Routledge Studies in Accounting
1 total work
Following the global financial crisis, many democracies struggle to be able to do more with less. One way of increasing efficiency in the public sector has been to increase public scrutiny. In the modern democracy, there is one organisation that enjoys a unique position in this regard, namely the Supreme Audit Institution (SAI). From an autonomous position under the national Parliament, this serves as a watchdog for the citizenry, keeping both them and Parliament informed on the performance of the administration. Despite their central position in democracy, SAIs have enjoyed surprisingly little attention in the international research literature. In cases where they are subjected to research, this is typically focused on performance audit methods or the relation to Parliament, whereas there is little discussion on other stakeholder relations and the importance of how these institutions are organized and lead. Auditing in the Public Sector: The Challenges for Supreme Audit Institutions aims to provide a solid starting point for such stream of research.
With special attention to the SAIs of Sweden and the United Kingdom, both aiming to serve as state-of-the-art in this context, it adopts a broad approach to SAIs, focusing on the development of SAIs as institutions. The two cases of Sweden (the Swedish National Audit Office, SNAO) and the United Kingdom (the National Audit Office, NAO) make an interesting comparison, partly because, in many regards, they have chosen to take on opposite paths. The relevance of these choices, internal managerial choices, and their differing consitutional conditions have a strong impact on what role the SAI takes and how it works to build legitimacy in the modern democracy. Accounts from ten other SAIs from democracies around the world are also included and discussed, making the book relevant and essential reading to a broad international research audience.
With special attention to the SAIs of Sweden and the United Kingdom, both aiming to serve as state-of-the-art in this context, it adopts a broad approach to SAIs, focusing on the development of SAIs as institutions. The two cases of Sweden (the Swedish National Audit Office, SNAO) and the United Kingdom (the National Audit Office, NAO) make an interesting comparison, partly because, in many regards, they have chosen to take on opposite paths. The relevance of these choices, internal managerial choices, and their differing consitutional conditions have a strong impact on what role the SAI takes and how it works to build legitimacy in the modern democracy. Accounts from ten other SAIs from democracies around the world are also included and discussed, making the book relevant and essential reading to a broad international research audience.