Popular Financial Reporting: Differences between Italy and the USA and Canada Initiative


Valerio Brescia , Daniel Iannaci , Luigi Corvo , Lavinia Pastore ,

Download Full PDF Pages: 01-23 | Views: 766 | Downloads: 267 | DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.4964707

Volume 9 - June 2020 (06)


This paper analyses what types of information the citizen wants and from which communication tools and forms the citizen expects to receive information, looking for the best features in the comparison between Europe, America, and Canada. The comparison between states allows highlighting the most significant elements looking for possible and better future applications. The questions reply to the research perspectives highlighted in previous research activities on widespread financial reporting. The leading American Accounting Associations have identified the Popular Financial Reporting (PFR) as a tool of transparency and accountability, confirming the centrality of the citizen in the decision-making process linked to public spending. The comparison provides exciting results on the best PFR dissemination tools to be used. In particular, the priorities for the media and dissemination provided by the American sample and the Italian analysis highlight some similar elements that differ in priority according to local needs. The analysis highlights some possible improvements.


Popular Financial Reporting; Italy; USA; accountability; transparency


  1. Adams, C. A. (2002). Internal organisational factors influencing corporate social and ethical reporting: Beyond current theorising. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 15(2), 223-250. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570210418905
  2. Alonso, Á. I., & Barbeito, R. L. (2016). Does e-participation Influence and Improve Political Decision Making Processes? Evidence From a Local Government. Lex Localis, 14(4), 873. https://doi.org/10.4335/14.4.873-891(2016)
  3. Alonso, A. I., Iglesias, R. L. B., & Taylor, R. (2016). Democracia electrónica participativa en el gobierno local: el proyecto de gobierno abierto decide Madrid. In Integraciones y desintegraciones sociales: Pobreza, migraciones, refugio (pp. 614-631).
  4. American National Election Studies. 2010b. Table 5A.5: Trust in Government Index 1958–2008. Accessed May 16, 2011. http://www.electionstudies.org/nesguide/toptable/tab5a_5.htm.
  5. Anderson, R. T., & Piotrowski, C. L. (1994). Popular financial reports: Accountability through readability. Community College Journal, 65(2), 38–42.
  6. Aragón, P., Gómez, V., & Kaltenbrunner, A. (2016, March). Visualization Tool for Collective Awareness in a Platform of Citizen Proposals. In ICWSM (pp. 756-757).
  7. Association of Government Accountants. 2008. Public Attitudes toward Government Accountability and Transparency. Accessed May 5, 2011. http://www.agacgfm.org/downloads/pollreport2008.pdf.
  8. Adams, C. A. (2002). Internal organisational factors influencing corporate social and ethical reporting: Beyond current theorising. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 15(2), 223-250. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570210418905
  9. AGA (2010), Public Attitudes Toward Government Accountability and Trasparency. Available at: www.agacgfm.org/AGA/ToolsResources/CCR/Survey-WhitePaper10.pdf.
  10. Babeiya, E. E., & Masabo, C. J. (2017). The role of ICTs in enhancing citizens’ involvement in decision-making in local governments in Tanzania. International Journal of Technology and Management, 2(2), 1-13.
  11. Bäckstrand, K. (2003). Civic science for sustainability: reframing the role of experts, policy-makers and citizens in environmental governance. Global Environmental Politics, 3(4), 24-41. https://doi.org/10.1162/152638003322757916
  12. Bäckstrand, K. (2006). Multi‐stakeholder partnerships for sustainable development: rethinking legitimacy, accountability and effectiveness. Environmental Policy and Governance, 16(5), 290-306. https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.425
  13. Belal, A. R. (2002). Stakeholder accountability or stakeholder management: a review of UK firms' social and ethical accounting, auditing and reporting (SEAAR) practices. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 9(1), 8-25. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.5
  14. Bartocci, L. (2003). Il bilancio sociale negli enti locali: fondamenti teorici e aspetti metodologici. G. Giappichelli.
  15. Biancone P.P., Secinaro S. (2015), Popular Financial Reporting. Un nuovo strumento di rendicontazione per le municipalità, Giappichelli Editore.
  16. Biancone, P.P., Secinaro, S. and Brescia, V. (2016), The Popular Financial Reporting: Focus on Stakeholders-The first European Experience. International Journal of Business and Management, 11, 11, pp.115-125. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v11n11p115
  17. Biancone, P., Secinaro, S., & Brescia, V. (2016a). Popular report and Consolidated Financial Statements in public utilities. Different tools to inform the citizens, a long journey of the transparency. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 7(1), 111-124.
  18. Biancone, P. P., Secinaro, S., & Brescia, V. (2017). Popular financial reporting: Results, expense and welfare markers. African Journal of Business Management, 11(18), 491-501. https://doi.org/10.5897/ajbm2017.8367
  19. Biancone, P. P., Silvana, S., & Valerio, B. (2017a). L’informazione consolidata e gli indicatori Bes: strumenti per una rendicontazione più accessibile ai cittadini. L’esperienza Italiana del Popular Financial Reporting. RIVISTA ITALIANA DI RAGIONERIA E DI ECONOMIA AZIENDALE, 68-85.
  20. Biancone, P., Secinaro, S., & Brescia, V. (2017b). The Popular Financial Reporting and Gender Accountability, the Integrated Approach in Municipalities and Public Bodies. AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH, 7(3), 1-11.
  21. Biancone, P. P., Secinaro, S., & Brescia, V. (2018). The innovation of local public-sector companies: Processing big data for transparency and accountability. African Journal of Business Management, 12(15), 486-500. https://doi.org/10.5897/ajbm2018.8596
  22. Biancone, P., Secinaro, S., Brescia, V., & Iannaci, D. (2019). The Popular Financial Reporting between Theory and Evidence. International Business Research, 12(7).
  23. Biancone, P. P., Secinaro, S., Brescia, V., & Chmet, F. (2020). Popular Financial Reporting in Heritage and Cultural Hybrid Organizations: The First European Experience. International Journal of Business Administration, 11(3).
  24. Billis, D. (2010). Towards a theory of hybrid organizations. Hybrid Organizations and the Third Sector. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 46-69.
  25. Biondi, L., & Bracci, E. (2018). Sustainability, popular and integrated reporting in the public sector: a fad and fashion perspective. Sustainability, 10(9), 3112.
  26. Bonsón, E., Torres, L., Royo, S., & Flores, F. (2012). Local e-government 2.0: Social media and corporate transparency in municipalities. Government information quarterly, 29(2), 123-132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2011.10.001
  27. Boston, J., & Pallot, J. (1997). Linking strategy and performance: Developments in the New Zealand public sector. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 382-404. https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6688(199722)16:3%3C382::aid-pam18%3E3.0.co;2-s
  28. Bovaird, T. (2006). Developing new forms of partnership with the ‘market’in the procurement of public services. Public Administration, 84(1), 81-102. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0033-3298.2006.00494.x
  29. Bovens, M. (2005), ‘Public Accountability’, in E. Ferlie, L. E. Lynn and C. Pollitt (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Public Management (Oxford University Press, Oxford), pp.182–208.
  30. Brescia, V. (2019). The popular financial reporting: new accounting tool for Italian municipalities (Vol. 1209, pp. 9-153). Franco Angeli.
  31. Brusca, I., & Montesinos, V. (2006). Are citizens significant users of government financial information?. Public Money and Management, 26(4), 205-209. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9302.2006.00526.x
  32. Brusca, A.I. (1997), “The usefulness of financial reporting in Spanish local governments”, Financial Accountability & Management, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 17-34. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0408.00024
  33. Burby, R. J. (2003). Making plans that matter: Citizen involvement and government action. Journal of the American Planning Association, 69(1), 33-49.
  34. Burns, D., Hambleton, R., & Hoggett, P. (1994). The politics of decentralisation: revitalising local democracy (Vol. 4). London: Macmillan.
  35. Cantador, I., Bellogín, A., Cortés-Cediel, M. E., & Gil, O. (2017, August). Personalized recommendations in e-participation: offline experiments for the'Decide Madrid'platform. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Recommender Systems for Citizens (p. 5). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3127325.3127330
  36. Caperchione, E. (2003). Local government accounting system reform in Italy: a critical analysis. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 15(1), 110. https://doi.org/10.1108/jpbafm-15-01-2003-b007
  37. Carroll, A.B. (1996), Ethics and Stakeholder Management, 3rd ed., South-Western College Publishing, Cincinnati, OH.
  38. Cavallaro, M., Diamanti, G., & Pregliasco, L. (2018). Una nuova Italia: Dalla comunicazione ai risultati, un’analisi delle elezioni del 4 marzo. LIT EDIZIONI.
  39. Chen, C. M., & Delmas, M. (2011). Measuring corporate social performance: An efficiency perspective. Production and Operations Management, 20(6), 789-804. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1937-5956.2010.01202.x
  40. CHESS, C., & PURCELL, K. (1999). Public participation and the environment: Do we know what works?. Environmental science & technology, 33(16), 2685-2692. https://doi.org/10.1021/es980500g
  41. Cohen, S., & Karatzimas, S. (2015). Tracing the future of reporting in the public sector: introducing integrated popular reporting. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 28(6), 449-460. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijpsm-11-2014-0140
  42. Clay, J. A. (2008). Popular Reporting. In E. M. Berman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Public Administration and Public Policy (2nd ed.). New York: Taylor & Francis.
  43. Clarkson, M. E. (1995). A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of management review, 20(1), 92-117. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9503271994
  44. Collier, P. M. (2008). Stakeholder accountability: A field study of the implementation of a governance improvement plan. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 21(7), 933-954. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570810907429
  45. Christiaens, J., Reyniers, B., & Rollé, C. (2010). Impact of IPSAS on reforming governmental financial information systems: a comparative study. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 76(3), 537-554. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852310372449
  46. Criado, J. I., & Carmen Ramilo, M. (2003). E-government in practice: an analysis of web site orientation to the citizens in Spanish municipalities. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 16(3), 191-218. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513550310472320
  47. Daniels, J. D., & Daniels, C. E. (1991). Municipal financial reports: What users want. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 10(1), 15-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/0278-4254(91)90018-f
  48. Deegan, C. (2002). Introduction: The legitimising effect of social and environmental disclosures–a theoretical foundation. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 15(3), 282-311.
  49. Del Gesso, C., & Romagnoli, L. (2020). Citizen-Centered Reporting: Assessing Popular Financial Reporting Practice in Italian Decentralized Governments. International Journal of Business and Management, 15(2).
  50. De Matteis, F. (2011). I contributi della letteratura internazionale e nazionale in tema di social accounting: quali criticità e quali spazi per un Bilancio per il cittadino negli enti locali?. Rivista Italiana di Ragioneria e di Economia Aziendale, (2).
  51. De Matteis F., Preite D., Steccolini I. (2009), Quali strumenti di rendicontazione per il cittadino? Milano e Memphis a confronto, Rivista Italiana di Ragioneria e di Economia Aziendale, gennaio-febbraio, pp. 1-15.
  52. de Villiers, C., Hsiao, P. C. K., & Maroun, W. (2017). Developing a conceptual model of influences around integrated reporting, new insights and directions for future research. Meditari Accountancy Research, 25(4), 450-460. https://doi.org/10.1108/medar-07-2017-0183
  53. DiMaggio, P. J. (1995). Comments on" What theory is not". Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(3), 391-397. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393790
  54. Dobre, C., & Xhafa, F. (2014). Intelligent services for big data science. Future Generation Computer Systems, 37, 267-281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2013.07.014
  55. Doh, J. P., & Guay, T. R. (2006). Corporate social responsibility, public policy, and NGO activism in Europe and the United States: An Institutional‐Stakeholder perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 43(1), 47-73. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00582.x
  56. Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of management Review, 20(1), 65-91. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9503271992
  57. Dunleavy, P., & Hood, C. (1994). From old public administration to new public management. Public money & management, 14(3), 9-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540969409387823
  58. Ebdon, C., & Franklin, A. (2004). Searching for a role for citizens in the budget process. Public Budgeting & Finance, 24(1), 32–49. doi:10.1111/j.0275-1100.2004.02401002.x
  59. Falco, E., & Kleinhans, R. (2018). Beyond Information-Sharing. A Typology Of Government Challenges And Requirements For Two-Way Social Media Communication With Citizens. Electronic Journal of e-Government, 16(1).
  60. Fox, J. (2007). The uncertain relationship between transparency and accountability. Development in practice, 17(4-5), 663-671. https://doi.org/10.1080/09614520701469955
  61. Franklin, Aimee L. and Carol Ebdon. 2007. “Democracy, Public Participation, and Budgeting: Mutually Exclusive or Just Exhausting.” In Democracy and Public Administration, edited by R. C. Box, 84–106. New York: M.E. Sharpe.
  62. Groff, J. E., & Pitman, M. K. (2004). Municipal financial reporting on the world wide web: a survey of financial data displayed on the official websites of the 100 largest US municipalities. The Journal of Government Financial Management, 53(2), 20.
  63. Gutiérrez, B. (2017). Radical Democracy: Spain’s Cities Overthrow Neoliberalism. World Policy Journal, 34(3), 90-95. https://doi.org/10.1215/07402775-4280040
  64. Haller, A. (2002). Financial accounting developments in the European Union: past events and future prospects. European Accounting Review, 11(1), 153-190. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638180220124770
  65. Harris, J., McKenzie, K., & Rentfro, R. (2008). Efforts and Accomplishments in Communicating Efforts and Accomplishments in Communicating with the Citizenry. Journal of Government Financial Management, 57(3).
  66. Herrmann, D., & Thomas, W. (1995). Harmonisation of accounting measurement practices in the European Community. Accounting and Business Research, 25(100), 253-265. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.1995.9729914
  67. Hinna, L. (2004). Il bilancio sociale nelle amministrazioni pubbliche: processi, strumenti, strutture e valenze. Angeli.
  68. Hoogendoorn, M. N. (1996). Accounting and taxation in Europe—A comparative overview. European Accounting Review, 5(sup1), 783-794. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638189600000050
  69. International Integrated Reporting Committee (IIRC) (2013), “Consultation draft of the international integrated reporting framework”, available at: http://integratedreporting.org/resource/consultationdraft2013/ (accessed October 6, 2015).
  70. International Integrated Reporting Committee (IIRC) (2014), “Realizing the benefits: the impact of integrated reporting”, available at: www.theiirc.org/wp content/uploads/2014/09/IIRC.Black_.Sun_.Research.IR_.Impact.Single.pages.18.9.14.pdf (accessed October 6, 2015).
  71. IPSASB (International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board). (2013). Handbook of International Public Sector Accounting Pronouncements Edition, International Federation of Accountants.
  72. Irvin, R.A. and Stansbury, J. (2004), “Citizen participation in decision making: is it worth the effort?”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 64 No. 1, pp. 55-65. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2004.00346.x
  73. Jones, D. B., Scott, R. B., Kimbro, L., & Ingram, R. W. (1985). The needs of users of governmental financial reports. Governmental Accounting Standards Board of the Financial Accounting Foundation.
  74. Jones, R. (1992). The development of conceptual frameworks of accounting for the public sector. Financial Accountability & Management, 8(4), 249-264. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0408.1992.tb00217.x
  75. Jones, R., & Pendlebury, M. (2000). Public sector accounting. Pearson Education.
  76. Joos, P., & Lang, M. (1994). The effects of accounting diversity: Evidence from the European Union. Journal of Accounting Research, 141-168. https://doi.org/10.2307/2491444
  77. Jordan, M. M., Yusuf, J. E., Berman, M., & Gilchrist, C. (2017). Popular Financial Reports as Fiscal Transparency Mechanisms: An Assessment Using the Fiscal Transparency Index for the Citizen User. International Journal of Public Administration, 40(8), 625-636. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2016.1186175
  78. Joskow, P. L. (1974). Inflation and environmental concern: Structural change in the process of public utility price regulation. The Journal of Law and Economics, 17(2), 291-327. https://doi.org/10.1086/466794
  79. Yusuf, J. E. W., & Jordan, M. M. (2012). Effective popular financial reports: The citizen perspective. Journal of Government Financial Management, 61(4).
  80. Yi, Z., & Yungui, P. (2013). The Application of" a Data Schema" as Central Database at the Municipal Level of Zunyi City, Guizhou Province on Land Resources in Coordination with Digital Geospatial [J]. Land and Resources Informatization, 1, 012.
  81. Yusuf, J. E., Jordan, M. M., Neill, K. A., & Hackbart, M. (2013). For the people: Popular financial reporting practices of local governments. Public Budgeting & Finance, 33(1), 95-113. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5850.2013.12003.x
  82. Kelly, J. M., & Swindell, D. (2002). A multiple–indicator approach to municipal service evaluation: correlating performance measurement and citizen satisfaction across jurisdictions. Public Administration Review, 62(5), 610-621. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6210.00241
  83. King, C. S., Feltey, K. M., & Susel, B. O. N. (1998). The question of participation: Toward authentic public participation in public administration. Public administration review, 317-326. https://doi.org/10.2307/977561
  84. Kitchin, R. (2014). The real-time city? Big data and smart urbanism. GeoJournal, 79(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-013-9516-8
  85. Klein, H. J. (1989). An integrated control theory model of work motivation. Academy of Management Review, 14(2), 150-172. https://doi.org/10.2307/258414
  86. Klijn, E. H. (2008). Governance and governance networks in Europe: An assessment of ten years of research on the theme. Public management review, 10(4), 505-525. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719030802263954
  87. Manes-Rossi, F., Aversano, N., & Polcini, P. T. (2019). Popular reporting: learning from the US experience. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management.
  88. Marcuccio, M., Steccolini, I., & Valotti, G. (2004). La rendicontazione sociale per gli enti locali in ottica strategica: un modello di riferimento. Azienda pubblica, 17(3), 365-394.
  89. Marcuccio, M., & Steccolini, I. (2005). Nuovi modelli di accountability nelle amministrazioni pubbliche: un’analisi empirica del contenuto del bilancio sociale degli enti locali. Azienda pubblica, 18(4), 665-688.
  90. Martin, J., & Kloot, L. (2001). Local government accountability: explaining differences. Accounting, Accountability & Performance, 7(1), 51.
  91. Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of management review, 22(4), 853-886. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1997.9711022105
  92. Myeong, S., & Choi, Y. (2010). Effects of information technology on policy decision-making processes: some evidences beyond rhetoric. Administration & Society, 42(4), 441-459. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399710362724
  93. Montanari, F., Pattaro, A. F., & Scapolan, A. (2013). Comuni 2.0. Un'indagine esplorativa sull'utilizzo dei social media nei Comuni italiani di medie e grandi dimensioni. Azienda Pubblica, 2, 191-220.
  94. Moon, J. (2004). Government as a driver of corporate social responsibility: the UK in comparative perspective.
  95. Mulgan, R. (2000). ‘Accountability’: An ever‐expanding concept?. Public administration, 78(3), 555-573. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9299.00218
  96. Northcott, D., & Ma'amora Taulapapa, T. (2012). Using the balanced scorecard to manage performance in public sector organizations: Issues and challenges. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 25(3), 166-191. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513551211224234
  97. Oliver, C., & Holzinger, I. (2008). The effectiveness of strategic political management: A dynamic capabilities framework. Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 496-520. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2008.31193538
  98. Olson, O., Guthrie, J., & Humphrey, C. H. R. I. S. T. O. P. H. E. R. (1998). International experiences with ‘new’public financial management (NPFM) reforms: New world? Small world? Better world. Global warning: Debating international developments in new public financial management, 17-48.
  99. Osborne, S. (2006), The new public governance?, Public Management Review, 8, 3: 377-387. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719030600853022
  100. Osborne, S. (2010) Delivering public services: time for a new theory?, Public Management Review, 12, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719030903495232
  101. Osborne, S. P., Radnor, Z., & Nasi, G. (2013). A new theory for public service management? Toward a (public) service-dominant approach. The American Review of Public Administration, 43(2), 135-158. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074012466935
  102. Peña-López, I. (2017). State of the Art: Spain. draft), Voice or Chatter, ITFC, MAVC.
  103. Peña-López, I. (2018). Increasing the quality of democracy through sovereignty devolution. Précis, January 2018.
  104. Pérez, C.C., Hernández, A.M.L. and Bolívar, M.P.R. (2005), “Citizens’ access to on-line governmental financial information: practices in the European Union countries”, Government Information Quarterly, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 258-276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2005.02.002
  105. Pina, V., Torres, L., & Acerete, B. (2007). Are ICTs promoting government accountability? A comparative analysis of E-Governance developments in 19 OECD countries. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 18(5), 583–602. doi:10.1016/j.cpa.2006.01.012
  106. Pina, V., Torres, L., & Royo, S. (2010). Is E-Government leading to more accountable and transparency local governments? An overall view. Financial Accountability & Management, 26(1), 3–20. doi:10.1111/j.1468- 0408.2009.00488.x
  107. Piotrowski, S. J., & Van Ryzin, G. G. (2007). Citizen attitudes toward transparency in local government. The American Review of Public Administration, 37(3), 306–323. doi:10.1177/0275074006296777
  108. Pollitt, C., & Summa, H. (1997). Trajectories of reform: public management change in four countries. Public Money and Management, 17(1), 7-18. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9302.00051
  109. Puddu, L., Rainero, C., Secinaro, S., Indelicato, A., & Vietti, M. C. (2013). The Consolidated Financial Statement: Are Ipsas And National Accounting Standards Comparable? The Turin City Council Case. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 4(13).
  110. Popular Financial Reporting della Città di Torino Anno 2014/2015 March 2016 DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.3419.4321
  111. Popular Financial Reporting City of Turin - Bilancio Pop della Città di Torino 2016/2017 - May 2018 DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18927.53920
  112. Rainero, C., & Brescia, V. (2018). The Participatory Budgeting Towards a New Governance and Accountability. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCES AND BUSINESS RESEARCH, 7(2), 54-67.
  113. Reichard, C. (1998). The impact of performance management on transparency and accountability in the public sector. Ethics and accountability in a context of governance and New Public Management, ed. Annie Hondeghem, 123-37.
  114. Roberts, J., & Scapens, R. (1985). Accounting systems and systems of accountability—understanding accounting practices in their organisational contexts. Accounting, organizations and society, 10(4), 443-456. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-3682(85)90005-4
  115. Roberts, C. B. (1991). Environmental disclosures: a note on reporting practices in mainland Europe. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 4(3). https://doi.org/10.1108/09513579110005536
  116. Rogate, C., & Tarquini, T. (2004). Il bilancio sociale negli enti locali: scenario, metodologia ed esperienze. Maggioli.
  117. Roome, N. (1992). Developing environmental management strategies. Business strategy and the environment, 1(1), 11-24. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3280010104
  118. Rubin, I. (2009). Bringing transparency to municipal budgets. The Public Manager, 38(1), 13–15.
  119. Sancino, A. (2010). L’attuazione del paradigma della public governance negli enti locali: implicazioni per il management. Economia Aziendale Online, 1(1), 49-58.
  120. Sannino, G., Paolo, T. P., Agliata, F., & Natalia, A. (2019). L’Integrated Popular Reporting come risposta alle esigenze informative degli utenti nelle aziende pubbliche. Rivista Italiana di Ragioneria ed Economia Aziendale, 2019. https://doi.org/10.17408/RIREAGSPTPFANA010203042019
  121. Secinaro, S., Brescia, V., Calandra, D., & Chmet, F. (2019). The Popular Financial Reporting for Hybrid Organization: A Solution to A Tricky Accounting Problem. Journal of Accounting and Finance, 19(8).
  122. Secinaro, S., Corvo, L., Brescia, V., & Iannaci, D. (2019a). Hybrid Organizations: A Systematic Review of the Current Literature. International Business Research, 12(11), 1-21.
  123. Sharp, F., Carpenter, F. H., & Sharp, R. F. (1998). Popular Financial Reports for Citizens. The CPA Journal, 68(3), 34-38.
  124. Steccolini, I. (2004). Is the annual report an accountability medium? An empirical investigation into Italian local governments. Financial Accountability & Management, 20(3), 327-350. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0267-4424.2004.00389.x
  125. Sternberg, E. (1997). The defects of stakeholder theory. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 5(1), 3-10. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8683.00034
  126. Turnpenny, J., Radaelli, C. M., Jordan, A., & Jacob, K. (2009). The policy and politics of policy appraisal: emerging trends and new directions. Journal of European Public Policy, 16(4), 640-653. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760902872783
  127. Verde, M. (2017). Responsabilità sociale di impresa tra teoria e prassi: Il bilancio sociale come processo di costruzione di senso (Vol. 6). G Giappichelli Editore.
  128. Vivian, B., & Maroun, W. (2018). Progressive public administration and new public management in public sector accountancy: An international review. Meditari Accountancy Research, 26(1), 44-69. https://doi.org/10.1108/medar-03-2017-0131
  129. Wallis, J., & Dollery, B. (2001). Local government policy evolution in New Zealand: radical reform and the ex post emergence of consensus or rival advocacy coalitions. Public Administration, 79(3), 533-560. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9299.00268
  130. Weick, K. E. (1995). What theory is not, theorizing is. Administrative science quarterly, 40(3), 385-390. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393789
  131. Zambon, F., & Beltrachi, G. (2016). City of Turin’s (Italy) Populaf Financial Reporting is credit positive. Moody’s Public Sector Europe.

Cite this Article: