Suchergebnisse

AbstractPublic reporting is a requirement for public affairs practitioners in public administration because of the democratic context in which government operates. By reporting to the public‐at‐large on agency activities, government agencies contributed to an informed citizenry, the essential foundation of a democracy. For public affairs in business administration and non‐profit administration, public reporting is desirable rather than mandatory. Public reporting was traditionally accomplished indirectly, through news media coverage of government. However, recent research suggests a diminution of interest by the media in fulfilling its role as an instrument of democracy. This means that the public reporting obligation of public affairs professionals in public administration needs to shift to direct reporting, through such products as annual reports, newsletters, TV programmes, Internet websites etc. Copyright © 2002 Henry Stewart Publications.

"Public value theory speaks to the co-creation of value between politicians, citizens, and public managers, with a focus on the public manager in terms of her contributions, initiatives, and limitations in value creation. But just who are public managers? Public value regularly treats the "public manager" as synonymous with bureaucrat, government official, civil servant, or public administrator. However, the categories of public managers represent a more versatile and expansive set of agents in society than they are given credit for, and the discourse of public value has typically not delved sufficiently into the variety of possible cadres that might comprise the "public manager." This book seeks to go beyond the assumed understandings of who the public manager is and what she does. It does so by examining the processes of value creation that are driven by non-traditional sets of public managers, which include: the judiciary, the armed forces, multilateral institutions, and central banks. It applies public value tools to understand their value creation, and uses their unique attributes to inform our understanding of public value theory. Tailored to an audience comprising public administration scholars, students of government, public officials, practitioners, and social scientists interested in contemporary problems of values in society, this book helps to advance public administration thought by re-examining the theory's ultimate protagonist: the public manager. It therefore constitutes an important effort to take public value theory forward by going "beyond" conceptions of the public manager as she has thus far been understood"--

"Public Opinion and Public Policy" published on by Oxford University Press.

AbstractWhat a public report should be and what it can do.

The role of the Prosecutor and the exercise of Prosecutorial discretion can have an enormous impact on the outcome of criminal proceedings. The exercise of Prosecutorial discretion is, however, often secretive and misunderstood. There have been concerns that a lack of accountability and transparency can result in a fertile bed for corruption. This article considers the development of the prosecution system in Australia. It analyses the discretion that the Prosecutor wields and examines Australian attempts at safeguarding this discretion. It points out the problems with the Australian system of prosecution and suggests that there is room for greater public accountability of the Prosecutor's role. In the search for a solution to the Prosecutorial conundrum, the article examines the Japanese model of "democratic" public prosecution to see if such a system could be adopted in Australia.

The role of the Prosecutor and the exercise of Prosecutorial discretion can have an enormous impact on the outcome of criminal proceedings. The exercise of Prosecutorial discretion is, however, often secretive and misunderstood. There have been concerns that a lack of accountability and transparency can result in a fertile bed for corruption. This article considers the development of the prosecution system in Australia. It analyses the discretion that the Prosecutor wields and examines Australian attempts at safeguarding this discretion. It points out the problems with the Australian system of prosecution and suggests that there is room for greater public accountability of the Prosecutor's role. In the search for a solution to the Prosecutorial conundrum, the article examines the Japanese model of "democratic" public prosecution to see if such a system could be adopted in Australia.