Guest  

 
Search: 
Search By: SubjectAbstractAuthorTitleFull-Text

 

Showing 1 through 5 of 3,039 records.
Pages: Previous - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 608 - Next  Jump:
2008 - MPSA Annual National Conference Words: 32 words || 
Info
1. Sterken Jr, Robert. "Accounting for Accountability: The Politics of Accountability in Higher Education" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the MPSA Annual National Conference, Palmer House Hotel, Hilton, Chicago, IL, <Not Available>. 2019-08-22 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p268652_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: The paper addresses a series of questions of significance: What are the political forces behind the accountability movement? Why have some states been quicker to seek accountability in their universities' than others?

2012 - International Communication Association Pages: unavailable || Words: 10106 words || 
Info
2. van Over, Brion. "Accounting for the Inexpressible: Routine Accounts Employed in Verbal Reports of Inexpressible Experience (LSI Top Student Paper)" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Sheraton Phoenix Downtown, Phoenix, AZ, May 23, 2012 Online <APPLICATION/PDF>. 2019-08-22 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p554940_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: This work analyzes accounts for apophy employed in verbal reports of inexpressible experience. The analysis identifies 5 dimensions routinely employed in the account, including: 1) embodiment 2) compartmentalization, 3) familiarity, 4) intensity, and 5) scope. Each dimension is invoked as culturally legitimate grounds for wordlessness and presumes and enacts a set of cultural premises about the configuration of the person, their relationship to others, the abilities and uses of words, and the role of emotion in experience and expression. The analysis concludes that verbal reports of inexpressible experience are a deeply cultural and situated accomplishment, despite the seemingly universal experience of the inexpressible.

2016 - 87th SPSA Annual Conference Pages: unavailable || Words: 7603 words || 
Info
3. Han, Yousueng. "Examining Accountability Level of Federal Agencies by Using Accountability Process Model on Policy Program" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the 87th SPSA Annual Conference, Caribe Hilton, San Juan, Puerto Rico, Jan 07, 2016 Online <APPLICATION/PDF>. 2019-08-22 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p1077905_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: This study examines accountability level of federal agencies based on accountability deficit in managing federal policy programs. Previous literature on accountability in the public sector has been mostly inclined to qualitatively study accountability concept/typology or rarely individual level analysis using survey. This study pursued objectively measuring accountability level in organizational level.
The accountability concept employed to measure the accountability level indicates that it inherently includes a series of process of information provision, mutual feedback between agent and principal, and sanction/consequence (Day & Klein, 1987 et al.). So, this research applies three steps of accountability concept consisting of 1) “information”, 2) “discussion”, and 3) “consequence/sanction” dimension to the accountability deficit measurement model. The deficit degree of each component by each program is measured, and then the degree is aggregated into agency level by the component. Finally, whole accountability level by agency is compared.
This paper focused on relationship between federal agencies and central budget office of Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The agencies should be accountable for programs operated under own agency to get relevant funding about program performance from OMB. Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART) data and budget document are utilized.
The measurement result shows, for example, that federal programs such as Veterans Disability Compensation belong to high “information”, high “discussion”, and high funding “consequence” degree in the measurement model, which contributes to high accountability level of relevant agency. However, lower funding despite higher performance of program can imply that the accountability mechanism is damaged by executive politics.

2017 - APSA Annual Meeting & Exhibition Pages: unavailable || Words: 18190 words || 
Info
4. Gould, Erica. "How Accountable?: Assessing Accountability Mechanisms at MDBs" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the APSA Annual Meeting & Exhibition, TBA, San Francisco, CA, Aug 31, 2017 <Not Available>. 2019-08-22 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p1243509_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Following the Asian Financial Crisis, there were calls for greater accountability at the international development agencies, most notably the World Bank and International Monetary Fund. A variety of ex ante and ex post institutional changes were implemented at both of these organizations and at numerous other regional multilateral development banks (MDBs). This paper will focus on a particularly interesting institutional change: the establishment of internal accountability offices (IAOs) through which civil society groups in recipient countries can bring claims against MDBs. The first of these accountability offices was the Inspection Panel at the World Bank, established in 1993. Since its creation, IAOs have been established at numerous other regional MDBs. Substantively, IAOs represent the first accountability mechanism by which those negatively impacted by MDBs’ development loans gone awry can air their complaints and potentially receive some remedy, possibly impacting the design or implementation of the loan program midstream. This goes to the heart of the many of the complaints concerning both the mottled impact of MDB lending and the broader democratic deficit critiques of international organizations. This paper provides new evidence to answer the question: what kind of impact are IAOs having on outcomes and why? The paper will provide descriptive statistics on the nature of the complaints and the functioning of the mechanisms using a new dataset; assess to what degree these institutional changes have impacted MDB practices or provided remedies to negatively impacted groups; and test a hypothesis that explains when these mechanisms are most likely to produce a remedy or program change.

Accountability offices are internal to the MDBs and have no enforcement power. Nonetheless, scholars have pointed to these IAOs, most notably the World Bank’s Inspection Panel, as examples of how international organizations may actually be more accountable than domestic governments (e.g., Grant and Keohane 2005; Keohane and Nye 2003). From a theoretical standpoint, they are particularly interesting because they represent a mechanism in international affairs that largely bypasses state actors and also represents a distinct move towards greater legalization. Individuals or citizen groups bring complaints against multilateral organizations, often with the help of international or domestic non-governmental organizations. By design, states are largely left out of the equation.

Despite these novel and intriguing features, there has been limited scholarship on IAOs. Previous scholarship has offered thin descriptions of these mechanisms, but little systematic empirical work to date on their functioning, efficacy or influence. This article will introduce a new dataset that includes all complaints brought against MDBs through these nine mechanisms between 1994 and 2015.

The paper will begin by providing rich descriptions of the nine abovementioned accountability mechanisms and describing how their complaints process work. Descriptive data will provide information about how many complaints have been brought to each mechanism, what types of MDB loans trigger the most complaints, which sectors are the subject of most complaints (infrastructure, extractives, etc.), what kinds of issues were raised by the complaints (environmental, human rights, etc.), how many of the complaints were about previously-flagged projects and how most of the complaints are resolved.

How effective are these accountability mechanisms? Initial data suggests that a very large percentage (about 70 percent) of complaints do not reach the final stage in the complaints process, much less impact the loan program or provide a remedy for the impacted community. A second set of cases complete the complaints process with a remedy recommendation, but the MDBs do not comply with it. A third set of cases--small, but not inconsequential—complete the complaints process and result in program changes or remedies delivered to impacted communities.

What explains the impact of these accountability mechanisms? Some scholars may anticipate little impact on outcomes, given that there is no enforcement mechanism. Others may dismiss these accountability offices as yet another example of international organizational “dysfunction.” However, a contingent of cases have surprisingly impactful outcomes, including one case where a loan program was actually changed midstream. In this paper, I will test a hypothesis that IAOs’ impact is contingent on the domestic politics of the loan recipient states. In other words, strong international accountability is in effect an extension of strong domestic accountability. When the loan recipient state is more receptive to domestic groups, then compliance by MDBs with accountability office recommendations increases.

2018 - Comparative and International Education Society Conference Words: 293 words || 
Info
5. Voisin, Annelise. "Accountability and its consequences: A comparative study of the impact of accountability policies on effectiveness and equity in education systems." Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Comparative and International Education Society Conference, Hilton Mexico City Reforma Hotel, Mexico City, Mexico, <Not Available>. 2019-08-22 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p1348431_index.html>
Publication Type: Panel Paper
Abstract: In the last decades accountability has become a centerpiece of the renewed governance of the education systems. Under the influence of New Public Management, the introduction of accountability systems is considered a political solution to the supposed crisis affecting education systems and became both an “instrument and a goal” (Bovens, 2007) to improve performance of public schools and equity in education systems. Nevertheless the development of accountability policies does not lead to a single model. The transnational models of accountability policies are recontextualized and translated in national policies in various ways (Maroy & Voisin, 2017). The purpose of this communication is to discuss the findings of a quantitative comparative study based on a secondary analysis of OECD PISA 2012 data that aims at characterizing accountability systems in Europe and Canada and at providing some insights into the relationship between accountability, effectiveness and equity in education systems. Using the concept of accountability in a broad sense that allows me to take into account several policy tools put in place at the education system level in order to “steer” the system, using multivariate analysis (Principal Component Analysis, Cluster analysis, multiple regressions), my study underlines three instrumental logics which underpin accountability systems in education systems of Europe and Canada : 1) a logic that rests on monitoring and evaluating the actor’s performance at the school level; 2) a logic that relies on direct incentives for teachers; 3) a logic that rests on school performance comparisons and involves internal mechanisms aimed at improving school results. Underpin by distinct tools, non-mutually exclusive, these instrumental logics have however little significant influence on effectiveness and equity in education systems. At the end, my study suggests that accountability systems do not provide the effectiveness and equity in education systems they promise.

Pages: Previous - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 608 - Next  Jump:

©2019 All Academic, Inc.   |   All Academic Privacy Policy