Original
Beyond monolithic state logic: how top-down accountability shapes policy implementation
Abstract
How does top-down accountability shape policy implementation? Drawing on institutional logics, this paper distinguishes two state sub-logics: ‘high-stakes context logic’ emphasizing centralized control during crises, and ‘routine governance logic’ allowing discretion during day-to-day administration. These sub-logics condition the perceived legitimacy of accountability demands, felt accountability, and behavioural responses. A survey experiment with over 800 public service respondents shows that, under high-stakes logic, intensified accountability progressively improve compliance, whereas under routine logic, moderate accountability produces optimal compliance, with high-intensity accountability yielding diminishing returns. These findings challenge binary views of accountability and reveal how within-logic variations may alter governance mechanisms.
中文
超越单一的国家逻辑:自上而下的问责如何塑造政策执行
摘要
自上而下的问责如何塑造政策执行?本文借鉴制度逻辑,区分了两种国家次级逻辑:强调危机期间集中控制的“高利害情境逻辑”,以及允许日常行政中自由裁量的“常规治理逻辑”。这些次级逻辑调节了问责要求的感知合法性、感受到的问责以及行为反应。一项针对800多名公共服务受访者的调查实验表明,在高利害情境逻辑下,问责强度的提高会逐步提升合规性;而在常规治理逻辑下,适度问责产生最优合规性,高强度问责则带来收益递减。这些发现挑战了关于问责的二元观点,并揭示了同一逻辑内部的差异如何可能改变治理机制。
关键词
自上而下问责、政策执行、制度逻辑、高利害情境逻辑、常规治理逻辑、调查实验、合规、自由裁量权