Fulltext present in this item

Thumbnail
Fulltext: 141836.pdf
Format: PDF
Description: publisher's version
Embargo: until further notice
Title: Harmonizing competing rationalities in evaluating governance
Author(s): Bemelmans-Videc, M.L. ; Fenger Ph.D., H.J.M.
Publication year: 1999
Source: Knowledge, Technology and Policy, vol. 12, iss. 2, (1999), pp. 38-51
ISSN: 1946-4789
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12130-999-1021-5
Publication type: Article / Letter to editor

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item : https://hdl.handle.net/2066/141836   https://hdl.handle.net/2066/141836

Display more details
Subject: Internationalisering van Europa
Organization: Bestuurskunde
Journal title:
Knowledge, Technology and Policy
Volume: vol. 12
Issue: iss. 2
Page start: p. 38
Page end: p. 51
Abstract:
Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs) investigate the regularity (conformity to legislation) and performance (economy, efficiency, and effectiveness) of central government policies and administration through the instrument of accountability. Both types of audit have their own research process and set of standards. This article deals with the question of whether this distinction inhibits a proper appraisal of policy and administration and investigates the possibilities for SAIs to attain more integrated assessment procedures. This question is of vital importance, not only to SAIs but to any controlling and inspecting body, whether political or administrative.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Browse

Statistics