Assessing Administrative Accountability

This article presents the results of a national survey on accountability practices in U.S. municipal administrations. It also examines possible causes and effects of accountability. It finds that city administrations use a variety of political and legal accountability tools. They reveal more financial information than performance information to their stakeholders. Accountability appears to be enhanced through eliminating government workers’concerns about exposing their performances. Responsiveness, public consensus, and stakeholder trust are strengthened in accountable administrations. However, stakeholder fiscal commitments and administrative service capacities are not associated with accountability.

[1]  C. Pateman.  Participation and democratic theory , 1970 .

[2]  J. Creighton.  The public involvement manual , 1981 .

[3]  Melvin J. Dubnick,et al.  Issues of Accountability in Flexible Personnel Systems , 1994 .

[4]  Barbara S. Romzek,et al.  Cross Pressures of Accountability: Initiative, Command, and Failure in the Ron Brown Plane Crash , 2000 .

[5]  Michael Barzelay,et al.  Breaking Through Bureaucracy , 1992 .

[6]  D. Sheldon.  Achieving Accountability in Business and Government: Managing for Efficiency, Effectiveness, and Economy , 1996 .

[7]  Evan M. Berman,et al.  Dealing with Cynical Citizens , 1997 .

[8]  Sanford M. Groves,et al.  Evaluating Financial Condition: A Handbook for Local Government , 2003 .

[9]  Robert K. Merton,et al.  Bureaucratic Structure and Personality , 1940 .

[10]  Jody Harris,et al.  行政機関の業績測定 : 政策評価の概念と手法 : ワークブック = Performance measurement : concepts and techniques , 1998 .

[11]  L. F. Carter.  Representative bureaucracy and the American political system , 1981 .

[12]  D. Osborne,et al.  Reinventing government , 1993, Nature.

[13]  Camilla Stivers,et al.  Government Is Us: Public Administration in an Anti-Government Era , 1998 .

[14]  Sally Selden.  Representative Bureaucracy , 1997 .

[15]  C. King,et al.  The Question of Participation: Toward Authentic Public Participation in Public Administration , 1998 .

[16]  M. A. Dupont-Morales,et al.  New Paradigms for Government: Issues for the Changing Public Service , 1994 .

[17]  H. Kaufman.  Administrative Decentralization and Political Power , 1969 .

[18]  Theodore H. Poister,et al.  Performance Measurement in Municipal Government: Assessing the State of the Practice , 1999 .

[19]  R. Kramer.  Government Is Us: Public Administration in an Anti‐Government Era , 1999 .

[20]  Robert B. Denhardt,et al.  Targeting Community Development in Orange County, Florida , 1998 .

[21]  Julia Melkers,et al.  The State of the States: Performance-Based Budgeting Requirements in 47 out of 50 , 1998 .

[22]  E. P. Herring,et al.  Public administration and the public interest , 1936 .

[23]  David Osborne,et al.  Banishing Bureaucracy: The Five Strategies for Reinventing Government , 1997 .

[24]  I. Rubin,et al.  Budgeting for Accountability: Municipal Budgeting for the 1990s , 1996 .