Democracia, accountability e avaliação: a avaliação de políticas públicas como instrumento de controle democrático

O presente trabalho, procura discutir o papel que a institucionalização de sistemas de avaliação de programas e políticas públicas podem desempenhar na criação ou aperfeiçoamento de mecanismos de accountability na gestão pública. Mais especificamente, se procura a analisar as relações entre o fortalecimento da função e da capacidade avaliadora do governo e a promoção de níveis crescentes de difusão de informação e criação de mecanismos de accountability. Analisando os casos do Sistema de Avaliação de Rendimento Escolar do Estado de São Paulo (SARESP) e Sistema de Monitoramento e avaliação do Programa Estadual de DST/AIDS (PE ¿ DST/AIDS) arriscamos uma hipótese para os diferentes graus de accountability proporcionados por tais mecanismos de avaliação; a saber, os diferentes níveis de transparência e responsabilização proporcionados pelos sistemas e mecanismos de avaliação parecem relacionar-se mais diretamente com o desenho institucional no qual se insere a política ou programa governamental e com os atores interessados (stakeholders) na sua gestão do que propriamente com as características intrínsecas às pesquisas ou sistemas de avaliação das políticas públicas

A contribuição do Sistema Integrado de Administração Financeira do Governo Federal (SIAFI) para a promoção da accountability: a percepção dos usuários

Este estudo investiga qual a contribuição do Sistema Integrado de Administração Financeira do Governo Federal (SIAFI) na promoção da accountability da Administração Pública Federal no Brasil, com base na pesquisa documental e na percepção dos usuários do sistema. O modelo de análise da accountability ocorre a partir da investigação das suas definições e dimensões, segundo levantamento do referencial teórico abrangendo o campo da administração pública e da previsão na legislação brasileira. São definidas três dimensões para descrição da accountability: transparência, prestação de contas e responsabilização. Na condução da metodologia, inicialmente essas dimensões foram tratadas pela pesquisa documental, por meio da investigação no SIAFI – Manual Web da existência de mecanismos de accountability, com a aplicação de técnicas voltadas a levantar as expressões e instrumentos do sistema que possibilitam a promoção da accountability. O resultado dessa análise evidenciou funcionalidades, que foram posteriormente escritas na forma de questões de avaliação, segundo escala Likert de 4 pontos, a fim de identificar a eficácia percebida por quatro grupos de usuários do sistema: gestor, operador, agente de controle e agente de investigação. O questionário foi aplicado via internet aos usuários de 128 órgãos do Governo Federal, tendo retornado 287 formulários respondidos. O tratamento e análise dos resultados permitiram observar que o sistema é percebido como eficaz na promoção da accountability, apesar da necessita de melhorias e de treinamento de seus usuários. Além disso, foram identificadas divergências estatisticamente significativas nas respostas dos perfis de usuários, apontando uma não uniformidade nessa percepção segundo a origem do usuário e finalidade de sua relação com o sistema.

Presidents, assemblies, and accountability

Much research has explored the relationship between economics and elections, and scholars have begun to explore how institutions mediate that link. However, the relationship between presidential institutions and electoral accountability remains largely unexplored in comparative politics. Because voters in presidential systems can cast votes for executive and legislative elections separately, we have good reasons to suspect that the institutions of presidentialism might generate different forms or degrees of accountability than parliamentarism. Powell and Whitten (1993) suggest that the partisan or institutional “clarity of responsibility” might mediate the relationship between economics and elections: when responsibility for outcomes is clear, the relationship should be strong, and vice-versa. I develop this notion for use in presidential systems, and explore executive and legislative elections in 24 countries. The results indicate that economics always influences the incumbent vote in executive elections, regardless of the partisan or institutional clarity of responsibility. Economics also affects vote swings in legislative elections, but the institutional clarity of responsibility does mediate this relationship: legislative accountability for national economic outcomes is lowest when clarity of responsibility is highest, a situation that arises when the president is relatively more powerful and the bases for electing legislators and the president differ. By providing an empirical basis for a discussion of accountability under presidentialism, these findings contribute to important debates in comparative politics.

Accountability and revenue metering in smart micro-grids

Smart micro-grids offer a new challenging domain for power theories and metering techniques, because they include a variety of intermittent power sources which positively impact on power flow and distribution losses, but may cause voltage asymmetry and frequency variation. Due to the limited power capability of smart micro-grids, the voltage distortion can also get worse (in case of supplying non-linear loads), affecting measurement accuracy and possibly causing tripping of protections. In such a context, a reconsideration of power theories is required, since they form the basis for supply and load characterization. A revision of revenue metering techniques is also needed, to ensure a correct penalization of the loads for their responsibility in generating reactive power, voltage unbalance and distortion. This paper shows that the Conservative Power Theory (CPT) provides a suitable background to cope with smart grids characterization and metering needs. Experimental results validate the proposed approach. © 2010 IEEE.

The Deprofessionalisation Thesis, Accountability and Professional Character

It is said that the deprofessionalisation of social work and other welfare occupations reduces workers' professional discretion and autonomy, and thus their capacity to act in the best interests of their client. Without necessarily regarding the deprofessionalisation thesis as conclusive, this paper will ask how the state's control of the role and task of social workers impacts on their role-implicated obligations as professionals. If workers are reduced (as claimed) to the status of mere functionaries in systems they neither approve of nor control, does this exonerate them from bad outcomes or service failures? How should we view the dramatic increase in formal regulation now seen in the UK - as professionalisation or deprofessionalisation? The paper will argue that whatever the drift of policy, workers remain in some measure personally accountable. Service failures imply faults of practical reason that are partly attributable to the moral and intellectual character of professionals as individuals. It is therefore up to professionals, and their organisations, to attend to the improvement of professional character.

Governance and the Capacity to Manage Resilience in Regional Social-Ecological Systems

The sustainability of regional development can be usefully explored through several different lenses. In situations in which uncertainties and change are key features of the ecological landscape and social organization, critical factors for sustainability are resilience, the capacity to cope and adapt, and the conservation of sources of innovation and renewal. However, interventions in social-ecological systems with the aim of altering resilience immediately confront issues of governance. Who decides what should be made resilient to what? For whom is resilience to be managed, and for what purpose? In this paper we draw on the insights from a diverse set of case studies from around the world in which members of the Resilience Alliance have observed or engaged with sustainability problems at regional scales. Our central question is: How do certain attributes of governance function in society to enhance the capacity to manage resilience? Three specific propositions were explored: ( 1) participation builds trust, and deliberation leads to the shared understanding needed to mobilize and self-organize; ( 2) polycentric and multilayered institutions improve the fit between knowledge, action, and social-ecological contexts in ways that allow societies to respond more adaptively at appropriate levels; and ( 3) accountable authorities that also pursue just distributions of benefits and involuntary risks enhance the adaptive capacity of vulnerable groups and society as a whole. Some support was found for parts of all three propositions. In exploring the sustainability of regional social-ecological systems, we are usually faced with a set of ecosystem goods and services that interact with a collection of users with different technologies, interests, and levels of power. In this situation in our roles as analysts, facilitators, change agents, or stakeholders, we not only need to ask: The resilience of what, to what? We must also ask: For whom?

New Patterns of Democracy in the Countries of the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems

The chapter introduces a new database on political-institutional patterns of democracy used in the contributions to the book. It provides an update and extension of Lijphart’s (1999, 2012) measurement of consensus and majoritarian democracy for the countries of the second wave of the CSES during the period 1997–2006, using 11 partly improved indicators. The chapter explores patterns of democracy by the means of factor analysis, construct additive indices, and present the resulting country scores of consensus and majoritarian democracy graphically. Two variants are presented, one featuring Lijphart’s (1999) classic ‘executives–parties’ and ‘federal–unitary’ dimensions, and another incorporating direct democracy into the framework, yielding an additional ‘cabinets–direct democracy’ dimension

Governance and the Capacity to Manage Resilience in Regional Social-Ecological Systems

The sustainability of regional development can be usefully explored through several different lenses. In situations in which uncertainties and change are key features of the ecological landscape and social organization, critical factors for sustainability are resilience, the capacity to cope and adapt, and the conservation of sources of innovation and renewal. However, interventions in social-ecological systems with the aim of altering resilience immediately confront issues of governance. Who decides what should be made resilient to what? For whom is resilience to be managed, and for what purpose? In this paper we draw on the insights from a diverse set of case studies from around the world in which members of the Resilience Alliance have observed or engaged with sustainability problems at regional scales. Our central question is: How do certain attributes of governance function in society to enhance the capacity to manage resilience? Three specific propositions were explored: ( 1) participation builds trust, and deliberation leads to the shared understanding needed to mobilize and self-organize; ( 2) polycentric and multilayered institutions improve the fit between knowledge, action, and social-ecological contexts in ways that allow societies to respond more adaptively at appropriate levels; and ( 3) accountable authorities that also pursue just distributions of benefits and involuntary risks enhance the adaptive capacity of vulnerable groups and society as a whole. Some support was found for parts of all three propositions. In exploring the sustainability of regional social-ecological systems, we are usually faced with a set of ecosystem goods and services that interact with a collection of users with different technologies, interests, and levels of power. In this situation in our roles as analysts, facilitators, change agents, or stakeholders, we not only need to ask: The resilience of what, to what? We must also ask: For whom?

Planning, programming, budgeting, evaluating systems /

WI docs. no.: Ed.3/2:I 5/1979/7/4

Food safety : experiences of seven countries in consolidating their food safety systems : report to Congressional requesters /

"February 2005."

Mixed-Member Electoral Systems in Constitutional Context : Taiwan, Japan, and Beyond /

After the electoral reform in 1994, Japan saw a gradual evolution from a multi-party system toward a two-party system over the course of five House of Representatives election cycles. In contrast, after Taiwan’s constitutional amendment in 2005, a two-party system emerged in the first post-reform legislative election in 2008. Critically, however, Taiwan’s president is directly elected while Japan’s prime minister is indirectly elected. The contributors conclude that the higher the payoffs of holding the executive office and the greater degree of cross-district coordination required to win it, the stronger the incentives for elites to form and stay in the major parties. In such a context, a country will move rapidly toward a two-party system. In Part II, the contributors apply this theoretical logic to other countries with mixed-member systems to demonstrate its generality. They find the effect of executive competition on legislative electoral rules in countries as disparate as Thailand, the Philippines, New Zealand, Bolivia, and Russia. The findings presented in this book have important implications for political reform. Often, reformers are motivated by high hopes of solving some political problems and enhancing the quality of democracy. But, as this group of scholars demonstrates, electoral reform alone is not a panacea. Whether and to what extent it achieves the advocated goals depends not only on the specification of new electoral rules per se but also on the political context—and especially the constitutional framework—within which such rules are embedded.

Directory of Illinois public retirement systems and pension funds /

"December 2005."

Directory of Illinois public retirement systems and pension funds /

"August 2008"

Directory of Illinois public retirement systems and pension funds /

"March 2010."