Ethical Disputes, Coordinated Behaviors, and the Construction of an Interactive Accountability Model for Non-Governmental Organizations: A Grounded Theory Study Based on a Dryland Farming Project in City H

Zhirui Wang

Show Less

¹ China University of Geosciences, Wuhan 430074, Hubei, China,

ssr 2025 , 7(5), 99–107; https://doi.org/10.26689/ssr.v7i5.10672

Abstract

Accountability holds significant normative significance in supervising the conduct of accountable entities. This study conducted unstructured interviews with 21 relevant individuals from the dry farming and rain-fed water-saving project team in H City, county and township government departments, village cadres, and farmers. Combined with grounded theory research on texts, it found that the characteristics of the accountability interaction process are: adhering to the principles of “transparency” and “information disclosure” after emergencies, ethical disputes, establishing a feedback mechanism through “villager participation” and “government collaboration”, implementing supervision and evaluation, and conducting dispute coordination. The core contribution of the accountability interaction model built on this basis lies in constructing an effective accountability mechanism for responding to emergencies, providing ideas for revealing the accountability interaction process of non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and constructing their accountability systems.

References

Hall M, O’Dwyer B, 2017, Accounting, Non-governmental Organizations and Civil Society: The Importance of Nonprofit Organizations to Understanding Accounting, Organizations and Society. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 2017(63): 1–5.

Agyemang G, O’Dwyer B, Unerman J, et al., 2017, Seeking “Conversations for Accountability”: Mediating the Impact of Non-governmental Organization (NGO) Upward Accountability Processes. Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal, 30(5): 982–1007.

Messner M, 2009, The Limits of Accountability: Accounting. Organizations and Society, 34(8): 918–938.

O’Dwyer B, Boomsma R, 2015, The Co-construction of NGO Accountability: Aligning Imposed and Felt Accountability in NGO-funder Accountability Relationships. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability, 28(1): 36–68.

Roberts J, 2003, No One is Perfect: The Limits of Transparency and an Ethic for “Intelligent” Accountability. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34(8): 957–970.

Roberts J, Scapens R, 1985, Accounting Systems and Systems of Accountability — Understanding Accounting Practices in their Organisational Contexts. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 10(4): 443–456.

Roberts J, 2003, No One is Perfect: The Limits of Transparency and an Ethic for “Intelligent” Accountability. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34(8): 957–970.

Ebrahim A, 2003, Accountability in Practice: Mechanisms for NGOs. World Development: Oxford, 31(5): 813–829.

Brendan O’Dwyer, Unerman J, 2008, The Paradox of Greater NGO Accountability: A Case Study of Amnesty Ireland. Accounting Organizations & Society, 2008, 33(7–8): 801–824.

Roberts J, 1991, The Possibilities of Accountability. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 16(4): 355–368.

O’Dwyer B, Unerman J, 2007, From Functional to Social Accountability: Transforming the Accountability Relationship between Funders and Non-governmental Development Organisations. Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal, 20(20): 446–471.

Patriotta G, Gond JP, Schultz F, 2011, Maintaining Legitimacy: Controversies, Orders of Worth, and Public Justifications. Journal of Management Studies, 48(8): 1804–1836.

Annisette M, Richardson AJ, 2011, Justification and Accounting: Applying Sociology of Worth to Accounting Research. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 24(2): 229–249.

Ness GD, 1967, Bureaucracy and Rural Development in Malaysia. University of California Press, California

Previous article in this issue

Next article in this issue