The Institutional Environment of Financial Reporting Regulation in ASEAN
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
The growth of regional trading blocs and economic alliances such as the European Union (EU) and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), has served to magnify interest in cross-national aspects of financial reporting regulation. While most of the extant literature has looked at developed industrialized countries, this article focuses on the principal features of the institutional environment for financial reporting in an economic bloc of developing countries—the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). These countries are currently the subject of much attention due to the Asian economic crisis. The article has several objectives. First, it highlights the principal features of the institutional structure of financial reporting regulation in ASEAN countries. Second, it helps understand how these features impact on and are affected by several issues, particularly the limits of private sector participation in regulatory affairs, and the need to improve the enforcement in these countries. Finally, it also studies the international dimensions of financial reporting regulation in ASEAN and considers whether ASEAN's institutional arrangements provide an auspicious environment in which to pursue accounting harmonization.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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