Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorLægreid, Per
dc.contributor.authorSchillemans, Thomas
dc.contributor.authorOverman, Sjors
dc.contributor.authorWood, Matthew
dc.contributor.authorFlinders, Matthew
dc.contributor.authorPapadopoulos, Yannis
dc.contributor.authorMaggetti, Martino
dc.date.accessioned2023-01-03T15:04:10Z
dc.date.available2023-01-03T15:04:10Z
dc.date.created2022-12-21T09:39:41Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.identifier.issn0952-0767
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/3040737
dc.description.abstractThis paper develops and applies the concept of accountability styles for analyzing and comparing accountability practices in different countries. This is relevant as there is considerable scholarship on public sector accountability but only very few comparative studies. Extant studies have shown that national styles of accountability are both marked by convergence as well as the resilience of national differences. The concept of accountability style is adopted to describe and interpret how and why accountability practices differ between administrative systems. It does so by analyzing practices of accountability of public sector agencies in four European democracies with different state traditions: the Netherlands, Norway, Switzerland and the UK. These countries vary with regards to state strength (interventionist propensity) and administrative concentration (high or low centralization). The analysis focuses on the accountability of arms’ length agencies which lends itself for comparisons across counties. The paper shows that the national political-administrative context crucially shapes practices of accountability and accountability regimes of agencies. The Norwegian accountability style is characterized as ‘centralized and convenient’. The UK-style is equally centralized yet not so convenient as it incurs high accountability-process costs on agencies. Switzerland is marked by limited hierarchical accountability. And the Dutch accountability style is comparatively ‘broad and informal’. State strength and administrative concentration explain some of the variance while historical legacies explain additional national variations.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherSAGEen_US
dc.rightsNavngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titlePublic sector accountability styles in Europe comparing accountability and control of agencies in the Netherlands, Norway, Switzerland and the UKen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.rights.holderCopyright 2022 the authorsen_US
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1177/09520767221098292
dc.identifier.cristin2096102
dc.source.journalPublic Policy and Administrationen_US
dc.identifier.citationPublic Policy and Administration. 2022.en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal