私人会计准则制定者的合法性:文献综述及对未来研究的建议

IF 4.6 Q1 BUSINESS, FINANCE
Masatsugu Sanada
{"title":"私人会计准则制定者的合法性:文献综述及对未来研究的建议","authors":"Masatsugu Sanada","doi":"10.1080/17449480.2020.1837889","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The purpose of this study is to critically synthesize extant research on the legitimacy of private accounting standard setters in order to inform future research opportunities. This study presupposes that legitimacy is an important issue for the survival of private accounting standard setters who face legitimacy claims from stakeholders and regulatory competition from other standard-setting bodies due to their lack of a democratic foundation. Findings show that the definition, typology, sources, and legitimacy characteristics that researchers use depend on the theoretical perspectives that they employ in their analysis. Simultaneously, they do have some common points despite the difference in their perspectives. Regarding legitimacy changes, prior studies suggest that moving from practical toward cultural legitimacy, the importance of due process, and the role of crises all affect these changes. The review also identifies future research directions as well as several challenges for legitimacy studies in accounting, namely defining an analytical framework, focus on the dynamic nature of legitimacy and output legitimacy, and the need for more empirical studies, among others.","PeriodicalId":45647,"journal":{"name":"Accounting in Europe","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17449480.2020.1837889","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Legitimacy of Private Accounting Standard Setters: Literature Review and Suggestions for Future Research\",\"authors\":\"Masatsugu Sanada\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17449480.2020.1837889\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The purpose of this study is to critically synthesize extant research on the legitimacy of private accounting standard setters in order to inform future research opportunities. This study presupposes that legitimacy is an important issue for the survival of private accounting standard setters who face legitimacy claims from stakeholders and regulatory competition from other standard-setting bodies due to their lack of a democratic foundation. Findings show that the definition, typology, sources, and legitimacy characteristics that researchers use depend on the theoretical perspectives that they employ in their analysis. Simultaneously, they do have some common points despite the difference in their perspectives. Regarding legitimacy changes, prior studies suggest that moving from practical toward cultural legitimacy, the importance of due process, and the role of crises all affect these changes. The review also identifies future research directions as well as several challenges for legitimacy studies in accounting, namely defining an analytical framework, focus on the dynamic nature of legitimacy and output legitimacy, and the need for more empirical studies, among others.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45647,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounting in Europe\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/17449480.2020.1837889\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounting in Europe\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449480.2020.1837889\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounting in Europe","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449480.2020.1837889","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: 5

摘要

摘要本研究的目的是批判性地综合现有的关于私人会计准则制定者合法性的研究,以提供未来的研究机会。本研究假设,合法性是私人会计准则制定者生存的一个重要问题,因为他们缺乏民主基础,面临利益相关者的合法性要求和其他准则制定机构的监管竞争。研究结果表明,研究人员使用的定义、类型、来源和合法性特征取决于他们在分析中使用的理论视角。同时,尽管他们的观点不同,但他们确实有一些共同点。关于合法性的变化,先前的研究表明,从实践到文化合法性的转变、正当程序的重要性以及危机的作用都会影响这些变化。该综述还确定了未来的研究方向以及会计合法性研究的几个挑战,即定义分析框架,关注合法性和产出合法性的动态性质,以及需要更多的实证研究等。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Legitimacy of Private Accounting Standard Setters: Literature Review and Suggestions for Future Research
Abstract The purpose of this study is to critically synthesize extant research on the legitimacy of private accounting standard setters in order to inform future research opportunities. This study presupposes that legitimacy is an important issue for the survival of private accounting standard setters who face legitimacy claims from stakeholders and regulatory competition from other standard-setting bodies due to their lack of a democratic foundation. Findings show that the definition, typology, sources, and legitimacy characteristics that researchers use depend on the theoretical perspectives that they employ in their analysis. Simultaneously, they do have some common points despite the difference in their perspectives. Regarding legitimacy changes, prior studies suggest that moving from practical toward cultural legitimacy, the importance of due process, and the role of crises all affect these changes. The review also identifies future research directions as well as several challenges for legitimacy studies in accounting, namely defining an analytical framework, focus on the dynamic nature of legitimacy and output legitimacy, and the need for more empirical studies, among others.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Accounting in Europe
Accounting in Europe BUSINESS, FINANCE-
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
7.10%
发文量
14
×
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