In response to the rapid development of green finance, this study evaluates a systematic literature survey with a focus on the determinants and the potential benefits of corporate engagement in environmentally responsible practices in the context of green bonds and green loans. We show that research has discovered that environmentally responsible practices not only enhance shareholder value but also the value accrued to nonfinancial stakeholders. Further, we provide an updated overview of research developments in relation to green bonds and syndicated loans. Lastly, we discuss the limitations in the nascent green finance research and propose new lines of research supporting our aim of advancing our knowledge of sustainable investments.

The examination of public and private not-for-profit sector financial reporting has been a topic of interest on a cyclical basis in Australia over the last 30 years. Traditional topics have included examinations of the intended and unintended consequences of specific standards, the accountability value of financial reports, transaction neutrality, compliance with the accounting standards, and more recently, the prospective implications of new, differently focused reporting standards considering such issues as income measurement and outcomes reporting. With increased recent attention from standard setters and regulators, and greater data availability, the opportunities for undertaking impactful research in these and related areas are increasing. In this paper, we focus on research that has examined the following questions: (i) Which private and public NFPOs lodge financial reports and what is reported; (ii) Who are the users and what are their information needs? (iii) Which private and public NFPs should lodge financial reports and what should be included in them; and (iv) How should the accounting frameworks for NFP sector reporting be set? For each of these issues, we identify the research gaps and opportunities for further research.

Markets are increasingly used by governments to deliver social services, underpinned by the belief that they can drive efficiency and quality. These ‘quasi‐markets' require on‐going management to ensure they meet policy goals, and address issues of market inequity. This has seen debates emerge around ‘market stewardship' and ‘market shaping’ that center on how best to manage markets toward optimal policy outcomes. At present, there is a significant gap in both literature and practice with regard to what types of actions are most effective for market stewardship. In this article, we outline a framework that helps diagnose different quasi‐market problems. We delineate two dimensions of public service quasi‐markets—sufficiency and diversity—using the example of a disability personalization market to show how this framework can unpack different types of quasi‐market states. Lastly, we outline the types of interventions that might be adopted to help deal with ineffective quasi‐markets. Evidence for Practice Market mechanisms are increasing being used by governments around the world to drive innovation and efficacies. Increasingly it is being recognized that these markets need intervention in order to meet policy goals. This paper provides a framework for conceptualizing types of market problems, and offers solutions for the scenarios outlined.

No abstract

This study seeks to answer the research question 'using reliance as the pivotal consideration, what factors determine the efficient and effective interrelationship between internal and external audit?', within the context of the Australian public sector. A qualitative approach, framed within agency theory, was adopted using a case study and structured interviews. Findings included factors supporting prior literature as well as some unique to the research described here. As a result, this article makes a contribution to the literature examining public sector internal and external audit interrelationships as well as the literature on police audit and performance. It also has practical implications for both the case study site and similar organisations throughout the world.

No abstract

This mixed‐method study explores the symptoms and potential causes of non‐profit vulnerability within the Australian context. Following two focus groups with CEOs and Chairs of non‐profit organizations, an online survey was developed, pilot tested and distributed to non‐profit CEOs. Our findings suggest three symptoms that might be particularly useful in identifying non‐profit vulnerability: a substantial increase in unit costs/delivery hours; a substantial increase in the proportion of administration to program expenses; and a reduced ability to pursue the organization's mission. The results also suggest various potential causes of non‐profit vulnerability; in particular, Board inadequacies; External environmental threats; Project management issues; and Funding constraints.

Improving collaboration by public sector agencies is an important element of many public sector reforms. Common approaches include introducing responsibilities under legislation and policy decisions, the provision of information and guidance, and strengthening thirdparty oversight. To identify how collaboration is being practised, this paper reviews evidence from over one hundred reports by Auditors-General and Ombudsmen in Australia and New Zealand to identify key attributes of collaboration, and assesses these further by examining three reports in detail. It concludes that problems that have been known for many years continue to constrain public sector effectiveness. Although continuing existing approaches may assist in improving collaboration, the paper argues that there is a need to adopt more systematic approaches to organisational capacity for collaboration. It further identifies that changes in the external environment such as technology-based innovation may demand rapid progress and change in relation to collaboration.