西方问责领域的定量研究及理论发展

被引：7

作者：

谷志军 ^{[1
,2
]}

机构：

[1] 深圳大学当代中国政治研究所

[2] 深圳大学管理学院

来源：

国外社会科学 | 2015年 / 04期

关键词：

问责要素; 问责立方; 委托代理;

D O I：

暂无

中图分类号：

D035 [国家行政管理];

学科分类号：

1204 ; 120401 ;

摘要：

西方问责领域的已有研究多是从定性的角度对问责进行概念性阐释,以及在此基础上通过委托代理理论解释问责存在的原因及其问题,而较少从定量的角度评估现实中的问责行为,以至于无法真正了解问责的实际运作过程。有鉴于此,本文从对问责概念的多元认识中总结出问责的三个核心要素,并对问责定量研究文献进行了系统梳理。研究发现,基于委托代理理论的研究只关注到了问责的信息阶段和结果阶段,而处于中间环节的讨论阶段则很少涉及。本文将尝试超越委托代理理论的解释范畴,并发掘出一个评估问责运作过程的新理论工具——"问责立方"理论。

引用

页码：41 / 48

页数：8

共 10 条

[1]

Further Understanding Accountability in Public Organizations[J] . Kaifeng Yang.Administration & Society . 2012 (3)

[2] Measuring the formal independence of regulatory agencies [J].

Hanretty, Chris ;

Koop, Christel .

JOURNAL OF EUROPEAN PUBLIC POLICY, 2012, 19 (02) :198-216

[3]

Analysing and Assessing Accountability: A Conceptual Framework1[J] . Mark Bovens.European Law Journal . 2007 (4)

[4] Are ICTs improving transparency and accountability in the EU regional and local governments? An empirical study [J].

Pina, Vicente ;

Torres, Lourdes ;

Royo, Sonia .

PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION, 2007, 85 (02) :449-472

[5] Does e-government promote accountability? A comparative analysis of website openness and government accountability [J].

Wong, W ;

Welch, E .

GOVERNANCE-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF POLICY ADMINISTRATION AND INSTITUTIONS, 2004, 17 (02) :275-297

[6]

Outcomes–Based Performance Management in the Public Sector: Implications for Government Accountability and Effectiveness[J] . Carolyn J.Heinrich.Public Administration Review . 2003 (6)

[7]

‘Accountability’: An Ever‐Expanding Concept?[J] . RichardMulgan.Public Administration . 2002 (3)

[8] Delegation and accountability in parliamentary democracies [J].

Strom, K .

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL RESEARCH, 2000, 37 (03) :261-289

[9]

Party manifestos and local accountability: A content analysis of local election pledges in Wales[J] . Rachel E. Ashworth.Local Government Studies . 2000 (3)

[10]

The chameleon of accountability: Forms and discourses[J] . Amanda Sinclair.Accounting, Organizations and Society . 1995 (2)

← 1 →