This paper presents a synthesis of academic research focused on First Nations peoples, contrasting First Nations versus non-Indigenous understandings of accounting and accountability. Key themes and trends in past research are identified across 51 publications spanning four decades, and directions for future research are proposed. The need for more culturally responsive accounting is well established, and past studies highlight the inadequacies of reporting practices which do not appear to capture the priorities and nuances of First Nations entities. The focus and execution of accounting research is shifting towards more contemporary experiences with accounting, and the contribution of First Nations worldviews to advances in non-financial reporting. This paper systematically explains the inadequacies of contemporary reporting practices and encourages the accounting community to reflect on future opportunities. It is therefore relevant to both academics and practitioners seeking to uphold the rights of First Nations peoples to self-determination in line with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Further work is urgently required to ensure First Nations organisations are adequately supported in their reporting practices, to incorporate traditional knowledges and to achieve positive outcomes for their communities.

Australia's Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander not‐for‐profit organisations (NFPs) are vital to the cultural and social fabric of the communities they represent. Yet while such entities are obligated to publish annual financial and non‐financial information, little is known about the role of these reports in terms of delivering accountability to culturally diverse stakeholders. This benchmark study is among the first to use grounded accountability theory to compare the results from quantitative content and qualitative thematic analysis of annual reporting across 100 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander NFPs. Our analysis reveals the communication of ‘cultural accountability’ that sets these entities apart from other NFPs. Implications of these findings for accountability practices in non‐Anglo‐Saxon cultural contexts are discussed.