Due process and standard-setting: An analysis of due process in three canadian accounting and auditing standard-setting bodies

Journal of Business Ethics

Volumn 81, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 679-696

  Richardson, Alan J ^a  

^a YORK UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Accounting standard setting; Canada; Due process

Indexed keywords

EID: 48349107800     PISSN: 01674544     EISSN: 15730697     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10551-007-9540-z     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Alberta Administrative Procedures Act, R.S.A. 2000, c. A-3
2. Belton, R. K.: 2005, Competing Definitions of the Rule of Law,' Carnegie Papers #55 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
3. Canada Constitution Act 1982 ( http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/const/ annex_e.html (accessed October, 2005)
4. Cunningham v. Canada: 1993, 2 S.C.R. 143
5. Dryzek J. S. (1990) Discursive Democracy: Politics, Policy and Political Science. Cambridge University Press, New York
6. Edelman L. B. (1990) Legal Environments and Organizational Governance: The Expansion of Due Process in the American Workplace. American Journal of Sociology 96:1401-1440
7. Edelman L., Uggen C., Erlanger H. (1999) The Endogeneity of Legal Regulation: Grievance Procedures as Rational Myth. American Journal of Sociology 105(2):406-454
8. Folger, R., M. A. Konovsky, R. Cropanzano: 1992, A Due Process Metaphor for Performance Appraisal', in B. M. Staw and L. L. Cummings (eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 13 (Greenwich, CT: JAI Press), pp. 129-177
9. Gerdin J., Greve J. (2004) Forms of Contingency Fit in Management Accounting Research - a Critical Review. Accounting, Organizations and Society 29:303-326
10. Griswold v. Connecticut: 1965, 381 U.S. 470
11. Habermas, J.: 1990, Discourse Ethics: Notes on a Program of Philosophical Justification', in his Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action, trans. C.Lenhardt and S. W. Nicholsen (MIT Press: Cambridge), pp. 43-115
12. Habermas J. (1996a) Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. MIT Press, Cambridge
13. Habermas J. (1996b) On the Cognitive Content of Morality. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 96:335-358
14. Habermas, J.: 1998, The Inclusion of the Other', in Studies in Political Theory (MIT Press: Cambridge)
15. Hyman A. T. (2005) The Little Word Due'. Akron Law Review 38(1):1-51
16. KPMG: 2005, A New Direction for Canadian Accounting Standards,' Accountability e-lert 2005-03 August 8, 2005 (accessed at http://www.kpmg.ca/ unitymail/accountability/en/issues/elert2005-003.html
17. Leuz C., Pfaff D., Hopwood A. (2004) The economics and politics of accounting. Oxford University Press, Oxford
18. MacInnis v. Canada (Attorney General) (C.A.): 1997, 1 F.C. 115
19. Magna Carta as confirmed by Edward I with his seal in1297 (from: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/ featured_documents/magna_carta/translation. html accessed October, 2005)
20. March J. G, J. P. Olsen (1989) Rediscovering Institutions: The Organizational Basis of Politics. Free Press: New York
21. Marpet M. I. (1998) An Ethical Issue in Voluntary-consensus-standard Development: A Decision-science View. Journal of Business Ethics 17:1701-1716
22. Mashaw J. L. (1985) Due Process in the Administrative State. Yale University Press, New Haven
23. Mathews v. Eldridge 424 U.S. 319 (1976) Docket Number: 74-204 US Supreme Court
24. Miller P. B. W. (2002) Viewing the 1996 FAF Restructuring as Policy Making Without a Formal Due Process. Accounting Horizons 16(3):199-214
25. Morley R. B., Newby S. P. (2002) Due Process Failure in Sector-Neutral Accounting Standard-setting. Financial Accountability and Management 18:1-23
26. McNollgast (listed author on paper a pseudonym for McCubbins, M. D., R. G. Noll, and B. R. Weingast): 1999, The Political Origins of the Administrative Procedure Act', Journal of Law Economics and Organization 15(1), 180-217
27. Mullane v. Central Hanover Trust Co.: 1950, 339 U.S. 306, 313
28. O'Toole J. (2000) Research on Policy Implementation: Assessment and Prospects. Public Administration Research and Theory 10(2):263-288
29. Priest G. H. (1977) The Common Law Process and the Selection of Efficient Rules. Journal of Legal Studies 6(1):65-82
30. Ramraj V. (2004) Four Models of Due Process. I.CON (International Journal of Constitutional Law) 2(3):492-524
31. Richardson, A. J.: 2005, Regulatory Networks for Accounting Standards: A Social Network Analysis of Canadian Accounting Standard-Setting', Working Paper, Schulich School of Business
32. Rubin P. H. (1977) Why is the Common Law Efficient?. Journal of Legal Studies 6(1):51-64
33. Shapiro B. P. (1998) Toward a Normative Model of Rational Argumentation for Critical Accounting Discussions. Accounting Organizations and Society 23(7):641-663
34. Shuchman, H. L.: 1983, Professional Associations and the Regulation of Standard-setting,' Perspectives on the Professions 3(3) (on-line version accessed at http://ethics.iit.edu/perspective/pers3_3sept83_4.html )
35. Siegel D. M. (2005) Canadian Fundamental Justice and U.S. Due Process: Two Models for a Guarantee of Basic Adjudicative Fairness. George Washington International Law Review 37:1-50
36. Sunder S. (1988) Political Economy of Accounting Standards. Journal of Accounting Literature 7:31-41
37. Taylor M. S. (1995) Due Process in Performance Appraisal: A Quasi-experiment in Procedural Justice. Administrative Science Quarterly 40(3):495-523
38. Taylor P., Turley S. (1986) The regulation of accounting standards. Blackwell, London
39. UK Council on Tribunals: 2003, Guide to Drafting Tribunal Rules' November 2003 (accessed at http://www.council-on-tribunals.gov.uk/files/guid_guidedraft. pdf )
40. Van Eemeren F. H., R. Grootendorst (1987) Fallacies in Pragma-Dialectical Perspective. Argumentation : an international journal on reasoning 1(3):283-301
41. Van Peursem K. A. (2005) Public Dialogue toward Social Policy: A Methodology for Accounting Research. Accounting and the Public Interest 5:56-87