAS.

The principle of prudence plays a critical role in the design of national and international public sector accounting. Whereas in private sector accounting there is a substantial body of literature with regard to conservatism, the academic debate on the prudence principle in public sector accounting has only started recently. The aim of this chapter is to analyse whether the International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSASs) address asymmetric prudence with respect to measurement. This chapter shows that the existence of requirements leading to asymmetric prudence with regard to the measurement of assets is widespread throughout the suite of IPSASs.

The objective of this chapter is to compare the measurement bases of income and expenditures found in International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS) used in Public Accounts with those in the statistical rules used in National Accounts/Government Finance Statistics (GFS). Both frameworks apply an accrual methodology, but, while some governments appear dubious about adopting the IPSAS framework, the National Accounts framework is more ‘tried and tested’ for government financial reporting on an international scale. The practical application of the accrual methodology in the two frameworks differs to a certain extent. These differences provide learning opportunities for both frameworks.

This book chapter intends to analyse a particular measurement basis, namely the ‘value in use’, regarding its definition and application in the public sector context. To this end, the current study assesses the development of a measurement practice in a particular jurisdiction, that is, Italy, compared with requirements in current International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSASs), in order to explore its suitability and practicability for a specific category of public sector assets, namely heritage assets.