1,720,990 research outputs found
LA LEGITTIMAZIONE DELL’AMMINISTRAZIONE PUBBLICA AI TEMPI DEL CORONAVIRUS. CHE COSA SI PUÒ IMPARARE DAL CASO “COREA DEL SUD”?
No full textThe Contingency Model of Reforms in Public Sector Accounting
Full text link[Excerpt] Definition: The “contingency model” (Lüder 1992, 1994, 2002) explains reforms in governmental accounting and financial management systems, resorting to several factors making part of the contextual conditions of those reforms. Also used in an a posteriori perspective, it essentially posits an a priori setting, where several factors combine more or less favorably to determine the likelihood of reforms to come to happen. In particular, the model allows to frame the more or less favorable combination of contextual conditions within one country, to conduct the so-called traditional governmental accounting system to change toward performance and resource accounting and budgeting.
The main underlying assumption is that specific contextual variables determine the primary user orientation of governmental accounting and reporting, which, in turn, determines the... [...]This study was conducted at the Research Center in Political Science (UIDB/CPO/00758/2020), University of Minho/University of Évora and supported by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) and the Portuguese Ministry of Education and Science through national funds.First Online: 09 February 201
LE RIFORME DEL SISTEMA SANITARIO NAZIONALE ITALIANO E GLI IMPATTI NELLA GESTIONE DELLA PANDEMIA
No full textTHE SOCIAL AUDIT AND SOCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY AMBIGUITIES IN THE CONTEXT OF THE PARTICIPATORY BUDGETING ADOPTION
Full text linkAn interesting initiative introduced in the public sector in recent years is participatory budgeting (PB), which has gained popularity, particularly with the advent of the New Public Governance (Touchton et al., 2023; Wampler & Touchton, 2019). PB aims to develop democratic strategies that allow communities to exercise popular control over decision-making processes (Mattei et al., 2022). While the preparatory side of PB has been extensively investigated in the literature, the user side remains largely unknown (Bartocci et al., 2022). In this light, it is possible to hypothesize that involving citizens in the evaluation and monitoring phases could improve the alignment between policy-making and citizens‘ expectations (Mattei et al., 2022). From this perspective, it becomes interesting to focus on social audit, which is a crucial process for an organization‘s social accountability. It is characterized by openness, transparency, and accountability, involving all stakeholders (Sathiabama, 2018). It serves as a managerial control mechanism that measures intangible and qualitative issues (Cotton, 2000). The purpose of a social audit is to enable organizations to evaluate and demonstrate their social, ethical, economic, and environmental benefits, as well as aspects related to health, working conditions, human rights, ethical rights, social protection, and transparency (Cotton, 2000; Humphrey & Owen, 2000; Sathiabama, 2018). It provides an assessment of an organization‘s performance and non-financial objectives by showcasing the achievement of its social goals and monitoring stakeholders‘ opinions (Sathiabama, 2018). However, the literature on this topic is still underdeveloped, and uncertainties persist, particularly regarding the terms used (e.g., ―social audit‖, ―social accountability‖, ―voice and accountability‖, or ―social control‖ used as synonyms) and the implied concepts (e.g., social auditing sometimes seen as equivalent to social accountability, while other times seen as a tool for it) (Baltazar & Sepúlveda, 2015). Therefore, considering the significance of participatory budgeting and the ambiguities surrounding social audit (or accountability), the aim is to understand how previous studies have analyzed the relationships between ―social audit‖ or ―social accountability‖ and ―participatory budgeting‖ to clarify the existing relations between these terms, given the aforementioned ambiguities about social audit and social accountability. To achieve this aim, a structured review of the literature (Massaro et al., 2016) has been carried out. In light of the purpose of the study, the keywords ̳participatory budget*‘ and ̳social audit*‘ and ̳social account*‘ were chosen in the string TITLE-ABS-KEY (―participatory budget*‖ and (―social audit*‖ or ―social account*‖)). This string was searched on Scopus because it is the most widely used and most available database for multidisciplinary scientific literature (De Moya-Anegón et al., 2007). The search was done in title, abstract and keywords because these are considered the sections‘ articles that typically contain keywords (Dal Mas et al., 2019; Natalicchio et al., 2017; Paoloni et al., 2020). The available papers were twelve. Then, the search was restricted to papers written in English to avoid translation problems (Mauro et al., 2017). Finally, two contributions were removed: a book that was a duplicate and a paper that was out of topic. Therefore, the eligible sample includes ten contributions. This analysis highlights the path of social auditing and its implications in the participatory process, like PB. The ten manuscripts have different natures; in detail: five are articles, and five are book chapters. Longitudinal analysis shows that the first publication dates to 2010 and that, thereafter, scientific production on this topic is very patchy. In fact, some years (2017, 2018 and 2021) present a couple of publications per year. In other years (2011, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2020), no articles are published. Looking at the geographical content considered by the authors of the eligible manuscripts, following the categorisation used by (Broadbent & Guthrie, 2008; Paoloni et al., 2020), it is possible to highlight that two documents have not considered a particular case because are literature review or conceptual paper. Then, four documents analysed the Asia context, followed by three manuscripts from Central and South America and only one document from Africa and the Middle East. The eligible studies are carried out with various methodologies; in detail: 7 used qualitative methods, only one author used a quantitative method, one used a conceptual, and one used a literature review. Finally, analysing the papers‘ content, it is possible to highlight how, over time, the social audit has become a means used not only by private companies to reconcile economic and social objectives (Evans et al., 1998) but also in the public sector, as the participatory budgeting, a participatory governance tool, even if they do it differently. Based on the literature review, social audit and participatory budgeting are considered tools within the broader concept of social accountability. Some authors (Chowdhury & Panday, 2018) see them as interconnected, while others view participatory budgeting as a means to enhance social accountability without explicitly mentioning social audit (Touchton et al., 2023). Future research could try to clarify these grey areas that have been highlighted. Further evidence emerges regarding the need to produce contextualised studies in Europe as well as a lack of quantitative studies analysing the above-mentioned phenomena. This study aims to emphasize the significance of social auditing, despite the persisting ambiguities surrounding the use of terms like social audit or social accountability in the context of PB. Additionally, it contributes by analyzing the present state of social auditing and social accountability in PB, highlighting the public sector reforms implemented during the analyzed period
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Full text linkWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
- …
