CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 495

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Pathologies of Accountability: ICANN and the Challenge of “Multiple Accountabilities Disorder”

Koppell, Jonathan GS·2005·Public Administration Review
DOI 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2005.00434.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Accountability is a core concept of public administration, yet disagreement about its meaning is masked by consensus on its importance and desirability. This article proposes a five-part typology of accountability conceptions. Transparency, liability, controllability, responsibility, and responsiveness are defined as distinct dimensions of accountability, providing an improvement on the current state of conceptual fuzziness. The typology provides a vocabulary for the core argument: that conflicting expectations borne of disparate conceptions of accountability undermine organizational effectiveness. This phenomenon—labeled multiple accountabilities disorder—is illustrated with a case study. ICANN, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, is a nascent organization charged with administering the Domain Name System, the Internet's address directory. In its four-year history, ICANN has been the object of much criticism. Conflicting accountability expectations have been a source of difficulty for ICANN's leaders as they have steered the organization through its early years.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2005.00434.x

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 76

  1. Aberbach, 1988, Mandates or Mandarins? Control and Discretion in the Modern Administrative State, Public Administration Review, 48, 606, 10.2307/975761 · DOI
  2. Angwin, 1997, Net Addresses Sold Like Real Estate, San Francisco Chronicle, A1
  3. Barnard, 1938, The Functions of the Executive
  4. Bawn, 1995, Political Control versus Expertise: Congressional Choices about Administrative Procedures, American Political Science Review, 89, 62, 10.2307/2083075 · DOI
  5. Beck, 1982, Presidential Influence on the Federal Reserve in the 1970s, American Journal of Political Science, 26, 415, 10.2307/2110936 · DOI
  6. Behn, 2001, Rethinking Democratic Accountability
  7. Bray, 2002, Net Attack Dismissed; Security Experts: Assault on Root Servers Easily Defeated, Boston Globe, C1
  8. Chandler, 1988, The Public Administration Dictionary
  9. Clausing, 2000a, A Leader in Cyberspace, It Seems, Is No Politician, New York Times, C1
  10. Clausing, 2000b, What's in a Name, New York Times, C9
  11. Dawson, 2001, Congress Tweaks ICANN, The Industry Standard.com
  12. Dilulio, 1994, Principled Agents: The Cultural Bases of Behavior in a Federal Government Bureaucracy, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 4, 277
  13. Eisner, 1990, Presidential Control versus Bureaucratic Power: Explaining the Reagan Revolution in Anti-Trust, American Journal of Political Science, 34, 269, 10.2307/2111519 · DOI
  14. Epstein, 1994, Administrative Procedures, Information and Agency Discretion, American Journal of Political Science, 38, 697, 10.2307/2111603 · DOI
  15. Epstein, 1996, Divided Government and the Design of Administrative Procedures: A Formal Model and Empirical Test, Journal of Politics, 58, 373, 10.2307/2960231 · DOI
  16. Ferejohn, 1990, Congressional Influence on Bureaucracy, Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, 6, 1, 10.1093/jleo/6.special_issue.1 · DOI
  17. Finer, 1941, Administrative Responsibility in Democratic Government, Public Administration Review, 1, 335, 10.2307/972907 · DOI
  18. Friedrich, 1940, Public Policy, 3
  19. Golden, 1992, Exit, Voice, Loyalty, and Neglect: Bureaucratic Responses to Presidential Control during the Reagan Administration, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 2, 29
  20. Goodin, 2000, The International Encyclopedia of Elections, 2
  21. Goodnow, 1900, Politics and Administration: A Study in Government
  22. Grossman, 2000, Is the Cybersquatting Cure Worse than the Disease, Legal Times, 24
  23. Gruber, 1987, Controlling Bureaucracies, 10.1525/9780520330351 · DOI
  24. Hammond, 1996, Who Controls the Bureaucracy? Presidential Power, Congressional Dominance, Legal Constraints, and Bureaucratic Autonomy in a Model of Multi-Institutional Policy-Making, Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, 12, 119, 10.1093/oxfordjournals.jleo.a023355 · DOI
  25. Healy, 1999, State Posts Drops in Births to Single Women; Welfare: California Leads the U.S. in Reducing Unwed Motherhood, Which Is Linked to Dependence on Aid, Los Angeles Times, A3
  26. Heclo, 1978, The New American Political System, 87
  27. Hill, 1991, Constraining Administrative Decisions: A Critical Examination of the Structure and Process Hypothesis, Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, 7, 373
  28. Horn, 1989, Symposium on the Law and Economics of Bargaining: Commentary on “Administrative Arrangements and the Political Control of Agencies: Administrative Process and Organizational Form as Legislative Responses to Agency Costs.”, Virginia Law Review, 75, 499, 10.2307/1073181 · DOI
  29. Hummel, 1987, The Bureaucratic Experience
  30. Kaplan, 1999, Domain Name Truce May Still Stall Suffixes, Los Angeles Times, C4
  31. Kearney, 1988, Professionalism and Bureaucratic Responsiveness: Conflict or Compatibility, Public Administration Review, 48, 571, 10.2307/975521 · DOI
  32. Krause, 1994, Federal Reserve Policy Decision Making: Political and Bureaucratic Influences, American Journal of Political Science, 38, 124, 10.2307/2111338 · DOI
  33. Labaton, 1993, Failing Grades on the First Waco Attack, New York Times, 42
  34. Leazes, 1997, Public Accountability, Administration and Society, 29, 395, 10.1177/009539979702900401 · DOI
  35. Liedtke, 2001, Web Domain Registrar Sets Sights on Empire, Toronto Star, B1
  36. Mashaw, 1994, Improving the Environment of Agency Rulemaking: An Essay on Management, Games, and Accountability, Law and Contemporary Problems, 57, 185, 10.2307/1192051 · DOI
  37. McCubbins, 1987, Administrative Procedures as Instruments of Political Control
  38. McCullagh, 2000, ICANN Elects Iconoclasts, Wired News
  39. McKinney, 1981, Process Accountability and the Creative Use of Intergovernmental Resources, Public Administration Review, 41, 144, 10.2307/975457 · DOI
  40. Melnick Shep, 1983, Regulation and the Courts: The Case of the Clean Air Act
  41. Mladenka, 1980, The Urban Bureaucracy and the Chicago Political Machine: Who Gets What and the Limits to Political Control, American Political Science Review, 74, 991, 10.2307/1954318 · DOI
  42. Moe, 1994, The “Reinventing Government” Exercise: Misinterpreting the Problem, Misjudging the Consequences, Public Administration Review, 54, 111, 10.2307/976519 · DOI
  43. Moe, 2000, Government Reinvention Revisited, The Public Manager, 29, 37
  44. Moe, 1995, Rediscovering Principles of Public Administration: The Neglected Foundation of Public Law, Public Administration Review, 55, 135, 10.2307/977179 · DOI
  45. Moe, 1982, Regulatory Performance and Presidential Administration, American Journal of Political Science, 26, 197, 10.2307/2111036 · DOI
  46. Mueller, 1999, ICANN and Internet Governance, Journal of Policy, Regulation and Strategy for Telecommunications Information and Media, 1, 497, 10.1108/14636699910801223 · DOI
  47. Mueller, 2002, Ruling the Root: Internet Governance and the Taming of Cyberspace
  48. Murphy, 2001, U.S. Government Should Retain Control of DNS, Say Congressmen, Computerwire
  49. O'Laughlin, 1990, What Is Bureaucratic Accountability and How Can We Measure It, Administration and Society, 22, 275, 10.1177/009539979002200301 · DOI
  50. O'Neill, 2001, Civilization Is under Attack: Bush: President Says Bin Laden Seeks “Evil Weapons;” Tells Allies They Must Join War, Ottawa Citizen, A6
  51. Osborne, 1992, Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit Is Transforming the Public Sector
  52. Pennock Roland, 1952, Responsiveness, Responsibility, and Majority Rule, American Political Science Review, 46, 790, 10.2307/1952285 · DOI
  53. Piven, 1971, Regulating the Poor: The Functions of Public Welfare
  54. Radin, 1996, Accountability Expectations in an Intergovernmental Arena: The National Rural Development Partnership, Publius, 26, 59, 10.1093/oxfordjournals.pubjof.a029855 · DOI
  55. Robinson, 1989, Symposium on the Law and Economics of Bargaining: Commentary on “Administrative Arrangements and the Political Control of Agencies”: Administrative Process and Organizational Form as Legislative Responses to Agency Costs, Virginia Law Review, 75, 483, 10.2307/1073180 · DOI
  56. Romzek, 1996, Handbook of Public Administration, 97
  57. Romzek, 1987, Accountability in the Public Sector: Lessons from the Challenger Tragedy, Public Administration Review, 47, 227, 10.2307/975901 · DOI
  58. Romzek, 2000, Cross Pressures of Accountability: Initiative, Command, and Failure in the Ron Brown Plane Crash, Public Administration Review, 60, 240, 10.1111/0033-3352.00084 · DOI
  59. Rosen, 1989, Holding Government Bureaucracies Accountable
  60. Rourke, 1992, Responsiveness and Neutral Competence in American Bureaucracy, Public Administration Review, 52, 539, 10.2307/977164 · DOI
  61. Rubin, 2000, European Director of Internet Group Hopes to End U.S. Domination of Web, Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News
  62. Sanger, 2002, Bush, at School, Promotes Education Bill, New York Times, A26
  63. Scales, 1999, Bush Raps Rivals, Own Party on Education; Urges Accountability for Schools; Rues Democrats' Despair, Boston Globe, A29
  64. Selznick, 1957, Leadership in Administration
  65. Sensenbrenner, 1991, Quality Comes to City Hall, Harvard Business Review, 69, 64
  66. Soat, 2001, IT Confidential, InformationWeek, 154
  67. Standen, 2001, The Saga of Sucks.Com, Ottawa Citizen, B7
  68. Stellin, 2001, New Contract Covering Internet Domain Name Registry Raises Questions about Whether the Address System Is Competitive, New York Times, C4
  69. Taggart, 2001a, ICANN-VeriSign Brouhaha, Wired News
  70. Taggart, 2001b, Furor Over ICANN-VeriSign Deal, Wired News
  71. Tullock, 1965, The Politics of Bureaucracy
  72. Waldmeir, 2000, Financial Times, 6
  73. Weingast, 1983, Bureaucratic Discretion or Congressional Control? Regulatory Policymaking by the Federal Trade Commission, Journal of Political Economy, 91, 765, 10.1086/261181 · DOI
  74. Wilson, 1989, Bureaucracy: What Government Agencies Do and Why They Do It
  75. Wilson, 1887, The Study of Administration, Political Science Quarterly, 2, 197, 10.2307/2139277 · DOI
  76. Wood, 1994, Bureaucratic Dynamics: The Role of Bureaucracy in a Democracy

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 495

Metadata

Authors
Koppell, J. G.
Venue
Public Administration Review
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-01
Volume
65
Issue
1
Pages
94-108
ISSN
0033-3352
DOI
10.1111/j.1540-6210.2005.00434.x
Cited by
495
References
0
Language
en
Licence
doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1 (tdm, 3895 d)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Pathologies of Accountability: ICANN and the Challenge of “Multiple Accountabilities Disorder”. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2005.00434.x
The paper
Koppell, J. G. (2005). Pathologies of Accountability: ICANN and the Challenge of “Multiple Accountabilities Disorder”. Public Administration Review. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2005.00434.x