IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nos/vgmu00/2021i5p7-26.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

External Audit And Fiscal Transparency: An Empirical Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Huseyin Cicek
  • Suleyman Dikmen

Abstract

The aim of this study is to examine the socio-economic, institutional, and political factors affecting external audit, with the use of an international comparison. In addition, the effect of external audit on fiscal transparency was analyzed. Although many empirical studies in the literature handle the factors affecting fiscal transparency, there are only a few empirical studies that focus on the factors affecting external audit and the impact of external audits on fiscal transparency. However, there is not one study dealing with the factors affecting external audit through making use of international comparisons. In this study we attempt to discover the factors affecting external audit and examine, using an international comparison, the impact of external audits on fiscal transparency. The Open Budget Survey published by the International Budget Partnership in 2017 was used to measure external audits. In the study, consisting of 115 countries, the effect of democratization level, government debt level, government balance, gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, legislative budget oversight, the SAI's audit diversity and the effect of a judicial model of the SAI on external audit were investigated. The effect of external audit on fiscal transparency is tested for 115 countries using the Two-Stage Least Squares Method (2SLS). According to the analysis, it is determined that the level of democratization, gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, budget oversight of the legislature, audit diversity of supreme audit institution and judicial model of supreme audit institution have significant and positive effects on external audit. It is also determined that external audit has a significant and positive effect on fiscal transparency.

Suggested Citation

  • Huseyin Cicek & Suleyman Dikmen, 2021. "External Audit And Fiscal Transparency: An Empirical Analysis," Public administration issues, Higher School of Economics, issue 5, pages 7-26.
    • Handle: RePEc:nos:vgmu00:2021:i:5:p:7-26
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://vgmu.hse.ru/data/2021/06/10/1442527974/2_Bloc_Engl_1_5_2021.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Reinikka, Ritva & Svensson, Jakob, 2004. "The power of information : evidence from a newspaper campaign to reduce capture," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3239, The World Bank.
    2. Blume, Lorenz & Voigt, Stefan, 2011. "Does organizational design of supreme audit institutions matter? A cross-country assessment," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 215-229, June.
    3. Lorenzo Cicatiello & Elina Simone & Giuseppe Lucio Gaeta, 2017. "Political determinants of fiscal transparency: a panel data empirical investigation," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 315-336, November.
    4. Alt, James E. & Lassen, David Dreyer, 2006. "Fiscal transparency, political parties, and debt in OECD countries," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 50(6), pages 1403-1439, August.
    5. Claudio Ferraz & Frederico Finan, 2008. "Exposing Corrupt Politicians: The Effects of Brazil's Publicly Released Audits on Electoral Outcomes," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 123(2), pages 703-745.
    6. Isaksson, Ann-Sofie & Bigsten, Arne, 2012. "Institution Building with Limited Resources: Establishing a Supreme Audit Institution in Rwanda," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 1870-1881.
    7. Schelker, Mark & Eichenberger, Reiner, 2010. "Auditors and fiscal policy: Empirical evidence on a little big institution," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 357-380, December.
    8. Benjamin A. Olken, 2007. "Monitoring Corruption: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Indonesia," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 115, pages 200-249.
    9. Benno Torgler & Christoph A. Schaltegger, 2005. "The Determinants of Political Discussion: How Important are Audit Courts and Local Autonomy?," CREMA Working Paper Series 2005-28, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    10. Mark Schelker & Reiner Eichenberger, 2003. "Starke Rechnungsprüfungskommissionen: Wichtiger als direkte Demokratie und Föderalismus? Ein erster Blick auf die Daten," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 139(III), pages 351-373, September.
    11. Reiner Eichenberger & Mark Schelker, 2007. "Independent and competing agencies: An effective way to control government," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 130(1), pages 79-98, January.
    12. Wehner, Joachim & de Renzio, Paolo, 2013. "Citizens, Legislators, and Executive Disclosure: The Political Determinants of Fiscal Transparency," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 96-108.
    13. Benno Torgler, 2005. "A Knight without a Sword?. The Effects of Audit Courts on Tax Morale," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 161(4), pages 735-760, December.
    14. Rachel Glennerster & Yongseok Shin, 2008. "Does Transparency Pay?," IMF Staff Papers, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 55(1), pages 183-209, April.
    15. Rick Stapenhurst & Jack Titsworth, 2001. "Features and Functions of Supreme Audit Institutions," World Bank Publications - Reports 11363, The World Bank Group.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ionel Bostan & Mihaela Brindusa Tudose & Raluca Irina Clipa & Ionela Corina Chersan & Flavian Clipa, 2021. "Supreme Audit Institutions and Sustainability of Public Finance. Links and Evidence along the Economic Cycles," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-24, August.
    2. Schelker, Mark, 2012. "Auditor expertise: Evidence from the public sector," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 116(3), pages 432-435.
    3. Schelker, Mark & Eichenberger, Reiner, 2010. "Auditors and fiscal policy: Empirical evidence on a little big institution," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 357-380, December.
    4. Blume, Lorenz & Voigt, Stefan, 2011. "Does organizational design of supreme audit institutions matter? A cross-country assessment," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 215-229, June.
    5. Mark Schelker & Reiner Eichenberger, 2008. "Rethinking public auditing institutions: Empirical evidence from Swiss municipalities," Working Papers 2008/3, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    6. Mark Schelker, 2009. "Auditor Terms and Term Limits in the Public Sector: Evidence from the US States," CREMA Working Paper Series 2009-19, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    7. Mark Schelker, 2012. "The influence of auditor term length and term limits on US state general obligation bond ratings," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 150(1), pages 27-49, January.
    8. Pintea Mirela-Oana & Achim Sorin Adrian & Lacatus Viorel, 2013. "Transparency Of Local Budgets In The North-West Region Of Romania," Annals of Faculty of Economics, University of Oradea, Faculty of Economics, vol. 1(1), pages 931-941, July.
    9. Montes, Gabriel Caldas & da Cunha Lima, Luiza Leitão, 2018. "Effects of fiscal transparency on inflation and inflation expectations: Empirical evidence from developed and developing countries," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 26-37.
    10. de Renzio, Paolo & Wehner, Joachim, 2017. "The impacts of fiscal openness," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 82521, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    11. Claudio Columbano, 2022. "Measuring fiscal guidance transparency," Public Sector Economics, Institute of Public Finance, vol. 46(2), pages 261-296.
    12. World Bank Group, 2014. "Strategic Framework for Mainstreaming Citizen Engagement in World Bank Group Operations," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 21113, December.
    13. Benno Torgler & Christoph A. Schaltegger, 2005. "The Determinants of Political Discussion: How Important are Audit Courts and Local Autonomy?," CREMA Working Paper Series 2005-28, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    14. Simeon Djankov & Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes & Andrei Shleifer, 2010. "Disclosure by Politicians," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 2(2), pages 179-209, April.
    15. Lino, André Feliciano & Azevedo, Ricardo Rocha de & Aquino, André Carlos Busanelli de & Steccolini, Ileana, 2022. "Fighting or supporting corruption? The role of public sector audit organizations in Brazil," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    16. Lasse Aaskoven, 2016. "Fiscal Transparency, Elections and Public Employment: Evidence from the OECD," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(3), pages 317-341, November.
    17. Isaksson, Ann-Sofie & Bigsten, Arne, 2012. "Institution Building with Limited Resources: Establishing a Supreme Audit Institution in Rwanda," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 1870-1881.
    18. De Simone Elina & Gaeta Giuseppe Lucio & Mourão Paulo Reis, 2017. "The Impact of Fiscal Transparency on Corruption: An Empirical Analysis Based on Longitudinal Data," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 17(4), pages 1-17, October.
    19. Lockwood, Ben & Porcelli, Francesco & Redoano, Michela & Schiavone, Antonio, 2022. "Does Data Disclosure Improve Local Government Performance? Evidence from Italian Municipalities," QAPEC Discussion Papers 17, Quantitative and Analytical Political Economy Research Centre.
    20. Nouha Bougharriou, 2017. "Understanding Public Debt from a Political Economy Perspective," Economic Alternatives, University of National and World Economy, Sofia, Bulgaria, issue 3, pages 379-389, September.

    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:nos:vgmu00:2021:i:5:p:7-26. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Irina A. Zvereva (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://vgmu.hse.ru/ .

    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.