Elaine Evans

This paper explores the motives of participants in the standard‐setting process, based on the premise that standard‐setters strive for standards that are useful for decision‐making by a wide range of financial statement users. Our setting is the development of a contentious but contained Australian accounting standard, Reduced Disclosure Requirements. A consultative process initiated by the Australian Accounting Standards Board to create a specific Australian accounting standard for differential reporting provided an opportunity for interested parties to participate. We analyse the motives of participants through semi‐structured interviews with members of the Australian Accounting Standards Board and comment letter writers who responded to the relevant exposure draft. Our findings identify participants’ economic and political motivations and question the ability of the current standard‐setting process to extract decision‐making requirements from a wide range of users of financial statements and to reflect these in financial reporting standards. We find that the perspectives gathered are homogenised and that the process privileges the voices of powerful elites.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to examine the perceptions of independent directors in Vietnam about their roles and challenges when sitting on the boards of listed companies. Design/methodology/approach: The study uses mailed questionnaires to collect data. The authors sent surveys to 810 independent directors from 354 listed companies and received feedback from 170 respondents. Findings: The authors examine several aspects of independent directors’ work on the board (such as the roles of and challenges for independent directors) as well as board environment (such as information provision or board interaction). Findings suggest that independent directors in Vietnam place more emphasis on their advisory role than their monitoring role. In addition, they also point out their challenges including information asymmetries and the influence of controlling shareholders. These challenges are significant and they prevent independent directors to properly execute their independent role on the board. These findings reflect the unique features of corporate governance in transition economies. Originality/value: The authors contribute to the literature through providing an insightful view about the nature of the work performed by this type of director in a transition economy. The study is also one of the first studies to use a qualitative instrument to provide an explanation of how controlling shareholders influence independent directors on boards of directors.

Our paper contributes to the audit literature by examining whether internal auditors' personal values measured by construal of self systematically influence their acceptance and likelihood of engaging in whistle‐blowing. China provides a particularly appropriate national context for our study because evidence shows that the traditional internal control systems have largely failed to achieve their objective of preventing wrongdoings. Internal auditors have been selected as subjects because of the importance placed on them by regulators and enterprises in designing and implementing whistle‐blowing systems. Construal of self has been selected for examination because it captures complex moral, cognitive processes experienced by individuals at both cultural and personality levels. This study develops and finds support for the hypotheses that, compared with independents , interdependent internal auditors are less accepting and less likely to engage in whistle‐blowing. The results also show the presence of “holier‐than‐thou” perception bias among internal auditors. The findings may benefit local and multinational enterprises, regulators, and researchers who are interested in designing and developing more compatible whistle‐blowing policies and procedures.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to understand the role of boundary-spanning organisations as intermediary institutions potentially able to close the gap between applied research and practice in sustainability accounting.Design/methodology/approach: A review of the literature reveals that boundary organisation theory provides a potential way of understanding the role of boundary-spanning organisations in the context of the research–practice gap. The theory is applied in the context of three cases of potential boundary-spanning organisations involved with sustainability accounting – Chartered Accountants in Australia and New Zealand, the World Business Council for Sustainable Development and the International Federation of Accountants.Findings: Findings from the three cases, which consider the application of boundary organisation theory, indicate the potential for professional accounting associations to act as sustainability accounting boundary-spanning organisations has not been realized for four main reasons. These relate to the need for finer granularity in relation to boundary objects and problem-solving; uncertainty about the range of parties to be involved as boundary-spanning organisations; the importance of reconciling views about different incentives for academics and practitioners in the sustainability accounting space; and the necessity for collaboration with other boundary-spanning organisations to address the transdisciplinary nature of sustainability accounting.Practical implications: Development of a way of seeing the relationships between academics and practitioners in the context of sustainability accounting has two messages for practice and practitioners. First, with such complex and uncertain issues as sustainability accounting, a transdisciplinary approach to resolving problems is needed, one which involves practitioners as integral and equal members of research teams. The process should help bring applied academic and practitioner interests closer together. Second, it has to be recognised that academics conducting basic research do not seek to engage with practitioners, and for this group, the academic–practitioner gap will remain.Social implications: Two main social implications emerge from the application of boundary organisation theory to analyse the academic–practitioner gap in the context of sustainability accounting. First, development of boundary organisations is important, as they can play a crucial role in bringing parties with an interest in sustainability accounting together in transdisciplinary teams to help solve sustainability problems. Second, collaboration is a foundation for success in the process of integrating applied researchers and practitioners, different disciplines which are relevant to solving sustainability problems and collaboration between different boundary spanning organisations with their own specialised foci.Originality/value: This paper considers boundary organisation theory and the role of boundary-spanning organisations in the context of the complex transdisciplinary problems of sustainability accounting.

Despite major accounting standards boards worldwide continuing to use fair value extensively, academic evidence on the relevance of fair value accounting has focused on financial assets. This study breaks new ground to provide the first empirical evidence for the agricultural sector on the relevance of fair value accounting. It examines the forecasting power of the fair value of biological assets for future operating cash flows. Using all agribusinesses listed in Australia, where fair value accounting was first implemented in the agricultural sector, we find that fair value of biological assets does not provide incremental forecasting power for future operating cash flows, whether market-determined prices or managerially estimated value is used. The findings of this study provide empirical support for the call by Elad and Herbohn in 2011 for the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) to revisit the implementation of fair value accounting in the agricultural sector. JEL Classification: G14, G38, M41, Q18

Purpose: While the debate about fair value accounting (FVA) and the global financial crisis (GFC) of 2008-2009 has been explored in the academic and professional literature, there has been little debate about the consequences of FVA being implicated in the crash of Enron around 2001, and the effect of this on later FVA developments and the GFC. The purpose of this paper is to examine how well regulators, political actors, and other commentators may have understood the use, misuse, effects and consequences of FVA at the time of Enron, and to examine how this collective understanding (or lack thereof) has influenced later accounting policy, especially that going into and arising from the GFC.Design/methodology/approach: Using content analysis, the commentary about FVA is traced through documents, primarily the US Congressional Hearings’ examination of the collapse of Enron that took place between December 2001 and December 2002. An assessment of the knowledge of and attitudes toward FVA is made from these and is then traced through later developments including policy responses before, during and after the GFC.Findings: Links are found between the collapse of Enron and adjustments to FVA in the mid-2000s, which in turn became implicated in the GFC. These linkages are explored in the context of a fair value world view held by global standards setters in the mid-2000s. During the timeline from the 1990s to the mid-2000s, those advocating and adopting FVA as part of this world view, may have had collectively an insufficient understanding of the consequences or effects of FVA technology.Originality/value: The study provides evidence of a direct link between Enron, the response of global standard setters, and the GFC controversy.

This paper develops recommendations for simplified decision‐useful SME financial reporting in Australia – a country that has traditionally allowed a wide range of reporting standards to be used by these entities. Drawing on interviews and comment letters from a number of stakeholders, and data from a survey of users of financial statements of non‐publicly accountable unlisted entities, we analyse stakeholder arguments for and against SMEs providing less detailed reports, and identify the line items that might be most useful to users for decision making.