Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of tables
- List of figures
- Acknowledgments
- List of contributors
- 1 Introduction: forging global accountabilities
- Part I Public accountability: participatory spheres from global to local
- Part II Experiments in forging NGO accountability: mutuality and context
- Part III Reflective accountability: new directions for participatory practices
- Part IV Global accountability frameworks and corporate social responsibility
- Index
- References
1 - Introduction: forging global accountabilities
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 September 2009
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of tables
- List of figures
- Acknowledgments
- List of contributors
- 1 Introduction: forging global accountabilities
- Part I Public accountability: participatory spheres from global to local
- Part II Experiments in forging NGO accountability: mutuality and context
- Part III Reflective accountability: new directions for participatory practices
- Part IV Global accountability frameworks and corporate social responsibility
- Index
- References
Summary
Accountability is a confusing term, one that readily confounds efforts at precise definition or application. On one hand, its implementation is regarded as a kind of panacea with respect to the need to prevent and, whenever necessary, to punish unethical, illegal, or inappropriate behavior by public officials, corporate executives and nonprofit leaders. The refrain is by now familiar: act against sham deals, accounting tricks, securities fraud, personal use of charitable and public funds, exchange of political favors and monies, and so on. The “problematics” of accountability are accordingly framed in terms that underscore the ever-present risks of deliberate malfeasance perpetrated by individuals acting to aggrandize themselves. The commonly espoused “solution” is predictable: better oversight through tougher regulation, combined with harsh penalties as a deterrent. The magic wand of accountability is similarly seen to be at play in instances of global and state governance, where it is regarded as a supervening force able to promote democracy, justice, and greater human decency through the mechanisms of transparency, benchmarked standards, and enforcement.
In recent years, however, the analytical domains of accountability have become so extended that the very precision once conveyed by the concept has become eroded. This has generated widespread concern that the term will become devalued or incapacitated through overuse. “Appropriated by a myriad of international donor and academic discourses,” write Newell and Bellour (2002, p. 2), “accountability has become a malleable and often nebulous concept, with connotations that change with the context and agenda.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Global AccountabilitiesParticipation, Pluralism, and Public Ethics, pp. 1 - 24Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2007
References
, and (eds.) The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality. University of Chicago.CrossRef
(1995) “Accountability of Nonprofit Organizations and Those Who Control Them: The Legal Framework,” Nonprofit Management and Leadership 6(2), 141–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1995) “A Stakeholder Framework for Analyzing and Evaluating Corporate Social Performance,” Academy of Management Review 20(1), 92–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2000) “International Institutions, Globalisation and Democracy: Assessing the Challenges,” Global Society 14(3), 377–98.Google Scholar
Dahl, R. A. (1999) “Can International Organizations be Democractic? A Skeptic's View,” in and (eds.) Democracy's Edges. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1998) “Clarifying Accountability: An Ethical Theory Framework,” in Public Sector Ethics: Finding and Implementing Values. NSW, Australia: The Federation Press/Routledge.Google Scholar
Dubnick, M. J. (2002) “Seeking Salvation for Accountability,” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston, MA (29 August–1 September).
Dubnick, M. J. and J. B. Justice (2004) “Accounting for Accountability,” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago (2–5 September).
and (1996) “Too Close for Comfort? The Impact of Official Aid on Nongovernmental Organizations,” World Development 24(6), 961–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1996) The Closed World: Computers and the Politics of Discourse in Cold War America. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
(1941) “Administrative Responsibility and Democratic Government,” Public Administration Review 1, 335–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foucault, M. (1991) “Governmentality,” in , , and (eds.) The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality. University of Chicago.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (eds.) (1998) The Struggle for Accountability: The World Bank, NGOs, and Grassroots Movements. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Friedrich, C. J. (1940) “Public Policy and the Nature of Administrative Responsibility,” in and (eds.) Public Policy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, pp. 3–24.Google Scholar
and (1996) Anthropology, Development and the Post-Modern Challenge. London: Pluto Press.Google Scholar
and (2001) “Very Public Scandals: Nongovernmental Organizations in Trouble,” Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 12(1), 49–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goetz, A. M. and R. Jenkins (2002) “Voice, Accountability and Human Development: The Emergence of a New Agenda,” Background paper for the Human Development Report 2002. New York: United Nations Development Programme.
Grant, R. W. and R. O. Keohane (2004) “Accountability and Abuses of Power, in World Politics,” International Law and Justice Working Paper. Institute for International Law and Justice, New York University School of Law.
, and (2003) “The Decision to Blow the Whistle: A Social Information Processing Framework,” Academy of Management Review 28(1), 107–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2001) “The Collaborative Enterprise: A Stakeholder Model Uniting Profitability and Responsibility,” Journal of Corporate Citizenship 1(2), 27–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herz, S. and A. Ebrahim (2005) A Call for Participatory Decision Making: Discussion Paper on World Bank–Civil Society Engagement. Civil Society Members of the World Bank–Civil Society Joint Facilitation Committee (JFC): ActionAid International, Amnesty International, Association for Women's Rights in Development, Caribbean Policy Development Centre, CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation, Europe and Central Asia NGO Working Group, Global Movement for Children, InterAction, International Confederation of Free Trade Unions, Transparency International, World Confederation of Labour, World Conference of Religions for Peace, World Council of Churches, WWF: The International Conservation Organization, World Young Women's Christian Association, Worldwide Initiatives for Grantmaker Support. Available at www.civicus.org/new/media_World_ Bank_Civil_Society_Discussion_Paper_FINAL_VERSION.pdf and at http://siteresources.worldbank.org/CSO/Resources/World_Bank_Civil_Society_Discussion_Paper_FINAL_VERSION.pdf.
(1998) “Organizing Ethics: A Stakeholder Debate,” Journal of Business Ethics 17, 1403–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2001) “Toward a Descriptive Stakeholder Theory: An Organizational Life Cycle Approach,” Academy of Management Review 26(3), 397–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kapur, D. (2002) “The Changing Anatomy of Governance of the World Bank,” in and (eds.) Reinventing the World Bank. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
(1996) Managing for Accountability: Preserving the Public Trust in Nonprofit Organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
and (1999) “Accounting for the Effects of Accountability,” Psychological Bulletin 125(2), 255–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and (2001) Going Global: Transforming Relief and Development NGOs. Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press.Google Scholar
(2000) “‘Accountability’: An Ever-Expanding Concept?,” Public Administration 78(3), 555–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2003) Holding Power to Account: Accountability in Modern Democracies. Hampshire, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1996) “NGO Accountability: A Conceptual Framework,” Development Policy Review 14, 339–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newell, P. and S. Bellour (2002) “Mapping Accountability: Origins, Contexts and Implications for Development,” IDS Working Paper 168. Sussex: Institute of Development Studies.
(2001) “Globalization's Democratic Deficit: How to Make International Institutions More Accountable,” Foreign Affairs 80(4 (July/August)), 2–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oakerson, R. J. (1989) “Governance Structures for Enhancing Accountability and Responsiveness,” in (ed.) Handbook of Public Administration. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, p. 114.Google Scholar
and (1974) “Organizational Decision Making as a Political Process: The Case of the University Budget,” Administrative Science Quarterly 19(2 [June]), 135–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1978) The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
(2000) “Dynamics of Public Sector Accountability in an Era of Reform,” International Review of Administrative Sciences 66(1), 21–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schedler, A. (1999) “Conceptualizing Accountability”, in , and (eds.) The Self-Restraining State: Power and Accountability in New Democracies. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
Smith, S. R. (1999) “Government Financing of Nonprofit Activity,” in and (eds.) Nonprofits and Government: Collaboration and Conflict. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press, pp. 177–210.Google Scholar
(2002) “Managerial Moral Strategies – In Search of a Few Good Principles,” Academy of Management Review 27(1), 114–24.Google Scholar
and (2002) “Religiosity and Ethical Behavior in Organizations: A Symbolic Interactionist Perspective,” Academy of Management Review 27(1), 77–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1997) The Stakeholder Corporation: The Body Shop Blueprint for Maximizing Stakeholder Value. London: Pitman.Google Scholar
, and (1994) “A Feminist Reinterpretation of the Stakeholder Concept,” Business Ethics Quarterly 4(4), 475–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woods, N. (2001) “Making the IMF and the World Bank More Accountable,” International Affairs (January).
Woods, N. (undated) “Accountability, Governance, and Reform in the International Financial Institutions,” unpublished paper.
, and (1996) “Structure and Accountability: A Study of National Nonprofit Associations,” Nonprofit Management and Leadership 6(4), 347–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12
- Cited by