Accountable to whom? Data transparency, depoliticisation and the myth of the market in English local government

TY - CHAP

T1 - Accountable to whom?

T2 - Data transparency, depoliticisation and the myth of the market in English local government

AU - Eckersley, Peter Mark

AU - Ferry, Laurence

N1 - Self-archiving of author accepted manuscript not supported by the publisher.

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - Data transparency and structural reforms are changing the nature of accountability in public services across the developed world, and English local government is no exception. Various central government initiatives since 2010 have increased the number of mechanisms through which councils can be held accountable, in line with a promise to improve ‘downwards’ accountability to citizens. However, these mechanisms are unlikely to be any more robust than their predecessors in improving this relationship. Instead, the reforms have actually strengthened ‘upwards’ accountability to central government for financial management, and sought (albeit largely unsuccessfully) to make local public bodies more responsive ‘horizontally’ to potential competitors in the public services marketplace. Indeed, since they are likely to result in greater outsourcing and privatisation of public services, the reforms can be seen as part of a wider neoliberal agenda that is contributing to ‘depoliticisation’ and a situation where policy decisions are taken increasingly by non-state or apolitical actors, to the detriment of democracy and public accountability.

AB - Data transparency and structural reforms are changing the nature of accountability in public services across the developed world, and English local government is no exception. Various central government initiatives since 2010 have increased the number of mechanisms through which councils can be held accountable, in line with a promise to improve ‘downwards’ accountability to citizens. However, these mechanisms are unlikely to be any more robust than their predecessors in improving this relationship. Instead, the reforms have actually strengthened ‘upwards’ accountability to central government for financial management, and sought (albeit largely unsuccessfully) to make local public bodies more responsive ‘horizontally’ to potential competitors in the public services marketplace. Indeed, since they are likely to result in greater outsourcing and privatisation of public services, the reforms can be seen as part of a wider neoliberal agenda that is contributing to ‘depoliticisation’ and a situation where policy decisions are taken increasingly by non-state or apolitical actors, to the detriment of democracy and public accountability.

KW - accountability

KW - transparency

KW - New Public Management

KW - local government

KW - depoliticisation

KW - England

UR - https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=59490&osCsid=6904969f605af544bd8db4204025417c

M3 - Chapter

SN - 978-1-63485-891-5

SP - 187

EP - 202

BT - Local Governments in the Digital Era

PB - Nova Science Publishers

CY - New York

ER -