1996
DOI: 10.1016/s1061-9518(96)90018-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Accounting standard-setting in Canada, 1864–1992: A theoretical analysis of structural evolution

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0
1

Year Published

2007
2007
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
0
9
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…These systems have their origins in Canada's status as a former colony and dependency of the British Crown. The early structure of the accounting profession in Canada closely followed British traditions, as they were set up under the guidance of such frameworks as the British Companies Act of 1900 (e.g., Baylin, MacDonald, and Richardson, 1996). The British influence on Canadian corporate governance practices is also evident: for example, Canadian principles of corporate disclosure were initially developed in compliance with the 1844 British law on joint stock companies (Gray and Kitching, 2005).…”
Section: Cultural Explanations For Canada's Ifrs Adoptionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These systems have their origins in Canada's status as a former colony and dependency of the British Crown. The early structure of the accounting profession in Canada closely followed British traditions, as they were set up under the guidance of such frameworks as the British Companies Act of 1900 (e.g., Baylin, MacDonald, and Richardson, 1996). The British influence on Canadian corporate governance practices is also evident: for example, Canadian principles of corporate disclosure were initially developed in compliance with the 1844 British law on joint stock companies (Gray and Kitching, 2005).…”
Section: Cultural Explanations For Canada's Ifrs Adoptionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, common research themes include: legitimacy, constituents' lobbying and regulatory capture (Shapiro, 1997;Cooper & Robson, 2006). Many of these academic studies cover standard setters from the United States (Johnson & Solomons, 1984;Tandy & Wilburn, 1992;Fogarty, 1994;Young, 1994;Christensen & Mohr, 1999), Canada (Baylin, Macdonald & Richardson, 1996;Durocher, Fortin & Côté, 2007;Durocher & Fortin, 2010), New Zealand (Baskerville & Pont Newby, 2002;Sinclair & Bolt, 2013), and the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) (Lawson, 2007;Zeff, 2002Zeff, , 2006Zeff, , 2012.…”
Section: Standard Setting Theories: Public Interest and Avoiding Regumentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although many authors have examined the shaping of accounting standards (Baylin, MacDonald, & Richardson, 1996;Craig & Diga, 1996;Fogarty, 1994Fogarty, , 1998Hronsky & Houghton, 2001;Street & Shaughnessy, 1998;Xiao & Pan, 1997), "…little is known about the shaping of auditing pronouncements and the social relations promoted by such policies" (Sikka, 1992, p. 350 Regarding the establishment of AGS-1010, questions remain over whether the public and users were given the opportunity to determine the final form of the audit guidance standard; and over the process by which comments received for the exposure draft AGS-1010 were incorporated into the final audit guidance statement. The setting of AGS-1010 is affected significantly by each of these remaining questions both of which are examined in this study.…”
Section: The Application Of Audit Standards and Audit Guidance Statemmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Baylin, MacDonald, and Richardson (1996) observed that when social values changed and the community of constituents became increasingly diverse, the standard-setting process sought legitimation from a wider community which might not be entirely conversant with technical matters though, in the past, legitimation had been sought from technical professionals only. Carpenter and Feroz (1992) concluded that the New York State's decision to adopt generally accepted accounting principles was an attempt to regain legitimacy for the State's financial management practices.…”
Section: Coercive Isomorphism (Substantive Strategy 2)mentioning
confidence: 99%