Accounts and accountability: Theoretical implications of the right-to-information movement in India

By R. Jenkins, A. Goetz. 1999

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Participatory development, complicity and desire (2005, background): “Much more work and research is required on this issue, but there is already evidence of the use of these types of political tactics: Jenkins & Goetz (1999) document how participation inspires a right-to-information campaign challenging government corruption and accountability in Rajasthan; and…”
The (im)possibility of development studies (2007, background): “49 For further discussion, see Jenkins and Goetz (1999).”
Social accountability: an introduction to the concept and emerging practice (2004, unknown): “See Jenkins and Goetz (1999).”
Hybrid Forms Of Accountability: Citizen engagement in institutions of public-sector oversight in India (2001, background): “These surveys have both merits and shortcomings (Jenkins and Goetz 1999a, 1999b), but most importantly they do not involve nancial or even actual performance auditing, and thus do not represent a challenge to the state’s monopoly over horizontal institutions of accountability.”
Is Transparency an Effective Anti-Corruption Strategy? Evidence from a Field Experiment in India (2010, background): “A “social audit” movement was born out of these efforts (Jenkins & Goetz 1999, pp. 614–615) and became institutionalized in state-level freedom of information statutes in Tamil Nadu (1997), Goa (1997), Rajasthan (2000), Karnataka (2000), and later in five other states.”