This paper provides a detailed, longitudinal study of the role and strategies of the Chinese Institute of Certified Public Accountants (CICPA) in building a Chinese home-grown public accounting profession since the late 1980s. Drawing on previously unaccessed archive materials and a series of interviews with senior representatives of the Chinese public accounting profession, this paper reveals a more nuanced empirical story of professional accounting development in China, in which the CICPA has had more strategic influence than is currently represented in the extant accounting literature. While the CICPA's position vis-à-vis the state is a fragile one and necessitates on various occasions following specific state requirements and instructions, it has still been able to pursue its strategic intention of securing a nationalistic approach to professional accounting development. This paper analyses the shifting nature of the CICPA's capacity for agency across three thematic areas of activities, including the CICPA's efforts to counter the power and influence of the Big Four in China, promote the growth of indigenous accounting firms and support the establishment of the Communist Party branches in accounting firms.
This article aims to contextualise the development of the Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants by the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC) between 1977 and 2006. Drawing on transnational regulation literature, an extensive review of archival documents was conducted. The analysis unfolds the development of the Code in an increasingly complex regulatory environment, revealing the dynamic forces and sequence of events that influenced its nature and contents over three distinctive periods. This study reveals that the shifts in IFAC’s priorities in pursuit of its global aspirations created mechanisms that allowed transnational accounting firms and international regulators to influence the priorities of the Ethics Committee. The Committee’s efforts to legitimise and secure endorsement of the Code were constrained by its initial work programme to develop a model code through minimum harmonisation. Later, the Committee redirected its focus towards meeting the needs of the international regulators by adding more rule-based guidance within the principle-based Code and heavily prioritising independence.
The purpose of this paper is to enhance our understanding of the notions and conceptual foundations of assurance in the standard setting arena. This will facilitate an informed discussion of the challenges and the role of assurance within an increasingly complex and fragmented corporate reporting regulatory landscape. The study draws on relevant literature on sustainability assurance and an analysis of how the assurance concept has been framed by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB) through the construction of standards. The analysis highlights that the fragility of the conceptual foundations of assurance, broad-based nature of standards and diversity in practice contribute to the persistent challenges of sustainability assurance. This paper makes an important contribution to the discussions and contemporary debates on the regulation of and through assurance as well as the complex newer concept of integrated assurance. It further contributes to a more informed policy discussion as to how it can(not) strengthen the role of non-financial reporting as an agent of change to encourage more sustainable companies.
Is audit capable of evolving into something that is more consistently valued and socially purposeful? We address this fundamental question, utilizing Sennett's (2008). The Craftsman. New Haven: Yale University Press) notion of 'dynamic repair' to present four key ways of thinking differently about the statutory financial audit and its core conceptual foundations. First, we highlight the capacity for audit to be regarded as a first-order function of value in its own right rather than a second-order function inherently dependent on corporate financial statements. Second, we call for a change in the assumed relationship between audit and assurance, arguing that assurance should be treated as a sub-set of audit rather than the other way round. Third, we consider the scope for audit standard setting to provide a space for 'product' innovation. Finally, we advocate moving beyond presumptions that the current statutory financial audit serves 'the public interest' to asking deeper questions about the type of society we want to inhabit and whether audit has a more direct and valued contribution to make. Collectively, such re-conceptualizations offer a broader canvas for audit innovation and can help to sustain the promise of current audit reform initiatives proposed by the Brydon Report and others.
This paper provides an analysis of the establishment of global accounting firms (the ‘Big Four’) in China between 1978 and 2007. Drawing on the extant literature on professional service firms, and the work of Faulconbridge and Muzio (2015) , this paper examines how the Big Four entered China following the country's ‘Reform and Opening-up’ and evolved from tentative representative offices to established accounting firms in the Chinese audit market. Based on an extensive analysis of archival materials and interviews, the findings of this paper show that the Big Four's establishment in China has been deeply intertwined with the country's socio-political and economic transition. It reveals important conjunctural moments in history that have provided the Big Four with important windows of opportunity to actively shape local institutional change to their own interests. This paper contributes to the extant accounting literature on the expansion of the Big Four in China by highlighting the interplay between their surrounding institutional context and their capacity for agency.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.