The article "Analysing and Assessing Accountability: A Conceptual Framework" by Mark Bovens explores the concept of accountability in European governance. It aims to develop a systematic framework for understanding and evaluating accountability practices. The article is structured around three main questions: what is meant by accountability, what types of accountability are involved, and how should these arrangements be assessed. 1. **Concept of Accountability**: The article defines accountability narrowly as a relationship between an actor and a forum, where the actor is obligated to explain and justify their conduct, the forum can pose questions and pass judgment, and the actor may face consequences. This definition emphasizes the interactive and evaluative nature of accountability. 2. **Types of Accountability**: The article identifies several dimensions of accountability, including political, legal, administrative, professional, and social accountability. Each type involves different forums and criteria for responsible conduct, and different obligations for the actor. 3. **Assessing Accountability**: The article provides three evaluative perspectives—democratic, constitutional, and learning—to assess the adequacy and effectiveness of accountability arrangements. These perspectives help identify both deficits and excesses in accountability practices. The article concludes by emphasizing the importance of accountability in monitoring and controlling government conduct, preventing power concentrations, and enhancing the learning capacity and effectiveness of public administration. It highlights the need for a systematic approach to understanding and evaluating accountability in European governance.The article "Analysing and Assessing Accountability: A Conceptual Framework" by Mark Bovens explores the concept of accountability in European governance. It aims to develop a systematic framework for understanding and evaluating accountability practices. The article is structured around three main questions: what is meant by accountability, what types of accountability are involved, and how should these arrangements be assessed. 1. **Concept of Accountability**: The article defines accountability narrowly as a relationship between an actor and a forum, where the actor is obligated to explain and justify their conduct, the forum can pose questions and pass judgment, and the actor may face consequences. This definition emphasizes the interactive and evaluative nature of accountability. 2. **Types of Accountability**: The article identifies several dimensions of accountability, including political, legal, administrative, professional, and social accountability. Each type involves different forums and criteria for responsible conduct, and different obligations for the actor. 3. **Assessing Accountability**: The article provides three evaluative perspectives—democratic, constitutional, and learning—to assess the adequacy and effectiveness of accountability arrangements. These perspectives help identify both deficits and excesses in accountability practices. The article concludes by emphasizing the importance of accountability in monitoring and controlling government conduct, preventing power concentrations, and enhancing the learning capacity and effectiveness of public administration. It highlights the need for a systematic approach to understanding and evaluating accountability in European governance.