How the new CPA Institute can compress decades of development into seven years

To understand Ethiopia’s accounting profession today requires understanding the peculiar path that led here. It is a path marked by political upheaval, yes, but also by a series of misalignments—between education and practice, between standards and reality, between credentials and context—that left the country in an unusual position: simultaneously educated and unprofessionalized, trained but not certified, competent but not recognized.

A History of Misalignment

The story begins in 1962, when Addis Ababa University established Ethiopia’s first accounting degree program. Seven years later, in 1969, Asmara University followed—though it would cease serving Ethiopian students after Eritrean independence in 1993. For context, this timing placed Ethiopia ahead of many African countries in formal accounting education. But the content of that education created complications that would echo for decades.

The curricula these universities adopted were American. Not adapted from American models—actually American. Students learned US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. They used American textbooks. They studied American case examples. This might seem unremarkable—many countries borrowed educational models—but the implications deserve attention.

Consider what this meant in practice. Ethiopian students learned accounting standards they would never use professionally. They studied regulatory frameworks that didn’t exist in Ethiopia. They absorbed principles designed for American corporate structures, American tax systems, American business environments. The education was rigorous—American accounting education was among the world’s best—but it was systematically disconnected from Ethiopian realities.

The disconnection was most striking in taxation. Accounting and taxation are inseparable in practice—every accountant must understand the tax implications of financial decisions, must prepare reports serving tax purposes, must navigate the intersection of financial reporting and tax compliance. Yet Ethiopian accounting programs included no taxation courses whatsoever. None. Students graduated with accounting degrees having never studied the Ethiopian tax system they would navigate throughout their careers.

There was one exception to this curricular pattern, and it’s worth noting precisely because it highlights how selective the localization was. A business law course was Ethiopian. Accounting students learned Ethiopian commercial law, Ethiopian contract law, Ethiopian regulatory frameworks. Someone, at some point, recognized that accountants practicing in Ethiopia needed to know Ethiopian law. But apparently the same logic didn’t extend to Ethiopian accounting standards or Ethiopian taxation. The result was an odd patchwork: American accounting standards, no tax education, Ethiopian legal frameworks. Rigorous in parts, but systematically misaligned as a whole.

Addis Ababa University remained the country’s primary source of accounting education through the political upheavals of the 1970s and 1980s (and after 1993, when Asmara became part of independent Eritrea, effectively the only Ethiopian university with accounting education). When the communist Derg regime took power in 1974, accounting education continued, though the economy it served transformed radically. State ownership. Central planning. Soviet-influenced economic structures. Yet students still learned American GAAP, still graduated without tax education, still trained for an economic reality that didn’t match the one outside their classrooms.

Then came 1991. The Derg fell. Ethiopia transitioned to a market-oriented economy. Two years later, in 1993, Eritrea gained independence, taking Asmara University with it. And then something unexpected happened: the floodgates opened. Universities multiplied across the country. Regional universities, private universities, distance education programs. Accounting programs proliferated. What had effectively been one university became dozens. Enrollments surged—regular programs, evening programs, distance modalities. Ethiopia was producing accounting graduates at unprecedented scale.

But scale without correction simply magnifies problems. The new universities largely replicated the existing model. American curricula spread from Addis Ababa to institutions across Ethiopia. More students learned US GAAP. More graduates entered practice without tax education. The expansion addressed quantity but not quality, access but not alignment. Ethiopia was building accounting education rapidly, but it was building the wrong thing rapidly.

The mid-2000s brought the first significant curriculum revision. Finally—more than four decades after Addis Ababa University’s founding—Ethiopian taxation entered the curriculum as actual courses. This was progress, certainly. Students could now study the tax system they’d actually use. But think about what this means in practical terms. By the mid-2000s, thousands of Ethiopian accountants had already graduated and entered practice. They’d learned their taxation on the job, through trial and error, through informal mentorship, through whatever means they could. The curriculum had been corrected, but a generation of practitioners had been trained incompletely.

The IFRS Shift and Persistent Gaps

Then came late 2014, and another fundamental shift: Ethiopia adopted International Financial Reporting Standards. This move created unexpected alignment after decades of disconnect. Students who graduated before 2014 learned US GAAP in their university courses. But those who actually qualified professionally through ACCA—the dominant pathway—practiced according to UK-influenced accounting principles. Universities taught one system, professional qualifications required another, neither matched Ethiopian contexts. IFRS adoption finally brought some coherence. Both education and professional practice could now align around the same international standards.

But consider the implications for different cohorts of accountants. Those who graduated before 2014 learned US GAAP in university. Those who passed ACCA examinations learned UK approaches through their professional studies. Those who graduated after 2014 learned IFRS. And those working practitioners who’d never pursued professional certification had learned whatever mix their mentors practiced—often UK-leaning because ACCA-qualified accountants dominated the profession. Ethiopia now had accounting graduates and practitioners trained across three different accounting frameworks, none specifically designed for Ethiopian contexts. The 2014 shift brought some standardization, but it couldn’t undo the fragmentation of previous decades.

Yet through all these shifts—from American standards to IFRS, from no tax education to Ethiopian taxation, from effectively one university to dozens—one crucial element remained absent. Ethiopia had accounting education. What it didn’t have was an accounting profession in the structured, regulated sense that exists elsewhere.

What does this mean, concretely? It means no domestic professional body examining whether graduates actually understood what they’d been taught. No certification process verifying competence. No unified standards defining what “qualified accountant” means in the Ethiopian context. No regulatory framework ensuring quality across the expanding universe of accounting programs. No continuing professional development system maintaining competence across careers. Universities could create accounting programs, students could earn accounting degrees, graduates could work as accountants—but there was no institutional infrastructure transforming education into profession, credentials into verified competence.

Into this vacuum stepped foreign professional bodies. By necessity, not by design. If Ethiopia wouldn’t certify its accountants, someone had to. The Association of Chartered Certified Accountants, a UK-based professional body, became the dominant certification route for Ethiopian accountants. Through distance learning, Ethiopians could qualify as ACCA members even before ACCA established formal presence in Ethiopia in 2004. ACCA offered what Ethiopia didn’t: internationally-recognized certification, rigorous examinations, professional credentials that commanded global respect.

The arrangement had obvious benefits. Ethiopian accounting graduates could gain professional certification. The qualification was credible—ACCA is among the world’s most respected accounting bodies. Ethiopian accountants with ACCA credentials could work internationally, could attract better positions, could demonstrate their competence according to globally recognized standards. When Ethiopia had no alternative, ACCA filled a genuine need.

But the arrangement also created another layer of misalignment. ACCA examinations, however excellent, weren’t designed for Ethiopian tax systems. They didn’t address Ethiopian regulatory environments. They weren’t structured around Ethiopian public sector accounting challenges or state-owned enterprise peculiarities. And the fees—expensive for most Ethiopians—created barriers limiting who could qualify. Only those with substantial means or employer support could afford the ACCA route to professional recognition.

By December 2025, when Ethiopia finally launched its Institute of Certified Public Accountants, the statistical result of these decades of misalignment was stark: approximately 95 percent of Ethiopia’s certified accountants—roughly 540 professionals serving 135 million people—held ACCA qualifications. Foreign certification had completely dominated. Not because ACCA actively displaced domestic alternatives, but because domestic alternatives didn’t exist.

Think about the layers of disconnection this created. Ethiopian students learned American accounting standards in university. Those who pursued professional certification learned UK-based approaches through ACCA. Both then practiced in Ethiopian businesses, navigating Ethiopian taxes, Ethiopian regulations, Ethiopian challenges—often under the supervision of ACCA-qualified accountants whose approach differed from what the graduates had been taught. At no point in this journey—from university education through professional certification to daily practice—was there alignment. Universities taught one system, professional bodies examined another, practitioners applied whatever mix they’d absorbed. Everything was international, rigorous, credible. Nothing was integrated. The 2014 IFRS adoption brought some alignment between education and practice, but decades of graduates remained trained in systems no longer used.

More fundamentally, outsourcing professional certification meant Ethiopia never developed domestic capacity for professional regulation. The country had universities teaching accounting—however misaligned the content. It had thousands of degree holders working in businesses and government. It had demand for accountants. What it lacked was the institutional infrastructure connecting these pieces: the professional bodies defining competence, the examination systems verifying it, the regulatory frameworks maintaining it, the continuing development mechanisms sustaining it.

Building Domestic Capacity

The Accounting and Auditing Board of Ethiopia, established in 2015, represented the first serious attempt to address this gap. AABE’s mandate included developing accounting and auditing standards, enforcing compliance, and—crucially—working toward creating a domestic professional body. This was the beginning of recognition that Ethiopia needed to build its own professional infrastructure rather than perpetually depending on foreign alternatives.

The process culminated on December 11, 2025, with ETiCPA’s launch. But understanding this moment requires seeing it in full historical context. ETiCPA’s task isn’t creating accounting education from scratch—dozens of universities already offer accounting degrees, thousands of students enroll annually. The task isn’t filling an empty field—thousands of accounting graduates already work in businesses, state enterprises, government, using accounting knowledge daily.

Rather, ETiCPA’s task is professionalization: transforming a field that exists in nascent, misaligned form into a coherent profession. Creating pathways serving both new students entering universities and existing graduates already working in the field. Establishing Ethiopian standards reflecting Ethiopian needs—finally, after decades of borrowed frameworks. Building domestic capacity for professional certification that’s contextually relevant in ways foreign qualifications, however rigorous, cannot be. Aligning, at long last, education, examination, and practice around the realities Ethiopian accountants actually face.

And doing this in seven years. The government pledged seven years of support before ETiCPA transitions to autonomy. Seven years to build what other countries took seventy years to develop. This borders on implausible. Which raises the central question: Can Ethiopia compress into seven years what Zimbabwe took 107 years, India took 75 years, Pakistan took 64 years, Ghana took 62 years to accomplish?

Here is where Ethiopia’s late arrival becomes advantage. When Zimbabwe established its institute in 1918, it had no models. When India built ICAI in 1949, few precedents existed. Ghana, Nigeria, Malaysia, Kenya, South Africa—each pioneered through trial and error. Ethiopia inherits their accumulated wisdom: 107 years of experience across three continents, proven models for every challenge, established institutes willing to partner.

There is something almost Hegelian about this possibility. The late-comer can potentially achieve in years what early movers took decades to accomplish. Not through superior effort but through inheritance. The same principle allowing late-industrializing countries to leapfrog technological generations applies to institutional development. But only if the late-comer has wisdom to learn and humility to adapt.

Why Seven Years Matters

The seven-year timeline reflects genuine crisis. Ethiopia’s tax-to-GDP ratio sits at 7.5 percent—half the 15 percent minimum threshold international institutions recommend for functional governance. Ethiopia collects half what it needs to fund basic services, infrastructure, social programs.

But here’s the crucial connection: this isn’t primarily an enforcement problem. It’s a capacity problem. State Minister of Revenue Abdurham Eid Tahir reports that approximately 20 percent of tax revenue comes from enforcement rather than voluntary compliance. Think about what this reveals. Most Ethiopian businesses aren’t deliberately evading taxes. They’re failing to comply because they lack accountants who can prepare proper financial reports. The infrastructure for voluntary compliance—which everywhere depends on accounting professionals—doesn’t exist at necessary scale.

Meanwhile, Ethiopia’s economic liberalization accelerates. Capital markets develop. Foreign investment barriers fall. State-owned enterprises open to private investment. Financial reporting standards modernize. Every reform assumes—requires—professional accountants. You cannot have capital markets without reliable financial reporting. You cannot attract foreign investment without credible audits. You cannot privatize state enterprises without accountants who can value them properly, structure deals appropriately, ensure transparency.

So here’s the bind: Economic reforms creating surging demand for professional accountants happen simultaneously with acute shortage of supply. The reforms can’t wait for slow professional development. But development done hastily, without proper foundations, produces credentials without competence. Ethiopia needs speed and quality simultaneously.

The seven-year window represents government commitment to supporting ETiCPA during critical formation. After seven years, the institute transitions to autonomy—self-funding, self-regulating, self-sustaining. This reflects political and fiscal realities. Government support competes with other urgent needs. Seven years is what Ethiopia can commit. Whether that’s enough depends entirely on how strategically those years are used.

First Lesson: Architecture Before Construction

South Africa’s contribution to accounting profession development isn’t its size—Nigeria has more members. It isn’t longevity—Zimbabwe is a century old. It’s methodology. Specifically, the competency framework approach to defining professional quality. This deserves careful attention because it represents a solution to a problem Ethiopia will face immediately: How do you define “qualified accountant” when you’re building a profession from scratch?

The intuitive answer—let universities define it through their curricula, or let employers define it through hiring practices, or let the market figure it out—doesn’t work. Ethiopia’s history proves this. Universities defined accounting education and produced US GAAP graduates while the country didn’t use US GAAP for financial reporting. Employers hired whoever had degrees, regardless of actual competence. The market sorted inefficiently, creating perverse incentives for credential accumulation over skill development.

SAICA solved this by developing explicit competency frameworks. The first framework came in 2008. It was refined substantially in 2014. It was revised again in 2021. Seventeen years of continuous evolution. The framework defines both technical competencies—accounting standards, auditing, financial analysis—and pervasive qualities: ethical leadership, professional skepticism, integrated thinking, communication.

Here’s why this matters: The framework doesn’t just guide curriculum development. It shapes professional training, defines examinations, structures continuing development, provides the basis for quality assurance. Every element of South Africa’s accounting profession aligns to one coherent definition of competence. This is architecture: structure that constrains and enables, sets boundaries while creating space for growth.

Ethiopia cannot copy SAICA’s framework. After decades of US curricula followed by ACCA certification, Ethiopia needs competencies reflecting Ethiopian realities—the tax system, regulatory environment, public sector requirements, state enterprise challenges. A competency framework is an act of definition, literally boundary-setting. When you specify what accountants should know and do, you create standards and exclude alternatives. This isn’t a bug—it’s the feature.

Developing one requires understanding Ethiopian realities deeply. What does tax accounting mean in Ethiopian tax systems? How does public sector accounting work in Ethiopian governmental structures? What challenges do state enterprises face? These aren’t questions with generic international answers. They require Ethiopian knowledge, Ethiopian input, Ethiopian definition.

This means ETiCPA’s first priority—before developing examinations, before accrediting universities—should be developing Ethiopia’s competency framework. Eighteen months of intensive stakeholder engagement. Engaging universities, practitioners, regulators, businesses, international partners. Synthesizing all of this into clear specifications of what Ethiopian chartered accountants should know and do.

This framework becomes the North Star. Universities seeking accreditation show how curricula develop these competencies. Examinations verify mastery. Professional development maintains them. Quality assurance checks for them. Everything aligns to one coherent definition, created for Ethiopian contexts, finally ending decades of borrowed frameworks that never quite fit.

Second Lesson: Multiple Pathways to One Destination

Ethiopia faces a challenge many founding institutes also confronted: thousands of accounting graduates already working but lacking professional certification. Experienced professionals understanding Ethiopian business realities, navigating local tax systems, managing state enterprise accounts. They possess contextual knowledge foreign qualifications can never fully capture. They lack formal recognition under credible professional frameworks.

Malaysia, India, and Pakistan each confronted similar situations. Malaysia’s 1967 establishment created multiple pathways: recognized international qualifications could apply directly, local degree holders completed practical requirements plus targeted examinations, and those with substantial experience could sit for qualifying exams. The principle: recognize genuine competence wherever it exists, but verify it against consistent standards.

India immediately registered 1,700 existing accountants qualified under colonial frameworks as founding members, then created pathways for university graduates through examinations and training. Pakistan, starting with only 106 qualified accountants, recognized British professional body members while creating examination routes for local graduates. Neither started from zero. Both built on existing capacity while channeling it through new quality standards.

The question is never whether to recognize existing capacity, but how to verify that capacity meets the standards the profession demands.

Ethiopia should create differentiated pathways. For accredited program graduates: streamlined routes combining practical experience with targeted examinations. For substantial experience with non-accredited degrees: qualifying examinations covering the full framework, with credit for demonstrated expertise. For foreign qualification holders: reciprocal recognition where equivalence exists, supplementary requirements where it doesn’t. Different routes to the same rigorously-defined destination.

Third Lesson: The Wisdom of Strategic Dependence

There exists false pride insisting on complete self-sufficiency, mistaking independence for strength. Ghana and Zimbabwe demonstrate different wisdom: strategic, temporary dependence often accelerates genuine independence.

Ghana’s journey illuminates this. Established in 1963, facing tension between national pride demanding Ghanaian qualifications and economic necessity demanding international credibility, Ghana collaborated fifteen years with England’s Institute of Chartered Accountants. When Ghana conducted its first locally-administered examinations in May 1968, only two of seven candidates passed—a harsh 28.6 percent pass rate establishing credibility. These weren’t participation certificates but genuine assessments the world could trust.

Yet during those fifteen years, Ghana wasn’t passively dependent. It actively learned, systematically building expertise. By 1978, Ghana achieved full autonomy because the partnership succeeded. The collaboration was always temporary scaffolding, not permanent structure.

Zimbabwe offers another model. Since 1918, understanding small professions cannot efficiently maintain high-quality examinations across all subjects, Zimbabwe partners with SAICA—not wholesale adoption but progressive localization. Zimbabwe marks taxation locally, develops capacity for other sections under SAICA mentorship. Each year brings greater autonomy while partnership continues serving Zimbabwe’s interests.

Strategic dependence, honestly acknowledged and intelligently managed, is often the fastest path to genuine independence.

For Ethiopia, the partnership implications are immediate. Examinations co-developed with established institutes—such as SAICA, given geographic proximity and regional context, or other bodies with relevant experience—would carry instant international credibility. Ethiopia’s seven-year timeline maps well onto graduated partnership: Years 1-3 partnership-based while developing local expertise, Years 4-6 co-development with decreasing external support, Year 7 full autonomy with proven quality.

Fourth Lesson: Direct Action and Scale

Kenya in the 1980s faced shortages Ethiopia would recognize. A 1987 study revealed Kenya needed 400 qualified accountants annually. Existing institutions—universities and professional bodies combined—were producing fewer than 100. The gap was systematic, structural. Market forces weren’t fixing it. Voluntary improvement wasn’t happening fast enough. The shortage was getting worse, not better.

ICPAK, Kenya’s professional institute, could have responded conventionally. Issue reports documenting the problem. Lobby government for intervention. Express concern publicly. Hope someone else would solve it. Instead, ICPAK did something more direct: it created capacity where none existed. In 1989, ICPAK founded Kenya College of Accountancy. Started with 170 students. Grew rapidly. Eventually achieved full university status. This represents institution-building as verb, not noun. Active creation rather than passive regulation. When markets fail to provide what society needs, institutions serving the public interest must act directly.

If Africa offers pragmatism and partnership, Asia offers scale and speed. India’s Institute started with 1,700 members in 1949—accountants inheriting colonial systems they hadn’t designed. Today: 320,000 members, the world’s second-largest accounting body. Pakistan in 1961 had exactly 106 qualified accountants for millions of people. Today: nearly 10,000 members, 70,000 students. Malaysia, established 1967, grew to 40,000 members and by 2010 hosted the World Congress of Accountants—6,000 delegates from 134 countries trusting a developing nation barely four decades into professional development.

Three elements enabled this rapid growth. First, statutory backing made membership mandatory for practice, creating clear boundaries and strong incentives. Certification wasn’t optional—it was required. Second, active international engagement from inception. India founding IFAC, Pakistan joining CAPA and SAFA early, Malaysia active in ASEAN bodies. This provided best practices access and facilitated mutual recognition. Third, continuous adaptation. Frameworks evolved with profession needs while maintaining core quality.

But Asia also reveals challenges. Malaysia faced 2012 World Bank criticism identifying governance weaknesses. Even successful institutes require continuous governance attention. Pakistan struggles ensuring quality across growing membership. Scale creates quality assurance challenges. India grapples maintaining examination standards while producing thousands annually. Volume and rigor can be in tension. These aren’t reasons for pessimism but reminders: rapid growth creates growing pains. Ethiopia should expect this, prepare for it.

Synthesis: An Ethiopian Model

Learning from others isn’t copying—it’s synthesizing. Ethiopia faces constraints no country faced in exactly this combination: the most acute shortage relative to population, thousands of graduates needing certification pathways, shortest timeline for building credibility, federal structure demanding regional collaboration, economy transforming at unprecedented speed, historical curriculum misalignments needing correction. No single model addresses all these. But elements from multiple models, intelligently combined, might.

From South Africa: competency framework methodology refined over seventeen years, adapted through Ethiopian stakeholder engagement. From Malaysia, India, Pakistan: multiple pathway principles—streamlined for accredited programs, examinations for others, recognition for foreign qualifications. From Ghana and Zimbabwe: partnership wisdom for examinations maintaining credibility while building capacity. From Kenya: proactive capacity building, specialized programs for working professionals.

From Nigeria: scale ambition and IFAC/PAFA engagement from inception. From India and Pakistan: statutory backing creating meaningful membership and qualification incentives. From Malaysia: continuous framework evolution maintaining relevance. Not eclectic borrowing but strategic assembly. Each element addresses specific Ethiopian challenges. Each reinforces others.

Together: coherent approach to compressed development—proven components combined for unprecedented speed, designed serving new entrants and existing professionals, finally aligning education, examination, and practice around Ethiopian realities. This synthesis isn’t about choosing one model over another. It’s about learning what each country discovered through decades of experience and adapting those lessons to Ethiopian contexts.

The Critical First Eighteen Months

Success depends on ETiCPA’s first eighteen months, building institutional foundations making everything possible. The timeline is aggressive but achievable if Ethiopia learns strategically.

Months 1-6: Develop competency frameworks through intensive stakeholder engagement. What competencies do existing graduates already possess? What gaps need filling? The framework should acknowledge existing capacity while defining clear standards. Not documents drafted in isolation but collaborative definitions emerging from universities, practitioners, regulators, businesses, international partners. Comprehensive enough guiding all decisions, clear enough that everyone—new students and working accountants—understands what Ethiopian CPAs should know and do.

Months 7-12: Translate frameworks into multiple pathways. Design university accreditation with transitional provisions for current students and recent graduates. Create examination routes for non-accredited program graduates with appropriate credit. Establish examination partnerships—experiences like Zimbabwe’s collaboration with SAICA and Ghana’s partnership with ICAEW provide proven models—serving both new students and working professionals. Engage IFAC and PAFA accessing technical resources, establishing international credibility from inception. Design professional development programs for working accountants: evening courses, weekend modules, distance platforms.

Months 13-18: Launch accreditation while simultaneously opening registration for existing graduates. Create clear pathway guidance based on backgrounds. Begin examination partnerships with schedules accommodating working professionals. Establish scholarships targeting traditional students and working accountants seeking qualification. Finalize foreign qualification recognition pathways. Create quality assurance mechanisms working across all pathways—different routes must lead to equivalent outcomes.

This timeline is aggressive but achievable. Ghana developed frameworks and established collaboration in roughly this timeframe while managing existing practitioners. Malaysia created multiple pathways from inception. India integrated existing professionals while building forward. The knowledge exists across three continents and over a century. The question is execution—and whether Ethiopia will remember that building professions means serving both those entering and those already in the field.

History as Foundation, Not Constraint

Ethiopia’s path wasn’t linear. From US-based accounting standards without Ethiopian tax education, through mid-2000s introduction of taxation courses, through late 2014’s IFRS adoption, through decades of foreign certification dependence, to December 2025’s domestic institute launch. But history needn’t determine future. That curricula once misaligned doesn’t mean professional frameworks cannot now align education, examination, and practice around Ethiopian realities.

There is an old Ethiopian proverb: “When spider webs unite, they can tie up a lion.” The web Ethiopia must weave draws strands from across the developing world—South African methodology, Ghanaian patience, Zimbabwean pragmatism, Kenyan entrepreneurship, Malaysian flexibility, Indian scale, Pakistani resilience. And crucially, Ethiopian wisdom about what Ethiopian contexts demand.

For Ethiopia’s accounting graduates—those who studied US GAAP in university while professional practice followed UK approaches, who had no taxation courses until the mid-2000s, who benefited from 2014’s IFRS alignment but represent multiple cohorts trained in different frameworks, who work using skills deserving recognition—this moment offers possibility. The profession being built can serve you. The pathways being created can include you. The standards being set can finally align with realities you actually face.

The December 11 launch was ceremonial. Real work begins now. Ethiopia has seven years proving that strategic learning can compress development timelines, that late movers can turn disadvantage into advantage, that professional development can serve both new entrants and existing practitioners while finally aligning education, examination, and practice around Ethiopian realities.

The path is illuminated by those who walked it before. The destination is clear—a world-class accounting profession serving Africa’s second-largest population, grounded in Ethiopian contexts, internationally credible without being internationally dependent. What remains is the journey. History brought Ethiopia to this moment. What Ethiopia does with the moment will write its own history.

Tesfaye T. Lemma (PhD) is a tenured Full Professor of Accounting at Towson University and Associate Editor of Business Strategy and the Environment. His research focuses on sustainability, climate-related governance, and sustainable finance in emerging economies. He taught accounting at Addis Ababa University (1999-2008), serving as Associate Dean/Acting Dean of the Faculty of Business and Economics. He subsequently taught at major South African universities, spearheaded SAICA accreditation for a historically disadvantaged university, and served on SAICA’s Accreditation Teams. He is a past president of the American Accounting Association Mid-Atlantic Region.