Advertisement

Accountability and Democracy: An Assessment

  • Gergana DimovaEmail author
Chapter
  • 60 Downloads
Part of the Challenges to Democracy in the 21st Century book series (CDC)

Abstract

It is difficult to assess whether an accountability process following media allegations is democratic or not. Existing methods assess accountability by using crude proxies, such as democracy and elections. A more refined approach measures accountability in terms of investigations, explanations and sanctions. The chapter develops this latter line of research further by contributing an original database and a novel methodology. The book assesses accountability through a multidimensional measure, which encompasses the sanctioning power of various accountability forums, information about the type of accuser, the type of the accusation, the type of explanations that the government gives, the type of investigations and the type of sanctions. The accountability pyramid is the main methodological innovation that the book advances. The accountability pyramid measures how many sanctions various investigations produce, and visualises the relative sanctioning capacity of various investigative bodies.

Keywords

Accountability Democracy Elections Media Sanctions Investigations 

References

  1. Adsera, Alicia, Carles Boix, and Mark Payne. 2000. Are You Being Served? Political Accountability and Quality of Government. Research Department Working Paper Series 438, Inter-American Development Bank.Google Scholar
  2. Aucoin, P., and R. Heintzman. 2000. The Dialectics of Accountability for Performance in Public Management Reform. International Review of Administrative Sciences 66 (1): 45–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barker, Anthony. 1994. The Upturned Stone: Political Scandals and Their Investigation Processes in Twenty Democracies. Crime, Law and Social Change 21 (4): 337–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bennetts, Marc. 2014. Kicking the Kremlin: Russia’s New Dissidents and the Battle to Topple Putin. Oneworld Publications.Google Scholar
  5. Bertelsman Transformation Index. Available at https://www.bti-project.org/en/country-reports/.
  6. Besley, Timothy, and Andrea Prat. 2006. Handcuffs for the Grabbing Hand? The Role of the Media in Political Accountability. American Economic Review 96 (3): 720–736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boin, A., Paul ’t Hart, A. McConell, and T. Preston. 2009. Towards a Theory of Crisis Exploitation: Political and Policy Impacts of Framing Contests and Blame Games. Journal of European Public Policy 16 (1): 81–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bovens, Mark. 2007. New Forms of Accountability and EU-Governance. Comparative European Politics 5: 104–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bovens, Mark. 2010. Two Concepts of Accountability: Accountability as a Virtue and as a Mechanism. West European Politics 33 (5): 946–967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bovens, Mark, Deirdre Curtin, and Paul ’t Hart (eds.). 2010. The Real World of EU Accountability: What Deficit? Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Bovens, Mark, Paul ’t Hart, S. Dekker, and G. Verheuvel. 1999. The Politics of Blame Avoidance: Defensive Tactics in a Dutch Crime-Fighting Fiasco. In When Things Go Wrong: Failures and Breakdowns in Organizational Settings, ed. H.K. Anheier, 123–147. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  12. Brandsma, Gijs Jan, and Thomas Schillemans. 2012. The Accountability Cube: Measuring Accountability. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 25 (1): 191–215.Google Scholar
  13. Brändstrøm, A., and S. Kuipers. 2003. From “Normal Incidents” to Political Crises: Understanding the Selective Politicization of Policy Failures. Government and Opposition 38 (3): 279–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bytzek, Evelyn. 2007. Politisches Ereignis: Diskussion, Definition and Auswahl. PhD dissertation, Mannheim University.Google Scholar
  15. Castells, Manuel. 2012. Networks of Outrage and Hope: Social Movements in the Internet Age. Polity Press.Google Scholar
  16. Chomsky, Noam. 2012. How the World Works. Hamish Hamilton.Google Scholar
  17. Colton, Timothy J. 2008. Yeltsin: A Life. Basic Books.Google Scholar
  18. Colton, Timothy, and Michael McFaul. 2003. Popular Choice and Managed Democracy: The Russian Elections of 1999 and 2000. Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
  19. Coombs, W.T. 1998. An Analytic Framework for Crisis Situations: Better Responses from a Better Understanding of the Situation. Journal of Public Relations Research 10 (3): 177–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dawson, James. 2016. Cultures of Democracy in Serbia and Bulgaria: How Ideas Shape Publics. Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. Della Porta, Donatella. 2012. Critical Trust: Social Movements and Democracy in Times of Crisis. Cambio 2 (4): 33–43. Available at http://cadmus.eui.eu/handle/1814/29983. Accessed February, 2015.
  22. Dewan, Torun, and Keith Dowding. 2005. The Corrective Effect of Ministerial Resignations. American Journal of Political Science 49 (1): 46–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dimova, Gergana. 2019. Politicising Government Accountability: The Case of Protest Network and the Model “Who?” in Bulgaria. In Comparing Strategies of (De) Politicisation in Europe: Governance, Resistance and Anti-politics, ed. Jim Buller, Pınar E. Dönmez, Adam Standring, and Matthew Wood, 53–79. Palgrave.Google Scholar
  24. Djankov, Simeon, Caralee McLiesh, Tatiana Nenova, and Andrei Shleifer. 2001. Who Owns the Media? NBER Working Papers 8288.Google Scholar
  25. Dunn, John. 2010. Democracy and Its Discontents. The National Interest. Available at www.thelifeanddeathofdemocracy.org/reviews_commentaries/reviews_dunn_feb_2010.html. Accessed May 13, 2015.
  26. Edelman, Murray. 1988. Constructing the Political Spectacle. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  27. EIU Democracy Index. Available at https://www.eiu.com/topic/democracy-index.
  28. Ercan, Selen, and Jean-Paul Gagnon. 2014. The Crisis of Democracy: Which Crisis? Which Democracy? Democratic Theory 1 (2): 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Flinders, Matthew. 2001. The Politics of Accountability in the Modern State. Ashgate.Google Scholar
  30. Flinders, Matthew, and Matthew Wood. 2013. Depoliticisation, Governance and the State. Policy and Politics 42 (2): 135–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Freedom House Democracy Index. Available at https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/freedom-world-2019.
  32. Funk, Carolyn. 1993. Personal Perception of Politicians Involved in Scandal. PhD dissertation, UCLA.Google Scholar
  33. Ganev, Venelin. 2014. The Legacies of 1989: Bulgaria’s Year of Civic Anger. Journal of Democracy 25 (1): 33–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Garrard, John, and James L. Newell. 2006. Scandals in Past and Contemporary Politics. Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Geddes, Barbara. 1990. How the Cases You Choose Affect the Answers You Get: Selection Bias in Comparative Politics. Political Analysis 2 (1): 131–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Genov, Julian. 2004. Why Do We Succeed So Little. Sofia: Iztok-Zapad Press.Google Scholar
  37. Gill, Stephen. 2008. Globalizing Élites in the Emerging World Order. In Power and Resistance in the New World Order. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Goetz, Ann, and Rob Jenkins. 2004. Reinventing Accountability: Making Democracy Work for the Poor. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  39. Goode, Paul. 2011. The Decline of Regionalism in Putins Russia: Boundary Issues. BASEES/Routledge Series on Russian and East European Studies.Google Scholar
  40. Goodin, Robert. 2003. Democratic Accountability: The Distinctiveness of the Third Sector. European Journal of Sociology 44 (3): 359–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Gorham, Michael, Ingunn Lunde, and Martin Paulsen. 2014. Digital Russia: The Language, Culture and Politics of New Media Communication. Routledge Contemporary Russia and Eastern Europe Series.Google Scholar
  42. Grant, R., and R.O. Keohane. 2005. Accountability and Abuses of Power in World Politics. American Political Science Review 99 (1): 29–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Green, Jeffrey. 2009. The Eyes of the People: Democracy in an Age of Spectatorship. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Green, Zachary, Shaun Bevan, and Caterina Froio. 2014. The Electoral Consequences of Government Accountability: Evidence from the United Kingdom. Paper presented at the American Political Science Association Conference, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  45. Hale, Henry. 2005. Why Not Parties in Russia?: Democracy, Federalism, and the State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Hanson, Stephen. 2010. Post-imperial Democracies: Ideology and Party Formation in Third Republic France, Weimar Germany, and Post-Soviet Russia. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Hellwig, Timothy, and David Samuels. 2007. Electoral Accountability and the Variety of Democratic Regimes. British Journal of Political Science 38: 65–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Hood, Christopher. 2014. Accountability and Blame Avoidance. In The Oxford Handbook Public Accountability, ed. Mark Bovens, Robert E. Goodin, and Thomas Schillemans. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Hood, C.C., W. Jennings, B. Hogwood, and C. Beeston. 2009. Fighting Fires in Testing Times: Exploring a Staged Response Hypothesis for Blame Management in Two Exam Fiasco Cases. European Journal of Political Research 48 (6): 695–722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Jakubowicz, Karol, and Miklós Sükösd (eds.). 2008. Finding the Right Place on the Map: Central and Eastern European Media Change in a Global Perspective. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  51. Jileva, Elena. 2002. Insiders and Outsiders in Central and Eastern Europe: The Case of Bulgaria. In In Search of Europe’s Borders, ed. Elspeth Guild and Kees Groenendijk. The Hague: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
  52. Kane, John, and Haig Patapan (eds.). 2009. Dispersed Democratic Leadership. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Kaufmann, Daniel, Aart Kraay, and Massimo Mastruzzi. 2008. Governance Matters VII: Aggregate and Individual Governance Indicators 1996–2007. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 4654, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  54. Keohane, Robert. 2003. Global Governance and Democratic Accountability. In Taming Globalization: Frontiers of Governance, ed. Mathias Koenig-Archibugi and David Held, 130–159. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  55. King, Anthony. 1984. Sex, Money and Power: Political Scandals in Great Britain and the United States. Department of Government, University of Essex.Google Scholar
  56. Koopmans, Ruud. 1993. The Dynamics of Protest Waves: West Germany, 1965 to 1989. American Sociological Review 58 (5): 637–658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Koopmans, Ruud. 1995. Democracy from Below: New Social Movements and the Political System in West Germany. Westview Press.Google Scholar
  58. Kostovicova, Denisa, and Marlies Glasius. 2011. Bottom-Up Politics: An Agency-Centred Approach to Globalization. Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  59. Kriesi, Hanspeter. 2013. Democracy as a Moving Target. In Democracy in the Age of Globalization and Mediatization, ed. Hanspeter Kriesi, Daniel Bochsler, Jörg Matthes, and Sandra Lavenex. Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  60. Ledeneva, Alena. 2013. Can Russia Modernise? Sistema, Power Networks and Informal Governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Lederman, D., N.V. Loayza, and R.R. Soares. 2005. Accountability and Corruption: Political Institutions Matter. Economics & Politics 17 (1): 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Lowi, Theodore. 1988. Forward. In The Politics of Scandal, ed. Mark Silverstein and Andrei Markovits. New York: Holmes & Meier Publishers.Google Scholar
  63. Lynch, Allen. 2005. How Russia Is Not Ruled: Reflections on Russian Political Development. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  64. Mancini, Paolo. 2011. Between Commodification and Lifestyle Politics. Does Silvio Berlusconi Provide a New Model of Politics for the 21st Century? Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, University of Oxford.Google Scholar
  65. Manin, Bernard. 1997. The Principles of Representative Government. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  66. March, James G., and Johan Olson. 1995. Democratic Governance. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  67. McConnell, A. 2003. Overview: Crisis Management, Influences, Responses and Evaluation. Parliamentary Affairs 56 (3): 393–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. McGraw, K.M. 1990. Avoiding Blame: An Experimental Investigation of Political Excuses and Justifications. British Journal of Political Science 20 (1): 119–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. McGraw, K. 1991. Managing Blame: An Experimental Test of the Effects of Political Accounts. American Political Science Review 85 (4): 1133–1157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. McMann, Kelly. 2012. Economic Autonomy and Democracy: Hybrid Regimes in Russia and Kyrgyzstan. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  71. Mulgan, Richard. 2014. Accountability Deficits. In The Oxford Handbook Public Accountability, ed. Mark Bovens, Robert E. Goodin, and Thomas Schillemans. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  72. Navarria, Giovani. 2010. Citizens Go Online-Porbing the Political Potential of the Internet Galaxy. PhD dissertation, University of Westminster.Google Scholar
  73. Oates, Sarah. 2006. Television, Democracy and Elections in Russia. BASEES/Routledge Series on Russian and East European Studies.Google Scholar
  74. O’Donnell, Guillermo. 2003. Horizontal Accountability: The Legal Institutionalization of Mistrust. In Democratic Accountability in Latin America, ed. Matthew McCubbins and Thomas Schwartz. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Oliver, Dawn. 1991. Government in the United Kingdom. Bristol: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  76. Papadopoulos, Yannis. 2013. Democracy in Crisis?: Politics, Governance and Policy. Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  77. Persson, Torsten, Gérard Roland, and Guido Tabellini. 1997. Separation of Powers and Political Accountability. Quarterly Journal of Economics 112 (4): 1163–1202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Peruzzotti, Enrique, and Catalina Smulovitz. 2006. Enforcing the Rule of Law: Social Accountability in the New Latin American Democracies. University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
  79. Pickles, John, and Adam Smith. 2005. Theorizing Transition: The Political Economy of Post-communist Transformations. Routledge.Google Scholar
  80. Pitkin, Hannah. 2004. Representation and Democracy: An Uneasy Alliance. Scandinavian Political Studies 27 (3): 335–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Randall, Vicky. 1998. Democratization and the Media. Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  82. Rosanvallon, Pierre. 2011. Democratic Legitimacy: Impartiality, Reflexivity, Proximity. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  83. Ross, Cameron. 2008. Local Politics and Democratization in Russia. Routledge.Google Scholar
  84. Ryabov, Andrei. 2012. Democratization and Modernization in the Context of Transformation of Post-Soviet Politics. In Democracy Versus Modernization: A Dilemma for Russia and for the World, ed. Vladislav Inozemtsev and Peotr Dutkiewicz. Routledge.Google Scholar
  85. Sakwa, Richard. 2008. Russian Politics and Society. Routledge.Google Scholar
  86. Sakwa, Richard. 2010. The Crisis of Russian Democracy: The Dual State, Factionalism and the Medvedev Succession. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  87. Sakwa, Richard. 2014. Putin Redux: Power and Contradiction in Contemporary Russia. Routledge.Google Scholar
  88. Schedler, Andreas. 2015. The Politics of Uncertainty: Sustaining and Subverting Electoral Authoritarianism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  89. Schillemans, Thomas. 2011. Does Horizontal Accountability Work? Evaluating Potential Remedies for the Accountability Deficit of Agencies. Administration and Society 43 (4): 387–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Schmitter, Philippe. 2004. The Ambiguous Virtues of Accountability. Journal of Democracy 15 (4): 47–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Schmitter, Philippe. 2007. Political Accountability in ‘Real-Existing’ Democracies: Meaning and Mechanisms. Available at http://www.eui.eu/Documents/DepartmentsCentres/SPS/Profiles/Schmitter/PCSPoliticalAccountabilityJan07.pdf. Accessed February 2015.
  92. Schudson, Michael. 2003. Notes on Scandal and the Watergate Legacy. American Behavioral Scientist 47 (9): 1231–1238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Sharafutdinova, Gulnaz. 2011. Political Consequences of Crony Capitalism Inside Russia. University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
  94. Shlapentokh, Vladimir, and Anna Arutunyan. 2013. Freedom, Repression, and Private Property in Russia. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  95. Shugart, Matthew Søberg, and Scott Mainwaring. 1997. Presidentialism and Democracy in Latin America: Rethinking the Terms of the Debate. In Presidentialism and Democracy in Latin America, ed. Matthew Søberg Shugart and Scott Mainwaring. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  96. Slaughter, Ann-Marie. 2004. Disaggregated Sovereignty: Towards the Public Accountability of Global Government Networks. Government and Opposition 31 (2): 159–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Stiglitz, Joseph. 2004. Information and the Change in the Paradigm in Economics, Part 2. The American Economic Review 92 (3): 460–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Stoner-Weiss, Kathryn. 2006. Resisting the State: Reform and Retrenchment in Post-Soviet Russia. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  99. Thompson, John. 1997. Scandal and Social Theory. In Media Scandals, ed. James Lull and Stephen Hinerman. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  100. Thompson, John. 2000. Political Scandal: Power and Visibility in the Media Age. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  101. Tsai, Lily. 2007. Accountability Without Democracy: Solidary Groups and Public Goods Provision in Rural China. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  102. Turpin, Colin. 1994. Ministerial Responsibility. In The Changing Constitution, ed. Jeffrey Jowell and Dawn Oliver. Oxford: Claredon Press.Google Scholar
  103. Vibert, Frank. 2007. The Rise of the Unelected: Democracy and the New Separation of Powers. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  104. Waller, Michael. 1995. Adaptation of the Former Communist Parties of East-Central Europe: A Case of Social-Democratization? Party Politics 1 (4): 473–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Weaver, R.K. 1986. The Politics of Blame Avoidance. Journal of Public Policy 6 (4): 371–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Генов, Юлиан. 2004. Защо Толкова Малко Успяваме. Изток-Запад, София.Google Scholar
  107. Kръстева, Анна. 2014. „Граждански протести, Е-демокрация, Нови Мобилизации”. в В: Канев, Добрин., Тодоров, Антоний (съст.) Качество на Демокрацията в България. Изток-Запад, София.Google Scholar
  108. Канев, Добрин., Тодоров, Антоний (съст.). 2014. Качество на Демокрацията в България. Изток-Запад, София.Google Scholar
  109. Проданов, Георги. 2014. „Качество на Демокрацията и Качество на Елитите”. в В: Канев, Добрин., Тодоров, Антоний (съст.) Качество на Демокрацията в България. Изток-Запад, София.Google Scholar
  110. Хаджийски, Иван. 2002 (1966). Бит и Душевност на Нашия Народ. Български писател.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Applied Social Sciences, Forensics and PoliticsUniversity of WinchesterWinchesterUK

Personalised recommendations