Do heritage recognition and disclosure matter? Evidence from university students

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to empirically investigate whether heritage recognition and extensive disclosure in public sector General Purpose Financial Reports (GPFR) contribute to accountability and decision making, with a specific focus on university students. Design/methodology/approach An artefactual survey experiment with 154 Italian university students was conducted to empirically test whether heritage recognition and extensive disclosure influence perceptions about the economic, cultural and social value of heritage, attitudes towards the sale of heritage, propensity for donations, perceptions of the government’s solvency, acceptance of conservation and promotion costs, and propensity towards coproduction. Findings Both recognition and extensive disclosure exert a positive impact on perceived economic value, acceptance of conservation and promotion costs, and propensity to coproduce. Critically, recognition also generates a more favorable attitude towards the sale of heritage, reduces propensity to provide donations, and inflates perceptions of the government’s solvency. Importantly, the first two of these undesirable effects are partially counterbalanced by extensive disclosure. Unlike recognition, moreover, extensive disclosure highlights the cultural and social significance of heritage. Originality/value The study provides quantitative empirical evidence about some benefits and drawbacks of heritage recognition and extensive disclosure as outlined in the academic and professional literature. By focusing on university students, it establishes a foundation for a broader research agenda that seeks to investigate citizens, who are generally presented as primary users of GPFRs, but are largely overlooked by both research and practice.