Paper Status Tracking
Contact us
[email protected]
Click here to send a message to me 3275638434
Paper Publishing WeChat

Article
Affiliation(s)

University of Salerno, Salerno, Italy

ABSTRACT

In recent years, the general reform of public sector has also interested accounting policies, techniques, and tools in order to make them as clear and understandable as possible. Thus, citizens and private organizations are even more demanding for a new and deeper disclosure of public accounting policies, fundamental to make them properly understood. This seems to be particularly important also because understanding public accounting policies is quite complex, because they highly vary not only among different countries, but also within a single country. It is also to be noted that in modern society, financial issues play a pivotal role in terms of public organizations’ efficiencies and competitiveness. This paper aims to investigate the spread and the application of emerging accounting policies and practices designed for public organizations. The analysis of a specific case study, settled in Italian context, points to better understand how public managers perceive the introduction and the results achieved through emerging accounting tools. The analysis offers some interesting insights in terms of new management accounting policies appliance to public organizations, in order to better respond to the emergent need for a much more open and transparent public management.

KEYWORDS

post new public management (post-NPM), accounting, public trust

Cite this paper

Journal of US-China Public Administration, September 2015, Vol. 12, No. 9, 695-705

References

Alford, J., & Hughes, O. (2008). Public value pragmatism as the next phase of public management. The American Review of Public Administration, 38, 130-148.

Barber, B. (1983). The logic and limits of trust. New Jersey: Rutgers University Press.

Bobbio, L. (2005). La democrazia deliberativa nella pratica (Deliberative democracy in practice). Stato e Mercato, 25(1), 67-88.

Brimson, J. A. (2002). The handbook of process-based accounting: Leveraging processes to predict results. AICPA.

Budd, L. (2007). Post-bureaucracy and reanimating public governance: A discourse and practice of continuity? International Journal of Public Sector Management, 20(6), 531-547.

Butterfield, R., Edwards, C., & Woodall, J. (2004). The new public management and the UK police service: The role of the police sergeant in the implementation of performance management. Public Management Review, 6(3), 395-415.

Capano, G. (2003). Administrative traditions and policy change: When policy paradigms matter. The case of Italian administrative reform during the 1990s. Public Administration, 81(4), 781-801.

Christensen, T., & Lægreid, P. (2007). The whole-of-government approach to public sector reform. Public Administration Review, 67(6), 1059-1066.

Christensen, T., & Lægreid, P. (2011). Complexity and hybrid public administration—Theoretical and empirical challenges. Public Organization Review, 11(4), 407-423.

Contini, F., & Lanzara, G. F. (2008). ICT and innovation in the public sector: European studies in the making of e-government. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Daly, H. E. (2006). Sustainable development—Definitions, principles, policies. The future of sustainability (pp. 39-53). Amsterdam: Springer Netherlands.

De Vries, M., & Nemec, J. (2013). Public sector reform: An overview of recent literature and research on NPM and alternative paths. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 26(1), 4-16.

Dong, L., Christensen, T., & Painter, M. (2009). A case study of China’s administrative reform: The importation of the super-department. The American Review of Public Administration, 40(2), 170-188.

Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S., & Tinkler, J. (2005). New public management is dead—Long live digital-era governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16, 467-494.

Dunlevy, P., Burren, K. A., Mills, K., Chitty, L. S., Copp, A. J., & Greene, N. D. (2006). Integrity of the methylation cycle is essential for mammalian neural tube closure. Birth Defects Research Part A: Clinical and Molecular Teratology, 76(7), 544-552.

Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.

English, L., & Baxter, J. (2010). The changing nature of contracting and trust in public-private partnerships: The case of Victorian PPP Prisons. Abacus, 46(3), 289-319.

Fayolle, A. (2004). French perspectives of international entrepreneurship. In L. Dana (Ed.), Handbook of research on international entrepreneurship (pp. 431-454). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Flak, L. S., & Dertz, W. (2005). Stakeholder theory and balanced scorecard to improve IS strategy development in public sector. Proceedings from the 28th Seminar on Information Systems Research in Scandinavia, Kristiansand, Norway. August.

Haque, M. S. (2001). The diminishing publicness of public service under the current mode of governance. Public Administration Review, 61(1), 65-82.

Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons. Public Administration, 69(1), 3-19.

Jackson, A., & Lapsley, I. (2003). The diffusion of accounting practices in the new “managerial” public sector. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 16(5), 359-372.

Kuhlmann, S. (2010). New public management for the “Classical Continental European Administration”: Modernization at the local level in Germany, France and Italy. Public Administration, 88(4), 1116-1130.

Leishman, F., Cope, S., & Starie, P. (1995). Reforming the police in Britain: New public management, policy networks and a tough “old bill”. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 8(4), 26-37.

Lippi, A. (2003). As a voluntary choice or as a legal obligation: Assessing new public management policy in Italy. In H. Wollmann (Ed.), Evaluation in public sector reform. Concepts and practice in international perspective (pp. 140-168). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Lippi, F. (2001). Labor markets and monetary union: A strategic analysis. The Economic Journal, 111, 541-561.

Lodge, M., & Gill, D. (2011). Toward a new era of administrative reform? The myth of post-NPM in New Zealand. Governance, 24(1), 141-166.

Luhmann, N., & Schorr, K. E. (1979). Reflexionsprobleme im Erziehungssystem (Reflection problems in the education system) (Vol. 740). Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta.

Magnier, A. (2003). Subsidiarity: Fall or premise of “local government reforms”. The Italian case. Reforming Local Government in Europe (Urban and Regional Research International), 4, 183-196.

Mouritsen, J., & Thrane, S. (2006). Accounting, network complementarities and the development of inter-organisational relations. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 31(3), 241-275.

Mussari, R. (2014). EPSAS and the unification of public sector accounting across Europe. Accounting, Economics and Law, 4(3), 299-312.

Norman, R. (1995). New Zealand’s reinvented government: Experiences of public managers. Public Sector, 18(2), 22-25.

Ongaro, E., & Valotti, G. (2008). Public management reform in Italy: Explaining the implementation gap. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 21(2), 174-204.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (1997). Best practice guidelines for contracting out government services. OECD.

Pollitt, C. (2003). The essential public manager. UK: McGraw-Hill Education.

Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2004). Public management reform: A comparative analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Promberger, M., & Marteau, T. M. (2013). When do financial incentives reduce intrinsic motivation? Comparing behaviors studied in psychological and economic literatures. Health Psychology, 32(9), 950.

Richardson, A. J. (1987). Accounting as a legitimating institution. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 12(4), 341-355.

Rossi, N., & Trequattrini, R. (2011). IPSAS and accounting systems in the Italian public administrations: Expected changes and implementation scenarios. Journal of Modern Accounting and Auditing, 7(2), 134-147.

Sciulli, N., & Wise, V. (2004). Public sector market testing for contracting out: Some implications for accounting and management. Victoria University Occasional Papers, 5. Retrieved from http://vuir.vu.edu.au/214/1/op5.pdf

Shahin, A., & Mahbod, M. A. (2007). Prioritization of key performance indicators: An integration of analytical hierarchy process and goal setting. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 56(3), 226-240.

Simmel, G. (1964). The sociology of Georg Simmel. New York: Free Press.

Smullen, J. (1997). Balanced scorecards and activity-based management: The practical application. London: Pitman Publishing.

Spanos, Y., Prastacos, G., & Panlymenakon, A. (2002). The relationship between information and communication technologies adoption and management. Information and Management, 39(8), 659-675.

Thaler, R. H. (1999). Mental accounting matters. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 12(3), 183-206.

Troisi, O. (2015). Governance e co-creazione di valore nella P.A. Una rilettura in otica Service-Dominant Logic (Governance and co-creation of value in public administration are reading in Service-Dominant Logic). Giappichelli, Torino.

United States General Accounting Office. (1997). Financial management: Outsourcing of finance and accounting functions. Report to Congressional Requesters, GAO/AIMD/NSIAD—98-43, October, United States General Accounting Office, Washington, DC.

Vazakidis, A., Karagiannis, I., & Tsialta, A. (2010). Activity-based costing in the public sector. Journal of Social Sciences, 6(3), 376-382.

Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Zucker, L. G. (1986). Production of trust: Institutional sources of economic structure, 1840-1920. Working Paper Series, No. 82.

About | Terms & Conditions | Issue | Privacy | Contact us
Copyright © 2001 - David Publishing Company All rights reserved, www.davidpublisher.com
3 Germay Dr., Unit 4 #4651, Wilmington DE 19804; Tel: 001-302-3943358 Email: [email protected]