Monitoring Local Government Financial Sustainability: A Dutch-English Comparison

Widt, Dennis De; Thorogood, Timothy; Llewelyn, Iolo

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-67466-3_8

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, prior evidence on client acceptance decisions by audit firms suggests that Big‐4 firms are less willing to accept clients carrying higher financial risks (Hsieh et al., 2018; Rama & Read, 2006). To analyse the relevance of this observation within the Dutch municipal audit context, we added the variable municipal debt (measured as the percentage of total municipal income), since debt is considered an important financial risk indicator for Dutch LGs (De Widt et al., 2021). In our model, Y is measured dichotomously, coded 1 if a municipality appointed a non‐Big‐4 auditor, and 0 if they appointed a Big‐4 auditor.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Liberalising audit markets for local government: The five forces at work in England and the Netherlands

2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Both England and the Netherlands have seen efforts to liberalise their audit markets for local government in recent decades. According to economic theory, these should benefit buyers as increased competition produces lower prices and improved quality. Increasing the number of competing audit firms in markets traditionally dominated by few large firms is widely seen as a key ingredient to this process. However, liberalisation has taken different paths in England, compared to the Netherlands. In England, a national‐level collaborative purchasing arrangement has seen a small number of large firms competing, whilst in the Netherlands, a free market has led to the withdrawal by Big‐4 firms and rapidly growing market share by mid‐tier and small firms. In this paper, we analyse contrasting market developments in local public audit in England and the Netherlands and accordingly analyse the underlying factors through applying an established framework for market analysis from industrial economics, Porter's five forces framework, together with an institutional logics approach to further understand the factors involved. We find the Porter framework a useful tool to identify structural differences between markets but one that requires further analysis to explain underlying dynamics, which in the case of Dutch and English local public audit markets is effectively provided by the use of concepts from institutional logics including a historical contingency analysis.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%