Search results

The purpose of this paper is to report a study of public accountability within the political and economic structures that characterise Pacific nations. The authors examine audit quality with respect to Pacific Island nations’ governmental reporting to investigate ways to improve accountability in a region that is economically and environmentally challenged.

The authors examine whether audit quality in Pacific Island nations is associated with the practical arrangements of Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs), taking into account external factors. The “practical arrangements” include the independence of a SAI (regarding its staffing and funding) and also the requirement for it to report to the Executive. The financial setting in each jurisdiction has been seen to impact the quality of financial reporting and auditing. The authors examine mediating factors such as income, political stability and education that may also impact audit quality. This study uses publicly available databases as well as jurisdictional annual reports and the associated audit opinions and management letters (where available). Jurisdictional reports on public financial management were also analysed.

The authors find that public sector audit quality is low in many Pacific countries, concluding that public accountability is impaired. While the authors recommend changes to the practical arrangements that can improve audit quality, the mediating factors also impact audit quality. They argue that a renewed focus on financial capability could enhance public accountability in these nations, but there are limiting factors that are difficult to overcome.

There are problems in providing accountability for public sector activities in Pacific nations. The authors suggest that improvements to the appointment and funding of SAIs to enhance their independence will help to reduce these issues.

The authors present a framework for analysing SAIs’ practical arrangements and audit quality that includes variables that may mediate the effects of these practical arrangements. They apply the model to 20 Pacific jurisdictions, showing that the practical arrangements of a SAI directly impact audit quality. Nevertheless, there are instances where audit quality is poor despite good practical arrangements, implying that mediating factors also play a substantial role in determining audit quality of a SAI.

Colonial epistemes distort ideologies through power structures and control, perpetuating differences and the development of an inferior status. This study aims to serve dual purposes: Firstly, the authors advocate for Pacific and international business (IB) researchers to consider adopting inclusive research practices, particularly regarding Pacific and indigenous populations. Secondly, the authors argue that decolonization presents conflicting challenges, demonstrating that the authors still have a long way to go regarding the decolonization agenda within academia, the university, IB and broader society.

An essay style is adopted to introduce inclusive Pacific research practices specific to the Pacific context, what that looks like and the advantages of using culturally appropriate methods.

This paper highlights some examples that justify why Pacific methods should be used, such as spirituality and prayers underpinned by the va (i.e. relational spaces) – a concept well-known in Pacific cultures but missing in Western academic frameworks, models and approaches. Additionally, the authors found that the endeavours to be inclusive can paradoxically lead to exclusion and marginalization within academia, the university and popular mainstream media.

This paper enriches IB theory and pedagogy by advocating for the co-creation of inclusive research practices in collaboration with Pacific and indigenous communities. It contributes to the broader movement to restore indigenous knowledge and scholarship research spaces.

The originality and value of the viewpoint lie in its potential to stimulate conversations and reflections among IB researchers regarding inclusive research practices of decoloniality. Thereby strengthening the “trumpet-shell” call to decolonize the field and academia, which IB as a discipline should not be immune to.