Accountability in Public Policy Partnerships

Steets, Julia

doi:10.1057/9780230290617

Cited by 33 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 107 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although accountability has several different theoretical underpinnings and meanings across the disciplines of international relations (70)(71)(72) , trade (73) and development (74,75) ; global governance for health and human rights (13,(76)(77)(78)(79)(80)(81) ; business, finance and social accounting (82)(83)(84)(85)(86)(87)(88)(89) ; social psychology and behavioural economics (90,91) ; and public health policy and law (92)(93)(94) , there are common principles across these diverse disciplines.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The literature shows various accountability expectations for transnational alliances and partnerships depending on their purpose (72) . Partnerships that raise awareness and advocate for important issues (e.g.…”

Section: Accountability Expectations For Partnershipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Partnerships used to generate information (e.g. World Action on Salt for Health) emphasize impartiality through professional independence, accuracy and quality (72) .…”

Section: Accountability Expectations For Partnershipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of the fifteen accountability frameworks reviewed, ten were developed for the disciplines of international relations, trade and development (13,(70)(71)(72)(73)(74)(75)(76)(77) , human rights (79,80) and global health (81) . One general framework was rooted in business, finance and social accounting (82)(83)(84)(85)(86)(87)(88)(89) .…”

Section: Strengths and Limitations Of The Framework Reviewedmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

An accountability framework to promote healthy food environments

Kraak

Swinburn

Lawrence

et al. 2014

Public Health Nutr.

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To review the available literature on accountability frameworks to construct a framework that is relevant to voluntary partnerships between government and food industry stakeholders. Design: Between November 2012 and May 2013, a desk review of ten databases was conducted to identify principles, conceptual frameworks, underlying theories, and strengths and limitations of existing accountability frameworks for institutional performance to construct a new framework relevant to promoting healthy food environments. Setting: Food policy contexts within high-income countries to address obesity and diet-related non-communicable diseases. Subjects: Eligible resources (n 26) were reviewed and the guiding principles of fifteen interdisciplinary frameworks were used to construct a new accountability framework. Results: Strengths included shared principles across existing frameworks, such as trust, inclusivity, transparency and verification; government leadership and good governance; public deliberations; independent bodies recognizing compliance and performance achievements; remedial actions to improve accountability systems; and capacity to manage conflicts of interest and settle disputes. Limitations of the three-step frameworks and 'mutual accountability' approach were an explicit absence of an empowered authority to hold all stakeholders to account for their performance. Conclusions: We propose a four-step accountability framework to guide government and food industry engagement to address unhealthy food environments as part of a broader government-led strategy to address obesity and diet-related non-communicable diseases. An independent body develops clear objectives, a governance process and performance standards for all stakeholders to address unhealthy food environments. The empowered body takes account (assessment), shares the account (communication), holds to account (enforcement) and responds to the account (improvements).

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Accountability Expectations For Partnershipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Partnerships used to generate information (e.g. World Action on Salt for Health) emphasize impartiality through professional independence, accuracy and quality (72) .…”

Section: Accountability Expectations For Partnershipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Strengths and Limitations Of The Framework Reviewedmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

An accountability framework to promote healthy food environments

Kraak

Swinburn

Lawrence

et al. 2014

Public Health Nutr.

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…iš 12, p. 9], "turi būti apsvarstyta ne tik jų dalyvavimas įgyvendinant programas, bet ir augantis jų poveikis iškeliant viešas problemas, pasirenkant politines alternatyvas bei priimant politinius ir administracinius sprendimus". Tuo tarpu kiti autoriai [13,31] pažymi, jog jų poveikis turėtų būti nagrinėjamas dar platesniu aspektu, apimant tai, kaip tinklinėje visuomenėje veikiančios nevyriausybinės organizacijos keičia galios pasiskirstymą tarp piliečių, bendruomenių ir viešojo sektoriaus institucijų ir kokias pasekmes jos sukelia, bei pažymi, jog augant šių organizacijų galiai svarbiu klausimu tampa kieno interesams ir kaip jos atstovauja.…”

Section: Pav Gerovės Valstybės Raida Europoje 1980-2030 Metaisunclassified

Nevyriausybinių organizacijų ir savivaldybių sąveika Lietuvoje: teoriniai sprendimų priėmimo ir įgyvendinimo proceso aspektai

Šilinskytė

2015

PPA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Legitimation of Certifying Partnerships in the Global Market Place

Glasbergen

2013

Env Pol Gov

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the main themes in the debate about global governance through private certifying partnerships regards their legitimacy. This paper argues that the main categories used in this debate -input and output legitimacy -largely result in a normative assessment, which does not help much with understanding better the practices of legitimating processes. As an addition to the literature focusing on legitimacy as a state of affair, this paper studies legitimacy as a dynamic process of change. To analyse these legitimation processes the paper suggests an approach based on the legitimacy challenges that the arrangements need to handle given the functions that they aim to fulfil. This approach is applied in a study of four frontrunner cases in different categories of certifying arrangements. The analysis reveals some of the drivers of legitimating processes and their relationships. It also shows the relative importance of procedural and substantive predetermined criteria to understand legitimacy issues of private regulation in the global market place.

show abstract

Accountability in Public Policy Partnerships

Cited by 33 publications

References 107 publications

An accountability framework to promote healthy food environments

An accountability framework to promote healthy food environments

Nevyriausybinių organizacijų ir savivaldybių sąveika Lietuvoje: teoriniai sprendimų priėmimo ir įgyvendinimo proceso aspektai

Legitimation of Certifying Partnerships in the Global Market Place

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About