IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/acctbr/v41y2011i1p29-50.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Practitioners' participation in the accounting standard-setting process

Author

Listed:
  • Sylvain Durocher
  • Anne Fortin

Abstract

Constituents' participation in standard-setting processes is seen as a key indicator of a standard setter's legitimacy. While previous research has mainly examined corporate economic determinants of participation, limited evidence exists on practitioners' motivations to become involved in developing accounting standards. This study uses expectancy theory to explain practitioners' intentions to participate in the standard-setting process in the context of the development of financial reporting standards for private enterprises in Canada. The results suggest that the variables of the expectancy valence model are determinant of the attractiveness of becoming involved in the standard-setting process by submitting a comment letter, and the variables of the expectancy force model are determinant of a practitioner's behavioural intentions to participate in the standard-setting process.

Suggested Citation

  • Sylvain Durocher & Anne Fortin, 2011. "Practitioners' participation in the accounting standard-setting process," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(1), pages 29-50, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:acctbr:v:41:y:2011:i:1:p:29-50
    DOI: 10.1080/00014788.2011.549635
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00014788.2011.549635
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00014788.2011.549635?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. Anthony Downs, 1957. "An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 65, pages 135-135.
    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. 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.
    2. Urska Kosi & Antonia Reither, 2014. "Determinants of Corporate Participation in the IFRS 4 (Insurance Contracts) Replacement Process," Accounting in Europe, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(1), pages 89-112, June.
    3. Morley Julia, 2022. "The Pluralistic Foundations of Conceptual Veiling," Accounting, Economics, and Law: A Convivium, De Gruyter, vol. 12(2), pages 191-210, May.
    4. Molina Sánchez, Horacio & Bautista Mesa, Rafael, 2018. "La participación en el /Participation in the IASB Due Process," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 36, pages 429-458, Mayo.
    5. Uyar, Ali & Güngörmüş, Ali Haydar, 2013. "Perceptions and knowledge of accounting professionals on IFRS for SMEs: Evidence from Turkey," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 77-87.
    6. Morley, Julia, 2022. "The pluralistic foundations of conceptual veiling," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 114359, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Rey, Andrea & Maglio, Roberto & Rapone, Valerio, 2020. "Lobbying during IASB and FASB convergence due processes: Evidence from the IFRS 16 project on leases," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    8. Molina Sánchez, Horacio & Mora Enguídanos, Araceli, 2015. "Cambios conceptuales en la contabilidad de los arrendamientos: retos normativos y académicos," Revista de Contabilidad - Spanish Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 99-113.
    9. Burke, Qing L., 2019. "Why haven’t U.S. GAAP and IFRS on insurance contracts converged? Evidence from an unsuccessful joint project," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 131-144.

    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. Christophe Crombez, 2004. "Introduction," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 16(3), pages 227-231, July.
    2. Persson, Torsten & Tabellini, Guido, 2002. "Political economics and public finance," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 24, pages 1549-1659, Elsevier.
    3. Kaivan Munshi & Mark Rosenzweig, 2008. "The Efficacy of Parochial Politics: Caste, Commitment, and Competence in Indian Local Governments," NBER Working Papers 14335, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Burkhard Schipper & Hee Yeul Woo, 2012. "Political Awareness and Microtargeting of Voters in Electoral Competition," Working Papers 124, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
    5. Marco Faravelli & Randall Walsh, 2011. "Smooth Politicians And Paternalistic Voters: A Theory Of Large Elections," Levine's Working Paper Archive 786969000000000250, David K. Levine.
    6. Hank C. Jenkins-Smith & Neil J. Mitchell & Kerry G. Herron, 2004. "Foreign and Domestic Policy Belief Structures in the U.S. and British Publics," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 48(3), pages 287-309, June.
    7. Eric Kaufmann & Henry Patterson, 2006. "Intra‐Party Support for the Good Friday Agreement in the Ulster Unionist Party," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 54(3), pages 509-532, October.
    8. Micael Castanheira, 2003. "Why Vote For Losers?," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 1(5), pages 1207-1238, September.
    9. Peter J. Coughlin, 2015. "Probabilistic voting in models of electoral competition," Chapters, in: Jac C. Heckelman & Nicholas R. Miller (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Voting, chapter 13, pages 218-234, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Mihir Bhattacharya, 2019. "Constitutionally consistent voting rules over single-peaked domains," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 52(2), pages 225-246, February.
    11. Marc Henry & Ismael Mourifié, 2013. "Euclidean Revealed Preferences: Testing The Spatial Voting Model," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(4), pages 650-666, June.
    12. , & ,, 2006. "Group formation and voter participation," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 1(4), pages 461-487, December.
    13. Dendi Ramdani & Arjen Witteloostuijn, 2012. "The Shareholder–Manager Relationship and Its Impact on the Likelihood of Firm Bribery," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 108(4), pages 495-507, July.
    14. Alan E. Wiseman, 2006. "A Theory of Partisan Support and Entry Deterrence in Electoral Competition," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 18(2), pages 123-158, April.
    15. Alessandro Olper & Johan Swinnen, 2013. "Mass Media and Public Policy: Global Evidence from Agricultural Policies," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 27(3), pages 413-436.
    16. Armèn Hakhverdian, 2009. "Capturing Government Policy on the Left–Right Scale: Evidence from the United Kingdom, 1956–2006," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 57(4), pages 720-745, December.
    17. Sven Banisch & Eckehard Olbrich, 2021. "An Argument Communication Model of Polarization and Ideological Alignment," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 24(1), pages 1-1.
    18. Robbett, Andrea & Matthews, Peter Hans, 2018. "Partisan bias and expressive voting," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 107-120.
    19. Peter Nijkamp & Marc van der Burch & Gabriella Vindigni, 2002. "A Comparative Institutional Evaluation of Public-Private Partnerships in Dutch Urban Land-use and Revitalisation Projects," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 39(10), pages 1865-1880, September.
    20. Vincenzo Atella & Jay Coggins & Federico Perali, 2005. "Aversion to inequality in Italy and its determinants," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 2(2), pages 117-144, January.

    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:taf:acctbr:v:41:y:2011:i:1:p:29-50. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RABR20 .

    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.