Understanding and Operationalizing Financial Accountability in Government Contracting Systems

  • Soojin KimEmail author
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_3795-1

Synonyms

Definition

Financial accountability in government contracts refers to the cost control in the proper use of financial resources, protection of assets against financial corruption, and transparent financial reporting and billing.

Introduction

Over the past few decades, there has been a spike in research activity regarding government contracts (also known as public procurement) in the area of public administration and policy. Notably, despite such progress in research, what is commonly acknowledged in past and recent scholarship is that, as governments have increasingly relied on goods and services provided by private contractors over time, government contracts have been more associated with fraud, abuse of taxpayers’ funds, conflicts of interest, and general waste (Kim 2017; Prager 1994; Savas 2000; Van Slyke 2009). From a conventional (normative) standpoint, research dealing with transaction-cost theory...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Amirkhanyan AA, Kim HJ, Lambright KT (2007) Putting the pieces together: a comprehensive framework for understanding the decision to contract out and contractor performance. Int J Public Adm 30(6–7):699–725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amirkhanyan AA, Kim HJ, Lambright KT (2012) Closer than “arms length”: understanding the factors associated with collaborative contracting. Am Rev Public Adm 42(3):341–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brown TL, Potoski M (2003a) Managing contract performance: a transaction costs approach. J Policy Anal Manage 22(2):275–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brown TL, Potoski M (2003b) Contract-management capacity in municipal and county governments. Public Adm Rev 63(2):153–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dicke LA (2002) Ensuring accountability in human services contracting: can stewardship theory fill the bill? Am Rev Public Adm 32(4):455–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fernandez S (2007) What works best when contracting for services? An analysis of contract performance of local governments in the U.S. Public Adm 85(4):1119–1141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fernandez S (2009) Understanding contracting performance: an empirical analysis. Adm Soc 41(2):67–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Girth AM (2012) A closer look at contract accountability: exploring the determinants of sanctions for unsatisfactory contract performance. J Public Adm Res Theory 23(3):1–32Google Scholar
  9. Kearns KP (1995) Accountability and entrepreneurial public management: the case of the Orange County investment fund. Public Budg Financ 15(3):3–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kim S (2017) Lessons learned from public and private contract managers for effective local government contracting out: the case of New Jersey. Int J Public Adm 40(9):756–769CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Liu X, Hotchkiss DR, Bose S (2007) The impact of contracting-out on health system performance: a conceptual framework. Health Policy 82(2):200–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Prager J (1994) Contracting out government services: lessons from the private sector. Public Adm Rev 54(2):176–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Savas ES (2000) Privatization and public-private partnerships. Seven Bridges Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Van Slyke DM (2009) Collaboration and relational contracting. In: O’Leary R, Bingham LB (eds) The collaborative public manager: new ideas for the 21st century. Georgetown University Press, Washington, DC, pp 137–156Google Scholar
  15. Witesman EM, Fernandez S (2013) Government contracts with private organizations: are there differences between nonprofits and for-profits? Nonprofit Volunt Sect Q 42(4):689–715CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Public Policy and Global Affairs Programme, School of Social SciencesNanyang Technological UniversitySingaporeSingapore