IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/aaajpp/aaaj-01-2019-3807.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The paradox of accounting for cultural heritage: a longitudinal study on the financial reporting of heritage assets of major Australian public cultural institutions (1992–2019)

Author

Listed:
  • Paolo Ferri
  • Shannon I.L. Sidaway
  • Garry D. Carnegie

Abstract

Purpose - The monetary valuation of cultural heritage of a selection of 16 major public, not-for-profit Australian cultural institutions is examined over a period of almost three decades (1992–2019) to understand how they have responded to the paradoxical tensions of heritage valuation for financial reporting purposes. Design/methodology/approach - Accounting for cultural heritage is an intrinsically paradoxical practice; it involves a conflict of two opposite ways of attributing value: the traditional accounting and the heritage professionals (or curatorial) approaches. In analysing the annual reports and other documentary sources through qualitative content analysis, the study explores how different actors responded to the conceptual and technical contradictions posed by the monetary valuation of “heritage assets”, the accounting phraseology of accounting standards. Findings - Four phases emerge from the analysis undertaken of the empirical material, each characterised by a distinctive nature of the paradox, the institutional responses discerned and the outcomes. Although a persisting heterogeneity in the practice of accounting for cultural heritage is evident, responses by cultural institutions are shown to have minimised, so far, the negative impacts of monetary valuation in terms of commercialisation of deaccessioning decisions and distorted accountability. Originality/value - In applying the theoretical lens of paradox theory in the context of the financial reporting of heritage, as assets, the study enhances an understanding of the challenges and responses by major public cultural institutions in a country that has led this development globally, providing insights to accounting standard setters arising from the accounting practices observed.

Suggested Citation

  • Paolo Ferri & Shannon I.L. Sidaway & Garry D. Carnegie, 2021. "The paradox of accounting for cultural heritage: a longitudinal study on the financial reporting of heritage assets of major Australian public cultural institutions (1992–2019)," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 34(4), pages 983-1012, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:aaajpp:aaaj-01-2019-3807
    DOI: 10.1108/AAAJ-01-2019-3807
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/AAAJ-01-2019-3807/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/AAAJ-01-2019-3807/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/AAAJ-01-2019-3807?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ellie Norris & Shawgat Kutubi & Steven Greenland, 2023. "Cultural accountability in the annual report: The case of First Nations entities in Australia," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 63(4), pages 4453-4478, December.
    2. Apostol, Oana & Mäkelä, Hannele & Vinnari, Eija, 2023. "Cultural sustainability and the construction of (in)commensurability: cultural heritage at the Roşia Montană mining site," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    3. Paolo Ferri & Simone Napolitano & Luca Zan, 2023. "The income gap reporting framework in public not-for-profit organizations: the British Museum case," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 27(4), pages 1303-1338, December.
    4. Garry D. Carnegie & Paolo Ferri & Lee D. Parker & Shannon I. L. Sidaway & Eva E. Tsahuridu, 2022. "Accounting as Technical, Social and Moral Practice: The Monetary Valuation of Public Cultural, Heritage and Scientific Collections in Financial Reports," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 32(4), pages 460-472, December.
    5. Garry D. Carnegie & Ann Martin-Sardesai & Lisa Marini & James Guthrie AM, 2021. "“Taming the black elephant”: assessing and managing the impacts of COVID-19 on public universities in Australia," Meditari Accountancy Research, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 30(6), pages 1783-1808, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:aaajpp:aaaj-01-2019-3807. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.