The effects of national institutions on audit research: evidence from Europe and North America
Auditing is claimed to have become more and more a global discipline. As a result of the expansion of the international audit firm networks, and the proliferation of International Standards on Auditing, differences between national auditing practices seem to have diminished. Surprisingly, national audit research communities seem to develop rather independently, suggesting that national institutions still play an important role in the production of audit research. Therefore, the objective of this paper is to assess the effects of local institutions on audit research. To that end, evidence is provided on the production of audit research in two areas: Europe and North America. Europe is an area with high variation in auditing institutions, while North America is an area with low variation in auditing institutions. A content analysis is presented of the European and North American auditing papers published in accounting and auditing research journals in the period 1990-7. The findings of the output assessment show that, compared to North American audit research, descriptions of national auditing institutions and environments are a dominant topic of European auditing papers, and that the output in terms of journal articles is lower. Subsequently, the paper attempts to explain why the assessed European and North American auditing research differs. The paper argues that the substantial differences in national institutional environments within Europe have two effects on European auditing research. On the one hand, national differences in auditing institutions and environments are an important subject of study. On the other hand, these differences result in a segmentation of the European audit research market, which is lacking in the North American market. The existence of a large number of smaller national auditing research markets results in different incentives, output and performance measures of auditing researchers. The paper concludes with an assessment of the future of audit research as a global discipline.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 9 (2000)
Issue (Month): 4 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/REAR20|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/REAR20|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Panozzo, Fabrizio, 1997. "The making of the good academic accountant," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 22(5), pages 447-480, July.
- Luc Quadackers & Theodore Mock & Steven Maijoor, 1996. "Audit risk and audit programmes: archival evidence from four Dutch audit firms," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(2), pages 217-237.
- Forte, Francesco, 1995. "European Economics: A Tiny Creature under Tutorship," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(2), pages 211-217.
- Dyl, Edward A. & Lilly, Martha S., 1985. "A note on institutional contributions to the accounting literature," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 171-175, April.
- Daron Acemoglu & Miles Gietzmann, 1998. "Auditor independence, incomplete contracts and the role of legal liability," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(3), pages 355-375.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:euract:v:9:y:2000:i:4:p:569-587. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.