Reform as regulation – accounting, governance and accountability in UK local government

Abstract

This paper is an attempt to theorise the recent changes to accounting practices in local government in the UK. The principal theory used is regulation theory, which incorporates aspects of hegemony theory and governance. Regulation theory attempts to explain major changes in national economic structures by examining underlying systems of capital accumulation, regulation and hegemony. Central to these structures and systems are the role and operation of the state and its institutions. Changes in economic structures will result in conditions, which favour different governance structures for these institutions; comprising markets, hierarchies, civil society, and heterarchic combinations. Several researchers in these areas have characterised 'traditional' institutional practices as Fordist and are associated with a particular approach to regulation. However, the underlying economic structure is seen to be in crisis and a new Post-Fordist regime may be emerging. Post-Fordism is associated with new institutional practices, particularly decentralised management, contracting out of public services, extended use of public private partnerships and concerns for value for money, charters and league tables. The introduction of such practices may therefore be explained by the changes in underlying structures rather than as a teleological development of accounting. Moreover, some researchers have characterised such changes as representing a fundamental shift from government to governance. The very nature of the relationship between governance, accountability and accounting may therefore have also changed. These issues are explored in the paper.

The Effect of Competence, Commitment, and Regulation on the Accountability of Village Financial Management With Moderated Spirituality.

“…The results of this study are supported by previous research, including Goddard (2005) which states that the emergence of regulation in a country is often associated with changes in privatization policies which lead to an emphasis on transparency and accountability. This was also confirmed by Rofika and Ardianto (2014) who stated that the implementation of accountability must be supported by adequate regulations as a reference in carrying out financial management.…”

“…Peraturan Menteri Dalam Negeri Nomor 113 Tahun 2014 mandates that village finances be managed with the principles of transparent, accountable, participatory, and carried out with the order and budget discipline. Goddard (2005) argues that the emergence of regulations in a country is often associated with changes in privatization policies that lead to the emphasis of transparency and accountability. This is also confirmed by Rofika and Ardianto (2014) who argued that the implementation of accountability must be supported by adequate regulations as a reference in implementing financial management.…”

The Role of Public Governance in the Pursuit of Sustainable Development of the ILVA Steel Plant: An Interpretative Framework

“…Regulation theory recognizes the centrality of institutions in economic life, offering a heterodox view of capitalist development [14][15][16]. The advocates of this approach think that the role of and the control exercised by the state should be of indirect types and must consist of the regulation of the activity exercised by third parties in the market, through the definition of standard and pseudo contracts [17].…”

Military, ‘managers’ and hegemonies of management accounting controls: A critical realist interpretation

“…Goddard (2005) has linked the emergence of new accounting practices in local governments in the UK to a new post-Fordist hegemonic arrangement between the state, the economy and civil society. Similarly, accounting researchers have studied cases in which new public management-inspired accounting and control changes have been introduced by the state in, for example, the fields of health and education, areas that had not previously been exposed to the logic of economic efficiency (Lawrence and Sharma, 2002;Broadbent et al, 1996).…”