The Fourfold Typology of Accountability: A Reexamination of Theoretical Connotations, Values, and Limits
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63313/SSH.9030Keywords:
Romzek and Dubnick, accountability typology, values, action, governance reformAbstract
This article reexamines Barbara S. Romzek and Melvin J. Dubnick’s fourfold typology of accountability, which distinguishes hierarchical, legal, professional, and political forms. The study aims to clarify the theoretical connotations, practical values, and inherent limitations of this framework in contemporary public administration. Methodologically, the paper conducts a systematic literature review combined with a critical theoretical analysis from a “values–action” perspective. The results show that the typology effectively expands the analytical boundaries of administrative responsibility by introducing a multidimensional and context-sensitive approach, thereby offering a flexible tool for understanding accountability in complex governance environments. However, its application in practice reveals persistent dilemmas, including conflicts among accountability types, blurred responsibility boundaries, and institutional path dependence, which may lead to accountability failure or buck-passing. The conclusion emphasizes that while the fourfold typology enriches the theoretical foundation of accountability studies, its practical implementation requires continuous adaptation to institutional contexts, task characteristics, and managerial strategies. For China, the framework provides significant insights into improving administrative accountability, particularly under the conditions of digital governance, globalization, and decentralization.
References
[1] Romzek, B. S., & Dubnick, M. J. (2018). Accountability in the public sector: Lessons from the Challenger tragedy. In Democracy, bureaucracy, and the study of administration (pp. 182-204). Routledge.
[2] Yu, W. (2006). A new conceptual framework of public responsibility: Compound public responsibility theory and its implications. Dongnan Xueshu (Southeast Academic Re-search), (3), 17–22.
[3] Finer, H. (1941). Administrative Responsibility in Democratic Government. Public Admin-istration Review, 1(4), 335.
[4] Friedlich, C. J. (1940). Public policy and the nature of administrative responsibility. Public policy, 1, 1-20.
[5] Hughes, O. E. (2007). Public management and administration: An introduction (3rd ed.; Zhang Chengfu et al., Trans.). Beijing: China Renmin University Press. p. 295..
[6] Hughes, O. E. (2007). Public management and administration: An introduction (3rd ed.; Zhang Chengfu et al., Trans.). Beijing: China Renmin University Press. p. 290-281.
[7] Schillemans, T., & Bovens, M. (2011). The challenge of multiple accountability. Accounta-ble governance: Problems and promises, 3-21.
[8] Wang, M. (2018). Research on graded protection of personal privacy in the era of big data. Beijing: Social Sciences Academic Press. pp. 37–48.
[9] Guo, D. (2022). Social governance and art critique from multiple perspectives. Chongqing: Chongqing University Press. pp. 73–135, 143–175.
[10] Li, M. (2007). The implications of the four-part accountability framework for the con-struction of China’s administrative accountability system. In Proceedings of the 2007 An-nual Conference of the Hubei Administrative Management Society.
[11] Thompson, J. D. (2017). Organizations in action: Social science bases of administrative theory. Routledge：1-224.
[12] Romzek, B. S., & Ingraham, P. W. (2000). Cross pressures of accountability: Initiative, command, and failure in the Ron Brown plane crash. Public Administration Review, 60(3), 240-253..
[13] Koppell, J. G. (2005). Pathologies of accountability: ICANN and the challenge of “multiple accountabilities disorder”. Public administration review, 65(1), 94-108..
[14] Weber, M. (2010). Economy and society (Vol. 1; Yan Kewen, Trans.). Shanghai: Shanghai People’s Publishing House. pp. 318–330.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 by author(s) and Erytis Publishing Limited.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
