Responsible Government: Financial and Performance Accountability
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This study examines public opinion toward responsible government in terms of accountability dilemma between financial and performance accountability. Using survey data from the International Social Survey Program (ISSP) “The role of Government 2006,” a question ‘what do the public consider more between finance accountability and performance accountability as to the responsible government?’ was analyzed in the national level such as US, Sweden, and Korea as well as in the international level. According to the OLS regression results, in sum, spending (financial accountability) impacts positively responsible government while performance (performance accountability) affects negatively to responsible government in general. Financial accountability is much valuable than performance accountability when expecting a responsible government. The result showed the reversed perception gap between financial accountability and performance accountability. The slogan “works better and cost less” for the government does not fit at least to the public view. Instead the citizens seem to argue that “spending matters.” Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
Abstract
This study examines public opinion toward responsible government in terms of accountability dilemma between financial and performance accountability. Using survey data from the International Social Survey Program (ISSP) “The role of Government 2006,” a question ‘what do the public consider more between finance accountability and performance accountability as to the responsible government?’ was analyzed in the national level such as US, Sweden, and Korea as well as in the international level. According to the OLS regression results, in sum, spending (financial accountability) impacts positively responsible government while performance (performance accountability) affects negatively to responsible government in general. Financial accountability is much valuable than performance accountability when expecting a responsible government. The result showed the reversed perception gap between financial accountability and performance accountability. The slogan “works better and cost less” for the government does not fit at least to the public view. Instead the citizens seem to argue that “spending matters.” Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
참고문헌 (39)
- Acar, M., "Accountability when hierarchical authority is absent : Views from public private partnership practitioners", American Review of Public Administration, 38(1), pp.323~ (2008)
- Aucoin, P., "The dialectics of accountability for performance in public management reform", International Review of Administrative Sciences, 66(1), pp.4555~ (2000)
- Baron, R. M., "The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research : Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), pp.1173~1182 (1986)
- Behn, R. D., "Rethinking Democratic Accountability" (2001), Brookings Institution Press
- Bovens, M., "Analyzing and assessing accountability : A conceptual framework", European Law Journal, 13, pp.447~468 (2007)
- Bovens, M., "Oxford Handbook of Public Management" (2005)
- Cooper, T. L., "The Paradox of Responsibility : An Enigma", Public Administration Review, 52(6), pp.599~604 (1996)
- Dowdle, M., "Public Accountability: Designs, Dilemmas and Experiences" (2006), Cambridge University Press
- Dubnick, M., "Accountability and ethics : Reconsidering the relationships", International Journal of Organization Theory and Behavior, 6(3), pp.405~441 (2003)
- Dubnick, M., "Accountability and The Promise of Performance : in Search of the Mechanisms", Public Performance & Management Review, 28(3), pp.376~417 (2005)
- Erkkila, T., "Governance and Accountability-A Shift in conceptualization. Public Administration Quarterly", Public Administration Quarterly, pp.1~38 (2007)
- Forrer, J., "PublicPrivate Partnerships and the Public Accountability Question", Public Administration Review, 70(3), pp.475~484 (2010)
- Gore, A., "National Performance Review" (1993)
- Goren, P., "The Two Faces of Government Spending", Political Research Quarterly, 61(1), pp.147~157 (2008)
- Gormley, W., "Bureaucracy and Democracy: Accountability and Performance" (2008), CQ Press
- ARIEHALACHMI, "WHO GETS WHAT, WHEN, AND HOW:PERFORMANCE MEASURES FOR ACCOUNTABILITY?FOR IMPROVED PERFORMANCE?", International Review of Public Administration, 7(1), pp.85~95 (2002), 한국행정학회
- Hwang, K., "Accountability Practices in Public Child Welfare Services", International Journal of Public Administration, 39(8), pp.587~596 (2016)
- Jacoby, W. G., "Issue Framing and Public Opinion on Government Spending", American Journal of Political Science, 44(4), pp.750~767 (2000)
- Jos, P., "The accountability paradox in an age of reinvention", Administration & Society, 36(3), pp.255281~ (2004)
- Kearns, K. P., "The Strategic Management of Accountability in Nonprofit Organizations : An Analytical Framework", Public Administration Review, 54(2), pp.185~192 (1994)
- Kim, S., "Impact of Competing Accountability Requirements on Perceived Work Performance", The American Review of Public Administration, 40(1), pp.100~118 (2010)
- Kim, S., "Balancing Competing Accountability Requirements : Challenges in Performance Improvement of the Nonprofit Human services Agency", Public Performance & Management Review, 29(2), pp.145~163 (2005)
- Koppell, J. GS., "Pathologies of Accountability : ICANN and the Challenge of"Multiple Accountabilities Disorder"", Public Administration, 65(1), pp.94~108 (2005)
- Lerner, J. S., "Accounting for the effects of accountability", Psycho-logical Bulletin, 125(2), pp.255~275 (1999)
- Lynn, L. E. Jr., "Public Management: Old and New" (2006), Routledge
- Morrison, B. J., "Governance for Broadened Accountability : Blending Deliberate and Emergent Strategizing", Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 36(2), pp.195~217 (2007)
- Moyhihan, D. P., "Managing for Results in State Government : Evaluating a Decade of Reform", Public Administration Review, 66(1), pp.77~89 (2006)
- Posner, P. L., "The Tools of Government: A Guide to the New Governance", pp.52351~ (2002), Oxford University Press
- Roberts, N. C., "Keeping Public Officials Accountable through Dialogue: Resolving the Accountability Paradox", Public Administration Review, 62(6), pp.658~669 (2002)
- Romzek, B. S., "Accountability in the public sector : Lessons from the Challenger tragedy", Public Administration Review, 47(3), pp.227~238 (1987)
- Romzek, B. S., "Cross Pressures of Accountability", Public Administration. Review, 69(3), pp.240~253 (2000)
- Rudolph, T. J., "Political Trust, Ideology, and Public Support for Government Spending", American Journal of Political Science, 49(3), pp.660~671 (2005)
- Self, P., "Administrative Theories and Politics: An Inquiry into the Structure and Processes of Modern Government" (1973), University of Toronto Press
- Selznick, P., "Institutionalism"Old"and New"", Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, pp.270~277 (1996)
- Schillemans, T., "Managing Public Accountability : How Public Managers Manage Public Accountability", International Journal of Public Administration, 38, pp.433~441 (2015)
- Thompson, D. F., "Moral Responsibility of Public Officials : The Problem of Many Hands", American Political Science Reviews, 74(4), pp.905~916 (1980)
- Van Thiel, S., "The Performance Paradox in the Public Sector", Public Performance & Management Review, 25(3), pp.26781~ (2003)
- Wang, X., "Assessing Administrative Accountability : Results from a National Survey", American Review of Public Administration, 32(3), pp.350~370 (2002)
- Yang, K., "Further Understanding Accountability in Public Organizations : Actionable Knowledge and the Structure-Agency Duality", Administration & Society, 44(1), pp.1~30 (2011)