Alexandra Patricia ARDELEAN


Confidence in accounting is conditional to justifying the legitimacy of the accountancy profession. To reinforce this confidence, IFAC issued a framework whose applicability is proposed to be verified through three criteria: a cost benefit analysis, adherence to democratic principles and processes, as well as the respect of cultural and ethical diversity. Hereby we analyzed the comments issued and found out that the complexity of the public interest notion makes it difficult to define, given its international reach. However, such a framework constitutes a step further to reinforcing the public's confidence. We conducted a complex analysis and pointed out the relevant aspects regarding the axiom of public interest, arguing that the commitment to society is the highest responsibility of the profession. As a conclusion, since accountants have a responsibility to protect the public interest while striving to progress with the interests of the profession, a concession between the two is indispensable.

Full text: PDF


public interest, cost benefit analysis, cultural diversity, code of ethics, ethical behaviour, public oversight, independence, scalability

JEL Codes

H41, I31, I38, M41, M42, M59


Arnold, P., 2005. Disciplining domestic regulation: the world trade organization and the market for professional services. Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 299-330.

Baker, Richard C., 2005. What is the Meaning of the Public Interest? Examining the ideology of the American Public Accounting Profession. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 18:5

Cooper, Christine, 2005. Accounting for the Public Interest: public Ineffectuals or Public Intellectuals. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 18:5

Cooper, D. and Robson, T., 2006. Accounting, professions and regulation: locating sites of professionalism. Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 31 Nos 4/5, pp. 415-44.

Dellaportas, S. and Davenport, L., 2008. Reflections on the public interest in accounting. Australian Accounting Review, No 48, Vol. 19, Issue 1

Kahn, J., 2002. Accounting in crisis: one plus one makes what?. Fortune, 7 January 2002.

Knechel, W., 2007. The business risk audit: origins, obstacles and opportunities. Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 32 Nos 4/5, pp. 383-408.

Lehman, Cheryl R., 2005. Accounting and the Public Interest: All the World's a stage. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 18:5

O’Regan, P., 2008. Elevating the profession: social closure and the development of the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Ireland, 1880–1909. Accounting, Business and Financial History, 18(1), 35–59.

Robson, K., Humphrey, C., Khalifa, R. and Jones, J., 2007. Transforming audit technologies: business risk audit methodologies and the audit field. Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 32 Nos 4/5, pp. 409-38.

Suddaby, R., Gendron, Y. and Lam, H., 2009. The organizational context of professionalism in accounting. Accounting, Organizations and Society, pp. 409-27.

Tiron-Tudor, A., 2013. Balancing the public and the private interest – a dilemma of accounting profession. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol 85 92, pp 101-109 930-935

Willmott, H., 1990. Serving the public interest? A critical analysis of a professional claim. Accounts, Macmillan, London, pp. 315-31.

Windsor, C. and Warming-Rasmussen, B., 2009. The rise of regulatory capitalism and the decline of auditor independence: a critical and experimental examination of auditors’ conflicts of interests. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 267-88.

Zeff, S., 2003b. How the US accounting profession got where it is today: Part II, Accounting Horizons, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 267-86.