REGULATION HEGEMONY AND ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT: A STUDY ON REGIONAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT IN INDONESIA

Authors

  • Banu Witono Surakarta muhammadiyah University and Brawijaya University
  • Eko Ganis Sukoharsono Brawijaya University
  • Nurkholis * Brawijaya University
  • Roekhudin * Brawijaya University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.ijabs.2021.29.1.4

Abstract

AbstractObjectives - The purpose of this study is to uncover the reality of implementing regional financial management regulations and their impact on local government accountability.Research method approach - This study uses a critical qualitative research approach to the Gramsci hegemony perspective. This approach is useful for analyzing the shackles of regulation in the implementation of regional financial management.Findings - The results show that regulation has become a means for the state to dominate in the realm of political society and hegemony for civil society. This results in an orientation of local government accountability which tends to vertical accountability rather than horizontal (public) accountability .Practical implications -  Changes in regional autonomy regulations have led to increasing dominance of the central government to the regions. This is reflected in the various regulations produced by the institutions in the central government which shackle the space and innovation of the local government in managing regional finances.Social implications - Due to the shackles of the regulation, local governments prioritize serving the interests of the central government (vertical accountability) compared to services to the society (horizontal accountability).Originality / Value - This study contributes to uncovering the facts that occur related to regional financial management, so that it can provide input to the government in the implementation of regional government accountability.Keywords: Regional Government Accountability, Regional Financial Management Regulations, Regulation Hegemony.Paper Type: Research Paper

References

Adhikari, P., & GÃ¥rseth-Nesbakk, L. (2016). Implementing public sector accruals in OECD member states: Major issues and challenges. Accounting Forum , 40 (2). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accfor.2016.02.001

Ahmed, Z., Hopper, T., & Wickramsinghe, D. (2010). Hegemony, Counter Hegemony and NGO Accountability Change: BRAC in Bangladesh. In The Sixth Asia Pacific Interdisciplinary Research in Accounting (APIRA) (pp. 1–39). Sidney. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004

Angelis, M. De, Carroll, T., Li, TM, & Fine, B. (2016). The Neoliberal Disaster: Dismantling Social Development Projects as Neoliberal Trojan Horses . (M. Habibi, Ed.). Malang: Intrans Publising.

Arnaboldi, M., Lapsley, I., & Steccolini, I. (2015). Performance Management in the Public Sector: The Ultimate Challenge. Financial Accountability and Management , 31 (1). https://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12049

Bovens, M. (2006). Analysis and Assessment of Public Accountability. A Conceptual Framework. Retrieved from http://www.connex-network.org/eurogov/

Bovens, M. (2007). Analyzing and Assessing Accountability: A Conceptual Framework. European Law Journal , 13 (4), 447–468. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0386.2007.00378.x

Cameron, W. (2004). Public accountability: Effectiveness, equity, ethics. Australian Journal of Public Administration , 63 (4), 59–67. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8500.2004.00402.x

Carter, D., & Molisa, P. (2005). Accounting Harmony, Neo Gramscian Disharmony: A New Zealand Perspective (2005 No. 37). Wellington, New Zealand. Retrieved from http://www.accounting-research.org.nz

Christensen, M. (2002). Accrual accounting in the public sector: The case of the New South Wales government . Accounting History (Vol. 7). https://doi.org/10.1177/103237320200700205

Christensen, T., & Lægreid, P. (2001). New public management: The effects of contractualism and devolution on political control. Public Management Review , 3 (1), 73–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616670010009469

Christensen, T., & Lægreid, P. (2014). Performance and Accountability — A Theoretical Discussion and an Empirical Assessment. Public Organization Review , 15 (2), 207-225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-013-0267-2

Connolly, C., & Hyndman, N. (2006). The actual implementation of accruals accounting: Caveats from a case within the UK public sector. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal , 19 (2), 272–290. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570610656123

Cooper, C. (1995). Ideology, Hegemony and Accounting Discourse: A Case Study of the National Union of Journalists. Critical Perspective on Accounting , 6 , 175–209.

Creswell, JW (2007). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches . Sage Publicantions, Thousand Oaks, California (Vol. 2nd ed). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aenj.2008.02.005

Denhardt, JV, & Denhardt, RB (2007). The New Public Service: Serving, Not Steering . ME Sharpe . New York: ME Sharpe, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1081/e-epap3-120024737

Djamhuri, A. (2009). a Case Study of Governmental Accounting . Universiti Sains Malaysia.

Downloads

Published

2021-04-30

How to Cite

Witono, B., Sukoharsono, E. G., *, N., & *, R. (2021). REGULATION HEGEMONY AND ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT: A STUDY ON REGIONAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT IN INDONESIA. The International Journal of Accounting and Business Society, 29(1), 57–94. https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.ijabs.2021.29.1.4

Most read articles by the same author(s)

> >>