Evaluating accounting standards: A comment on Ramanna's 'the international politics of IFRS Harmonization'

2Citations
Citations of this article
13Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Ramanna (this issue) argues that the big question at the centre of IFRS research is: “is the political process underlying IFRS facilitating the production of economically efficient standards?”, and presents new evidence that is informative about the political process underlying IFRS adoption decisions. In this comment, I explore how questions about the economic efficiency of standards might come to be answered. The current expertise-based approach to the evaluation of accounting standards is likely limited because it requires the deployment of expertise where it is likely least valuable, in low-validity/low feedback environments. I propose regulatory field experimentation as a potential alternative means of accumulating the knowledge required to perform effective expertise-based evaluations of standards. But field experimentation could be costly and politically controversial. The proposal to permit multiple accounting standard-setters to compete in a given jurisdiction may be an effective means of reducing the reliance of the evaluative system on expertise, replacing it with market feedback.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Madsen, P. E. (2013). Evaluating accounting standards: A comment on Ramanna’s “the international politics of IFRS Harmonization.” Accounting, Economics and Law, 3(2), 77–92. https://doi.org/10.1515/ael-2013-0031

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free