The paper “ Has Public Accountability Seen Erosion under Current Mode of Governance and Market-Oriented Reforms? ” is a worthy variant of the literature review on management. The public sector is an important aspect of the growth and development of a nation as they are crucial in the delivery of social welfare services, administration, and creation of an enabling environment for the private sector to thrive. However, the public sector under the traditional Weberian concept of bureaucratic government as compared to the private sector has been marred by negative claims such as low productivity, less accountability, bureaucracy, and inadequate customer-centered focus (Siddique, 2006, p. 339; Kolthoff, Huberts & Van den Heuvel, 2006, p. 400; McInerney & Barrows, 2000, p. 1).
To overcome such challenges in the public sector, various governments embarked on a reform mission so as to embrace a new public management system (NPM) where efficiency is the order of the day (De Araú jo, 2001, p. 916-917). One such approach under the new public management governance is the market-oriented reforms (Soto & Loayza, 2004, p. 2). Various countries under differing terms have implemented market-oriented reforms in the public sector so as to align their operations with present global trends anchored on market forces.
For instance, we have a major option plan in Portugal, the next steps in the United Kingdom, renewal of public service in France, and the financial management improvement program in Australia among others. However, there is contention on whether a market-oriented system has led to an increase in the decline of public accountability (Haque, 2001, p. 65-66). As such, the aim of the paper is to assess whether or not the adoption of a market-oriented system in public management has lead to erosion in public accountability.
The paper adopts a one-sided argument by soliciting for supporting evidence that points towards the argument that public accountability has seen erosion under the current model of governance and market-oriented reforms. Key termsThe market-oriented system falls within the domain of new public management approaches that are aimed at enhancing public sector productivity and inculcate service-centric delivery that has been in the private sector through business like reforms (Soto & Loayza, 2004, p. 2).
Buchanan, R., & Pilgrim, C 2004, Transparency and Accountability in Government Decision-making: Devolved service delivery. In Conferenz 6 th Annual Public Law Forum: New Zealand. http://www. oag. govt. nz/reports/docs/transparency- accountability-paper-conferenz. pdf Accessed (Vol. 20, No. 10, p. 2008).
Coats, D & Passmore, E 2008, Public value: The next steps in public service reform, Work Foundation.
Curristine, T., Lonti, Z & Joumard, I 2007, Improving Public Sector Efficiency: Challenges and Opportunities, OECD Journal on Budgeting, 7(1), p. 34-65.
De Araújo, J. F. F. E. 2001, Improving public service delivery: the crossroads between NPM and traditional bureaucracy, Public Administration, 79(4), p. 915-932.
Engida, T & Bardill, J 2013, Reforms of the public sector in the light of the new public management: A cases of Sub-Saharan Africa, Journal of Public Administration and Policy Research, 5(1), p. 1-7.
Falconer, P 1999, Public Administration and the New Public Management: Lessons from the UK Experience, línea: http://www. vus. uni-lj. si/Anglescina/FALPOR97. doc.
Haque, M 2000, Significance of accountability under the new approach to public governance, International Review of Administrative Sciences, 66(4), p. 599-618.
Haque, M 2001, The diminishing publicness of public service under the current mode of governance, Public Administration Review, 61(1), p. 65-82.
Kearns, K 1994, The strategic management of accountability in nonprofit organizations: An analytical framework, Public Administration Review, p. 185-192.
Kolthoff, E., Huberts, L & Van den Heuvel, H 2006, The ethics of new public management: is integrity at stake? Public Administration Quarterly, p. 399-439.
Loayza, N & Soto, R 2003, Market-Oriented Reforms: Definitions and Measurement. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Instituto de Economía.
McInerney, R & Barrows, D 2000, Management Tools For Creating Government Responsiveness, Retrieved on 8 April, 2014 from http://www.innovation.cc/case- studies/barrows-ed.pdf.
Mulgan, R 2000, ‘Accountability’: An Ever‐Expanding Concept? Public administration, 78(3), p. 555-573.
Mulgan, R 2004, Public sector reform in New Zealand: issues of public accountability, Available at: https://crawford.anu.edu.au/degrees/pogo/discussion_papers/PDP04-3.pdf.
Odhiambo-Mbai, C 2003, Public service accountability and governance in Kenya since independence. Nairobi.
Sevilla, J 2005, Accountability and Control of Public Spending in a Decentralised and Delegated Environment, OECD Journal on Budgeting, 5(2), p. 23-67.
Siddique, A 2006, Public management reform in Malaysia Recent initiatives and experiences. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 19(4), p. 339-358.
Soto, R & Loayza, N 2004, On the measurement of market-oriented reforms (Vol. 3371). World Bank Publications. Available at: http://elibrary.worldbank.org/doi/pdf/10.1596/1813-9450-3371.