The research question and the tenacity of the study have been addressed explicitly by the authors. The manuscript provides the operational definition of the concept of governance networks and also describes conceptual models. Besides, the authors have referenced different works of literature that express the idea of governance network and which link network governance to accountability. Additionally, the authors apply the governing framework to various studies that were carried out on several regulatory systems involved in the recovery and response after Hurricane Katrina. The paper describes governance network to be a steady pattern of matched actions and resource linking policy actors crossing different social scales drawn from the public, private, or nonprofit administrations. These sectors relate through a variety of modest, understanding and control, cooperative and discussed provisions.
The most effective structure for analyzing accountability within multifaceted management glitches within the governing networks. The examination of its effectiveness is conducted by identifying the multi-state and public, private and nonprofit characteristics of these systems. Moreover, a responsibility philosophy is advanced and planned around chosen human representatives and the legitimate organization, proprietors together with consumers and administration relationships. Therefore, hurricane Katrina which occurred as a result of gulf coast landfall on August 29, 2005, is a consequence of numerous failures in the government. Hurricane Katrina exposed failures in systems such as engineering, public safety, logistics, recovery, and race relations. Additionally, the disaster is as a result of poorly coordinated responses among all levels of the regime.
The authors are trying to examine how trade-offs amid different accountability models could have resulted in failures in the performance of the governance networks. Also, the review seeks to provide suggestions for policymakers and disaster management practitioners. Additionally, the literature review aims at discussing how the government, as well as the private organizations, fail in the enactment and highlight the need for additional theoretic as well as the experimental growth of investigative tools to ascertain and evaluate how and where fiasco’s of responsibility caved in. For instance, Edward 2009 suggests that most functions fail as a result of leaders’ failures to implement comprehensive, proficient judgments while they are on duty.
127 our experts are availableright now
The literature review of this article is thorough in that the authors have used rigorous frameworks to analyze the accountability structures of the government organizations. The review focuses on the Dubnick and Romzek’s model of accountability framework and applies it to examine organizations governance accountability structures. The authors have also represented the accountability model in a table which contains the essential elements of the concept to which they are used on eight accountability types.
Various cases have been put into consideration, for instance, the four different accountability structures that function within NASA in addition to government actors in general. The administrative practitioners include; legal, bureaucratic, political and professional. Moreover, ascendency network structure control is understood regarding vertical and horizontal nature of associations among players. Consistent with Scott, 2006, these assertions give shape to the theoretic and concrete uses of narratives in responsibility.
The work adequately addresses the main components and concepts of research. For instance, ascendency networks apply the degree of significance and the relative powers of controlling bodies. Therefore, this suggests that the tyranny makes the individuals holding high positions in governance to implement bad decisions. Moreover, the review addresses various dichotomies modeled within the political management and partisan discipline fields such as politics and administration dichotomy. The article takes the combination of both responsibilities to govern public establishments successfully. However, According to Rosen bloom, 1983, the separation among the political and organizational functions in public management model is extensively assumed.
The literature is not bias as it addresses several loopholes and mismanagement of the public resources among the individuals who have been trusted with them. The authors further explain that mismanagement of public resources can be dealt with by constructing a tri-prolonged concept of accountability for ascendency networks incorporating democratic, market and administrative frames.
Consequently, the literature does an excellent job of presenting the three-pronged theory of accountability for ascendency systems. The approach shows the relationship among the citizen and the government. Additionally, the authors have recast Romzek and Dubnick’ perspective of political accountability by focusing on the important responsibilities and duties of citizens and elected representatives. Furthermore, the manuscript distills governance relationships into its central processes and investigates how accountability is framed in regards to the dynamics functioning between professionals, principals, collaborators, and agents. The democratic frame shows the relationship between the political constituents and public stakeholders. On the other hand, the market frame differentiates the capital and production markets among the private and public entities. The administrative framework exhibited the vertical and horizontal connections within classified administrations and compliment cooperative arrangements. The hypotheses being applied in this research have been put into practice to help minimize the tradeoffs being experienced.
The information gathered from the landfall of Hurricane Katrina provided relevant data on the number of individuals who suffered as a result of lack of coordination, miscommunication, and failure of an initiative by representatives. The research question demonstrates and confirms the validity and reliability of the sources and the content of the authors. According to the research, political actors were the principal accountable for the organization and resourcefulness required to respond to the landfall of the hurricane successfully.
Nevertheless, the authors such as Sigler describes that the information given is reliable by providing the amplitude and the magnitude of the effects that were experienced after the individuals elected to perform their duties failed to conduct them effectively thus resulting to failures found in the democratic accountability frame. Moreover, the data presented by the authors in the article on individuals who were deployed to rescue and those who perished in the landfall indicate that the data collected provide a valid measure of dependent and independent variables. However, according to Brinkley 2006, the statistics collected did not account for thousands of individuals and hoc saviors, and the emergency reaction groups who endangered their survival to save their related members.
The authors do not clearly explain the methods used for research and data collection procedures. However, the statistics briefly describes and gives estimates of the organizations both public and private that were involved in the rescue’s mission and the people who were located at the scene, thus giving a non-scholar a general idea of the approximate members who were involved in the whole operation and those who perished. Additionally, the methods applied are not as effective as it failed to provide the exact figures of the people who succumb to the disaster and those who participated in the rescue mission. Some of the challenges people encountered include; delays in medical care, lack of emergency services and failure of ingenuity. The government at all stages cannot be quantified thus the qualitative perspective is incorporated. As a result of the landslide many people suffered lost properties and died, therefore, bringing into account the view of quantitative measure, consequently both qualitative and quantitative measures can be used together.
The results obtained have been recorded in a manner that both the scholars and the non-scholars can be able to comprehend the statistics with ease and without further interpretation. Each account of the tragedy has been recorded and activities to have been kept into the record for easy understanding by the residents. There are diagrams which have been applied for easy recognition by the scholars such as the standard process for requesting assistance. Additionally, the authors have used a table to present their information. The simplicity in their presentation and interpretation of results has aided students to comprehend what is required and the procedure that is to be applied when calling for assistance in crises.
The results have supported the conclusion presented about the findings. The outcome is reliable as the public regime has a crucial and unique role to play in the governance network to ensure the quality of autonomous anchorage subsists among the citizen and the government. Moreover, the public value should be considered regarding productions and results and also regarding accountability governments to guarantee that the public interest is being aided.
In a nutshell, the authors have conducted this research in a way that shows the scholar the happenings from the start, the situation and the causes of the scenarios to the consequences that resulted from the poor governance network. Additionally, it has explained technical terms and models using several works of literature from other, others. Therefore depicts high research quality conducted by the authors. Furthermore, the paper has a significant contribution to the general public, the public servants and the students at large. Students can learn the aspects that poor leadership can result to and also to learn on the ways they can help curb the mismanagement and where else, the public have been able to learn on the methods of asking for assistance in case a calamity occurs.
