Reluctant ally: The development of statutory regulation of the accountancy profession in South Africa, 1904–1951
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accountants in South Africa established professional organizations to protect and promote the profession in the rapidly growing business environment after the discovery of diamonds and gold in the last quarter of the nineteenth century. This article investigates the development of the statutory regulatory environment of the accounting profession, which gradually emerged alongside the profession’s own structures. The growth of the South African economy created a rising demand for professional accountants, and large numbers of accountants from Britain emigrated to South Africa (or to the former colonies under British control, which later formed the Union of South Africa in 1910). Professional regulation remained a professional concern until the 1951 Act which established the Public Accountants and Auditors Board. The article extends the existing literature on the state–profession nexus by explaining the circumstances leading to proactive intervention of the state and the intersection of the state’s public interest responsibility and the closure attempts of the profession.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it