IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jmgtgv/v2y1998i3p287-296.html

The Grasshoppers and the Great Cattle: Participation and Non-Participation in the ASB's Standard-Setting Process

Author

Listed:
  • Doreen Gilfedder
  • Ciarán Ó hÓgartaigh

Abstract

This paper presents the results of a research study of participation in the accounting standard-setting process in the United Kingdom. The study considers the 1,519 responses to the Accounting Standards Board's ('the ASB') proposals for accounting standards. Consistent with the findings of other studies in the USA and Australia, the present paper finds that there is a high level of participation by the preparers of financial statements in the ASB's consultation process. The paper then examines the size of the preparer firms which formally lobby the ASB. The evidence confirms that those firms which become involved in the lobbying process in the UK tend to be larger than non-lobbying firms, and the paper concludes that, as elswhere, the standard-setting process in the UK appears to be a discourse of the powerful. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 1998

Suggested Citation

  • Doreen Gilfedder & Ciarán Ó hÓgartaigh, 1998. "The Grasshoppers and the Great Cattle: Participation and Non-Participation in the ASB's Standard-Setting Process," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 2(3), pages 287-296, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jmgtgv:v:2:y:1998:i:3:p:287-296
    DOI: 10.1023/A:1009911411266
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1023/A:1009911411266
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1023/A:1009911411266?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Francis, Jere R., 1987. "Lobbying against proposed accounting standards: The case of employers' pension accounting," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 35-57.
    2. Cooper, David J. & Sherer, Michael J., 1984. "The value of corporate accounting reports: Arguments for a political economy of accounting," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 9(3-4), pages 207-232, October.
    3. Anthony Downs, 1957. "An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 65(2), pages 135-135.
    4. Zmijewski, Mark E. & Hagerman, Robert L., 1981. "An income strategy approach to the positive theory of accounting standard setting/choice," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(2), pages 129-149, August.
    5. Sutton, Timothy G., 1984. "Lobbying of accounting standard-setting bodies in the U.K. and the U.S.A.: A Downsian analysis," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 81-95, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Maroun, Warren & van Zijl, Wayne, 2016. "Isomorphism and resistance in implementing IFRS 10 and IFRS 12," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 220-239.

    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. Georgiou, George, 2010. "The IASB standard-setting process: Participation and perceptions of financial statement users," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 103-118.
    2. McLeay, Stuart & Ordelheide, Dieter & Young, Steven, 2000. "Constituent lobbying and its impact on the development of financial reporting regulations: evidence from Germany," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 79-98, January.
    3. Elbannan, Mohamed & McKinley, William, 2006. "A theory of the corporate decision to resist FASB standards: An organization theory perspective," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 31(7), pages 601-622, October.
    4. Georgiou, George & Roberts, Clare B., 2004. "Corporate lobbying in the UK: an analysis of attitudes towards the ASB's 1995 deferred taxation proposals," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 441-453.
    5. van Lent, L.A.G.M., 1999. "Incomplete contracting theory in empirical accounting research," Other publications TiSEM 088f797d-9fa4-4081-98f4-1, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    6. Holder, Anthony D. & Karim, Khondkar E. & Lin, Karen Jingrong & Woods, Maef, 2013. "A content analysis of the comment letters to the FASB and IASB: Accounting for contingencies," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 134-153.
    7. Vinnari, Eija & Dillard, Jesse, 2016. "(ANT)agonistics: Pluralistic politicization of, and by, accounting and its technologies," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 25-44.
    8. Pranil Prasad & Parmod Chand, 2017. "The Changing Face of the Auditor's Report: Implications for Suppliers and Users of Financial Statements," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 27(4), pages 348-367, December.
    9. Cooper, David J. & Robson, Keith, 2006. "Accounting, professions and regulation: Locating the sites of professionalization," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 31(4-5), pages 415-444.
    10. Durocher, Sylvain & Fortin, Anne & Cote, Louise, 2007. "Users' participation in the accounting standard-setting process: A theory-building study," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 32(1-2), pages 29-59.
    11. Brown, Judy, 2009. "Democracy, sustainability and dialogic accounting technologies: Taking pluralism seriously," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 313-342.
    12. Karen Handley & Elaine Evans & Sue Wright, 2020. "Understanding participation in accounting standard‐setting: the case of AASB ED 192 Revised Differential Reporting Framework," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 60(4), pages 3621-3645, December.
    13. George Georgiou, 2002. "Corporate non-participation in the ASB standard-setting process," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(4), pages 699-722.
    14. Roland Königsgruber, 2013. "Expertise-based lobbying and accounting regulation," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 17(4), pages 1009-1025, November.
    15. Markus Widmann & Florian Follert & Matthias Wolz, 2021. "On the Political Decision of Audit Market Regulation: Empirical Evidence of Audit Firm Tenure and Maximum Durations within the European Union," Economies, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-24, May.
    16. Merridee L. Bujaki & Bruce J. McConomy, 2007. "Income Tax Accounting Policy Choice: Exposure Draft Responses and the Early Adoption Decision by Canadian Companies," Accounting Perspectives, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(1), pages 21-53, February.
    17. van Lent, L.A.G.M., 1995. "Pressure and politics in financial accounting regulation," Research Memorandum FEW 686, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    18. 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.
    19. Denis Cormier & Charlotte Beauchamp, 2016. "Le rôle des acteurs dans la normalisation comptable internationale : Le cas de la norme IFRS 9," Post-Print hal-01902328, HAL.
    20. van Lent, L.A.G.M., 1995. "Pressure and politics in financial accounting regulation," Other publications TiSEM 5ae3c9e9-0adb-4d81-b455-9, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.

    More about this item

    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:kap:jmgtgv:v:2:y:1998:i:3:p:287-296. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.