SAIs Work against Corruption in Scandinavian, South-European and African Countries: An Institutional Analysis

Kristin Reichborn-Kjennerud, Belén González-Díaz, Enrico Bracci, Thomas Carrington, James Hathaway, Kim Klarskov Jeppesen, Ileana Steccolini

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

International pressures on Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs) to fight corruption are increasing. Nevertheless, SAIs lack a clear mandate and may appear ineffective in their anticorruption work. Using an institutional approach, this paper compares the cases of seven SAIs from Scandinavian, South-European and African countries to better understand how these institutions perceive their role in fighting corruption. Our article demonstrates that the way SAIs organize their work cannot simply be explained by the countries' level of corruption. Rather, efforts to fight corruption reflect the ways in which coercive, mimetic and normative pressures interact with institutional logics to guide the SAIs' work. We conclude that the influence of INTOSAI still appears to be limited, and it needs increased institutional recognition if it is to be effective in harmonizing SAIs' work worldwide to fight corruption.
Original languageEnglish
Article number100842
JournalThe British Accounting Review
Volume51
Issue number5
Number of pages16
ISSN0890-8389
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sep 2019

Bibliographical note

Published online: 13. August 2019

Keywords

  • Supreme audit institution
  • Corruption
  • Comparative research
  • Accountability
  • Control
  • Audit

Cite this

Reichborn-Kjennerud, Kristin ; González-Díaz, Belén ; Bracci, Enrico ; Carrington, Thomas ; Hathaway, James ; Klarskov Jeppesen, Kim ; Steccolini, Ileana. / SAIs Work against Corruption in Scandinavian, South-European and African Countries : An Institutional Analysis. In: The British Accounting Review. 2019 ; Vol. 51, No. 5.
@article{c095df77c2ca468b9e5326f6c2769270,
title = "SAIs Work against Corruption in Scandinavian, South-European and African Countries: An Institutional Analysis",
abstract = "International pressures on Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs) to fight corruption are increasing. Nevertheless, SAIs lack a clear mandate and may appear ineffective in their anticorruption work. Using an institutional approach, this paper compares the cases of seven SAIs from Scandinavian, South-European and African countries to better understand how these institutions perceive their role in fighting corruption. Our article demonstrates that the way SAIs organize their work cannot simply be explained by the countries' level of corruption. Rather, efforts to fight corruption reflect the ways in which coercive, mimetic and normative pressures interact with institutional logics to guide the SAIs' work. We conclude that the influence of INTOSAI still appears to be limited, and it needs increased institutional recognition if it is to be effective in harmonizing SAIs' work worldwide to fight corruption.",
keywords = "Supreme audit institution, Corruption, Comparative research, Accountability, Control, Audit, Supreme audit institution, Corruption, Comparative research, Accountability, Control, Audit",
author = "Kristin Reichborn-Kjennerud and Bel{\'e}n Gonz{\'a}lez-D{\'i}az and Enrico Bracci and Thomas Carrington and James Hathaway and {Klarskov Jeppesen}, Kim and Ileana Steccolini",
note = "Published online: 13. August 2019",
year = "2019",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1016/j.bar.2019.100842",
language = "English",
volume = "51",
journal = "British Accounting Review",
issn = "0890-8389",
publisher = "Academic Press",
number = "5",

}

Reichborn-Kjennerud, K, González-Díaz, B, Bracci, E, Carrington, T, Hathaway, J, Klarskov Jeppesen, K & Steccolini, I 2019, 'SAIs Work against Corruption in Scandinavian, South-European and African Countries: An Institutional Analysis', The British Accounting Review, vol. 51, no. 5, 100842. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2019.100842

SAIs Work against Corruption in Scandinavian, South-European and African Countries : An Institutional Analysis. / Reichborn-Kjennerud, Kristin; González-Díaz, Belén; Bracci, Enrico; Carrington, Thomas; Hathaway, James; Klarskov Jeppesen, Kim; Steccolini, Ileana.

In: The British Accounting Review, Vol. 51, No. 5, 100842, 09.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - SAIs Work against Corruption in Scandinavian, South-European and African Countries

T2 - An Institutional Analysis

AU - Reichborn-Kjennerud, Kristin

AU - González-Díaz, Belén

AU - Bracci, Enrico

AU - Carrington, Thomas

AU - Hathaway, James

AU - Klarskov Jeppesen, Kim

AU - Steccolini, Ileana

N1 - Published online: 13. August 2019

PY - 2019/9

Y1 - 2019/9

N2 - International pressures on Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs) to fight corruption are increasing. Nevertheless, SAIs lack a clear mandate and may appear ineffective in their anticorruption work. Using an institutional approach, this paper compares the cases of seven SAIs from Scandinavian, South-European and African countries to better understand how these institutions perceive their role in fighting corruption. Our article demonstrates that the way SAIs organize their work cannot simply be explained by the countries' level of corruption. Rather, efforts to fight corruption reflect the ways in which coercive, mimetic and normative pressures interact with institutional logics to guide the SAIs' work. We conclude that the influence of INTOSAI still appears to be limited, and it needs increased institutional recognition if it is to be effective in harmonizing SAIs' work worldwide to fight corruption.

AB - International pressures on Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs) to fight corruption are increasing. Nevertheless, SAIs lack a clear mandate and may appear ineffective in their anticorruption work. Using an institutional approach, this paper compares the cases of seven SAIs from Scandinavian, South-European and African countries to better understand how these institutions perceive their role in fighting corruption. Our article demonstrates that the way SAIs organize their work cannot simply be explained by the countries' level of corruption. Rather, efforts to fight corruption reflect the ways in which coercive, mimetic and normative pressures interact with institutional logics to guide the SAIs' work. We conclude that the influence of INTOSAI still appears to be limited, and it needs increased institutional recognition if it is to be effective in harmonizing SAIs' work worldwide to fight corruption.

KW - Supreme audit institution

KW - Corruption

KW - Comparative research

KW - Accountability

KW - Control

KW - Audit

KW - Supreme audit institution

KW - Corruption

KW - Comparative research

KW - Accountability

KW - Control

KW - Audit

UR - https://sfx-45cbs.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/45cbs?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rfr_id=info:sid/sfxit.com:azlist&sfx.ignore_date_threshold=1&rft.object_id=954922649136&rft.object_portfolio_id=&svc.holdings=yes&svc.fulltext=yes

U2 - 10.1016/j.bar.2019.100842

DO - 10.1016/j.bar.2019.100842

M3 - Journal article

VL - 51

JO - British Accounting Review

JF - British Accounting Review

SN - 0890-8389

IS - 5

M1 - 100842

ER -