International Accounting Standardisation: Is Politics Back?

Burlaud, Alain; Colasse, Bernard

doi:10.1080/17449480.2011.574412

Cited by 89 publications

(64 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Hence, we should not be surprised if the Board allowed themselves to be guided by constituent opinion during the due process to maintain its perceived legitimacy (Richardson and Eberlein, 2011). The principal advantages of examining IFRS 7 are: first, documentation relating to meetings of the Board and technical working group was available covering the whole period; second, this is an area where there were strongly competing interests and conflicting opinions between stakeholders and across jurisdictions; and third, there have been ex-post criticisms of IFRS 7's requirements (Walton, 2004;Burlaud and Colasse, 2011;Harrington, 2012;Gebhardt, 2012).…”

Section: "The Genius Of the Fasb's Due Process Is The Cultivation Of mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This has frequently been called into question in the context of standard-setting (e.g. Burlaud and Colasse, 2011;Kwok and Sharp, 2005;McEnroe, 1991, 1998). Procedural legitimacy is rooted in the perception of an organisation's independence and impartiality.…”

Section: Forms Of Legitimacymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…McEnroe, 1991, 1998;Kwok and Sharp, 2005;Cortese, Irvine and Kaidonis, 2010). Almost invariably, influence and legitimacy are considered together (Hussein and Ketz, 1991;McEnroe, 1993;Tutticci, Dunstan and Holmes, 1994;Suchman, 1995;Larson, 2002;Chua and Taylor, 2008;Burlaud and Colasse, 2011;Danjou and Walton, 2012). This paper reviews the IASB's standard-setting due process in relation to the complex and controversial subject of financial instruments disclosures (International Financial Reporting Standard 7 Financial Instruments: Disclosures [IFRS 7], 2005) through the lens of legitimacy theory.…”

Section: "The Genius Of the Fasb's Due Process Is The Cultivation Of mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The principles-based requirements cover sensitive issues such as market, credit and liquidity risk. Despite the lengthy discussion period, the requirements have been criticised ex-post (Burlaud and Colasse, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This paper reviews the IASB's standard-setting due process in relation to the complex and This study is motivated, at least in part, by criticisms of, and challenges to, the IASB's procedural legitimacy (e.g. Larson and Herz, 2013;Burlaud and Colasse, 2011; Kwok and Sharp, 2005). This is an important issue within an accounting standard-setting context.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

An examination of international accounting standard-setting due process and the implications for legitimacy

Bamber

McMeeking

2016

The British Accounting Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper explores the due process of accounting standard-setting by focusing on relative levels of stakeholder and jurisdictional influence. We draw on legitimacy theory to explain our findings and ask what implications any bias might have for the IASB. This study extends the standard-setting literature in three ways. First, we create a weighted coding system to analyse the content of comment letters. Second, we test for differences in the acceptance rate of comments made by stakeholders and by jurisdictions. Third, we analyse IASB discussion documentation that sheds light on the decision-making process. Previous studies have focused on whether outcome-oriented proposals are 'influential' (persuasive) by focusing on success rates measured as proposed changes being accepted. We widen this definition to include whether constituents' views are discussed. We find that accounting firms appear to have significantly less influence than other stakeholders. We also find that the IASB reacts less favourably to UK proposals but comments from the US are more likely to be discussed. A lack of fairness (real or perceived) could jeopardise perceptions of the procedural legitimacy of the due process and ultimately impair the IASB's cognitive legitimacy. Fogarty's (1994) review of the FASB standard-setting process identified a series of constraints, opportunities and dilemmas. The question of whether certain stakeholder groups hold greater levels of (relative) influence has been the subject of much work and researchers have studied this phenomenon in both domestic and international contexts (e.g. McEnroe, 1991, 1998; Kwok and Sharp, 2005; Cortese, Irvine and Kaidonis, 2010). Almost invariably, influence and legitimacy are considered together (Hussein and Ketz, 1991;McEnroe, 1993;Tutticci, Dunstan and Holmes, 1994;Suchman, 1995;Larson, 2002;Chua and Taylor, 2008;Burlaud and Colasse, 2011;Danjou and Walton, 2012). This paper reviews the IASB's standard-setting due process in relation to the complex and This study is motivated, at least in part, by criticisms of, and challenges to, the IASB's procedural legitimacy (e.g. Larson and Herz, 2013;Burlaud and Colasse, 2011; Kwok and Sharp, 2005). This is an important issue within an accounting standard-setting context. Procedural legitimacy is a type of moral legitimacy which can be created (lost), maintained, and built (impaired) according to levels of perceived independence and impartiality (Suchman, 1995). Suchman (1995) distinguishes legitimacy into three primary forms: pragmatic, moral and cognitive.

show abstract

Section: "The Genius Of the Fasb's Due Process Is The Cultivation Of mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Forms Of Legitimacymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: "The Genius Of the Fasb's Due Process Is The Cultivation Of mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

An examination of international accounting standard-setting due process and the implications for legitimacy

Bamber

McMeeking

2016

The British Accounting Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Accounting and Regulation

Pietra¹,

McLeay²,

Ronen³

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Constituents’ Participation in the IASC/IASB’s due Process of International Accounting Standard Setting: A Longitudinal Analysis

Jorissen

Lybaert²,

Orens³

et al. 2014

Accounting and Regulation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to increase its legitimacy as worldwide accounting standard setter, the International Accounting Standards Committee (IASC) reformed in 2001 its due process of standard setting with the purpose of instigating a more widespread constituents' participation in terms of stakeholder diversity and geographical diversity. Using a multi-period/multi-issue research design, this study sets out to analyze whether constituents' participation changed after the reform in comparison to the period before the reform. An analysis of 7,442 comment letters sent to the standard setter over the periods 1995-2007 reveal that conclusions are different according to the topic on the agenda of the standard setter. Constituents' participation with regard to financial-instruments-related issues did not change after the reform. These topics always generated widespread interest from all corners of the world and from all types of constituents. Participation in response to non-financial instruments-related proposals, increased after the reform, especially due to a much more active participation of constituents from G4+1 countries.This chapter includes the paper originally titled ''Lobbying toward the IASB: A multi-issues analysis of participation in the due process of standard setting'' and discussed at the Third International Workshop on Accounting and Regulation in 2007.

show abstract

International Accounting Standardisation: Is Politics Back?

Cited by 89 publications

References 10 publications

An examination of international accounting standard-setting due process and the implications for legitimacy

An examination of international accounting standard-setting due process and the implications for legitimacy

Accounting and Regulation

Constituents’ Participation in the IASC/IASB’s due Process of International Accounting Standard Setting: A Longitudinal Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About