Dubnick, Mel, “Clarifying Accountability: An Ethical Theory Framework .” Paper prepared for delivery at the Fifth International Conference of Ethics in the Public Service: an International Network, 5-9 August 1996, Brisbane, Queensland, AUSTRALIA.
Author’s Note:
This is one of two papers presented at the Queensland conference. See “Accountability and the Cultures of Blame”. A version of this paper was later published as: “Clarifying Accountability: An Ethical Theory Framework,” in PUBLIC SECTOR ETHICS: FINDING AND IMPLEMENTING VALUES, 1998.
AI-Generated Summary:
This document explores the conceptual foundations, linguistic distinctions, and historical development of accountability within public administration and governance.
The Cultural and Linguistic Roots of Accountability
- Accountability is an anglican concept, distinct from responsibility, with unique linguistic origins.
- In many languages, accountability is translated as responsibility or obligation, but English emphasizes rendering accounts to someone.
- Its roots trace back to Norman England, notably through the Domesday Book, which established a system of detailed property enumeration and loyalty oaths.
- The concept historically reinforced royal authority and legitimacy, especially in England, contrasting with French approaches that emphasized local responsibility without formal accountability systems.
Perspectives on Accountability in Scholarship
- Two main scholarly views exist: social psychologists focus on conduct (AC), while political scientists emphasize institutional conduct (CA).
- AC examines individual rationalizations and excuses, regardless of the institutional setting.
- CA studies structures and procedures that enable accountability, often with a normative focus on institutions like law, organizations, and politics.
- A comprehensive framework must integrate both perspectives to understand public administrative behavior fully.
Ethical Foundations of Accountability
- Current social theory often overlooks the ethical dimension of public administration.
- Human actions are best understood as ends-oriented, regulated by norms and values, influenced by moral pushes and pulls.
- Nozick’s ethical theory highlights the tension between moral push (virtue) and moral pull (respect for others), shaping ethical behavior.
- Recognizing the ethical nature of accountability emphasizes moral reflection as central to understanding administrative conduct.
A Multi-Dimensional Accountability Framework
- Accountability encompasses various species, including legal, organizational, professional, and political forms.
- These institutional types internalize external expectations, such as liabilities, answerability, responsibility, and responsiveness.
- Effective accountability involves internal moral obligations, not just external legal or procedural compliance.
- The framework aims to help systematically analyze how accountability influences public administration and behavior.
Different Forms of Accountability
- Accountability includes legal liability, answerability, responsibility, and responsiveness.
- These forms relate to moral pulls and pushes guiding public administrative behavior.
Ethical Foundations of Accountability
- Accountability is rooted in ethical behavior, emphasizing moral responsibility and loyalty.
- It involves internalized commitments like fidelity and a desire to serve the public or clients.
Professional Loyalty and Responsibility
- Professionals depend on moral standards and technical competence, integrating personal identity with collective goals.
- Loyalty to the profession often influences behavior, especially in government roles like law or military.
Internalized Service Motivation
- Effective administrative behavior relies on internal motivation to serve public interests.
- This internalized amenability can be directed toward the public or influential political entities.
Conceptualization of Accountability
- A useful framework should transcend cultural boundaries and focus on forms like responsibility.
- It should incorporate ethical dimensions, linking accountability to moral behavior and social action theory.
Practical and Theoretical Goals
- The framework aims to generate insights, improve understanding, and develop toward a theory of public behavior.
- Continuous refinement and application are essential for advancing accountability studies.