IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/crpeac/v99y2024ics1045235423001429.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Maintaining and extending hegemony: The politics of accounting standard setting

Author

Listed:
  • Warren, Rebecca

Abstract

This paper offers a critical analysis of the politics of accounting standard setting. The International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) hold an increasingly monopolistic role in accounting regulation across the globe, and make claims to transparency, neutrality and superior expertise to legitimize their hegemonic position. In 2009 the IASB extended their standard setting beyond listed entities to the International Financial Reporting Standard for Small and Medium-Sized Entities (IFRS for SMEs). This paper explores the political antagonisms surrounding this extension, finding that the IASB undertook this project to block counter articulations from several bodies. To unpack the politics of the IASB’s extension this paper draws on Laclau and Mouffe’s hegemony and Glynos and Howarth’s political logics, to argue that the IASB maintain and extend hegemony by dismissing and blocking alternatives through the rhetoric of superior expertise, which ultimately enables them to extend ideologies of advanced financial capital and capital markets to new spaces.

Suggested Citation

  • Warren, Rebecca, 2024. "Maintaining and extending hegemony: The politics of accounting standard setting," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:crpeac:v:99:y:2024:i:c:s1045235423001429
    DOI: 10.1016/j.cpa.2023.102686
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1045235423001429
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.cpa.2023.102686?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cortese, Corinne L. & Irvine, Helen J. & Kaidonis, Mary A., 2010. "Powerful players: How constituents captured the setting of IFRS 6, an accounting standard for the extractive industries," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 76-88.
    2. Corinne L. Cortese & Helen J. Irvine & Mary A. Kaidonis, 2010. "Powerful players: How constituents captured the setting of IFRS 6, an accounting standard for the extractive industries," Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(2), pages 76-88, June.
    3. Suddaby, Roy & Saxton, Gregory D. & Gunz, Sally, 2015. "Twittering change: The institutional work of domain change in accounting expertise," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 52-68.
    4. Martinez-Diaz, Leonardo, 2005. "Strategic Experts and Improvising Regulators: Explaining the IASC's Rise to Global Influence, 1973–2001," Business and Politics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(3), pages 1-26, December.
    5. Ronita Ram & Susan Newberry, 2017. "Agenda Entrance Complexity in International Accounting Standard Setting: The Case of IFRS for SMEs," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 53(4), pages 485-512, December.
    6. repec:dau:papers:123456789/7512 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Cortese, Corinne & Irvine, Helen, 2010. "Investigating international accounting standard setting: The black box of IFRS 6," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 87-95.
    8. Alan Richardson & Burkard Eberlein, 2011. "Legitimating Transnational Standard-Setting: The Case of the International Accounting Standards Board," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 98(2), pages 217-245, January.
    9. Sylvain Durocher & Yves Gendron, 2011. "IFRS: On the Docility of Sophisticated Users in Preserving the Ideal of Comparability," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(2), pages 233-262.
    10. Julia Black, 2008. "Constructing and contesting legitimacy and accountability in polycentric regulatory regimes," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(2), pages 137-164, June.
    11. Laaksonen, Jenni, 2022. "Translation, hegemony and accounting: A critical research framework with an illustration from the IFRS context," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    12. Durocher, Sylvain & Georgiou, Omiros, 2022. "Framing accounting for goodwill: Intractable controversies between users and standard setters," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    13. Cooper, Christine, 2015. "Accounting for the fictitious: A Marxist contribution to understanding accounting's roles in the financial crisis," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 63-82.
    14. Young, Joni J., 2003. "Constructing, persuading and silencing: the rhetoric of accounting standards," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 621-638, August.
    15. Bamber, Matthew & McMeeking, Kevin, 2016. "An examination of international accounting standard-setting due process and the implications for legitimacy," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 59-73.
    16. Spence, Crawford, 2009. "Social accounting's emancipatory potential: A Gramscian critique," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 205-227.
    17. World Bank, 2002. "Report on the Observance of Standards and Codes : Corporate Governance Country Assessment, Bulgaria," World Bank Publications - Reports 14459, The World Bank Group.
    18. George Georgiou, 2004. "Corporate Lobbying on Accounting Standards: Methods, Timing and Perceived Effectiveness," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 40(2), pages 219-237, June.
    19. World Bank, 2004. "India - Report on the Observance of Standards and Codes (ROSC) : Corporate Governance Country Assessment," World Bank Publications - Reports 14465, The World Bank Group.
    20. Chiapello, Eve & Medjad, Karim, 2009. "An unprecedented privatisation of mandatory standard-setting: The case of European accounting policy," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 448-468.
    21. Camfferman, Kees & Zeff, Stephen A., 2015. "Aiming for Global Accounting Standards: The International Accounting Standards Board, 2001-2011," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199646319, Decembrie.
    22. Perera, Dinuja & Chand, Parmod, 2015. "Issues in the adoption of international financial reporting standards (IFRS) for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMES)," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 165-178.
    23. repec:eme:aaaj00:aaaj-04-2018-3464 is not listed on IDEAS
    24. Alain Burlaud & Bernard Colasse, 2011. "International Accounting Standardisation: Is Politics Back?," Accounting in Europe, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 23-47, June.
    25. Philippe Danjou & Peter Walton, 2012. "The Legitimacy of the IASB," Accounting in Europe, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(1), pages 1-15, June.
    26. Hopper, Trevor & Lassou, Philippe & Soobaroyen, Teerooven, 2017. "Globalisation, accounting and developing countries," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 125-148.
    27. Christopher Nobes, 2013. "The continued survival of international differences under IFRS," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(2), pages 83-111, April.
    28. Hines, Ruth D., 1991. "The FASB's conceptual framework, financial accounting and the maintenance of the social world," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 313-331.
    29. Botzem, Sebastian, 2014. "Transnational standard setting in accounting: Organizing expertise-based self-regulation in times of crises," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 27(6), pages 933-955.
    30. Shyam Sunder, 2011. "IFRS monopoly: the Pied Piper of financial reporting," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(3), pages 291-306, August.
    31. Lehman, Cheryl R., 2013. "Knowing the unknowable and contested terrains in accounting," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 136-144.
    32. Meghana Ayyagari & Thorsten Beck & Asli Demirguc-Kunt, 2007. "Small and Medium Enterprises Across the Globe," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 29(4), pages 415-434, December.
    33. S. Susela Devi & R. Helen Samujh, 2015. "The Political Economy of Convergence: The Case of IFRS for SMEs," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 25(2), pages 124-138, June.
    34. Christine Cooper, 2005. "Accounting for the public interest: public ineffectuals or public intellectuals?," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 18(5), pages 592-607, October.
    35. Stenka, Renata, 2022. "Beyond intentionality in accounting regulation: Habitual strategizing by the IASB," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    36. Hines, Ruth D., 1988. "Financial accounting: In communicating reality, we construct reality," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 251-261, April.
    37. Rebecca Warren & David Bernard Carter & Christopher J. Napier, 2019. "Opening up the politics of standard setting through discourse theory: the case of IFRS for SMEs," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 33(1), pages 124-151, September.
    38. Martinez-Diaz Leonardo, 2005. "Strategic Experts and Improvising Regulators: Explaining the IASC's Rise to Global Influence, 1973-2001," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 7(3), pages 1-28, December.
    39. Ronita Ram & Susan Newberry, 2013. "IFRS FOR SMEs: THE IASB'S DUE PROCESS," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 23(1), pages 3-17, March.
    40. Eve Chiapello, 2007. "Accounting and the birth of the notion of capitalism," Post-Print hal-00466515, HAL.
    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. Crawford, Louise, 2019. "Exploring the emancipatory dimensions of globalisation: The struggle over IFRS8 and country-by-country reporting," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    2. Hervé Kohler & Christine Pochet & Anne Le Manh, 2021. "Auditors as intermediaries in the endogenization of an accounting standard: The case of IFRS 15 within the telecom industry," Post-Print hal-03337420, HAL.
    3. Kohler, Hervé & Pochet, Christine & Le Manh, Anne, 2021. "Auditors as intermediaries in the endogenization of an accounting standard: The case of IFRS 15 within the telecom industry," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    4. Kettunen, Jaana, 2017. "Interlingual translation of the International Financial Reporting Standards as institutional work," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 38-54.
    5. Stenka, Renata & Jaworska, Sylvia, 2019. "The use of made-up users," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    6. Samindi Ishara Hewa & Rajni Mala & Jinhua Chen, 2020. "IASB's independence in the due process: an examination of interest groups’ influence on the development of IFRS 9," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 60(3), pages 2585-2615, September.
    7. Mantzari, Elisavet & Georgiou, Omiros, 2019. "Ideological hegemony and consent to IFRS: Insights from practitioners in Greece," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 70-93.
    8. Stenka, Renata, 2022. "Beyond intentionality in accounting regulation: Habitual strategizing by the IASB," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    9. Bamber, Matthew & McMeeking, Kevin, 2016. "An examination of international accounting standard-setting due process and the implications for legitimacy," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 59-73.
    10. S. Susela Devi & R. Helen Samujh, 2015. "The Political Economy of Convergence: The Case of IFRS for SMEs," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 25(2), pages 124-138, June.
    11. Durocher, Sylvain & Picard, Claire-France & Dugal, Léa, 2024. "Giving sense to and making sense of OCI: When each component makes sense, but the whole does not," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    12. Raffaele Fiume & Tiziano Onesti & Valerio Pieri, 2013. "Dialogue with standard setters," FINANCIAL REPORTING, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2013(3-4), pages 169-189.
    13. Paola Ramassa & Alberto Quagli, 2024. "Interpreting IFRS: The Evolving Role of Agenda Decisions," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 60(2), pages 205-235, June.
    14. Bhimani, Alnoor & Bond, David & Sivabalan, Prabhu, 2019. "Does greater user representation lead to more user focused standards? An empirical investigation of IASB’s approach to standard setting," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 91196, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    15. Laaksonen, Jenni, 2022. "Translation, hegemony and accounting: A critical research framework with an illustration from the IFRS context," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    16. Esther Pittroff, 2021. "The legitimacy of global accounting rules: a note on the challenges from path-dependence theory," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 25(2), pages 379-396, June.
    17. Flauzeliton José Aparecido Gonçalves & André Aroldo Freitas De Moura & Fabio Yoshio Suguri Motoki, 2022. "What influences the implementation of IFRS for SMEs? The Brazilian case," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(2), pages 2947-2992, June.
    18. Zhang, Ying & Andrew, Jane, 2014. "Financialisation and the Conceptual Framework," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 17-26.
    19. Ahblom, Per & Sjögren, Ebba, 2019. "Delivering performance: the capital market framing of financial numbers from a preparer perspective," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 102819, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    20. Beaumont, Stacey & Clarkson, Peter & Tutticci, Irene, 2018. "Identifying lobbying strategies: An analysis of public responses to the Productivity Commission Inquiry into executive remuneration in Australia," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 288-306.

    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:eee:crpeac:v:99:y:2024:i:c:s1045235423001429. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/critical-perspectives-on-accounting/ .

    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.