Accountability is promoted as a fundamental institution to regulate, rectify, and steer public officials. It is normally related to positive resonance and good governance (Bovens, 2007; Yang, 2012). Enhanced accountability may boost the fulfillment of responsibilities by creating greater answerability and transparency in the bureaucracy, curbing flagrant abuse of power, and ensuring compliance with superiors’ mandates (Dunn & Legge, 2001; Dubnick, 2003). However, the potential for paradox or pathology within accountability mechanisms is concerning and puzzles both scholars and practitioners (Koppell, 2005; Ossege, 2012; Schillemans et al., 2013; Hood, 2014).

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Introduction: The Accountability Paradox in the Chinese Bureaucracy

  • Wenyan Tu

摘要

Accountability is promoted as a fundamental institution to regulate, rectify, and steer public officials. It is normally related to positive resonance and good governance (Bovens, 2007; Yang, 2012). Enhanced accountability may boost the fulfillment of responsibilities by creating greater answerability and transparency in the bureaucracy, curbing flagrant abuse of power, and ensuring compliance with superiors’ mandates (Dunn & Legge, 2001; Dubnick, 2003). However, the potential for paradox or pathology within accountability mechanisms is concerning and puzzles both scholars and practitioners (Koppell, 2005; Ossege, 2012; Schillemans et al., 2013; Hood, 2014).