Paternalism, Patronage, and Potlatch: The Dynamics of Giving and Being Given To [and Comments and Reply]

Goodell, Grace E.; Aronoff, Myron J.; Austin, Diane J.; Cadeliña, Rowe V.; Emmerson, Donald K.; Hansen, Karen Tranberg; Loïzos, Peter; Mandal, Bipin B.; Pettigrew, Joyce; Riesebrodt, Martin; Sinha, Aseema; Thuen, Trond; Berghe, Pierre L. van den; Wiseman, John A.

doi:10.1086/203252

Cited by 33 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The reciprocal, quid pro quo nature of patron–client relationships implies the presence of a further, specific kind of accountability (Goodell, , p. 252): in patron–client relationships “a detailed ledger of services given and received is maintained,” and if expectations are not met, the relationship terminates (Boissevain, , p. 22).…”

Section: Positioning Patronage In the Accountability Debatementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Patron-client relationships are defined as unequal, vertical, and reciprocal (Eisenstadt & Roniger, 1980;Kettering, 1988). In this relationship, reasons for conduct are still demanded and given (Boissevain, 1966;Goodell, 1985). However, as opposed to other forms of accountability, these reasons are almost impossible to ascertain by those excluded from the face-to-face interactions between accountee and accountor.…”

Section: Turning Point 2: the Substitution Of The First Commissionermentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Accountability and patronage in extraordinary administrations: Evidence from Pompeii

Ferri

Zan

2018

Financ Acc Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drawing on the concept of an accountability web, this paper analyzes the 2‐year long extraordinary administration of the archaeological site at Pompeii, where the Italian Prime Minister appointed a special Commissioner to deal with the alleged decay of the site in July 2008. Findings shed light on critical issues related to the appointment of “loyal experts” in terms of strong personalization, short‐term thinking, and the influence of the media in the administration of public services. Moreover, the paper introduces patronage accountability as a distinct accountability dimension that is characterized by a hierarchical and informal nature, and which cannot be accessed by those who are not part of the transaction. We add to the literature by identifying patronage accountability as a separate accountability dimension that conflicts with more common ones, and examine the implications of this practice for public administration.

show abstract

Section: Positioning Patronage In the Accountability Debatementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Turning Point 2: the Substitution Of The First Commissionermentioning

confidence: 99%

Accountability and patronage in extraordinary administrations: Evidence from Pompeii

Ferri

Zan

2018

Financ Acc Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Rather, the empoweree might feel strongly that the empowerer's benevolent act demands gratefulness and, therewith, the acknowledgment of the empowerer's superiority as legitimate, a social situation of indebtedness that can never be balanced. Goodell et al (1985) formulated this issue in connection with the effects of state paternalism: "The very nature of what [the state] grants emphasizes the state's vast power and the recipients' superfluousness, and therefore there is no way in which the latter can relieve themselves of their debt" (p. 253).…”

Section: Paternalistic Aspects Of Empowermentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Empowerment Gone Bad

Weidenstedt

2016

Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Empowerment as a positively connoted concept has been studied extensively in applied research in different fields. Yet its unfavorable, paradoxical character has so far not received enough theoretical attention to make it possible to improve empowerment efforts. In this theoretically informed analysis of the processes that lead to the paradox of empowerment, the author argues that it evolves from discrepancies between approaching empowerment from a structural versus a communicative viewpoint: empowerees' agency might be increased on a structural level but simultaneously decreased on a communicative level, leaving them feeling disempowered.

show abstract

“…Instead, they represent philanthropic gestures aimed, primarily, at keeping the community 'on side'. In this sense, the relations of rule established between mining companies and local communities resemble a form of 'patronage' (Abercrombie and Hills, 1976;Goodell, 1985) based on structurally differentiated access to resources between the two parties, but nevertheless underpinned by a degree of reciprocity -in this case, financial support in exchange for legitimacy and community goodwill (see Rajak, 2008 for a similar point in South Africa).…”

Section: Background To the Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

A corporate responsibility? The constitution of fly-in, fly-out mining companies as governance partners in remote, mine-affected localities

Cheshire

2010

Journal of Rural Studies

110

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Paternalism, Patronage, and Potlatch: The Dynamics of Giving and Being Given To [and Comments and Reply]

Cited by 33 publications

References 27 publications

Accountability and patronage in extraordinary administrations: Evidence from Pompeii

Accountability and patronage in extraordinary administrations: Evidence from Pompeii

Empowerment Gone Bad

A corporate responsibility? The constitution of fly-in, fly-out mining companies as governance partners in remote, mine-affected localities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About