Accountability and Transparency in Regulation: critiques, doctrines and instruments

The supposed rise of the regulatory state (Majone 1997), often associated with the international privatisation policies and ‘within government’ change (Hood et al. 1999), has led to a renewed emphasis on debates concerning accountability and transparency. Accountability and transparency have also become prominent features in the talk about ‘governance’, as promoted by diverse groups and organisations such as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the OECD and so-called NGOs, for example by ‘Transparency International’. At the domestic level, the perception of limited accountability and transparency of regulatory regimes have been at the forefront of criticisms by the media, the wider public, business and so-called public interest groups. Far from implying a unified understanding of what constitutes accountability and transparency, universal endorsement by such a diversity of actors suggests that the appeal of these terms is primarily based on them meaning different things to different people. Questions of who is accountable and transparent, to whom and on what terms therefore represent crucial dimensions in any regulatory regime and therefore deserve critical analysis. Three, partly overlapping discussions make the study of accountability and transparency relationships in the regulatory state particularly pertinent.