IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/dij/revfcs/v11y2008iq4p31-63.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Concentration et compétitivité du marché de l'audit en France:une étude longitudinale 1997-2003

Author

Listed:
  • Charles Piot

    (Université de Grenoble 2)

Abstract

(VF) Cet article étudie la concentration et l'intensité concurrentielle du marché de l'audit français dans la phase de regroupements des Big Six aux Big Four, suite aux critiques de «cartélisation» souvent formulées. Les mesures portent sur l'ensemble des sociétés cotées fin 1997 et fin 2003, ainsi que sur une segmentation sectorielle de ce marché. Il ressort que la concentration s'est logiquement accrue, globalement et dans la plupart des secteurs. À l'instar des pays anglo-saxons, les ratios de concentration montrent une tendance vers l'oligopole restreint, confirmée par les indices de Linda qui suggèrent un resserrement, dans cette période, de huit à cinq firmes d'audit dotées d'un poids significatif. Toutefois, les indices de Herfindahl suggèrent que l'intensité concurrentielle demeure vive entre les grandes firmes d'audit, et que le marché reste concurrentiel par les prix fin 2003.(VA)Following growing critics of "cartelization", this paper investigates the concentration and competitiveness of the French audit market during the Big Six to Big Four merger period. Concentration is measured for the whole population of listed companics at the end of 1997 and 2003, and within industry segments. It appears that concentration has logically increased, overall, and in most of the industry segments. As observed on Anglo-Saxon markets, concentration ratios characterize a closed oligopoly , which is confirmed by Linda indices showing that the market has reduced from eight to five audit firms with significant market power. However, Herfindahl indices suggest that competition remains fierce between the larger audit firms, and that the whole market is still price competitive by the end of 2003.

Suggested Citation

  • Charles Piot, 2008. "Concentration et compétitivité du marché de l'audit en France:une étude longitudinale 1997-2003," Revue Finance Contrôle Stratégie, revues.org, vol. 11(4), pages 31-63, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:dij:revfcs:v:11:y:2008:i:q4:p:31-63
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repec-crego.u-bourgogne.fr/images/stories/rev/114063.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simunic, Da, 1980. "The Pricing Of Audit Services - Theory And Evidence," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(1), pages 161-190.
    2. Charles Piot, 2001. "Agency costs and audit quality: evidence from France," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(3), pages 461-499.
    3. Tonge, Stanley D. & Wootton, Charles W., 1991. "Auditor concentration and competition among the large public accounting firms: Post-merger status and future implications," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 157-172.
    4. Sumithira Thavapalan & Robyn Moroney & Roger Simnett, 2002. "The effect of the PricewaterhouseCoopers merger on auditor concentration in Australia: A note," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 42(2), pages 153-167, June.
    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. Charles Piot, 2007. "Concentration Et Compétitivité Du Marché De L'Audit En France : Une Étude Longitudinale 1997-2003," Post-Print halshs-00534787, HAL.
    2. Akihiro Yamada & Kento Fujita, 2022. "Impact of Parent Companies and Multiple Large Shareholders on Audit Fees in Stakeholder-Oriented Corporate Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-20, May.
    3. Markus Widmann & Florian Follert & Matthias Wolz, 2021. "What is it going to cost? Empirical evidence from a systematic literature review of audit fee determinants," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 71(2), pages 455-489, April.
    4. Ben Ali Chiraz & Cédric Lesage, 2010. "Ownership concentration and audit fees: do auditors matter most when investors are protected least?," Post-Print hal-00476923, HAL.
    5. Christopher Pong, 2004. "A descriptive analysis of audit price changes in the UK 1991-95," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 161-178.
    6. Michael Firth & Thomas Lau, 2004. "Audit pricing following mergers of accounting practices: evidence from Hong Kong," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(3), pages 201-213.
    7. Mehdi Nekhili & Wafa Masmoudi & Dhikra Chebbi Nehkili, 2009. "Choix de l’auditeur externe, honoraires d’audit et gouvernance des entreprises françaises," Working Papers CREGO 1090501, Université de Bourgogne - CREGO EA7317 Centre de recherches en gestion des organisations.
    8. Raúl Barroso & Chiraz Ben Ali & Cédric Lesage, 2018. "Blockholders’ Ownership and Audit Fees: The Impact of the Corporate Governance Model," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(1), pages 149-172, January.
    9. K. A. Houghton & C. Dolley & C. A. Jubb & K. M. Chong, 2002. "Jurisdictional Differences in Contracting Out GBE Audits: The Impact on Audit Pricing," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 12(28), pages 50-57, November.
    10. Charles Piot & Alain Schatt, 2010. "La réglementation de l’audit est-elle dans l’intérêt public:quelques enseignements du modèle français," Working Papers CREGO 1100606, Université de Bourgogne - CREGO EA7317 Centre de recherches en gestion des organisations.
    11. Alhababsah, Salem, 2019. "Ownership structure and audit quality: An empirical analysis considering ownership types in Jordan," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 71-84.
    12. Cahan, Steven & Hay, David & Li, Lina Z., 2021. "Audit firm merger and the strategic response by large audit firms," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(3).
    13. de Fuentes, Cristina & García Benau, María Antonia & Pucheta Martínez, María Consuelo & Ruiz Barbadillo, Emiliano, 2015. "El éxito de los procesos de fusión en el mercado de auditoría: el caso de PriceWaterhouseCoopers," Revista de Contabilidad - Spanish Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 55-67.
    14. Juan A. Toscano M. & Maria A. Garcia-Benau, 2014. "Structure and Nature of Competition in the Market for Financial Audit Services in Mexico," Journal of Business Administration Research, Journal of Business Administration Research, Sciedu Press, vol. 3(2), pages 1-10, October.
    15. Alhababsah, Salem & Yekini, Sina, 2021. "Audit committee and audit quality: An empirical analysis considering industry expertise, legal expertise and gender diversity," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    16. Laurence Kranich & Andrés Perea & Hans Peters, 2005. "Core Concepts For Dynamic Tu Games," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 7(01), pages 43-61.
    17. Ju Ryum Chung & Eun Jung Cho & Ho-Young Lee & Myungsoo Son, 2017. "The impact of labour unions on external auditor selection and audit scope: evidence from the Korean market," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(48), pages 4833-4850, October.
    18. Sang Cheol Lee & Mooweon Rhee & Jongchul Yoon, 2018. "Foreign Monitoring and Audit Quality: Evidence from Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-22, September.
    19. Frecka, Thomas J. & Griffin, Jeremy B. & Stevens, Jennifer Sustersic, 2018. "Transparency and the audit industry? Not in the U.S. Evidence on audit production costs, profitability and partner compensation from the U.K," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 73-81.
    20. Fangjun Wang & Luying Xu & Fei Guo & Junrui Zhang, 2020. "Loan Guarantees, Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure and Audit Fees: Evidence from China," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 166(2), pages 293-309, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    concentration; compétitivité; marché de l'audit; Big Six/Four; fusions de cabinets; competitiveness ; audit market; auditor mergers.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • M42 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Auditing

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:dij:revfcs:v:11:y:2008:i:q4:p:31-63. 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: Informatique Technique MSH Dijon (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.revues.org/ .

    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.