Forces Leading to the Adoption of Accrual Accounting by the Canadian Federal Government: An Institutional Perspective*/ LES FORCES AYANT MENÉ L'ADMINISTRATION FÉDÉRALE CANADIENNE À ADOPTER LA COMPTABILITÉ D'EXERCICE: UNE PERSPECTIVE INSTITUTIONNELLE
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
ABSTRACT In 1995, the federal government of Canada announced that it would adopt full accrual accounting. The change was fully implemented at the department level in 2001 and for government‐wide financial reporting in 2003. Using the perspective of institutional theory, we examine several factors that had the potential to influence the federal government's decision to adopt full accrual accounting, including two royal commissions, the Office of the Auditor General of Canada, the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants, credit markets, and the practices of other national governments. We find that the decision to change to accrual accounting can be largely attributed to coercive and normative influences of the Office of the Auditor General of Canada (supported by the normative influence of the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants' Public Sector Accounting Board) and mimetic isomorphism with other members of the federal government's organizational field.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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