Main Article Content


This study refers to the influence of the age of local government, status, number of Regional Device Task Force (SKPD), financial autonomy ratios, effectiveness ratios, local income growth ratios, and the quality of local financial reports that exist in local governments as an independent variable on the compliance of local governments to implement government accounting systems as the dependent variable. Using quantitative methods with secondary data obtained from information on the publication of the Indonesian Financial Audit Agency, the Central Bureau of Statistics of the Republic of Indonesia (BPS), and local government reports. The sample used is limited to the municipal and district governments in western Indonesia, which are being evaluated by the Indonesian Financial Audit Agency in the implementation of an accrual base government accounting system of 158 local governments namely 36 cities and 122 districts. Multiple linear regression analysis was used to test the hypothesis. The research is a causality, quantitative research model, and secondary data from local governments throughout Indonesia and secondary data about the compliance of local governments in the application of Government Accounting Standards (SAP) published by the Audit Board of the Republic of Indonesia (BPK). The results of the hypothesis analysis conclude that the status of local government, the ratio of regional government autonomy, and the growth of local revenue significantly influence the compliance of local governments in the implementation of the accrual base government accounting system.


characteristics of local government, local government finance team, local government report, government system base accrual base.

Article Details

Author Biographies

Wahyu Widayat, BPKP Nusa Tenggara Barat

BPKP Nusa Tenggara Barat

Siti Arifah, Universitas Tidar

Accounting program in Economic Faculty


  1. Adhikari, P., C. Kuruppu, and S. Matilal. 2013. Dissemination and institutionalization of public sector accounting reforms in less developed countries: A comparative study of the Nepalese and Sri Lankan central governments. Accounting Forum 37 (3):213-230.
  2. Alam, M. 1997. Budgetary process in uncertain contexts: a study of state-owned enterprises in Bangladesh. Management Accounting Research 8 (2):147-167.
  3. Alawattage, C., T. Hopper, D. Wickramasinghe, N. Putu S, G. Jan van Helden, and S. Tillema. 2007. Public sector performance measurement in developing countries: A literature review and research agenda. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change 3 (3):192-208.
  4. Almquist, R., G. Grossi, G. J. van Helden, and C. Reichard. 2013. Public sector governance and accountability. Critical Perspectives on Accounting 24 (7–8):479-487.
  5. Andon, P., J. Baxter, and W. F. Chua. 2007. Accounting change as relational drifting: A field study of experiments with performance measurement. Management Accounting Research 18 (2):273-308.
  6. Anthony, R. N. 1978. Financial accounting in nonbusiness organizations: an exploratory study of conceptual issues: Financial Accounting Standards Board.
  7. Arnaboldi, M., and I. Lapsley. 2009. On the implementation of accrual accounting: a study of conflict and ambiguity. European Accounting Review 18 (4):809-836.
  8. Arundel, A., L. Casali, and H. Hollanders. 2015. How European public sector agencies innovate: The use of bottom-up, policy-dependent and knowledge-scanning innovation methods. Research Policy 44 (7):1271-1282.
  9. Atamian, R., and G. Ganguli. 1991. The recipients of municipal annual financial reports: a nationwide survey. The Journal of Government Financial Management 40 (3):3.
  10. Bale, M., and T. Dale. 1998. Public sector reform in New Zealand and its relevance to developing countries. The World Bank Research Observer 13 (1):103-121.
  11. Becker, S. D., T. Jagalla, and P. Skærbæk. 2014. The translation of accrual accounting and budgeting and the reconfiguration of public sector accountants’ identities. Critical Perspectives on Accounting 25 (4–5):324-338.
  12. Bell, J., Z. Hoque, H. Harun, K. Van Peursem, and I. Eggleton. 2012. Institutionalization of accrual accounting in the Indonesian public sector. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change 8 (3):257-285.
  13. Bell, J., Z. Hoque, M. A. Norhayati, and A. K. Siti-Nabiha. 2009. A case study of the performance management system in a Malaysian government linked company. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change 5 (2):243-276.
  14. Bergevärn, L.-E., F. Mellemvik, and O. Olson. 1995. Institutionalization of municipal accounting — a comparative study between Sweden and Norway. Scandinavian Journal of Management 11 (1):25-41.
  15. Brignall, S., and S. Modell. 2000. An institutional perspective on performance measurement and management in the ‘new public sector’. Management Accounting Research 11 (3):281-306.
  16. Carlin, T. M. 2005. Debating the impact of accrual accounting and reporting in the public sector. Financial Accountability & Management 21 (3):309-336.
  17. Chan, J. L. 2003. Government accounting: an assessment of theory, purposes and standards. Public Money & Management 23 (1):13-20.
  18. Chang, L. c. 2009. The impact of political interests upon the formulation of performance measurements: the NHS star rating system. Financial Accountability & Management 25 (2):145-165.
  19. Chow, D., C. Humphrey, and J. Moll. 2009. New development: In pursuit of WGA—Research findings from the UK. Public Money & Management 29 (4):257-260.
  20. Christensen, M. 2007. What We Might Know (But Aren't Sure) About Public‐Sector Accrual Accounting. Australian Accounting Review 17 (41):51-65.
  21. Christensen, M., and L. Parker. 2010. Using ideas to advance professions: public sector accrual accounting. Financial Accountability & Management 26 (3):246-266.
  22. Christiaens, J., and J. Rommel. 2008. Accrual accounting reforms: only for businesslike (parts of) governments. Financial Accountability & Management 24 (1):59-75.
  23. Christiaens, J., and E. D. Wielemaker. 2003. Financial accounting reform in Flemish universities: an empirical study of the implementation. Financial Accountability & Management 19 (2):185-204.
  24. Collier, P. M. 2006. Costing police services: The politicization of accounting. Critical Perspectives on Accounting 17 (1):57-86.
  25. Connolly, C., and N. Hyndman. 2006. The actual implementation of accruals accounting: caveats from a case within the UK public sector. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 19 (2):272-290.
  26. Damanpour, F. 1991. Organizational Innovation: A Meta-Analysis of Effects of Determinants and Moderators. The Academy of Management Journal 34 (3):555-590.
  27. Downs, A. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy: Harper.
  28. English, L. 2003. Emasculating public accountability in the name of competition: transformation of state audit in Victoria. Critical Perspectives on Accounting 14 (1):51-76.
  29. Gårseth-Nesbakk, L. 2011. Accrual accounting representations in the public sector—A case of autopoiesis. Critical Perspectives on Accounting 22 (3):247-258.
  30. Gillibrand, A., and B. Hilton. 1998. Resource accounting and budgeting: principles, concepts and practice—the MoD case. Public Money and Management 18 (2):21-28.
  31. Goldman, F., and E. Brashares. 1991. Performance and accountability: Budget reform in New Zealand. Public Budgeting & Finance 11 (4):75-85.
  32. Guthrie, J. 1998. Application of accrual accounting in the Australian public sector–rhetoric or reality. Financial Accountability & Management 14 (1):1-19.
  33. Guthrie, J., and L. English. 1997. Performance information and programme evaluation in the Australian public sector. International Journal of Public Sector Management 10 (3):154-164.
  34. Halim, A. 2012. Akuntansi keuangan daerah: akuntansi sektor publik.
  35. Harun. 2007. Obstacles to public sector accounting reform in Indonesia. Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies 43 (3):365-376.
  36. Hodges, R., and H. Mellett. 2003. Reporting public sector financial results. Public Management Review 5 (1):99-113.
  37. Hoque, Z. 2008. Measuring and reporting public sector outputs/outcomes: Exploratory evidence from Australia. International Journal of Public Sector Management 21 (5):468-493.
  38. Hoque, Z., and J. Moll. 2001. Public sector reform-Implications for accounting, accountability and performance of state-owned entities-an Australian perspective. International Journal of Public Sector Management 14 (4):304-326.
  39. Hyndman, N., and C. Connolly. 2011. Accruals accounting in the public sector: A road not always taken. Management Accounting Research 22 (1):36-45.
  40. Jorge de Jesus, M. A., and J. S. B. Eirado. 2012. Relevance of accounting information to public sector accountability: A study of Brazilian federal public universities. Tékhne 10 (2):87-98.
  41. Kamal Hassan, M. 2005. Management accounting and organisational change: an institutional perspective. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change 1 (2):125-140.
  42. Kominis, G., and A. I. Dudau. 2012. Time for interactive control systems in the public sector? The case of the Every Child Matters policy change in England. Management Accounting Research 23 (2):142-155.
  43. Lawton, A., D. McKevitt, and M. Millar. 2000. Developments: Coping with ambiguity: Reconciling external legitimacy and organizational implementation in performance measurement. Public Money and Management 20 (3):13-20.
  44. Liguori, M., and I. Steccolini. 2011. Accounting change: explaining the outcomes, interpreting the process. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 25 (1):27-70.
  45. Likierman, A. 2000. Changes to managerial decision-taking in UK central government. Management Accounting Research 11 (2):253-261.
  46. Lilian Chan, Y.-C. 2004. Performance measurement and adoption of balanced scorecards: a survey of municipal governments in the USA and Canada. International Journal of Public Sector Management 17 (3):204-221.
  47. Lüder, K., A. G. Zürich PriceWaterhouseCoopers, and R. Jones. 2003. Reforming Governmental Accounting and Budgeting in Europe: Fachverlag Moderne Wirtschaft.
  48. Mack, J., and C. Ryan. 2006. Reflections on the theoretical underpinnings of the general-purpose financial reports of Australian government departments. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 19 (4):592-612.
  49. McLeod, R. H., and H. Harun. 2014. Public Sector Accounting Reform at Local Government Level in Indonesia. Financial Accountability & Management 30 (2):238-258.
  50. Mettänen, P. 2005. Design and implementation of a performance measurement system for a research organization. Production Planning & Control 16 (2):178-188.
  51. Mir, M., and W. Sutiyono. 2013. Public Sector Financial Management Reform: A Case Study of Local Government Agencies in Indonesia. Australasian Accounting Business & Finance Journal 7 (4):97.
  52. Modell, S. 2001. Performance measurement and institutional processes: a study of managerial responses to public sector reform. Management Accounting Research 12 (4):437-464.
  53. ———. 2003. Goals versus institutions: the development of performance measurement in the Swedish university sector. Management Accounting Research 14 (4):333-359.
  54. Nisfiannoor, M. 2009. Pendekatan statististika Modern untuk Ilmu Sosial: Penerbit Salemba.
  55. Nor-Aziah, A. K., and R. W. Scapens. 2007. Corporatisation and accounting change: The role of accounting and accountants in a Malaysian public utility. Management Accounting Research 18 (2):209-247.
  56. Othman, R., A. K. A. Domil, Z. C. Senik, N. L. Abdullah, and N. Hamzah. 2006. A case study of balanced scorecard implementation in a Malaysian company. Journal of Asia-Pacific Business 7 (2):55-72.
  57. Pallot, J. 1997. Infrastructure accounting for local authorities: technical management and political context. Financial Accountability & Management 13 (3):225-242.
  58. ———. 2001. A decade in review: New Zealand’s experience with resource accounting and budgeting. Financial Accountability & Management 17 (4):383-400.
  59. Parker, L. D., and J. Guthrie. 1993. The Australian public sector in the 1990s: new accountability regimes in motion. Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation 2 (1):59-81.
  60. Perrin, J. 1998. Resource accounting and budgeting: from cash to accruals in 25 years. Public Money and Management 18 (2):7-10.
  61. Pilcher, R., and G. Dean. 2009. Consequences and costs of financial reporting compliance for local government. European Accounting Review 18 (4):725-744.
  62. Rantanen, H., H. I. Kulmala, A. Lönnqvist, and P. Kujansivu. 2007. Performance measurement systems in the Finnish public sector. International Journal of Public Sector Management 20 (5):415-433.
  63. Rutherford, B. A. 2000. The construction and presentation of performance indicators in executive agency external reports. Financial Accountability & Management 16 (3):225-249.
  64. Ryan, C. 1998. The introduction of accrual reporting policy in the Australian public sector: an agenda setting explanation. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 11 (5):518-539.
  65. ———. 1999. Australian public sector financial reporting: a case of cooperative policy formulation. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 12 (5):561-582.
  66. Ryan, C., K. Dunstan, and J. Brown. 2002. The value of public sector annual reports and annual reporting awards in organisational legitimacy. Accounting, Accountability & Performance 8 (1):61.
  67. Saleh, Z., and M. W. Pendlebury. 2006. Accruals Accounting in Government–Developments in Malaysia. Asia Pacific Business Review 12 (4):421-435.
  68. Shih-Jen, K. H., and L. C. Yee-Ching. 2002. Performance measurement and the implementation of balanced scorecards in municipal governments. The Journal of Government Financial Management 51 (4):8.
  69. Shiraz Rahaman, A. 2009. Independent financial auditing and the crusade against government sector financial mismanagement in Ghana. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management 6 (4):224-246.
  70. Siti-Nabiha, A. K., and R. W. Scapens. 2005. Stability and change: an institutionalist study of management accounting change. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 18 (1):44-73.
  71. Stanton, P., and J. Stanton. 2002. Corporate annual reports: research perspectives used. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 15 (4):478-500.
  72. Suhardjanto, D., and R. R. Yulianingtyas. 2011. Pengaruh karakteristik pemerintah daerah terhadap kepatuhan pengungkapan wajib dalam laporan keuangan pemerintah daerah (Studi empiris pada kabupaten/kota di Indonesia). Jurnal Akuntansi dan Auditing 8 (1):30-42.
  73. Ter Bogt, H. J., and G. J. Van Helden. 2000. Accounting change in Dutch government: exploring the gap between expectations and realizations. Management Accounting Research 11 (2):263-279.
  74. Vámosi, T. S. 2000. Continuity and change; management accounting during processes of transition. Management Accounting Research 11 (1):27-63.
  75. Van Peursem, K. A., M. J. Prat, and S. R. Lawrence. 1995. Health management performance: a review of measures and indicators. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 8 (5):34-70.
  76. Wilson, C., D. Hagarty, and J. Gauthier. 2004. Results using the balanced scorecard in the public sector. Journal of Corporate Real Estate 6 (1):53-64.
  77. Wisniewski, M., and S. Ólafsson. 2004. Developing balanced scorecards in local authorities: a comparison of experience. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 53 (7):602-610.
  78. Wisniewski, M., and D. Stewart. 2004. Performance measurementfor stakeholders: The case of Scottish local authorities. International Journal of Public Sector Management 17 (3):222-233.
  79. Zimmerman, J. L. 1977. The municipal accounting maze: An analysis of political incentives. Journal of Accounting Research:107-144.