Search

Participatory budgeting (PB) is a relatively novel approach to the allocation of funds which allows ordinary citizens to become directly involved in how local government money is spent. This study identifies and examines the features and drivers of PB that incentivize citizen participation and the co-production of public services. Our analysis takes a fresh approach by setting PB initiatives in an innovative frame combining a paradigm of ‘ideal’ types of PB and their diachronic constituent phases. The results provide insights for both scholars and policy makers on the key features and drivers of citizen participation through PB. © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.

Continuing in the perspective of comparative public sector accounting research suggested by Chan et al. (1996), the articles in this annual issue focus on the effects of some public finance management (PFM) reforms. Based on empirical research, the articles provide the reader with interesting insights on what happens once reforms have been implemented.

Based on the legitimacy theory, the study enhances the understanding of disclosure practices of European companies operating in the energy sector regarding the adherence to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Toward this end, the study analyses how SDGs reporting is evolving and what are the most addressed SDGs in the context of European energy sector companies. The paper's ultimate contribution is to dive deep into how such companies disclose their contributions to the SDGs to determine whether they adopt a substantive or merely symbolic approach to corporate legitimacy. To address the research objectives, a content analysis has been performed on non-financial reports published by a sample of 15 European energy sector companies included in the Global Reporting Initiative database as SDGs reporters for the period 2017–2019. Our findings suggest that while SDGs are becoming an integral part of corporate disclosure, symbolic rather than substantial changes appear to prevail, calling for actions from legislators and policy-makers.

The change in the public university setting in the last few decades, with the wave of New Public Management (NPM) logics and neo-liberal imperatives supported by a mode of regulation based on “fabrication” (Ball, 2000), commodification (Radin, 2001) and performativity (Lyotard, 1984), has led to a drastic reduction of public funds, managerialization and dramatic cut in costs, while obnubilating the idea that public universities produce public goods.

Harmonization of public sector accounting is attracting increasing attention from scholars and practitioners. A focal component of this phenomenon is the setting of accounting standards, whose legitimacy is paramount to their application. As participation by constituents is considered fundamental for ensuring this legitimacy, in this study, we focus on participation through comment letters in the due process. In particular, we explore the type of respondents, their geographical area, their agreement/disagreement with the documents prepared by the International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board (IPSASB) and the issues of importance to them, through an analysis of the comment letters submitted for six projects launched over the period 2017–2020 by the IPSASB. Furthermore, we analyze some factors that may affect countries’ participation in the due process. The analysis enriches our understanding of the IPSASB’s due process and provides relevant insights for the growing research into accounting standard-setting.

The public sector accounting harmonization process that started in the European Union in the aftermath of the financial crisis led the European Commission to launch a project for the development of a set of European Public Sector Accounting Standards (EPSAS). This paper analyses the process and the decision-making around development of the EPSAS through the lens of the garbage can model (Cohen, M. D., March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1972). A garbage can model of organizational choice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(1), 1–25). More specifically, by identifying problems, participants, solutions, and choice opportunities, it discusses why the development of the EPSAS is taking so long and why the process does not seem to be progressing as planned. To this end, documents related to the process of EPSAS development are analyzed. The results provide evidence of problematic preferences and fluid participation possibly coupled with flight decisions—three elements of the garbage can model. Postponing decisions can be an option to dampen reluctance. The more the public sector becomes accustomed to the International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS) by adopting IPSAS-like accrual accounting standards while waiting for the completion of the EPSAS, the less resistance there might be to moving to accrual accounting standards. However, at the same time, an imminent change to a new set of EPSAS standards might become less plausible if changes demand extra reform.