Accountability, governance, and institutional change in intergovernmental relations: A theoretical framework

This article develops an explanatory framework of institutional change in intergovernmental relations. Using new institutionalism, we focus on a main factor—the players' perceptions their own accountability and that others. Integrating the concepts multiple felt accountability, develop concept gap, meaning differences between players central government about responsibility to provide local services at level responsibilities. Our claim is perceptual gaps concerning two-tiered or multi-tiered system may influence interests, strategies, behavior hence determine timing pace specific changes. We illustrate theoretical by examining how Spain managed COVID-19 pandemic. Aguado, N. Alexander. 2018. “Mayor-Council Form Government Policy Responses Times Economic Travail.” Politics & 46(5): 714–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12273. French, Edward P., Doug Goodman. 2011. “Local Human Resource Management Past, Present, Future: Revisiting Hays Kearney's Anticipated Changes Decade Later.” 39(5): 761–85. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2011.00312.x. Kwon, Sung-Wook, Sylvia Gonzalez-Gorman. 2019. “Influence Local Political Institutions Punctuation Three Areas.” 47(2): 300–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12295. Este artículo desarrolla un marco explicativo del cambio institucional en las relaciones intergubernamentales. Utilizando el nuevo institucionalismo, nos enfocamos factor principal: percepciones de los jugadores sobre su propia responsabilidad y la demás. Al integrar conceptos rendición cuentas múltiple sentida, desarrollamos concepto brecha cuentas, lo que significa diferencias entre actores gobierno brindar servicios locales nivel sus responsabilidades. Nuestra afirmación es brechas percepción sistema dos o múltiples niveles pueden influir intereses, estrategias comportamiento y, por tanto, determinar momento ritmo cambios institucionales específicos. Ilustramos teórico examinando cómo España gestionó pandemia COVID-19. 本文对政府间关系中的制度变革提出了一项解释性框架。我们使用新制度主义，聚焦于一个主要的解释因素——参与者在自身问责和他人问责方面的感知。结合多重问责和感知问责的概念，我们提出了问责差距这一概念，即中央政府参与者对其提供地方服务的责任的感知，与地方政府参与者对其责任的感知之间的差异。我们论证认为，双层或多层系统中关于问责的感知差距可能会影响其利益、战略和行为，从而决定特定制度变革的时机和速度。为阐述该理论框架，我们研究了西班牙如何应对2019冠状病毒病(COVID-19)大流行。 In recent decades, there have been numerous changes modes governance. Neo-liberal ideas public management doctrines prompted decentralization decision making modernization provision (Bouckaert et al., 2010; Peters, 2012; Van Kersbergen Waarden, 2004; Wollmann Thurmaier, 2011). Institutional become governance tool, yet many them proven be only partially effective (Pollitt Bouckaert, 2017). issue has resulted creation various such as public–private partnerships, network governance, hybrid government, participatory flat lean (Mizrahi, Mizrahi Minchuk, 2019; Peters Pierre, 1998; Pollitt As result, neither hierarchal nor market coordination mechanisms are dominant government. Instead, mixture mechanisms, which often creates confusion, problems, ineffective (Jann Lægreid, 2015; Michels Meijer, 2008; 2019). These processes clearly evident well relations governments (Bergström 2021; Laffin, 2009). Thurmaier (2011) suggest one consequence reforms devolution more responsibilities from governments. Given constraints ability create revenue sources, they responded these mandates increasingly contracting with non-governmental organizations, private firms, other deliver services. On hand, Jones Stewart (2012, p. 346) Britain, centralist approach prevailed, way ahead “to culture through code central–local relations.” Thus, sources. Any attempt evaluate effectiveness stability must consider factors. address this challenge developing analyze system, especially officials different levels no clear hierarchy them, strategies behavior, For example, when official regards his her greater than corresponding who sees himself herself less responsible, body former part will empowered providing The important link make interests. While regarded virtue mechanism (Bovens, 2010), indications forums should monitor (e.g., citizens) too weak fragmented enforce it (Lindberg, 2013; Mizrahi, 2017; remains abstract little use variable empirical research. our framework, refer account givers, rather holders, regarding enforcement mechanisms. Based perceptions, whether support status quo, even if produces negative policy feedback dissatisfaction, favor might bring improvements. helps explain lead types maintain fills void scholarly literature, tends neglect aspect 2022; Heinelt 2018; 2009; Sellers Lidström, 2007). using real-world scenarios focusing dynamics occurred countries during idea serve sector general particular. defining change, institutionalism institutions expressions rules game—formal informal. occurs transformed either radically immediately latent incremental (Mahoney Thelen, Olsen, 2010, Steinmo, 2001; Streeck 2005). Neo-institutionalism focuses relationship powerful economic, political, ideological forces impact outcomes. section, first can integrated into analysis complex, relationships. then typology last decade, emerged major discourse administration research (Aleksovska Grossi 2020; Lindberg, 2013). Accountability mean things people, connotes good transparency, equity, democracy, efficiency, responsiveness, responsibility, integrity Dubnick, Bovens (2007) defines actor forum. justify conduct, forum pose questions pass judgment, face consequences. Nevertheless, (2010) also distinguishes mechanism. More recently, scholars emphasized two aspects accountability: accountabilities Overman Schillemans, 2021). principal–agent principals authority over agents, prompt latter invest effort contribute organization's effectiveness. agents information allows manipulate distort principals' decision-making processes. report principals, However, given agents' interests reporting for sake, not Furthermore, try control positive incentives measure performance, usually find ways game monitoring systems, leading malfunctions problems exist (the principals) agents). literature indicates complex interactions stakeholders realm life described relations, where player principal interaction agent another locally elected vis-à-vis bureaucrats, but citizens elect politicians them. nested further motivate manipulation distortion activities, weakening refers context accountabilities, based observation work organizations constantly scrutinized hold (Busuioc Lodge, Willems Dooren, 2012). uniquely positioned serve, clients public, authorizes operate, professional communities oversight bodies set standards 2007; Ewert, 2020). Studies linked multiple, conflicting demands number dysfunctions sector, including blame games, transaction costs, ineffectiveness, loss due (Koppell, 2005; Schillemans Bovens, Indeed, Rodríguez (2022) shows distribution break down, engage reactive multi-level games. discussion suggests factors hierarchal, Aleksovska others (2021) conducted cross-national experiment prioritization process accountabilities. study concluded likelihood threat sanctions—which “answerability perspective” emphasizes control—is consistently most driver decisions. “management expectations,” forum's expertise relationships forums, appears largely dependent additional, fine-grained variations. Hence, strongly related cost–benefit calculations, change. logic stands core framework. implies open subjective interpretations, view accords accountability. impression givers held accountable performance future (Hall It expresses views note since actors act base makers style possibilities sanctioning differences, variations responses pressures. call tailor-made regulation models context-sensitive (Schillemans, 2016). accordance call, four result interpretations perceptions. explaining level, center (Heinelt Stewart, A type protects some values, contradict values (Peters, Public themselves conflict prefer another. rely moral reality decide obligations commitment Elected want promote career maximize chances being re-elected. They “blame avoidance behavior” designed divert unpopular (Downs, 1957; Hood, Pierson, 1995; Rodríguez, Weaver, 1986). therefore assume case failure adequate goods services, take degree feel have. compare counterparts greater, same, officials. election voting interest groups' activities thus impose sanctions interpret shape analyzing wave pandemic, Askim Bergström pandemic was seen political leave scene health authorities. contrast, Belgium, Flemish mayors reported marginalized regional/Flemish central/Flemish authorities handling (Wayenberg 2022). These, observations Europe Navarro Velasco, 2022), demonstrate role setting difference compared player's defined gap. definition, referring dichotomous high low, identify categories system: duplicate deficiency national lack Duplicate exists both believe level. regard relative high. practice, means see having primary punish improvement. countries, had exclusive medical data infected people. data, established program epidemiological investigation. still tracked monitored all patients area. protect residents prevent outbreaks, while saw protecting preventing any outbreaks (Haffajee Mello, Mallinson, responsible One example centralized allocation resources fight (Aubrecht (2012) give examples where, historical reasons, much politicians. At same time, (de Widt 2018). Velasco took managing third fourth phases crisis. phases, issues subsided, whereas social welfare intensified. were dealing issues. played larger itself resolving water supply wastewater industry England fully privatized. shift urban infrastructure development dominance (Bakker, 2003; Dore 2004). decided minimal measures, leaving (Council Europe, Figure 1 illustrates emerge each scenario. 2 × matrix, dimensions represent indicating strong keeping quo avoiding depending gap follows directly developed Hacker (2004) Mahoney Thelen (2010). typologies, depends strength internal external barriers veto quo. Hacker's place change: authoritative barrier players, second discretion coalitions basically organization. propose model begins identification structural conditions calculations finally occurs. drift, layering, conversion, displacement. Two exact low; compliance space discretion, low. combines dimension adds 2010). changing indicate discretion. scope direction significant determining service, large case, understand maintaining severe costs Therefore, play oppose Rather, likely Returning 1, results. dissatisfaction. empower structuring setting. increase autonomy independence, centralize so (Jones inevitable struggle authority. formal nature extent power has, primarily attitudes Historically, available dictate policies When meet, becomes stick adopt order respond positively citizens' expectations. option leverage demand decentralize transferred way, avoid time gain cooperation show sophisticated plan keep hands optimal existed struck, full crisis, marginalizing crisis eased little, pressures became acute, withdrew, manage opposite situation results free responsibility. Such ongoing failures dissatisfaction trust continuous results, freeze underbudgeting area terms drift (Hacker, response, do-it-yourself seek alternate sources scenario, intensify until reach peak collapses. legalize alternative method called privatization displacement reform privatization, transfers market. Laffin (2009) describes trend grown significance service delivery advice He demonstrates providers growing private–public partnership finance initiatives cases, blocking changes, parallels category opposition typology. layering mechanism, remain unchanged, operation institutions, practices added without replacing New Homes Bonus introduced Britain 2011 incentive encourage housing growth areas. Referring stages, threats severe, health-care issue. Spain, existing its (Navarro it. conversion structurally unchanged cost-shifting unfunded understood conversion—that is, perceived low higher level—which dump particular human-centered, onto (Dollery 2006; Kelly, 1994). drastic measures Spanish beginning gradually spread, raising “emerged active deploying autonomous particularly programs” 2022, 193). next discuss insights operationalize variables Finally, works decisions involve article, focused connecting individual organizational present transform relatively notion measurable variable. An additional contribution connects pioneering paid systematic attention (Sellers 2007) settings decentralization, UK Clarke Cochrane, like Poland, Zealand, Australia, accompanied constitutional grant Levitas, Nel, 2015). following, help Spain's response demonstration (2022), analyzed detail, rarely referred operationalized Between February 20, 2020 December 2020, went regional phase (February 20–March 13), goal simply limit spread disease isolation. point, indication emergency. characterized territorial functioned properly, dominated changed dramatically. moved forward backward centralization decentralization. moves. phase, followed granted fields. Note, however, did include care. stage believed under control, interpreted indicates, “autonomous community isolated tackle situations contagion” 197), foreign affairs only. lasted March 14 May 21, recognized facing global Since nationally involvement governments, attached almost issued “state alarm” applied throughout country. Practically, declaration meant civil placed orders competent authorities—in Prime Minister together members cabinet There centralization. left room fields regulated Royal Decree long those contrary goals. surprising nationalist parliament centralization, attributing extreme seriousness managerial shocks vary among arrangements according shock, derived stable phase. changed. Regions claimed space, provoking tensions. Regional parties Madrid successful realizing thanks National vocal well—particularly populist party VOX, fierce criticism addition, beyond areas All developments indicated wanted increased lower left-hand box upper box. move displacement, occur cooperation. tensions government's moves led increasing toward preferred conflict, revolutionary legal reform, approved parliament, reinforced vertical strengthened powers Interterritorial Council Health System majority rule approving measures. To extent, balanced decentralized prevailed before clear, requiring constant intervention Constitutional Court doubts raised. weak. boundaries institutionalized, conflicts bridged arrangements. motivated cooperate other, June 7 October 25. equilibrium continued (October 25–December). prism Throughout used several worldwide model. examine international World Bank, federal confederations EU, neighborhoods. within top street-level bureaucrats constitute system. comparative analyses ten European three processes: (1) predominantly multi-layered involving limited (2) attempts suppress (3) conflicted contested tend poor well, Further investigate effect trends systems scale quality Future studies perception and/or If distinguish accountable, able inculcate sense latter. Joseph Benveniste senior administrator Israeli Ministry Interior independent researcher. completed PhD Ben-Gurion University (2019) he wrote dissertation subject “Accountability, Governance Change: Comparative Analysis Statutory Procedures Legislative Processes.” Shlomo Professor Department Administration Policy, School Science, Haifa, Israel. Research Interests: policy, NPM, structures state, choice theory, governances, emergency management. reached [email protected]