Abstract
This research explores accountability to beneficiaries within Civil Society Organisations (CSOs). Conceptualised as “downward”, this direction of accountability is of increasing research interest, given that beneficiaries are impacted by the mission of a CSO. However, the concept of downward accountability is used almost unanimously across CSO forms which cover a diverse array of organisational qualities, structures, missions, and people. This suggests downward accountability to be an encompassing concept, amenable to diversity among CSO forms; but is this the case? Is downward accountability the same across CSO forms and if not, how does the CSO form impact downward accountability? To respond to these questions, this research examines downward accountability across and within three CSO forms in Australia: public philanthropic foundation, service provider, and cooperative. Findings from 48 interviews suggest while there are clear differences in downward accountability relationships, mechanisms, and motivations across the three CSO forms examined, the impact of these different CSO forms upon the conception of downward accountability is minimal, where downward accountability displays similar characteristics across these forms. The insights gained contribute to problematising the concept of downward accountability, thereby providing a more sophisticated and nuanced understanding of a complex phenomenon.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adam, T. (2020). The genesis and proliferation of civil society in democracy and monarchy: A historical comparison of America and Prussiain the nineteenth century. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 31(4), 688–697. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-019-00149-w
Agyemang, G., O’Dwyer, B., Unerman, J., & Awumbila, M. (2017). Seeking “conversations for accountability”: Mediating the impact of non-governmental organization (NGO) upward accountability processes. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 30(5), 982. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-02-2015-1969
Andrews, A. (2014). Downward accountability in unequal alliances: Explaining NGO responses to zapatista demands. World Development, 54, 99–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2013.07.009
Anheier, H. K., & List, R. A. (2005). A dictionary of civil society, philanthropy and the third sector. Routledge.
Assad, M. J., & Goddard, A. R. (2010). Stakeholder salience and accounting practices in Tanzanian NGOs. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 23(3), 276–299. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513551011032482
Awio, G., Northcott, D., & Lawrence, S. (2011). Social capital and accountability in grass-roots NGOs: The case of the Ugandan community-led HIV/AIDS initiative. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 24(1), 63–92. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513571111098063
Bawole, J. N., & Langnel, Z. (2016). Downward accountability of NGOs in community project planning in Ghana. Development in Practice, 26(7), 920–932. https://doi.org/10.1080/09614524.2016.1210094
Birchall, J. (2011). People-centred businesses. In people-centred businesses: Co-operatives, mutuals and the idea of membership (1st ed.). Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Burger, R. (2012). Reconsidering the case for enhancing accountability via regulation. VOLUNTAS International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 23(1), 85–108. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-011-9238-9
Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. (2019). Sociological paradigms and organisational analysis: Elements of the sociology of corporate life (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Chen, J., Dyball, M. C., & Harrison, G. (2019). Stakeholder salience and accountability mechanisms in not-for-profit service delivery organizations. Financial Accountability & Management, 36(1), 50. https://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12217
Christensen, R. A., & Ebrahim, A. (2006). How does accountability affect mission? The case of a nonprofit serving immigrants and refugees. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 17(2), 195–209. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.143
Connolly, C., & Hyndman, N. (2013). Charity accountability in the UK: Through the eyes of the donor. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 10(3/4), 259–278. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRAM-02-2013-0006
Connolly, C., & Hyndman, N. (2017). The donor–beneficiary charity accountability paradox: A tale of two stakeholders. Public Money & Management, 37(3), 157–164. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2017.1281629
Cordery, C., & Sim, D. (2018). Dominant stakeholders, activity and accountability discharge in the CSO sector. Financial Accountability & Management, 34(1), 77–96. https://doi.org/10.1111/faam.12144
Cordery, C., Belal, A. R., & Thomson, I. (2019). NGO accounting and accountability: Past, present and future. Paper presented at the Accounting Forum.
Dewi, M. K., Manochin, M., & Belal, A. (2019). Marching with the volunteers: Their role and impact on beneficiary accountability in an Indonesian NGO. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 32(4), 1117–1145. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-10-2016-2727
Ebrahim, A. (2003a). Accountability in practice: Mechanisms for NGOs. World Development, 31(5), 813–829. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X(03)00014-7
Ebrahim, A. (2003b). Making sense of accountability: Conceptual perspectives for northern and southern nonprofits. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 14(2), 191–212. https://doi.org/10.1002/nml.29
Ebrahim, A. (2005). Accountability myopia: Losing sight of organizational learning. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 34(1), 56–87. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764004269430
Ebrahim, A. (2010). The many faces of nonprofit accountability. Wiley.
Ebrahim, A. (2007). Towards a reflective accountability in NGOs. In E. Weisband & A. Ebrahim (Eds.), Global accountabilities: Participation, pluralism, and public ethics (pp. 193–224). Cambridge University Press.
Edwards, M., & Hulme, D. (1996). Too close for comfort? The impact of official aid on nongovernmental organizations. World Development, 24(6), 961–973. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-750X(96)00019-8
Egholm, L., Heyse, L., & Mourey, D. (2020). Civil society organizations: The site of legitimizing the common good—a literature review. VOLUNTAS International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 31(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-019-00171-y
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25–32. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.24160888
Gray, R., Bebbington, J., & Collison, D. (2006). NGOs, civil society and accountability: Making the people accountable to capital. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 19(3), 319–348. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570610670325
Harrow, J. (2016). Accountability in 4-D: Changing approaches in contemporary philanthropy. In T. Jung, S. Phillips, & J. Harrow (Eds.), The Routledge companion to philanthropy. London: Routledge.
Hernández-Espallardo, M., Arcas-Lario, N., & Marcos-Matás, G. (2013). Farmers’ satisfaction and intention to continue membership in agricultural marketing cooperatives: Neoclassical versus transaction cost considerations. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 40(2), 239–260. https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/jbs024
Hu, M., Zhu, J., & Kong, D. (2019). Voluntary financial disclosure to downward stakeholders: An empirical examination of Chinese nonprofits. Public Performance & Management Review. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2019.1601573
Irvine, H., & Gaffikin, M. (2006). Getting in, getting on and getting out: Reflections on a qualitative research project. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 19(1), 115–145. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513570610651920
Jacobs, A., & Wilford, R. (2010). Listen First: A pilot system for managing downward accountability in NGOs. Development in Practice, 20(7), 797–811. https://doi.org/10.1080/09614524.2010.508113
Jordan, L. (2007). A rights-based approach to accountability. Cambridge University Press.
Kaldor, M. (2003). The idea of global civil society. International Affairs, 79(3), 583–593. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2346.00324%JInternationalAffairs
Kilby, P. (2006). Accountability for empowerment: Dilemmas facing non-governmental organizations. World Development, 34(6), 951–963. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2005.11.009
Kingston, K. L., Furneaux, C., de Zwaan, L., & Alderman, L. (2020). From monologic to dialogic. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 33(2), 447–471. https://doi.org/10.1108/aaaj-01-2019-3847
Knutsen, W., & Brower, R. (2010). Voluntary organizations: A qualitative investigation managing expressive and instrumental accountabilities in nonprofit and voluntary associations: A qualitative investigation. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 39(4), 588–610.
Koop, C., & Hanretty, C. (2017). Political independence, accountability, and the quality of regulatory decision-making. Comparative Political Studies, 51(1), 38–75.
Kraeger, P., & Robichau, R. (2017). Questioning stakeholder legitimacy: A philanthropic accountability model. Journal of Health and Human Services Administration, 39(4), 470.
Levi, Y., & Davis, P. (2008). Cooperatives as the “enfants terribles” of economics: Some implications for the social economy. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 37(6), 2178–2188.
Maher, C., Hadfield, M., Hutchings, M., & de Eyto, A. (2018). Ensuring rigor in qualitative data analysis: A design research approach to coding combining NVivo with traditional material methods. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 17(1), 160940691878636.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. Sage publications.
Murtaza, N. (2012). Putting the lasts first: The case for community-focused and peer-managed NGO accountability mechanisms. VOLUNTAS International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 23(1), 109–125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-011-9181-9
Muukkonen, M. (2009). Framing the field: Civil society and related concepts. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 38(4), 684–700. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764009333245
Najam, A. (1996). NGO accountability: A conceptual framework. Development Policy Review, 14(4), 339–354. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7679.1996.tb00112.x
O’Dwyer, B., & Unerman, J. (2008). The paradox of greater NGO accountability: A case study of Amnesty Ireland. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 33(7), 801–824. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2008.02.002
O’Dwyer, B., & Unerman, J. (2010). Enhancing the role of accountability in promoting the rights of beneficiaries of development NGOs. Accounting and Business Research, 40(5), 451–471. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2010.9995323
O’Leary, S. (2017). Grassroots accountability promises in rights-based approaches to development: The role of transformative monitoring and evaluation in NGOs. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 63, 21–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2016.06.002
O’Leary, N., Tranter, R., & Bennett, R. (2018). Are farmer personality traits associated with farm profitability? Results from a survey of dairy farmers in England and Wales. International Journal of Agricultural Management, 7(2), 17–25. https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.301161
Pill, M. C. (2019). Embedding in the city? Locating civil society in the philanthropy of place. Community Development Journal, 54(2), 179–196. https://doi.org/10.1093/cdj/bsx020
Productivity Commission. (2010). Contribution of the Not-For-Profit Sector, Research Report. Retrieved from Canberra: http://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/not-for-profit/report
Saldana, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. SAGE Publications.
Uddin, M., & Belal, A. (2019). Donors’ influence strategies and beneficiary accountability: An NGO case study. Accounting Forum, 43(1), 113–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accfor.2018.11.002
Wellens, L., & Jegers, M. (2014). Beneficiary participation as an instrument of downward accountability: A multiple case study. European Management Journal, 32(6), 938–949. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2014.03.004
Wellens, L., & Jegers, M. (2017). Beneficiaries’ participation in development organizations through local partners: A case study in Southern Africa. Development Policy Review, 35(S2), O196–O213. https://doi.org/10.1111/dpr.12279
Williamson, A., Luke, B., & Furneaux, C. (2018). Why be accountable? Exploring voluntary accountability of Australian private ancillary funds. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 77(3), 375–391. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12255
Williamson, A., Luke, B., Leat, D., & Furneaux, C. (2017). Founders, families, and futures: Perspectives on the accountability of Australian private ancillary funds. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 46(4), 747–771. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764017703711
Willock, J., Deary, I. J., McGregor, M. M., Sutherland, A., Edwards-Jones, G., Morgan, O., & Austin, E. (1999). Farmers’ attitudes, objectives, behaviors, and personality traits: The Edinburgh study of decision making on farms. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54(1), 5–36. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1998.1642
van Zyl, H., & Claeyé, F. (2018). Up and down, and inside out: Where do we stand on NGO accountability? The European Journal of Development Research. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41287-018-0170-3
van Zyl, H., Claeyé, F., & Flambard, V. (2019). Money, people or mission? Accountability in local and non-local NGOs. Third World Quarterly, 40(1), 53–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2018.1535893
Funding
No funding was received for conducting this study.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.
Ethical Approval
QUT Ethics Approval Numbers 1800000968, 1700000820, and 1600000863 pertain to this study and were assessed as negligible or low risk research.
Informed Consent
The research was undertaken with informed consent from participants, in compliance with the ethical standards of Queensland University of Technology’s Office for Research Ethics & Integrity.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Williamson, A.K., Kingston, K.L. & Bennison, L. Similar or Different? Downward Accountability Across Civil Society Organisational Forms. Voluntas 33, 1002–1014 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-021-00441-8
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-021-00441-8