Examining the Impact of Government Regulations on Financial Accountability and Risk Management in Public Sector Institutions

Ajeng Pratama; Ibnu Haedir; Mardiah; Aan Pratama; Wahyu Gunawan

doi:10.37899/mjdpp.v3i1.339

Authors

Ajeng Pratama Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Sam Ratulangi, Indonesia
Ibnu Haedir Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Sam Ratulangi, Indonesia
Mardiah Department of Public Administration, Politeknik Negeri Manado, Indonesia
Aan Pratama Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Sam Ratulangi, Indonesia
Wahyu Gunawan Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Sam Ratulangi, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.37899/mjdpp.v3i1.339

Keywords:

Government Regulation, Financial Accountability, Risk Management, Public Sector Governance

Abstract

This study examines the impact of government regulations on financial accountability and risk management in public sector institutions, addressing an important gap in regulatory governance literature that often treats these domains separately. Using a quantitative research design, data were collected from public sector institutions subject to formal financial management and risk governance regulations. The analysis employs descriptive statistics, reliability and validity testing, and regression and mediation analysis to assess the relationships among government regulation, financial accountability, and risk management. The results indicate that government regulations have a strong and statistically significant positive effect on financial accountability, reflected in enhanced transparency, internal control effectiveness, and responsiveness to audit findings. While regulation also positively influences risk management practices, the magnitude of this effect is comparatively weaker, suggesting that risk management remains more compliance oriented than strategic. Importantly, the findings reveal that financial accountability partially mediates the relationship between government regulation and risk management, highlighting the interconnected nature of these governance mechanisms. This study contributes to public sector governance literature by providing empirical evidence that effective regulation operates through both direct and indirect pathways. The findings offer policy relevant insights for regulators and public managers seeking to design integrated regulatory frameworks that strengthen accountability and improve risk governance in the public sector.

References

Alsharari, N. M. (2022). Risk management practices and trade facilitation as influenced by public sector reforms: institutional isomorphism. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, 18(2), 192-216. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAOC-11-2018-0117

Arena, M., Arnaboldi, M., & Azzone, G. (2017). Enterprise risk management in public organizations: The role of institutional context. Public Money & Management, 37(5), 365–372. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2017.1328191

Bovens, M., Goodin, R. E., & Schillemans, T. (2014). The Oxford handbook of public accountability. Oxford University Press.

Brusca, I., Gómez-Villegas, M., & Montesinos, V. (2018). Public financial management reforms: The role of IPSAS in Latin America. Public Administration and Development, 38(1), 23–41. https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.1817

Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.

Carlin, T. M. (2005). Debating the impact of accrual accounting and reporting in the public sector. Financial Accountability & Management, 21(3), 309–336. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0267-4424.2005.00223.x

Christensen, T., Lægreid, P., & Rykkja, L. H. (2019). Organizing for crisis management: Building governance capacity and legitimacy. Public Administration Review, 79(6), 887–897. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13158

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage Publications.

DeVellis, R. F. (2017). Scale development: Theory and applications (4th ed.). Sage Publications.

Fraser, J. R. S., & Simkins, B. J. (2016). The challenges of and solutions for implementing enterprise risk management. Business Expert Press.

Gatawa Kandage, C. J. (2025). Transplanting the western approaches to accounting reforms in emerging economies: implementing accrual basis International Public Sector Accounting Standards in Sri Lanka (Doctoral dissertation, University of Essex).

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.

Hood, C. (2010). Accountability and transparency: Siamese twins, matching parts, awkward couple? West European Politics, 33(5), 989–1009. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2010.486122

Ibrahim, S. A. (2022). Impact of public sector financial management reforms on the performance of government entities’ in Nigeria. Kwara State University (Nigeria).

Islam, S. (2025). A systematic review of public budgeting strategies in developing economies: Tools for transparent fiscal governance. American Journal of Advanced Technology and Engineering Solutions, 1(01), 602-635. https://doi.org/10.63125/wm547117

Israel, M., & Hay, I. (2006). Research ethics for social scientists. Sage Publications.

Lapsley, I., Mussari, R., & Paulsson, G. (2009). On the adoption of accrual accounting in the public sector. Public Money & Management, 29(2), 99–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540960902721672

Lodge, M., & Wegrich, K. (2014). The problem-solving capacity of the modern state: Governance challenges and administrative capacities. Oxford University Press.

Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363. https://doi.org/10.1086/226550

Mikes, A., & Kaplan, R. S. (2015). When one size does not fit all: Evolving directions in the research and practice of enterprise risk management. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 27(1), 37–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/jacf.12112

Milutinović, S., Medved, I., & Dimitrijević, D. (2024). Public oversight and performance measurement in the public sector entities. Anali Ekonomskog fakulteta u Subotici, 60(52), 139-151. https://doi.org/10.5937/10.5937/AnEkSub2400007M

Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.

OECD. (2012). OECD recommendations of the council on regulatory policy and governance. OECD Publishing.

OECD. (2015). Public governance reviews: Public sector efficiency. OECD Publishing.

Ogedengbe, A. O., Jejeniwa, T. O., Friday, S. C., & Olatunji, H. (2024). Framework for digitally transforming financial management systems in SME and public sector organizations. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Growth Evaluation, 5(5), 1122-1142.

Peters, B. G. (2018). The politics of bureaucracy (7th ed.). Routledge.

Power, M. (2007). Organized uncertainty: Designing a world of risk management. Oxford University Press.

Power, M. (2009). The risk management of nothing. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34(6–7), 849–855. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2009.06.001

Schillemans, T., & Busuioc, M. (2015). Predicting public sector accountability. Public Administration, 93(1), 191–209. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12105

Wahyuningrum, I. F. S., Budihardjo, M. A., Probohudono, A. N., Yanto, H., & Oktavilia, S. (2025). An analysis of water disclosure quantities: Evidence from agricultural companies in Indonesia. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 11(2), 100563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joitmc.2025.100563

Yamamoto, K., & Schührer, S. (2023). Finance and accounting: recent developments and challenges building efficiency and public accountability. Handbook of public administration reform, 90-110