The Financial Value of Cultural, Heritage and Scientific Collections: A Public Management Necessity

Hone, Phillip

doi:10.1111/j.1835-2561.1997.tb00026.x

Cited by 26 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 1 publication

(2 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The inclusion of heritage assets in the balance sheet could provide the opportunity for governments that hold them to obtain useful information about their nature and potential, in order to facilitate the achievement of objectives for decision‐making and performance measurement (Hone, ; and Barton, ), whether this is for narrow economic purposes or for the wider social good.…”

Section: Previous Researches On Heritage Assetsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Governmental Financial Reporting of Heritage Assets From a User Needs Perspective

Aversano¹,

Christiaens

2014

Financ Acc Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The implementation of IPSASs in European Union countries and the harmonization of governmental financial reporting are intended to respond to the needs of citizens. An important characteristic of reforms to governmental accounting and financial reporting is the incorporation within the accounting systems of all public authority assets, which include the case of ‘heritage assets’. This paper investigates to what extent IPSAS 17 responds to user needs of governmental financial reporting about heritage assets by conducting a survey of mayors and councillors in the Italian local government.

show abstract

Section: Previous Researches On Heritage Assetsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Governmental Financial Reporting of Heritage Assets From a User Needs Perspective

Aversano¹,

Christiaens

2014

Financ Acc Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It should be noted that the Statements of Accounting Concepts were initially developed for commercial accounting and the public sector was subsequently required to adopt them. The analysis below is only brief as the issues have already been covered by Pallot (1990Pallot ( , 1992 and by Carnegie and Wolnizer (1995, 1996, 1997, 1999. At present, there is no uniformity of accounting treatment for heritage assets in Australia, and one of the purposes of the recent public sector accounting standards is to institute a standard method of accounting for them under full accrual accounting.…”

Section: Are Heritage Facilities Assets Of the Government?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These new standards were preceded by a series of research monographs prepared by the Australian Accounting Research Foundation (AARF) which advocated their inclusion in government financial statements (Rowles, 1992;Micallef et al, 1994). This treatment has been critically examined and rejected by Carnegie and Wolnizer (1995, 1996, 1997, 1999 and Stanton and Stanton (1998), and vigorously defended by Micallef and Peirson (1997) who were involved with its development by AARF, and by Hone (1997).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accounting for public heritage facilities – assets or liabilities of the government?

Barton

2000

Accounting, Auditing &Amp; Accountability Journal

125

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.Abstract Public heritage facilities ± national parks, art galleries, museums and so on ± are now required by professional accounting standards in Australia to be valued and included in government general purpose financial statements as assets. This study challenges the appropriateness of such an accounting treatment in relation to the SAC4 definition of assets and the purported usefulness of the information. Instead it is argued that these facilities are public goods, and that commercial accounting principles should not be applied to them. The article explains the nature and significance of public goods and how they differ from private goods. It explains why commercial accounting principles are irrelevant for public heritage facilities because their objectives are social rather than financial and why commercial valuations are irrelevant and unreliable if applied to them. Finally, it is contended that the facilities are assets held in trust for the nation by government and hence should not be included in its general purpose financial reports.The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

show abstract

“…A major concern of the literature is its engagement in the argument regarding the nature of accountability as it applies to the public sector. A further argument in the literature strongly debates whether the requirement for PBEs to provide financial statements based on the private sector model impacts positively or negatively on public sector accountability outcomes (for example, Barton, 1999a;Booth & Peterson, 1982;Carnegie & Wolnizer, 1996;Carnegie & West, 2005;Cooper & Owen, 2007;Edwards & Hulme, 1996;Gray, 1983;Gray & Bebbington, 2006;Hofstede, 1981;Hone, 1997;Huggins, 1983;Kay & Thompson, 1986;Leat, 1988;Micallef & Peirson, 1997;O'Dwyer, 2008). Despite ongoing controversy over the past three decades, and disputed claims regarding the efficacy of the changes imposed, conventional accounting policy continues to support the reporting practices introduced by the NPM (IFRS17; NZ Treasury, 2002;UK Treasury, 2008;ASB, 2006aASB, , 2006bIFAC, 2001IFAC, , 2006.…”

Section: Background To Public Sector Reporting Changesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While there exists an extensive prior literature focused on reporting HCA within a conventional accounting framework (see, for example, ACCA, 2006;Carlin, 2005;Price & Smith, 2000;Thompson, 1998;Hone, 1997;Stanton & Stanton, 1997;Rowles, 1991;Currie, 1987;Huggins, 1983;Mautz, 1981;Hofstede, 1981), there is little that addresses the valuation and reporting of such assets from an alternative, non-financial perspective. In order to gain potential insights for the purpose of developing an alternative, more comprehensive reporting model relevant to such organisations, this paper analyses the public documents provided by the New Zealand Māori educational organisation Te Wānanga-o-Raukawa.…”

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

The Financial Value of Cultural, Heritage and Scientific Collections: A Public Management Necessity

Cited by 26 publications

References 1 publication

Governmental Financial Reporting of Heritage Assets From a User Needs Perspective

Governmental Financial Reporting of Heritage Assets From a User Needs Perspective

Accounting for public heritage facilities – assets or liabilities of the government?

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About