The Communication Gap: Why Doesn't Accounting Research Make a Greater Contribution to Debates on Accounting Policy?

Abstract

On many important accounting problems there seems to be a gap in knowledge and understanding between the academic world and those whose views are most prominent in public debate. The paper explores the reasons for this gap, and suggests that the biggest problem is the perception of irrelevance. The paper discusses how the gap can be narrowed, using ICAEW's Information for Better Markets work, in particular on business reporting models, as an example.

Notes

This survey, which cites 381 works, overlooks Arnold et al. (1992), which arguably played a key role in the development of the impairment approach to goodwill, now adopted by standard setters around the world.

There are exceptions: a fairly recent one is Measurement Bases for Financial Accounting – Measurement on Initial Recognition (Staff of the Canadian Accounting Standards Board, 2005). An earlier one particularly relevant to our work on reporting models is Upton (2001).

Watts and Zimmerman (1979) gives interesting examples in relation to accounting theory.

On the operation of the RAE in relation to accounting and finance, see Ashton et al. (2009).

An approach suggested by Richard Macve, ICAEW's academic adviser.

We are indebted to the two editors of ABR since 2005 – first Ken Peasnell and then Pauline Weetman – for their support. We are also indebted to Martin Walker, vice-chairman of ICAEW's Research Advisory Board, as IAPF was his idea.

In this connection, I should acknowledge the debt that we owe to the members of ICAEW's Research Advisory Board, for their invaluable advice on all our research-related activities and in particular to Richard Macve and Laura Spira, ICAEW research relationships adviser, who help us make sure that we are aware of relevant research.