Suchergebnisse

In the standard works, accountability is defined as the legal obligation to respect the legitimate interests of others affected by decisions, programs, & interventions. This has usually meant that agencies obey those in the line of authority above them. However, the simplicity of this doctrine is often contradicted by the demands of contracting-out & output-based performance. Using interviews & surveys (n = 1164) of front-line officials in Australia, the Netherlands, New Zealand, & the UK, this study examines accountability as different forms of responsiveness, obligation, & willingness to communicate with others. It compares traditional vertical accountability with new forms of horizontal recognition. The research shows that there is a high degree of regime consistency across these two dimensions. Horizontal accountability is mostly a problem when it is accompanied by competition between public & private agencies in the same policy fields. 5 Tables, 41 References. Adapted from the source document.

Contemporary debates concerning the nature of "new governance" typically focus upon the shifting roles played by bureaucracies, networks & markets in the provision of public services (Kooiman 1993; Ormsby 1988). At the core of these recent changes we find a strong interest in having private agents deliver public services. Sometimes this is expressed as privatization & in other cases a "mixed economy" of public & private participation may be devised (Williamson 1975; Moe 1984). In this study, a number of central elements of neoliberal public management are brought together in a single focus on the "contract regime" to examine the extent to which single initiatives might combine to produce a recognizable system of governance. Such an institutional form may then be more carefully specified & its impact compared in different governmental systems. Using a four-country comparison of employment service reform, the study shows that distinctions based on degree of privatization do not adequately explain regime types, whereas distinctions based on "compliance-centered" or "client-centered" forms of contracting are more powerful. The type of reflexive interaction between different elements or levels of contracting also explains country differences. 1 Table, 28 References. Adapted from the source document.