Power dynamics in Australian public sector accounting reform: A Machiavellian interpretation

IF 3.1 Q2 BUSINESS, FINANCE Financial Accountability & Management Pub Date : 2024-01-31 DOI:10.1111/faam.12388
Ching Chau
{"title":"Power dynamics in Australian public sector accounting reform: A Machiavellian interpretation","authors":"Ching Chau","doi":"10.1111/faam.12388","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>During the era of New Public Management from the 1970s to the 1990s, government accountability in Australia underwent a significant transformation from compliance to performance evaluation. This change underscores a Machiavellian interpretation presented in this paper, emphasizing the politicized and power-driven nature of public sector accounting reforms. The Australian Government employed a commercial accounting model to legitimize these reforms, leveraging Machiavellian principles to strengthen political power. Despite the accounting profession's role in legitimizing public sector financial reporting, its control over Australian accounting standard setting diminished. The new public sector accountability framework allowed the shifting of blame to the profession when problems arose. An analysis of the New South Wales Government's journey through the reform, from embracing accrual accounting to rejecting heritage assets measurement and applauding fair value, illustrates the complex interplay between self-interest and the protection of public interest. The Australian Government strategically enlisted the support of the outer fringe accounting profession and successfully instituted reforms premised on the principle of public accountability and liberty for Australian society. Once the reformer's goals were achieved, the facilitating elites found themselves marginalized from the bureaucratic group and power reclaimed deftly to the Government with CLERP reforms paving the way for the adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards. This shift exemplifies Machiavelli's perspective, where liberty is used as a means to garner public support and ultimately attain power, a strategy that continues to hold validity in contemporary political contexts.</p>","PeriodicalId":47120,"journal":{"name":"Financial Accountability & Management","volume":"40 4","pages":"498-519"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Financial Accountability & Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/faam.12388","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

During the era of New Public Management from the 1970s to the 1990s, government accountability in Australia underwent a significant transformation from compliance to performance evaluation. This change underscores a Machiavellian interpretation presented in this paper, emphasizing the politicized and power-driven nature of public sector accounting reforms. The Australian Government employed a commercial accounting model to legitimize these reforms, leveraging Machiavellian principles to strengthen political power. Despite the accounting profession's role in legitimizing public sector financial reporting, its control over Australian accounting standard setting diminished. The new public sector accountability framework allowed the shifting of blame to the profession when problems arose. An analysis of the New South Wales Government's journey through the reform, from embracing accrual accounting to rejecting heritage assets measurement and applauding fair value, illustrates the complex interplay between self-interest and the protection of public interest. The Australian Government strategically enlisted the support of the outer fringe accounting profession and successfully instituted reforms premised on the principle of public accountability and liberty for Australian society. Once the reformer's goals were achieved, the facilitating elites found themselves marginalized from the bureaucratic group and power reclaimed deftly to the Government with CLERP reforms paving the way for the adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards. This shift exemplifies Machiavelli's perspective, where liberty is used as a means to garner public support and ultimately attain power, a strategy that continues to hold validity in contemporary political contexts.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
澳大利亚公共部门会计改革中的权力动态:马基雅维利式的解释
在 20 世纪 70 年代至 90 年代的新公共管理时代,澳大利亚的政府问责制经历了 从遵守规定到绩效评估的重大转变。这一变化凸显了本文提出的马基雅弗利式解释,强调公共部门会计改革的政治化和权力驱动性质。澳大利亚政府采用商业会计模式使这些改革合法化,利用马基雅弗利原则加强政治权力。尽管会计专业在使公共部门财务报告合法化方面发挥了作用,但其对澳大利亚会计准则制定的控制却有所减弱。新的公共部门问责框架允许在出现问题时将责任推给会计专业。对新南威尔士州政府改革历程的分析,从接受权责发生制会计到拒绝遗产资产计量,再到赞扬公允价值,说明了自身利益与保护公众利益之间复杂的相互作用。澳大利亚政府战略性地争取到了外围会计行业的支持,成功地实施了以澳大利亚社会的公共责任和自由原则为前提的改革。一旦改革者的目标得以实现,协助改革的精英们发现自己已被边缘化,脱离了官僚集团,而政府则通过CLERP改革巧妙地收回了权力,为采用《国际财务报告准则》铺平了道路。这一转变体现了马基雅维利的观点,即把自由作为争取公众支持并最终获得权力的一种手段,这一策略在当代政治环境中依然有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
18.20%
发文量
27
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Environmental reporting in public sector organizations: A review of literature for the future paths of research Unfolding crowd‐based accountability of a charity fund during the war Tribute for Irvine Lapsley Making sense of climate change in central government annual reports and accounts: A comparative case study between the United Kingdom and Norway
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1