Auditoría Pública nº 78. Revista de los órganos autonómicos de control externo

REVISTA AUDITORÍA PÚBLICA / 78 50 ¡ Cuadrado-Ballesteros B (2014): The impact of functional decentralization and externalization on local government transparency. Government Information Quarterly 31: 265-277. ¡ Domingues AR, Moreno-Pires S, Caeiro S and Ramos TB (2015): Defining criteria and indicators for a sustainability label of local public services. Ecological Indicators 57: 452-464. ¡ Dye K (2007): Corruption and fraud detection by supreme audit institutions. In: Anwar S (Ed.), Performance Accountability and Combating Corruption . Washington, DC: World Bank, pp. 303-322. ¡ Garde-Sánchez R, Rodríguez-Bolívar MP and Alcaide- Muñoz L (2014): Are Spanish SAIs accomplishing INTOSAI’s best practices code of transparency and accountability? Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences 10(43): 122-145. ¡ González-Díaz B and García-Fernández R (2016): Supreme Audit Institutions: A literature review and research agenda for the future. In: I Reunión Internacional de Investigación en Contabilidad y Auditoría , Colima (México). ¡ González-Díaz B, García R and López A (2013): Communication as a transparency and accountability strategy in Supreme Audit Institutions. Administration & Society , 45(5): 583-609. ¡ González-Díaz B, LópezA andGarcía R (2008): Supreme Audit Institutions and their communication strategies. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 74:435- 461. ¡ Greco G, Sciulli N and D’Onza G (2015): The influence of stakeholder engagement on sustainability reporting: Evidence from Italian local councils. Public Management Review, 17: 465-488. ¡ Gustavson M and Sundström A (2016): Organizing the Audit Society Does Good Auditing Generate Less Public Sector Corruption? Administration & Society , 50(10): 1508-1532. ¡ Hay D and Cordery C (2018): The value of publica sector audit: Literatura and history, Journal of Accounting Literature , 40: 1-15. ¡ International Organization of Supreme Audit Institu- tions (INTOSAI) (1977): The Lima declaration. Available at: http://www.issai.org/media(622,1033)/ISSAI_1_E.pdf. ¡ International Organization of Supreme Audit Insti- tutions (INTOSAI) (2006): INTOSAI communication policy: A framework “Mutual exchange of information benefits all. Available at: http://www.intosai.org/ uploads/compolicyfin031106.pdf. ¡ International Organization of Supreme Audit Insti- tutions (INTOSAI) (2007): ISSAI 1260 Communication with those charged with governance. Available at: http:// www.issai.org/media(635,1033)/ISSAI_1260_E.pdf. ¡ InternationalOrganization of SupremeAudit Institu - tions (INTOSAI) (2009a): ISSAI 20: Principles of trans - parency and accountability. Available at: h tt p : / /ww w. issai.org/media(794,1033)/ISSAI_20_Endorsement_ version_June.pdf. ¡ International Organization of Supreme Audit Institu- tions (INTOSAI) (2009b): ISSAI 21: Principles of transpa- rency and accountability – Principles and good practices. Available at: http://www.issai.org/media(795,1033)/IS- SAI_21_Endorsement_version_June.pdf. ¡ International Organization of Supreme Audit Institu- tions (INTOSAI) (2010): INTOSAI communication gui- deline . Available at: http://www.intosai.org/uploads/in- tkommrichtliniee.pdf. ¡ International Organization of Supreme Audit Institu- tions (INTOSAI) (2013):  ISSAI 12: The value and benefits of supreme audit institutions – Making a difference to the lives of citizens . Copenhagen: INTOSAI. ¡ Kayrak M (2008): Evolving challenges for supreme audit institutions in struggling with corruption. Journal of Financial Crime 15(1): 60-70. ¡ Kells S (2011): The Seven Deadly Sins of Performance Auditing: Implications for Monitoring Public Audit Institutions. Australian Accounting Review 21(4): 383- 396. ¡ Krause RM, Feiock RC and Hawkins CV (2016): The administrative organization of sustainability within local government. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 26: 113-127.