Types of accountability based on „to whom‟ an acceptor is

In an accountability relationship, a delegator (the public) may delegate functions (seeking information, evaluating performance based on explanation, and/or allocating rewards or sanctions) to agent(s) (Ombudsmen, Officers of Parliament/OAG, and elected representatives) (Mulgan, 1997). Thus, the acceptor may be accountable not only to the delegator but also to the delegator‟s agents. In this study, the term „accountability stakeholder‟ is used to denote both a delegator and a delegator‟s agent.

Prior research outlines different contexts for accountability that result in an acceptor being accountable to stakeholder(s), in various directions. Figure 3.2 summarises the four directions of accountability which have been discussed by prior researchers. Where the acceptor and accountability stakeholder(s) are in the same hierarchical structure, the acceptor may have upwards, downwards, or horizontal (lateral) accountability to the accountability stakeholders. Where the acceptor and accountability stakeholder(s) are not in the same hierarchical arrangement, the acceptor will have outwards accountability to the stakeholder(s). These directional accountabilities of an acceptor are depicted in Figure 3.2 and discussed below.

72

Figure 3.2: Directional accountability of an acceptor within and outside a hierarchical structure

Within a hierarchical structure

Outside the hierarchical structure D o w n w a rd s a cc o u n ta b ili ty Horizontal accountability U p w a rd s a cc o u n ta b ili ty Outwards accountability Party 1 Party 2 Party 3 Party 4 acceptor

Upwards accountability is the obligation to report to the acceptor‟s superiors up the hierarchical structure who tend to have direct influence on the acceptor‟s performance and access to the information (Corbett, 1996; Mulgan, 2003; Taylor & Rosair, 2000). In an organisational setting, Patton (1992) and Perks (1993) refer to this form of accountability as managerial accountability, such as that existing between an employee and employer. In a public-sector context, Normanton (1971), Sinclair (1995) and Mulgan (2003) refer to this form of accountability as political accountability; it includes the ministerial and parliamentary accountability of department chief executives, who are required to report, respectively, to Ministers and Parliament. In the local government context, the chief executive of a local authority has upwards accountability to his/her

73

elected councillors and mayor and, for some, legal obligations to the regional council and the courts.

Downwards accountability requires a hierarchical superior to be accountable to his/her subordinate (Corbett, 1996; Mulgan, 2003). For example, the chief executive of a local authority is accountable to the council‟s staff for, inter alia, the equitable allocation of work and safe working conditions in conformance with the council‟s rules or a public-sector employees‟ union agreement. Nevertheless, this form of accountability may not be specified in any rule and/or may not be easily enforced by the subordinates (communal). In such cases, the accountability of the supervisor (acceptor) rests on his/her sense of moral obligation (Corbett, 1996). An example of such a circumstance is the obligation of the chief executive to inform the council‟s staff about any significant matter that may affect their safety and welfare (such as, heath hazards in the workplace) (Corbett, 1996).

Horizontal (or lateral) accountability arises when an acceptor is accountable to accountability stakeholders with equal status in a hierarchy (Mulgan, 2003; Munro & Hatherly, 1993). For example, a local authority is accountable to other local authorities in the same region for the provision of civil defence services in the event of a natural disaster (such as a severe flood) under the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002. The horizontal stakeholders of a local authority can also include an agent in the broader governmental setting (under constitutional bindings) who does not have an upward relationship, such as the OAG and the ombudsmen.

74

Outwards accountability occurs when an acceptor is accountable to a party outside the acceptor‟s hierarchical structure, and no direct relational status exists (Corbett, 1996; Mulgan, 2003). Some prior researchers (for example, Coy, et al., 2001; Glenn & Murphy, 1996; Normanton, 1971; Perks, 1993; Stewart, 1984) refer to the outwards accountability of public-sector entities to the general public as public accountability. In the context of local authorities, „the public‟ comprises primarily local communities who are predominantly local authority taxpayers and ratepayers and their dependents, who are major recipients of goods and services provided by the local authority (Taylor & Rosair, 2000).

Besides these four directions of accountability, some authors (Corbett, 1996; Mulgan, 1997; Sinclair, 1995) add inwards accountability, which requires an acceptor to be accountable to his or herself for actions to be in conformity with moral standards (Corbett, 1996; Mulgan, 2003). Arguably, morality is subjective for individuals and what appears to be moral to one may not be so for others (Corbett, 1996).

An acceptor may place different importance on different stakeholder relationships. Kloot and Martin (2001) surveyed 195 local authority managers across all States of Australia to examine perceptions of their relative accountability to their multiple stakeholder groups. Kloot and Martin (2001) found that managers accorded equal highest priority to their ratepayers and councillors (outward and upward accountability). In contrast, Steccolini (2004) found that Italian local governments perceived councillors and cabinet members (upward accountability) as the most important groups to whom they were accountable, while citizens

75

(outward accountability) were the least important. Under the New Public Management, accountability of the public-sector to customers for public-sector goods and services has gained increased priority (Parker & Gould, 1999). In this study, the outwards (public) accountability of local authorities to customers/taxpayers, who are recipients of wastewater services, are the focal stakeholders. Note that „taxpayers‟ refers to anyone who pays taxes, rates, and levies to local authorities.

3.3.2 Types of accountability based on ‘for what’ an acceptor is