IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/icr/wpicer/03-2007.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Supreme Audit Institutions: Supremely Superfluous? A Cross Country Assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Lorenz Blume
  • Stefan Voigt

Abstract

This is the first study that assesses the economic effects of supreme audit institutions (SAIs) on a cross country basis. Drawing on two distinct sources (a survey carried out by the International Organization of the SAIs in the early 90ies and an OECD/World Bank Survey of Budget Practices and Procedures carried out in 2003), the effects of SAIs on three groups of economic variables are estimated, namely on (1) fiscal policy, on (2) government effectiveness, and on (3) productivity. On the basis of up to 40 countries, differences in the independence, the mandate, the implementation record, and the organizational model of the SAIs do not seem to have any clear-cut effect on any of the three groups of dependent variables. There is only one exception: perceived levels of corruption (an aspect of government effectiveness) are significantly higher if the SAI is structured along the court model of auditing. Although in isolation the number of observations appears to be quite low, we argue that the results are unlikely to significantly change if the number of observations is increased for two reasons: the two surveys cover different sets of countries and the individual significance levels are usually extremely low indicating that the structure of SAIs could, indeed, be completely superfluous for the effectiveness of these organizations. Classification-H1, H3, H5, H8

Suggested Citation

  • Lorenz Blume & Stefan Voigt, 2007. "Supreme Audit Institutions: Supremely Superfluous? A Cross Country Assessment," ICER Working Papers 03-2007, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:icr:wpicer:03-2007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.bemservizi.unito.it/repec/icr/wp2007/ICERwp03-07.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. AlÌcia Adserý, 2003. "Are You Being Served? Political Accountability and Quality of Government," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(2), pages 445-490, October.
    2. Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes & Andrei Shleifer & Robert W. Vishny, 1998. "Law and Finance," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(6), pages 1113-1155, December.
    3. Treisman, Daniel, 2000. "The causes of corruption: a cross-national study," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(3), pages 399-457, June.
    4. Beck, Thorsten & Clarke, George & Groff, Alberto & Keefer, Philip & Walsh, Patrick, 2000. "New tools and new tests in comparative political economy - the database of political institutions," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2283, The World Bank.
    5. Daniel Kaufmann & Aart Kraay & Massimo Mastruzzi, 2003. "Governance Matters III: Governance Indicators for 1996-2002," Macroeconomics 0308006, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Mueller,Dennis C., 2003. "Public Choice III," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521894753, September.
    7. Feld, Lars P. & Voigt, Stefan, 2003. "Economic growth and judicial independence: cross-country evidence using a new set of indicators," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 497-527, September.
    8. Mark Schelker & Reiner Eichenberger, 2003. "Starke Rechnungsprüfungskommissionen: Wichtiger als direkte Demokratie und Föderalismus? Ein erster Blick auf die Daten," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 139(III), pages 351-373, September.
    9. Reiner Eichenberger & Mark Schelker, 2007. "Independent and competing agencies: An effective way to control government," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 130(1), pages 79-98, 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. Stuart Kells, 2011. "The Seven Deadly Sins of Performance Auditing: Implications for Monitoring Public Audit Institutions," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 21(4), pages 383-396, December.
    2. Danielle Morin, 2008. "Auditors general's universe revisited: An exploratory study of the influence they exert on public administration through their value for money audits," Managerial Auditing Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 23(7), pages 697-720, July.
    3. Andrei Markevich, 2011. "How Much Control is Enough? Monitoring and Enforcement under Stalin," Europe-Asia Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 63(8), pages 1449-1468.
    4. Cristina-Petrina Drăgușin (Trincu-Drăgușin) & Ileana Cosmina Pitulice & Aurelia Ștefănescu, 2021. "Harmonisation and Emergence Concerning the Performance Audit of the EU Member States’ Public Sector. Romania’s Case," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-18, March.
    5. Konstantinos Siassiakos & Georgios A. Papadopoulos & Evripidis P. Kechagias & Marina Kafasi, 2020. "The role and the perceived impact of fiscal audits, conducted by the Hellenic Court of Audit (HCA), towards the effectiveness and efficiency of Greek Public Organizations," Advances in Management and Applied Economics, SCIENPRESS Ltd, vol. 10(3), pages 1-7.
    6. Ionel Bostan & Mihaela Brindusa Tudose & Raluca Irina Clipa & Ionela Corina Chersan & Flavian Clipa, 2021. "Supreme Audit Institutions and Sustainability of Public Finance. Links and Evidence along the Economic Cycles," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-24, August.

    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. Blume, Lorenz & Voigt, Stefan, 2011. "Does organizational design of supreme audit institutions matter? A cross-country assessment," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 215-229, June.
    2. Stefan Voigt, 2011. "Positive constitutional economics II—a survey of recent developments," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 146(1), pages 205-256, January.
    3. Hayo, Bernd & Voigt, Stefan, 2007. "Explaining de facto judicial independence," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 269-290, September.
    4. Stefan Voigt & Lorenz Blume, "undated". "The Economic Effects of Direct Democracy - A Cross-Country Assessment," German Working Papers in Law and Economics 2006-1-1144, Berkeley Electronic Press.
    5. Matthias Benz & Bruno S. Frey, "undated". "Corporate Governance: What can we Learn from Public Governance?," IEW - Working Papers 166, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    6. David De La Croix & Clara Delavallade, 2011. "Democracy, Rule of Law, Corruption Incentives, and Growth," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 13(2), pages 155-187, April.
    7. Stefan Voigt & Lorenz Blume, 2007. "Wenn Justitia die Hand aufhält – Ursachen und Folgen korrupter Justizbehörden," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 8(1), pages 65-92, January.
    8. Aysan, Ahmet Faruk, 2005. "The Role of Efficiency of Redistributive Institutions on Redistribution: An Empirical Assessment," MPRA Paper 17773, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Lorenz Blume & Jens Müller & Stefan Voigt, 2009. "The economic effects of direct democracy—a first global assessment," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 431-461, September.
    10. Lars P. Feld & Stefan Voigt, 2004. "Making Judges Independent – Some Proposals Regarding the Judiciary," CESifo Working Paper Series 1260, CESifo.
    11. Zane Spindler & Xavier Vanssay & Vincent Hildebrand, 2008. "Using Economic Freedom Indexes as Policy Indicators: An Intercontinental Example," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 195-214, September.
    12. Konstantinos Angelopoulos & George Economides, 2008. "Fiscal policy, rent seeking, and growth under electoral uncertainty: theory and evidence from the OECD," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(4), pages 1375-1405, November.
    13. Simeon Djankov & Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes & Andrei Shleifer, 2010. "Disclosure by Politicians," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 2(2), pages 179-209, April.
    14. Bernhard P. Zaaruka & Johannes W. Fedderke, 2011. "Measuring Institutions: Indicators of Political and Economic Institutions in Namibia: 1884 – 2008," Working Papers 236, Economic Research Southern Africa.
    15. Adam, Antonis & Delis, Manthos D. & Kammas, Pantelis, 2011. "Are democratic governments more efficient?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 75-86, March.
    16. Theo S. Eicher & David J. Kuenzel, 2019. "European influence and economic development," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(2), pages 667-734, May.
    17. Haggard, Stephan & Tiede, Lydia, 2011. "The Rule of Law and Economic Growth: Where are We?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 673-685, May.
    18. Andreas Kyriacou & Oriol Roca sagalés, 2009. "Fiscal descentralization and the quality of government: evidence from panel data," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 189(2), pages 131-155, June.
    19. Alberto Chong & Alejandro Riaño, 2006. "El entorno político y los precios de las privatizaciones," Research Department Publications 4440, Inter-American Development Bank, Research Department.
    20. Luis Angeles & Kyriakos C. Neanidis, "undated". "Colonialism, elite Formation and corruption," Working Papers 2011_02, Business School - Economics, University of Glasgow.

    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:icr:wpicer:03-2007. 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: Daniele Pennesi (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/icerrit.html .

    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.