Browsing by Subject "Accountability"
Now showing items 1-2 of 2
-
(2021)This study aims to analyze institutional change and transparency practices of the National Audit Office of Peru (NAO), whose job is to promote accountability in public administration but paradoxically faced an accountability crisis in 2017. This study analyzes the combination of logics of explanation that fostered the changes in the NAO during 2010 to 2020, and the role of transparency practices in institutional change. This study answers two research questions about the logics of explanation that were decisive to promote institutional change and the role of transparency in institutional change at the National Audit of Peru during the ten-year study of 2010-2020. In that regard, this theory-based qualitative research is based on institutional change theories and the four logics of explanation proposed by Vivien Schmidt: institutional design, evolutionary, appropriateness, and communication, the perceptions of seven decision-makers, managers, authors, or participants who worked during the time of the study frame of ten years, plus the analysis of statistical data. Since only one logics of explanation cannot explain the changes, a combination of the four logics of explanation were necessary. Each of the logics of explanation merge with thematical axis proposed after coding the interviewees' perspectives to explain how the changes were produced and the role of the transparency practices that fostered the changes within an accountability public institution between 2010 2020. Moreover, theories of accountability, trustworthiness, transparency and communication are presented to answer the research questions. This study uses the content analysis method and other qualitative research tools such as document review, website review, and information from the organization, which is of public domain. Finally, the conclusions of this study show that the combination of the four logics of explanation was crucial for the changes at the National Audit Office, and the practices of transparency were effects of those changes.
-
(2020)Blame avoidance research mainly assumes that it is in the interest of people in positions of power to minimize the amount of blame directed at them. But the perspective can be different when it comes to populist leaders. A discourse theoretical analysis focusing on Janez Janša, former Prime Minister of Slovenia, shows how populist rhetoric and conspiracy theories can be used as blame avoidance strategies. The data consists of interviews with Janša, published by the Slovenian government, as well Janša’s participance in the European Parliament during a discussion on media freedom and the rule of law. According to Ernesto Laclau (2005), articulating an antagonistic frontier is an important part of the populist logic. The antagonistic frontier is a central aspect of the rhetoric of Janez Janša, who depicts himself as a victim of a socialist elite controlling large parts of society. Janša’s claims can be understood as a conspiracy theory, fulfilling the criteria by Jovan Byford (2011). This conspiracy theory can also be understood through the framework of populist logic and the antagonistic frontier. This framework of populism can be applied to understand the underlying patterns of the blame avoidance strategies used by Janez Janša, as well as the possible effects on accountability. Blame can play a part in articulating the antagonistic frontier and Janša does not always attempt to minimize blame, but on the contrary sometimes acts in a way that is certain to attract blame. When looking at this through the perspective of populist logic, there is a central difference between two types of blame. It is in the interest of a populist leader to avoid criticism from their own side of the antagonistic frontier in order to keep the chain of equivalence intact. On the other hand, blame from the other side might strengthen the antagonistic frontier and even be beneficial for the populist leader.
Now showing items 1-2 of 2