Investigating the implementation of and accountability in PPPs: a case study in public water management

Abstract

PurposeThis study analyses how the implementation of PPPs to operate rural water infrastructures and deliver water to local population has led to a new accountability archetype.Design/methodology/approachThe archetype theory is used to analyse the process of implementing PPPs as a new archetype and setting up systems and structures of accountability between contracting parties. The empirical part of the study is based on extensive document analysis in an East African country. Documents analysed are from governmental sources, UNICEF and the World Bank and cover a period from 1998 to early 2019.FindingsThe process of implementing PPPs was revolutionary at the national level and evolutionary at micro levels. The sequence of the change process moved from central to peripheral. The linearity followed a reorientation track strategy. Setting up systems and structure of accountability was evolutionary, peripheral to central following the reorientation strategy. National authorities reacted proactively to comments and suggestions from international donors and local population. However, not all districts have fully implemented PPPs in their rural water sector. The structure of accountability at the local level, however, still suffers from logistical and professional capacity constraints.Research limitations/implicationsEmpirical findings cannot be generalised to other situations, but the theoretical framework used in this study can be applied elsewhere.Practical implicationsGiving priority to hearing from end users themselves before designing and implementing policies that intend to respond to specific local needs is recommended.Originality/valueThis study explains the ways in which micro-organisational change can lead to revolutionary archetypes such as PPPs, whereas the implementation of systems and the structure of accountability at inter-organisational level remain evolutionary.

Performance measurement in smart city governance: a case study of an Egyptian city council

“…But, its scope was extended to include the powerful role(s) of these “institutionalised” performance measurement systems or metrics in making and remaking political decisions and military actions in the city council. This further supports the most recent study of Steccolini et al (2020) arguing for the role(s) of accounting and performance measurement systems in contemporary public administration (see also Mutiganda et al , 2020; Englund and Gerdin, 2020; Noguchi et al , 2015). Clearly, this goes beyond the Dillard et al ’s (2004) framework which is limited to the cascading (macro-micro) institutionalisation process in organisations.…”

“…This further supports the recent study of Englund and Gerdin (2020), arguing for the importance of studying the resulting influences of intra-organisational performance evaluations to better understand their powerful roles within individual organisations (see also Steccolini et al , 2020; Speklé and Verbeeten, 2014). This is in an agreement with Mutiganda et al (2020) and Andon (2012) arguing for public-private participation and its political importance for public investment financing, with a special focus on the role and effect of accounting and accountability therein. And last but not least, this is also in an agreement with Alawattage and Alsaid's (2018) study that addressed accounting's role in public sector structural reforms in the Egyptian context, which is currently characterised by political sensitivity and military engagement (see also Jayasinghe and Uddin, 2019; Alsaid and Mutiganda, 2018; Noguchi et al , 2015).…”

“…Last but not least, another set of previous studies have examined this trendy topic from the perspective of the alleged relationship between smart cities, neoliberalism and socio-political urban developments (Tan and Taeihagh, 2020; Raucci and Tarquinio, 2020; Grossi and Pianezzi, 2017; Meijer et al , 2017; Hollands, 2008). However, despite these valuable efforts and attempts to provide different theoretical and empirical perspectives on the potential relationship between performance measurement and smart city governance, these research endeavours have indicated that smart city governance requires complex decisions to be made with attention to economic, social and environmental performance (Tan and Taeihagh, 2020; Raucci and Tarquinio, 2020; Grossi et al , 2020), but with not enough attention to also “political intervention” (Steccolini et al , 2020; Meijer et al , 2017), “military engagement” (Alawattage and Alsaid, 2018; Noguchi et al , 2015) and “public-private collaboration” (Mutiganda et al , 2020; Alsaid and Mutiganda, 2020) in place. Although these angles have been widely theorised in public sector management accounting research, especially in neoliberalism and its various forms of privatisation, modernisation and state budget reforms (see, e.g.…”

Managing expectations with emotional accountability: making City Hospitals accountable during the COVID-19 pandemic in Turkey

“…Public sector governance considers how the public sector meets the expectations of its citizens and is accountable to them. This renders the public sector accountable to a number of different stakeholders, each of whom has different legitimate interests often with conflicting expectations from the state (Demirag et al, 2004;Mutiganda et al, 2020). Arguably, accountability to stakeholders should be embedded within PPPs due to their public characteristics.…”

“…Both sides are appealing for the citizens; either to address their sentimental needs of safeness, security and well-being during the pandemic, or to question whether the citizens' taxes are being used in a proper, fair and transparent way. These contradicting policies show the diversity of stakeholders' expectations which makes accountability complex, dynamic and therefore it may never be fully discharged (Demirag et al, 2004;Mutiganda et al, 2020).…”