An examination of Pacific nations ‘legislatures’ interactions with Supreme Audit Institutions and the impact on audit quality

Purpose 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. Design/methodology/approach 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. Findings 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. Practical implications 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. Originality/value 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.