No abstract

PurposeThe monetary valuation of cultural heritage of a selection of 16 major public, not-for-profit Australian cultural institutions is examined over a period of almost three decades (1992–2019) to understand how they have responded to the paradoxical tensions of heritage valuation for financial reporting purposes.Design/methodology/approachAccounting for cultural heritage is an intrinsically paradoxical practice; it involves a conflict of two opposite ways of attributing value: the traditional accounting and the heritage professionals (or curatorial) approaches. In analysing the annual reports and other documentary sources through qualitative content analysis, the study explores how different actors responded to the conceptual and technical contradictions posed by the monetary valuation of “heritage assets”, the accounting phraseology of accounting standards.FindingsFour phases emerge from the analysis undertaken of the empirical material, each characterised by a distinctive nature of the paradox, the institutional responses discerned and the outcomes. Although a persisting heterogeneity in the practice of accounting for cultural heritage is evident, responses by cultural institutions are shown to have minimised, so far, the negative impacts of monetary valuation in terms of commercialisation of deaccessioning decisions and distorted accountability.Originality/valueIn applying the theoretical lens of paradox theory in the context of the financial reporting of heritage, as assets, the study enhances an understanding of the challenges and responses by major public cultural institutions in a country that has led this development globally, providing insights to accounting standard setters arising from the accounting practices observed.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate how teaching broader accounting concepts through real life non-financial case study information (such as COVID-19 case reporting) can assist students understanding accounting’s technical, social and moral perspectives. Accounting education and practice has traditionally focussed on the technical aspects of accounting and has situated accounting within a financial context. Design/methodology/approach This exploratory study uses content analysis of COVID-19 case and death numbers reported by several international health reporting agencies. This study does not set out to provide a detailed technical or comparative jurisdictional analysis of the decision-usefulness of COVID-19 information. Rather, this study looks at the “decision-usefulness” of the COVID-19 case and death number information, and provides examples that educators can draw upon for inspiration when showing how the qualitative characteristics of decision-useful information can be applied to non-financial information. This study also highlights, by use of a “novel data set”, the technical, social and moral aspects of accounting. Findings This study finds that the COVID-19 pandemic provides an opportunity for accounting education by positioning the qualitative characteristics of decision-useful information beyond a financial context. The exploration of accounting within this setting effectively demonstrates that accounting has “technical”, “social” and “moral” dimensions. Originality/value This paper fulfils an identified need to include teaching of decision-usefulness of non-financial information in the accounting curriculum to ensure that future professional accountants possess technical and professional competency skills.

The International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board of the International Federation of Accountants issued exposure draft ED78 Property Plant and Equipment in April 2021. It proposes valuing ‘heritage items’ for recognition as ‘heritage assets’ in statements of financial position. This proposed requirement for global application casts the spotlight on a highly controversial topic in regulated financial reporting. The monetary valuation of cultural, heritage and scientific collections of public not‐for‐profit museums, art galleries and similar repositories has been subject to considerable discussion and debate for the past three decades. Our purpose is to critically examine this perennial financial reporting controversary, in the context of the three conceptions of accounting: accounting as technical practice, social practice and moral practice as articulated in the definition of accounting proposed by Carnegie et al. (2021a, 2021b) for discussion, debate and potential adoption in the accounting profession, including by accounting standard setters in all sectors. This article is intended to challenge accounting to enhanced self‐awareness in reaching its full potential.