Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

“Guardians of Knowledge and Public Interest”: A Reply

“Guardians of Knowledge and Public Interest”: A Reply The recent article “Guardians of Knowledge and the Public Interest” was highly critical of the UK audit standard‐setting process. However, it was seriously flawed in several respects: it failed to present a balanced view of the “due process” by which auditing standards and guidelines are developed, it did not develop a coherent formulation of what constitutes the “public interest” and it contained misrepresentations and errors of fact. In reply this article corrects the errors and presents an objective view of the standard‐setting process, including its weaknesses. It does not attempt to formulate a definition of the “public interest”, a task which even the courts are unwilling to undertake. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal Emerald Publishing

“Guardians of Knowledge and Public Interest”: A Reply

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/guardians-of-knowledge-and-public-interest-a-reply-yeNNF0q1FF

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © 1991 MCB UP Ltd. All rights reserved.
ISSN
0951-3574
DOI
10.1108/EUM0000000001929
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

The recent article “Guardians of Knowledge and the Public Interest” was highly critical of the UK audit standard‐setting process. However, it was seriously flawed in several respects: it failed to present a balanced view of the “due process” by which auditing standards and guidelines are developed, it did not develop a coherent formulation of what constitutes the “public interest” and it contained misrepresentations and errors of fact. In reply this article corrects the errors and presents an objective view of the standard‐setting process, including its weaknesses. It does not attempt to formulate a definition of the “public interest”, a task which even the courts are unwilling to undertake.

Journal

Accounting, Auditing & Accountability JournalEmerald Publishing

Published: Dec 1, 1991

Keywords: Auditing profession; Accountability; Accountancy; Standards; Regulations; United Kingdom

There are no references for this article.