Search results

Governments in Australia are in the process of implementing accrual reporting for their departments and governments as a whole. The central issue of this paper is to provide an explanation as to how general purpose financial reporting became a significant issue for governments in Australia. Agenda‐setting literature provides the framework within which to analyse the specific events and strategies used by public sector accountants to promote accrual technologies. The main finding of the research is that accrual technologies have been promoted by public sector accountants working from within government institutions, and often aligned with the organised accounting profession. Prior to the late 1980s the Auditors‐General were the main actors involved, however, more recently, accounting technologies have been promoted by accounting policy units within Treasuries and Departments of Finance. The paper concludes with a call for future research on the implications of such accounting changes for organisational and social functioning.

This paper aims to evaluate responses to the International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board’s proposed conceptual framework for evidence of support of new public management doctrines by key stakeholders, namely, accounting professionals, government agencies and international bodies.

The research uses a content analysis of response letters to select phases of the conceptual framework project to identify themes/principles pointing to acceptance or rejection of new public management principles by stakeholders.

Accounting professionals tend to support proposals that are consistent with principles of new public management providing evidence of normative and mimetic isomorphic pressure to align public and private sector accounting practices. Some government agencies and international organisations appear to have conformed but the majority resist efforts to incorporate a new public management discourse in public sector accounting.

The study is based on a content analysis of publically available response letters. It does not engage directly with respondents. In addition, not all stakeholders have submitted an equal number of response letters, with the result that it was not possible to compare responses from the developed and developing world or according to variations in legal and governance systems.

The study provides empirical evidence of different perspectives of the International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board’s conceptual framework project, which have not been considered explicitly by the previous research. The findings support the view that the accounting profession, as an integral part of the capital market system, exerts pressure to drive standardisation of financialised accounting practices. In contrast, government agencies support accounting systems aligned with conventional accountability principles aligned with jurisdiction-specific contexts. The interaction of these opposing perspectives is a primary determinant of change in accounting practice in the public sector space.

The purpose of this paper is to debate the future form of reporting in the public sector by examining alternative forms of reporting, and more specifically the frameworks of integrated reporting and popular reporting. Moreover, the paper explores whether and how these reports could be related to each other in order for the needs of a pillar user group, that of the citizens, to be addressed.

The authors analyze the frameworks of integrated reporting and popular reporting, and by combining their characteristics the authors propose a creative synthesis suitable for the public sector.

The analysis leads to the conclusion that governmental entities need to take the next step on reporting in two parallel levels: the first would require the publication of information encountered in integrated reports containing various information elements that are not confronted to the traditional financial ones. The second would result in the provision of this information in a concise and easily comprehensive way. The merger of these two streams will give rise to the publication of “Integrated Popular Reports – IPR.”

This move would result to useful and meaningful reporting with potential strategic advantages. The integrated reporting dimension of the reports combined to the popular reporting dimension would provide an adequate information matrix for citizens and other user groups (e.g. politicians, public executives), that are interested to understand the “whole picture” of public sector entities but at the same time they neither possess advanced accounting knowledge nor they are familiar with technical terminology.

Public information disclosure is a manifestation of transparency and contributes to governance-by-disclosure. Also, better financial reporting can improve the credibility and integrity of public finances and contribute to a better management of public resources. A survey was carried out in Cyprus of users’ of public financial reports concerning an expectation gap about the types of information included in such reports (information needs expectation gap) as well as the quality of such information (information quality satisfaction gap). The paper aims to discuss these issues.

Two focus groups of users and preparers of public financial reports were used to construct the questionnaire. Users of such reports, who belonged to all three categories of public sector financial reporting identified by IPSASB, were surveyed. The quantitative data obtained was analysed using SPSS and quadrant analysis to answer the research questions posed.

Data from 101 respondents confirmed that each of the information needs identified in the IPSASB Consultation Paper (2008) was rated as being a significant information need. Data analysis also showed that both types of expectation gap exist, especially as far as local authority and semi-public organisations are concerned.

The response rate in the self-administered survey was admittedly rather low but it was not unexpected mainly due to the survey’s very specialised nature and the tendency by people in Cyprus not to critique public bodies.

Deficient financial public sector reporting means the auditor general is not able to adequately express an opinion on public spending at the local government level. This, in turn, means taxpayers do not get the quality of services they pay for. At the same time, the lack of information transparency means corrupt practices are not eradicated. One answer to the problem would be legislating the content of public financial reports.

The lack of governance-by-public exposure means that services to the local community cost a lot more, due to corruption and inefficiency. In addition, it contributes to lowering market confidence and eventually contributes to financial crisis at the national level.

The survey conducted was the first of its kind in Cyprus to investigate financial public sector reporting and document both manifestations of the expectation gap. In addition, information needs identified in the IPSASB Consultation Paper (2008) was rated as significantly needed and this is the first time it has been done in Eurozone member state and in a country facing a financial crisis.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse how austerity has impacted to date upon European Union (EU) financial reporting developments and how this might influence future reforms. It considers how a critical juncture in EU financial reporting might be recognized and factors which might prevent or delay such a juncture being realized.

The paper uses the theoretical conceptualization of the territorializing, mediating, adjudicating and subjectivizing roles of accounting (Miller and Power, 2013), linked to document analysis and interviews with members of the relevant policy communities. In technical terms, austerity makes accounting subject to greater demands for consistency and uniformity. In political terms, accounting is implicated in increasing external fiscal surveillance of sovereign states.

The authors have shown how the Miller-Power framework illuminates these developments. The territorializing role of accounting in sovereign states creates an environment which facilitates the mediating, adjudicating and subjectivizing roles. Austerity promotes re-territorializing, yet also creates incentives for governments to hide risks and guarantees: the comparability of financial reports and national accounts may be achieved only at a rhetorical level. Evidence for a critical juncture would be termination of national traditions of financial reporting, greater harmonization of accounting across tiers of government, weakening of the linkages to private sector accounting, and stronger alignment of government financial reporting with statistical accounting.

The paper provides a theoretically based analysis of how austerity influences government financial reporting and statistical accounting and brings them into closer contact. This analysis is located within broader tensions between technocracy and democracy that are institutionalized in EU fiscal surveillance.

This paper aims to examine empirically whether the system of public expenditure reporting is capable of delivering financial accountability, focusing on the UK government's use of private finance for roads.

Publicly available documents from the public and private sector partners for 11 roads contracts are examined, together with a publicly provided bridge paid for via tolls as a comparator.

Reporting by both public and private sectors is limited and opaque, such that accountability to the public is inadequate. The evidence also shows that the scale of the additional expenditure generated by private finance warrants greater disclosure and scrutiny than is currently the case.

These findings, which occur in the roads sector where projects are large and visible, are likely to be replicated elsewhere in the public sector. Accountability issues may be even more problematic in public bodies where reporting is more diffuse. Furthermore, the proliferation of other forms of private finance increases the problems of reporting clear financial information, the lack of which not only makes informed public debate about public and fiscal policy impossible but also may lead to the wrong policy choice.

There has been little ex post facto examination as to whether extant reporting requirements permit understanding and scrutiny of the cost of private finance. The paper presents a desired list of annual disclosure, highlighting an information gap.

This article analyzes the links between financial reports and reputation in the context of Finnish public sector organizations. In general, the paper discusses the accounting treatment of intangible and tangible assets and the quality and relevance of public sector financial reporting.

For data, we combine three data sets: financial statement information of eight anonymous Finnish public organizations, the results of a reputation survey among their key stakeholders (N = 914) and a sample of the social media sentiment around the organizations.

Our findings suggest that a decrease in spending and, surprisingly in the nonprofit sector, an increase in the surplus, indicate better perceived financial performance. An increase in surplus is positively linked with the reputational factors, for example, trust. However, disclosing excessive amounts of information, for example, in financial reporting seems to contribute to negative discussions on social media.

We highlight the importance of managing intangibles, including those not recognized in the balance sheet, such as reputation. We present three propositions with potential managerial relevance.

Despite the considerable amount of financial information disclosed by public sector organizations, few studies have analyzed its relevance or connection to reputation. This first-of-a-kind paper combines intangible and tangible assets by analyzing how financial data and intangible reputation are linked in the public sector accounting context. Six reputational factors were discovered, and financial performance was found to correlate with trust in the public sector.

In the past two decades, the public sector both in Australia and overseas has undergone a period of intense change. The focus has been on efficiency, effectiveness and value for money of public sector operations. The methods by which governments account and report on their operations has received scrutiny. While Treasuries and Departments of Finance in each Australian jurisdiction have traditionally formulated the reporting and accounting rules used in the public sector, since 1983, with the formation of the Public Sector Accounting Standards Board (PSASB), the accounting profession has become involved in the setting of accounting standards for the public sector. Several researchers have suggested that a “contest” exists between the accounting profession and the government regulators for control over the public sector accounting standards process. This paper explores the processes whereby the public sector in Australia formulates its financial reporting policies by examining the interactions between the PSASB and the government regulators in each of the Australian jurisdictions. Policy community and policy network theory are used to argue that policy is formulated by a “cooperative” grouping of accounting professionals from the central agencies of Treasuries and Departments of Finance and the PSASB. The paper concludes that this method of policy formulation has implications for the content of policy and for the access of stakeholders to the formulation of that policy.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the effects of the implementation of the International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS) on Nigeria’s financial reporting quality.

The study employed a survey research design to determine the effects of the implementation of the IPSAS on Nigeria’s financial reporting quality. Partial Least Square 3(SmartPLS 3) technique of analysis was applied to achieve the research objective.

The study found that accountability positively and significantly affects the quality of financial reporting in Nigeria. Specifically, IPSAS has improved the level of accountability, which in turn improved Nigeria’s financial reporting quality.

The study only explored two explanatory variables whereas other variables such as transparency, corruption minimization, comparability and faithful representation were not considered in this study. It is, therefore, recommended that further studies could expand the scope to cover some other variables not included in this paper.

IPSAS-Accrual has engendered the Nigerian Government to launch the Asset Tracking and Management Project (ATMProject) in order to easily track its assets for the purpose of accountability. Thus, accountability was discovered in this study to be the most essential factor to enhance the quality of financial reporting using accrual-based IPSAS in Nigeria.

Accountability will impact positively on the lives of Nigerians in relation to the application of public funds to impact on the lives of the masses.

The statistical significance of accountability found in this study, using partial least square technique of data analysis, will further enhance financial integrity in the country.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the future development of heritage reporting in Australia. Public sector reporting of heritage has been a long-standing issue, due to shortcomings in (sector-neutral) for-profit-based financial reporting standards. Australia’s sector-neutral approach does not meet public sector users’ information needs. The authors develop a heritage reporting model to balance community and other stakeholders’ interests and address prior critiques.

The paper reviews heritage reporting requirements in Anglo-Western Countries, and analyses commentaries and research publications. It evaluates the existing reporting requirements in the context of new public management (which focusses on information and efficiency) and new public governance (NPG) (focussing on balancing interests and quality).

The paper proposes an NPG-based heritage reporting model which includes indicators of performance on the five UNESCO (1972) dimensions and operational guidelines issued by UNESCO (2015). These are identification, presentation, protection, conservation and transmission. The proposed model is consistent with the notion of US SFFAS 29 (the standard for Federal entities). Not all heritage must be capitalised and hence attachment of monetary value, but detailed disclosures are necessary.

The authors expect the proposed heritage reporting model to better serve users of heritage information compared to the present Australian Accounting Standards Board 116: Property, Plant and Equipment.

The authors’ proposed model of heritage reporting attempts to answer Carnegie and Wolnizer’s (1995, 1999) six questions, addresses decades of concerns raised in previous literature and provides a new perspective to heritage reporting based on NPG that should better serve users’ needs.