The development of the European Union auditing research over the past decade: a systematic literature review and future research opportunities

IF 3.3 Q1 BUSINESS, FINANCE
Mohammed Ibrahem Ali Hassan, Katalin Borbély, Árpád Tóth
{"title":"The development of the European Union auditing research over the past decade: a systematic literature review and future research opportunities","authors":"Mohammed Ibrahem Ali Hassan, Katalin Borbély, Árpád Tóth","doi":"10.1108/jfra-03-2024-0124","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>The purpose of this study is to provide a systematic review of research development on auditing in the European Union over the past decade and suggest future research directions.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>Following the PRISMA protocol, the authors systematically reviewed the relevant literature and conducted a qualitative content analysis of 107 studies on auditing in the European Union published between 2012 and 2023.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>The results indicate increased auditing literature in the European Union from 2012 to August 2023. Around 40% of the papers were focused on six nations: Germany, Spain, Italy, the UK, Sweden and France. Additionally, 35.5% of papers have been published in three major journals: <em>Accounting in Europe</em>, <em>International Journal of Auditing</em> and <em>the European Accounting Review</em>. Moreover, 82.24% of papers used quantitative methods, with a few using qualitative or mixed methods. Also, most of the studies in the sample endorsed the European Union’s auditing reforms, which included implementing a cap on nonaudit fees and enhancing the independence of audit committees. Contrary to this viewpoint, multiple studies have expressed disagreement with enforcing a total prohibition on nonaudit services, as certain services can enhance auditing quality. Similarly, other studies have contested the necessity of mandatory auditor rotation every 10 years, citing the significant additional expenses associated with this practice. Finally, further studies supported the European Union’s decision to make the joint audit voluntary, as it is related to high audit fees and low audit quality.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Research limitations/implications</h3>\n<p>The limitations of this research primarily stem from the authors’ choices in selecting the database and defining the criteria for searching the studied papers.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Practical implications</h3>\n<p>This paper offers valuable insights into the future research prospects in the European Union’s auditing field. Hence, this analysis can be helpful for researchers and practitioners in developing this field based on future research recommendations and the identified themes.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is the first study to systematically review the developments of the European Union auditing literature over the past decade.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":15826,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jfra-03-2024-0124","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to provide a systematic review of research development on auditing in the European Union over the past decade and suggest future research directions.

Design/methodology/approach

Following the PRISMA protocol, the authors systematically reviewed the relevant literature and conducted a qualitative content analysis of 107 studies on auditing in the European Union published between 2012 and 2023.

Findings

The results indicate increased auditing literature in the European Union from 2012 to August 2023. Around 40% of the papers were focused on six nations: Germany, Spain, Italy, the UK, Sweden and France. Additionally, 35.5% of papers have been published in three major journals: Accounting in Europe, International Journal of Auditing and the European Accounting Review. Moreover, 82.24% of papers used quantitative methods, with a few using qualitative or mixed methods. Also, most of the studies in the sample endorsed the European Union’s auditing reforms, which included implementing a cap on nonaudit fees and enhancing the independence of audit committees. Contrary to this viewpoint, multiple studies have expressed disagreement with enforcing a total prohibition on nonaudit services, as certain services can enhance auditing quality. Similarly, other studies have contested the necessity of mandatory auditor rotation every 10 years, citing the significant additional expenses associated with this practice. Finally, further studies supported the European Union’s decision to make the joint audit voluntary, as it is related to high audit fees and low audit quality.

Research limitations/implications

The limitations of this research primarily stem from the authors’ choices in selecting the database and defining the criteria for searching the studied papers.

Practical implications

This paper offers valuable insights into the future research prospects in the European Union’s auditing field. Hence, this analysis can be helpful for researchers and practitioners in developing this field based on future research recommendations and the identified themes.

Originality/value

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is the first study to systematically review the developments of the European Union auditing literature over the past decade.

过去十年欧洲联盟审计研究的发展:系统文献综述和未来研究机会
本研究的目的是系统回顾过去十年欧盟审计研究的发展情况,并提出未来的研究方向。设计/方法/途径作者遵循 PRISMA 协议,系统回顾了相关文献,并对 2012 年至 2023 年间发表的 107 篇有关欧盟审计的研究报告进行了定性内容分析。约 40% 的论文集中在六个国家:德国、西班牙、意大利、英国、瑞典和法国。此外,35.5% 的论文发表在三大期刊上:欧洲会计》、《国际审计杂志》和《欧洲会计评论》。此外,82.24% 的论文采用定量方法,少数采用定性或混合方法。此外,样本中的大多数研究都赞同欧盟的审计改革,其中包括实施非审计费用上限和加强审计委员会的独立性。与此观点相反,多项研究表示不赞同全面禁止非审计服务,因为某些服务可以提高审计质量。同样,其他研究也对强制审计师每 10 年轮换一次的必要性提出了质疑,理由是这种做法会带来大量额外开支。最后,更多的研究支持欧盟将联合审计自愿化的决定,因为这与高审计费用和低审计质量有关。研究局限性/启示本研究的局限性主要源于作者在选择数据库和定义所研究论文的搜索标准时的选择。因此,本分析有助于研究人员和从业人员根据未来研究建议和确定的主题发展这一领域。原创性/价值据作者所知,本文是第一份系统回顾过去十年欧盟审计文献发展的研究报告。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
16.00%
发文量
65
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信