Impact of IPSAS on reforming governmental financial information systems: a comparative study

Abstract

The diversity in reformed governmental financial information systems created a need for harmonized international accounting standards, resulting in the elaboration of the IPSAS (International Public Sector Accounting Standards). By means of a survey on experts, this study examines the extent to which European governments adopt IPSAS accrual accounting and how the differing levels of adoption can be explained. The study reveals diversity in the adoption process of IPSAS and accrual accounting. Some governments still use cash based accounting. Only a minority apply IPSAS. The majority of local and central governments apply accrual accounting disregarding IPSAS. The trend toward accrual accounting can be explained by the need for transparency and efficiency. The fact that the IPSAS are unique and offer specific know-how is the main argument for making use of them. However, a number of jurisdictions do not adopt IPSAS because they transfer their own local business accounting rules.

Points for practitioners

The transition to business accounting is an important element of New Public Management in that modernized governmental management needs useful financial information, and business accounting is supposed to accomplish this need. An important characteristic of the IPSAS accounting standards is that governments are not obliged to adopt them and thus their adoption depends on a free choice. Therefore, it is clear that the success of IPSAS strongly depends on setting out its strengths and highlighting the necessary conditions to be met. Based on this article, an important condition is that practitioners keep in mind that in governments business accrual accounting rules are not a substitute for IPSAS.

Keywords

accounting reform accounting standards comparative accounting study government reporting IPSAS New Public Management public sector accounting

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Algemene Rekenkamer ( 2003) Begroting en verantwoording in balans. Het baten-lastenstelsel voor de rijksoverheid. Den Haag: Sdu Uitgevers, Tweede Kamer, vergaderjaar 2002-2003, 28 860, No. 1-2

Anessi-Pessina E. and Steccolini I. ( 2007) Effects of budgetary and accruals accounting coexistence: Evidence from Italian local governments. Financial Accountability & Management 23(22): 113-131.

Benito B. , Brusca I. and Montesinos V. ( 2007) The harmonization of government financial information systems: The role of the IPSASs. International Review of Administrative Sciences 73(2): 293-317.

Bossert J. ( 2005) Moving to Accrual Accounting: Governmental Accounting and Budgeting Reform in Europe, presentation VUA Amsterdam.

Brusca I. and Condor V. ( 2002) Towards the harmonisation of local accounting systems in the international context. Financial Accountability & Management 18(2): 129-162.

Carlin TM ( 2005) Debating the impact of accrual accounting and reporting in the public sector. Financial Accountability & Management 21(3): 309-336.

Carvalho J. , Jorge S. and Fernandes M. ( 2007) Conformity and Diversity of Accounting and Financial Reporting Practices in Portuguese Local Government. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences 24(1): 2-14.

Christiaens J. and Van den Berghe M. ( 2006) The Ernst & Young Guide to Applying IPSAS. Brugge: Die Keure.

FEE (Federation des Experts Comptables Européens) ( 2007) Accrual Accounting in the Public Sector, paper presented to the FEE Public Sector Committee.

10.

Groot T. and Budding T. ( 2008) New public management’s current issues and future prospects. Financial Accountability & Management 24(1): 1-13.

11.

Guthrie J. ( 1998) Application of accrual accounting in the Australian public sector - rhetoric or reality? Financial Accountability & Management 14(1): 1-19.

12.

Guthrie J. , Olson O. and Humphrey C. ( 1999) Debating developments in new public financial management: The limits of global theorising and some new ways forward. Financial Accountability & Management 15(3-4): 209-228.

13.

Hathorn M. ( 2008) Thirty Years of Progress - International Federation of Accountants - International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board (ISPASB) , lecture at the EC/ FEE conference Modernising Accounting in the Public Sector - Accrual Accounting: Where Are We and Where to Go Next?, 19 slides.

14.

Ifac (2008) 2008 IFAC Handbook of International Public Sector Accounting Pronouncements. New York: IFAC.

15.

IFAC PSC ( 2000) Study 11 - Government Financial Reporting: Accounting Issues and Practices. New York: IFAC.

16.

Intosai (2005) Strategic Plan 2005-2010. Vienna: INTOSAI.

17.

Lapsley I. ( 1999) Accounting and the New Public Management: Instruments of substantive efficiency or a rationalising modernity. Financial Accountability & Management 15(3-4): 201-207.

18.

Lüder K. ( 1992) A contingency model of governmental accounting innovations in the political administrative environment. Research in Governmental and Nonprofit Accounting 7: 99-127.

19.

Lüder K. ( 1994) The ‘‘Contingency Model’’ reconsidered: Experiences from Italy, Japan and Spain. In: Buschor E and Schedler K (eds) Perspectives on Performance Measurement and Public Sector Acccounting. Berne: Haupt , 1-15.

20.

Lüder K. and Jones R. ( 2003) Reforming Governmental Accounting and Budgeting in Europe . Frankfurt am Main: Fachverlag Moderne Wirtschafts.

21.

Mellemvik F. and Pettersen I. ( 1998) Norway - A hesitant reformer? In: Olson O , Guthrie J and Humphrey C (eds) Global Warning: Debating International Developments in New Public Financial Management. Oslo: Cappelen Akademisk Forlag, 185-218.

22.

Oecd (2002) Models of public budgeting and accounting reform. OECD Journal on Budgeting 2(Supplement 1): 1-356.

23.

OECD Public Management Committee (2000) Accrual Accounting and Budgeting Practice in Member Countries - Overview , paper presented at the International Accrual Accounting and Budgeting Symposium in Paris. Paris: OECD .

24.

Olson O , Guthrie J and Humphrey C (eds) (1998) Global Warning: Debating International Developments in New Public Financial Management . Oslo: Cappelen Akademisk Forlag .

25.

Osborne D. and Gaebler T. ( 1993) Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector. New York: Penguin.

26.

Pina V. and Torres L. ( 1999) An Empirical Study about the Degree of the Coincidence of Central Government Financial Reporting in the EU, USA, Canada, New Zealand and Australia, paper presented at the fifth Comparative International Governmental Accounting Research Conference, Tilburg, The Netherlands.

27.

Pina V. and Torres L. ( 2003) Reshaping public sector accounting: An international comparative view. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences 20(4): 334-350.

28.

Pina V. , Torres L and Yetano A (2009) Accrual accounting in EU local governments: One method, several approaches. European Accounting Review 18(4): 765-807.

29.

Pollitt C. and Bouckaert G. ( 2004) Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis . Oxford: Oxford University Press .

30.

Van Der Hoek MP ( 2005) From cash to accrual budgeting and accounting in the public sector: The Dutch experience. Public Budgeting & Finance 25(1): 32-45.

31.

Vela JM and Fuertes I. ( 2001) Local government accounting in Europe: A comparative approach . In: Bac A (ed.) International Comparative Issues in Government Accounting. Dordrecht , The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers , 87-102.