IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/parpps/par-01-2016-0005.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bridging the gap between academia and standard setters

Author

Listed:
  • Rowena Sinclair
  • Carolyn J. Cordery

Abstract

Purpose - This commissioned paper reviews literature outlining reasons for a perceived gap between academics and standard setters as policy makers. The aim of this paper is to emphasise how academics and standard setters can collaborate on accounting and audit research and assist standard setters to act in the public interest. Design/methodology/approach - The approach is primarily a literature and document review of relevant issues, summarising New Zealand’s standard setting arrangements, providing examples of successful policy-changing research, and making recommendations on future research topics. Findings - Despite the long-held views of a gap between academic researchers and standard setters, increasingly standard setters utilise research and request input from academics in their deliberations. Standard setters can increase the likelihood of relevant research by promoting critical issues for research and connecting their practitioner networks with academics. Academics can bridge the gap by selecting topics of mutual interest and by communicating their findings extensively and well. Practical implications - Increasing collaboration should lead to better accounting and audit standards. Originality/value - This paper highlights matters of concern in the New Zealand standard setting environment where there is a strategic objective to undertake research.

Suggested Citation

  • Rowena Sinclair & Carolyn J. Cordery, 2016. "Bridging the gap between academia and standard setters," Pacific Accounting Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 28(2), pages 135-152, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:parpps:par-01-2016-0005
    DOI: 10.1108/PAR-01-2016-0005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/PAR-01-2016-0005/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/PAR-01-2016-0005/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/PAR-01-2016-0005?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Paola Ramassa & Francesco Avallone & Alberto Quagli, 2024. "Can “publishing game” pressures affect the research topic choice? A survey of European accounting researchers," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 28(2), pages 507-542, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:parpps:par-01-2016-0005. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.