Shared heritage,shared authority,shared accountability? Co-generating museum performance criteria as a means of embedding ‘shared authority’

Abstract

This New Zealand case study presents insights from the perspectives of Māori and non-Māori museum stakeholders. It aimed to understand which activities and responsibilities mattered to stakeholders, in order to develop more meaningful accountability for their shared heritage. Using a participatory mixed method, the research explored how museum stakeholders assess their museum’s performance. Māori and non-Māori generated, sorted and rated 'possible performance statements’. A cultural analysis, using proprietary software, produced concept maps which illustrate differently nuanced museum constructs with different relative importance for constituent elements. Pattern-matching revealed divergent priority accorded certain museum activities, but also commonalities. Both cultural groups prioritised factors not generally featured in compliance-driven approaches to accountability reporting. For Māori, greatest importance was placed on care of taonga (‘treasures’), Māori-specific practice and engagement with Māori, while collections and staff were the key assessment factors for non-Māori. Incorporating stakeholder perspectives in a museum performance framework provides opportunities to report performance on dimensions which matter to wider communities. Where shared authority is taken seriously and stakeholders are involved, accountability becomes meaningful. This collaborative approach to performance framework development offers a tool for embedding the realities of shared authority into planning and delivering the museum’s activities and responsibilities.     

Legislative accountability in a mixed-member system

Accountability of representatives to electors is a key indicator of democratic health. In mixed-member systems, the coexistence of two kinds of representation provides the opportunity to test competing claims with minimal confounding factors. There is debate about the relative accountability of constituency and list MPs, and in particular, concerning dual candidacy, where individuals can stand for both constituency and list seats. Analysing New Zealand elections since 1999, with comparisons back to the previous single-member plurality system, this article examines the effects of dual candidacy, legislative turnover and the cases where constituency or electorate MPs have lost their seats, but remained in Parliament as list members.

代表对选民负责乃民主是否健康的一个关键指标。在混合成员制下,两类代表的共存为比较单纯地检验其竞争的主张提供了机会。不过,选区及名单议员的相对责任,尤其在一个个体可以既代表选区又代表名单席位的情况下的责任,对此是有争议的。本文分析了新西兰1999年以来的选举,并与之前的单一成员多数选举制做了对比,还考察了双重候选人制的效果、议员的流动、以及选区或议员落选但依然是国会名单成员的情况。     

Public administration in the Australian Journal of Political Science: A review

This article reviews publications on public administration in the Australian Journal of Political Science (AJPS). A distinction needs to be drawn between public administration as a discipline and as a field of inquiry that engages specialists from several areas. The latter has been more significant in Australia in contrast to Europe and the United States. The questions discussed in the AJPS cover changes in the field and practice of public administration; the state and government; the structures of local government, public organisation and federalism; interfaces between public administration and other sectors and institutions; and issues with public sector reform and accountability. Despite the emphasis on governance in discourse and practice, the role of government continues to be central, and what emerges from experiments in new governance is that the authority of government and the significance of hierarchy (compared to markets and networks) very often remains pivotal.     

Proceeding through Colonial Past-Presents in Fieldwork: Methodological Lessons on Accountability,Refusal, and Autonomy

This article examines how the colonial past manifests within the present through an analysis of ethnographic and archival fieldwork. Drawing on feminist geographic scholarship for decolonising knowledge production, I argue that geographers have a responsibility to the people they work with and the places where they conduct research to know what came before. Through an analysis of how the colonial past surfaced in everyday and ongoing experiences of negotiating consent during fieldwork, I show how reflecting on the colonial past-present offers insights into the colonial power geometries of knowledge production. Proceeding through the colonial past-present offers useful lessons on being accountable to people and lands, recognising refusal, and making autonomy. While this article is focused on my experiences as a white settler scholar from the USA who did research in a Mixe community in Oaxaca, Mexico, proceeding through colonial past-presents offers lessons to any and all geographers who struggle to unsettle the persistent colonial power geometries of knowledge production.     

Transnational environmental obligations: locating new spaces of accountability in a post-Westphalian global order

The growth of transnational environmental harm is not only leading to new obligations between states, it is also recasting democratic accountability for the crossboundary environmental performance of public and private actors. Informed by pragmatist ideas on public discourse, I propose a conceptual schema for understanding the moral geography of these new transnational environmental obligations: they mark out non-territorial spaces of public communication delimited according to moral precepts of harm prevention, inclusiveness and impartiality. I outline how the recognition of transnational affected publics is reconstituting and rescaling environmental accountability within international regimes of harm prevention and liability. The critical geopolitical challenge in institutionalizing non-territorial domains of environmental accountability will be the mapping and empowerment of transnational affected publics.     

Changing public accountability mechanisms in the governance of Dutch urban regeneration*

Contemporary urban planning dynamics are based on negotiation and contractual relations, creating fragmented planning processes. On the one hand, they trigger technocratic forms of governance, which require the ‘legal instrumentalisation’ of planning in a piecemeal approach ensuring legal certainty. On the other hand, these processes require flexibility to enable easy, fast and efficient forms of implementation due to the increasing involvement of private sector actors in urban development. This article unravels the influence of these conflicting dynamics on the fundamentals of urban planning practices by focusing on changing public accountability mechanisms created through contractual relationships between public and private sector agencies. Dutch urban regeneration has demonstrated changing governance principles and dynamics in the last three decades. Representing instrumental and institutional measures, we connect accountability mechanisms to these changes and argue that they ‘co-exist’ in multiple forms across different contexts. This article embeds this evolution in wider theoretical discussions on the changing relationships between public and private sector actors in urban governance relative to the changing role of the state, and it addresses questions on who can be held accountable, and to what extent, when public sector actors are increasingly retreating from regulatory practices while private sector actors play increasingly prominent roles.     

Dispelling myths about conventions: ministerial advisers and parliamentary committees

There is a tension between a key principle underpinning liberal democratic governments and the associated political practice. Responsible government demands that the Executive is responsible to the Legislature. Governments, however, are generally inclined to evade or limit their accountability to Parliament wherever possible. In addition, ministerial advisers have thus far been excluded from the accountability framework of responsible government. This has led to an accountability deficit in terms of ministerial advisers appearing before parliamentary committees. Indeed, Ministers in the Australian Commonwealth and State of Victoria have claimed that there is a constitutional convention that ministerial advisers do not appear before parliamentary committees. This article challenges this claim and argues that there are no strong grounds based on precedent, reason, and the beliefs of political participants to conclude that there is a constitutional convention preventing ministerial advisers from appearing before parliamentary committees.     

秦汉行政中的效率规定与问责

秦汉行政中的效率规定主要表现为政府对行政事务的完成明确限期。以限期为中心的效率规定在秦汉政治中具有普遍性,不仅体现在政府的行政立法之中,而且也被广泛应用于和日常行政运作关系更为密切的文书命令中。秦汉时期,效率规定已经有了和唐代类似的、比较科学性的规律性。针对违反"效率规定"的行为,秦汉政府形成了一套比较完备的问责机制。     

Medical Hermeneutics of Murder. Race,Medicine and Law in a Murder Case from Finnmark, 1911

Abstract

This article seeks to investigate the investigation of a murder case in Finnmark in 1911, where four siblings killed their young brother. In the legal investigations following the misdeed, a number of medical experts played a prominent role. Their role was to assess the mental condition of the defendants, but also to make sense of the murder. A specific interpretational mode was called for: a “medical hermeneutics” of the murder. The murder investigation becomes an occasion for discussing medical and juridical interpretations of human agency at the turn of the century, and especially of the role of the concept of “race” in these interpretations. For at least some of the physicians involved, the racial make-up of the ethnic group to which the actors belonged constituted an inevitable part of the context that made the act intelligible. Although the concept of race, and the conceptual frameworks offered by degenerationism and medical psychology to a certain degree made the act intelligible, these interpretational schemes had little to offer in terms of assessing the legal accountability of the defendants. Hence, the case illustrates the profound epistemological limits of medical interpretation in facing a legal case.