Unravelling the Rhetoric About the Financial Reporting of Public Collections as Assets

Carnegie, Garry D.; Wolnizer, Peter W.

doi:10.1111/j.1835-2561.1999.tb00095.x

Cited by 50 publications

(59 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A number of authors including Rentschier and Potter (1996), Carnegie and Wolnizer (1999), and Barton (2000) suggest that when heritage assets are controlled by non-business public sector entities, they are different from other types of assets held by the same entities. However, when controlled by business entities, heritage assets appear to be accounted for in a way consistent with other assets.…”

Section: Accounting For Heritage Assetsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Parker (1996) observes that we have witnessed an ongoing rush to incorporate the supposedly sophisticated and developed private sector accounting methodologies into public sector accounting[1]. Carnegie and Wolnizer (1999) also argue that full accrual accounting information is designed for commercial firms and is less appropriate for public heritage facilities. Because public heritage assets cannot be or should not be sold, there is an argument that they should not be included in governments' (or other managing entities') statements of financial position.…”

Section: Accounting For Heritage Assetsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They are not resources, which can be used to generate cash for the discharge of liabilities, and their inclusion in a statement of financial position is misleading to management and to creditors". Carnegie and Wolnizer (1999) believe not-for-profit public collections should not be recognised for financial reporting purposes. They argue that collections in the public domain are prized for their cultural, heritage, scientific and educative qualities and that those attributes cannot be quantified in monetary terms.…”

Section: Accounting For Heritage Assetsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Knowing “the price of everything and the value of nothing”: accounting for heritage assets

Hooper

Kearins

Green

2005

Accounting, Auditing &Amp; Accountability Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -This paper aims to examine the conceptual arguments surrounding accounting for heritage assets and the resistance by some New Zealand museums to a mandatory valuing of their holdings. Design/methodology/approach -Evidence was derived from museum annual reports, interviews and personal communications with representatives of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of New Zealand (ICANZ) and a range of New Zealand museums. Findings -ICANZ's requirement that heritage assets be accounted for in a manner similar to other assets is shown as deriving from a managerialist rationality which, in espousing sector neutrality, assumes an unproblematic stance to the particular nature and circumstances of museums and their holdings. Resisting the imposition of the standard, New Zealand's regional museums evince an identity tied more strongly to notions of aesthetic, cultural and social value implicit in curatorship, than to a concern with the economic value of their holdings. Museum managers and accountants prefer to direct their attention to what they see as more vitally important tasks related to the conservation, preservation and maintenance of heritage assets, rather than to divert scarce funds to what they see as an academic exercise in accounting. Originality/value -The paper points to some of the difficulties inherent in the application of a one-size-fits-all application of an accounting standard to entities and assets differentiated in their purpose and essence.

show abstract

Section: Accounting For Heritage Assetsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Accounting For Heritage Assetsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Accounting For Heritage Assetsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Knowing “the price of everything and the value of nothing”: accounting for heritage assets

Hooper

Kearins

Green

2005

Accounting, Auditing &Amp; Accountability Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Market-focused principles of management reoriented the primary function of public sector organisations towards the achievement of defined service outputs, economic outcomes and commercial practices, rather than traditional social goals. (Kelsey, 1995;Easton, 1997;Barton, 1999aBarton, , 2000Boston, et al, 1996;Broadbent & Guthrie, 1992;Carnegie & Wolnizer, 1999). Among the range of major shifts in focus imposed on NFP PBEs, tertiary educational institutions were reoriented as service providers of private education benefits to fee-paying students, required to be responsive to market demand and to generate an alternative income to supplement their reduced government funding (Kelsey, 1995, p4).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accounting for Heritage, Cultural and Community Assets – Alternative Metrics from a New Zealand Māori Educational Institution

Wild¹

2013

AABFJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the 1980s, with the rise to dominance of governments with neoliberal economic and social agendas, the public sector in major western countries underwent a process of fundamental reforms. A key aspect of the change imposed was the implementation of a market-oriented, cost-efficiency focus towards the management of public sector organisations, described collectively as the New Public Management (NPM) model (Kelsey, 1995;Boston et al, 1996; Easton 1996;Barton, 2002Barton, , 2005aBarton, , 2005bCarnegie & West, 2005;Ball & Grubnic, 2008;Davis, 2010). This reform process included the imposition of regulatory measures requiring public sector organisations to provide annual financial reports prepared on an accounting basis comparable to those for the private sector, and incorporated an obligation to disclose (at economic values) all assets held. For public benefit entities holding heritage, cultural and community assets (HCA), this reporting requirement has been particularly problematic, entailing substantive changes to public accounting policy. This paper critiques the political ideologies and practices of the NPM model, and challenges its assumptions that private sector financial reporting requirements, based on international accounting standards and Generally Accepted Accounting Practice (GAAP), are appropriate for universal application to public benefit and other not-for-profit entities holding HCA. In particular, the paper argues against the NPM assumption that reporting all HCA in economic terms improves accountability in public benefit entities. Instead, the paper proposes an alternative reporting model based on a set of cultural rather than economic values for reporting HCA. It suggests as an exemplar the 'Wellbeing of Communities' reporting and accountability framework devised for application by an indigenous New Zealand Māori educational institution, Te Wānanga-o-Raukawa. AbstractIn the 1980s, with the rise to dominance of governments with neoliberal economic and social agendas, the public sector in major western countries underwent a process of fundamental reforms. A key aspect of the change imposed was the implementation of a market-oriented, cost-efficiency focus towards the management of public sector organisations, described collectively as the New Public Management (NPM) model

show abstract

“…(Bryer 1999a, Bryer 1999b, Robson 1999, Whittington 1999. Additionally, other authors point out that the conceptual framework defines assets based on prospective cash inflows, making it more favourable towards market constituents (Carnegie andWolnizer 1999, Samuelson 1999). …”

Section: Early 1990s: Offering Stable Compromisesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accounting Meets Politics: Theoretical Interpretation of Key Events (1940–2003) of the Accounting Profession in Australia

Abeysekera

2006

Australian Accounting Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines some key developments in the Australian accounting profession and the changing nature of the authoritative influence of that profession on accounting and auditing activities. The purpose of this investigation is to demonstrate the shift in power between the political constituent (the government) and the accounting profession. The paper attempts to demonstrate how the corporatist view can help us understand the social nature of accounting and how the accounting profession can gain a greater awareness of this reality.

show abstract

Unravelling the Rhetoric About the Financial Reporting of Public Collections as Assets

Cited by 50 publications

References 14 publications

Knowing “the price of everything and the value of nothing”: accounting for heritage assets

Knowing “the price of everything and the value of nothing”: accounting for heritage assets

Accounting for Heritage, Cultural and Community Assets – Alternative Metrics from a New Zealand Māori Educational Institution

Accounting Meets Politics: Theoretical Interpretation of Key Events (1940–2003) of the Accounting Profession in Australia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About