Governance and Accountability to Service Users

  • Julian ClarkeEmail author


Julian Clarke raises a question common to all democratic politics namely what kind of accountability are we promoting? Accountability to local populations emerged as a fully formed but vaguely defined duty for FRS in the Coalition Governments 2012 National Framework. Clarke traces the source of this duty and looks at the emergence of accountability as a central feature of local governance. But one of the central problems of prioritising public services, whether in an era of austerity or of plenty, is the divide between expert allocation of scarce resources and a range of localised ‘community' interests which may or may not be consistent with each other. The second part of this chapter discusses this issue and explores alternative accountability mechanisms.


Accountability Scrutiny Citizens Service Users Risk 


  1. Audit Commission. (2010). Local savings review guide. London: Audit Commission.Google Scholar
  2. Arch, B., & Thurston, M. (2012). An assessment of the impact of home safety assessments on fires and fire-related injuries: A case study of Cheshire Fire and Rescue. Journal of Public Health, 35(2), 200–205.Google Scholar
  3. Arnstein, S. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Planning Association, 35(4), 216–224.Google Scholar
  4. Audit Commission. (2008). Corporate assessment Cleveland Fire Authority. London: Audit Commission.Google Scholar
  5. Audit Commission. (2009). Comprehensive area assessment framework document. London: Audit Commission.Google Scholar
  6. Bain, G., (2002). The future of the fire service; reducing risks saving lives: The independent review of the fire service. Norwich: TSO.Google Scholar
  7. Bovens, M. (2010). Two concepts of accountability: Accountability as a virtue and as a mechanism. West European Politics, 33(5), 946–967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boyle, M., & Harris, D. (2009). The challenge of co-production: How equal partnerships between professionals and the public are crucial to improving public services. London: National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts (Great Britain).Google Scholar
  9. Birmingham City Council. (2014). Local code of governance. Available at
  10. Cheshire FRS. (2009). Community empowerment strategy. Winsford: Cheshire FRS.Google Scholar
  11. Cheshire FRS. (2013). Statement of assurance 2012–13. Winsford: Cheshire FRS.Google Scholar
  12. Cheshire FRS. (2014). Making Cheshire safer: Integrated risk management plan for 2014/1. Winsford: Cheshire FRS.Google Scholar
  13. Cheshire FRS. (2012). Consultation and engagement strategy. Winsford: Cheshire FRS.Google Scholar
  14. Cheshire FRS. (2015). Member training and development programme 2015/2016. Winsford: Cheshire FRS.Google Scholar
  15. Cheshire FRS. (2016). Making Cheshire safer. Winsford: Cheshire FRS.Google Scholar
  16. Cheshire Resilience Forum. (2014). Emergency response manual. Winsford: Cheshire FRS.Google Scholar
  17. CIPFA/SOLACE Working Group. (2001). Corporate governance in local government - a keystone for community governance. London: CIPFA.Google Scholar
  18. CIPFA/SOLACE. (2007). Delivering good governance in local government framework. London: CIPFA.Google Scholar
  19. Clarke, J. (2016). Beyond authority: Public value, innovation and entrepreneurship in a UK fire and rescue service. In J. Liddle (Ed.), New perspectives on research, policy & practice in public entrepreneurship (Vol. 6). Bingley: Emerald.Google Scholar
  20. Clarke, J., & Kaleem, N. (2010). Equality, vulnerability, risk, and service delivery: equality improvement in fire and rescue services. International Fire Service Journal of Leadership and Management, 4(2), 12–22.Google Scholar
  21. Cockburn, C. (1977). The local state: Management of cities and people. Race & Class, 18, 363–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Craig, G., & Mayo, M. (1995). Community empowerment: A reader in participation and development. London: Zed books.Google Scholar
  23. DCLG. (2006). Strong and Prosperous Communities. London: TSO.Google Scholar
  24. DCLG. (2009). Review of fire and rescue service response times. London: TSO.Google Scholar
  25. DCLG. (2008a). Creating strong, safe and prosperous communities. London: TSO.Google Scholar
  26. DCLG. (2008b). Citizens in control: Fire futures localism and accountability report. London: TSO.Google Scholar
  27. DCLG. (2010). Fire Futures. London: TSO.Google Scholar
  28. DCLG. (2011). Accountability and transparency for fire and rescue authorities. London: TSO.Google Scholar
  29. DCLG. (2012). Fire and rescue national framework for England. London: TSO.Google Scholar
  30. DCLG. (2015). Fire incidents response times: April 2014 to March 2015, England. London: TSO.Google Scholar
  31. Daily Mail. (2012). No need for a fireman’s pole! World’s tiniest fire station is just big enough to store a single emergency LAND ROVER, 13 January, London.Google Scholar
  32. Derbyshire Fire Authority. (2014). Corporate code of governance. Littleover: Derbyshire FRA.Google Scholar
  33. Denhardt, J., & Denhardt, R. (2015). The New Public Service revisited. Public Administration Review, 75(5), 664–672.Google Scholar
  34. Fire Services Youth Training Organization. (2016). See
  35. Fire Brigades Union. (2010). It’s about time, why emergency response times matter to firefighters and the public. Kingston-upon-Thames: FBU.Google Scholar
  36. Firehouse. (2016). What is The Smallest Fire Dept. That You've Seen?
  37. Gailmard, S. (2012). Accountability and principal-agent models, Oxford handbook of public accountability. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
  38. Home Office. (1999). Response time fatality rate relationships for dwelling fires (Entec UK Limited). London: TSO.Google Scholar
  39. Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons? Public Administration, 69(1), 3–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kloot, L. (2009). Performance measurement and accountability in an Australian fire service. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 22(2), 128–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Knight, K. (2013). Facing the future: Findings from the review of efficiencies and operations in fire and rescue authorities in England. London: TSO.Google Scholar
  42. Lynn, L. E. (2001). The myth of the bureaucratic paradigm: what traditional public administration really stood for. Public Administration Review, 61(2), 144–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Laffont, J.-J., & Martimort, D. (2003). The theory of incentives:The principal-agent model. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Manchester FRS. (2012). Consultation and engagement strategy 2012–2015. Manchester: Manchester FRS.Google Scholar
  45. Manchester FRS. (2013). Statement of assurance 2012–2013. Manchester: Manchester FRS.Google Scholar
  46. Manchester FRS. (2014). Member training and development policy. Manchester: Manchester FRS.Google Scholar
  47. Matheson, K., Manning, R., & Williams, S. (2011). From brigade to service: an examination of the role of fire and rescue services in modern local government. Local Government Studies, 37(4), 451–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. McGuirk, S. (2010). From cure to prevention - transformational change in the Fire and Rescue Service. International Journal of Leadership in Public Services, 6(4), 18–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Miller, G. (2005). The political evolution of principal-agent models. Annual Review of Political Science, 8, 203–225.Google Scholar
  50. Mowbray, M. (2011). What became of the local state? Neo-liberalism, community development and local government. Community Development Journal, 46, 132–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Mutz, D. C. (2006). Hearing the other side: Deliberative versus participatory democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. (2004). The 2004/2004 fire and rescue service national framework. London: TSO.Google Scholar
  53. OPM & CIPFA. (2004). The good governance standard for public services. London: CIPFA.Google Scholar
  54. Peak District National Park Authority. (2012). Code of corporate governance. Bakewell: PDNPA.Google Scholar
  55. Sheedy, A. (2008). Handbook on citizen engagement: Beyond consultation. Ottawa: Canadian Research Policy Networks.Google Scholar
  56. Svara, J., & Denhardt, J. (2010). The connected community: Local governments as partners in citizen engagement and community building. White paper. Arizona: Arizona State University.Google Scholar
  57. Surrey FRS. (2013). Governance Review. Guildford, Surrey FRS.Google Scholar
  58. West Midlands Fire Authority. (2013). A strategy for supporting and developing members. Birmingham: WMFA.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Edgehill Business School, Edgehill UniversityLancashireUK

Personalised recommendations