Abstract
Over the past two decades, public sector accounting reforms based on International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS) have become part of the government financial modernization agendas in various countries. Despitenormativeargumentsregardingfiscaltransparencyandaccountability,theadoptionofIPSAShasnotbeen uniform. Knowledge of how institutional contexts shape reform pathways remains limited. This study analyses IPSAS reforms in Australia, Indonesia, and Kazakhstan through a comparative institutional analysis approach. This analysis combines a research-based mini-review with structured secondary evidence from IFAC adoption status, a previous cross-country classification of standard-setting pathways, and selected PEFA indicators. The threecountries are examined through different institutional logics: performance-based logic and New Public ManagementinAustralia,statutoryauditaccountabilitylogicandadministrativecapacity-buildinginIndonesia, andmodernizationandinternationallegitimacylogicinKazakhstan.Thefindingsindicatethatdifferences in institutional logics and PFM system integration result in variations in the form of IPSAS implementation outcomes: substantive integration in Australia, gradual convergence with partial substantive integration in Indonesia, and hybrid modernization-driven reform with partial institutional decoupling in Kazakhstan. These results imply that accounting reform cannot be understood solely as a technical transformation of reporting standards, but as a process of institutional change within the fiscal governance architecture. Practically, this study provides insights into the importance of alignment between budgeting, treasury, audit, and financial information systems to ensure the sustainabilityof IPSAS-based accrual reform