Muhittin Acar

Understanding Collaboration Among Nonprofit Organizations: Combining Resource Dependency, Institutional, and Network Perspectives

Existing research stops short of explaining why nonprofit organizations develop certain forms of collaborations instead of others. In this article, the authors combine resource dependency, institutional, and network theories to examine the factors that influence the likelihood that nonprofit organizations develop formal types of collaborative activities vis-à-vis informal types. Based on the survey data of 95 urban charitable organizations, the study has found that an organization is more likely to increase the degree of formality of its collaborative activities when it is older, has a larger budget size, receives government funding but relies on fewer government funding streams, has more board linkages with other nonprofit organizations, and is not operating in the education and research or social service industry.

Accountability When Hierarchical Authority is Absent: Views from Public-Private Partnership Practitioners

What function does accountability serve in public–private partnerships where one partner has no authority over others and no control over results? This article aims to shed light on this question by studying participants of partnerships formed between K-12 public schools and private and/ or nonprofit organizations. Findings support the notion that accountability plays a greater role in public management than indicated by the idea of answerability. Five potential functions of accountability are identified: mapping and manifesting expectations, mobilizing and motivating (ex-ante), monitoring and measuring progress and performance, modifying, and mobilizing and motivating (ex-post).

Accountability Challenges in Networks and Partnerships: Evidence from Educational Partnerships in the United States

The study from which this article is drawn constitutes one of the first attempts to remedy the paucity of research on accountability in the context of interorganizational networks and public–private partnerships. The data for the study were drawn from field research focusing particularly on partnerships formed between K-12 public schools and private and/or non-profit organizations in the United States. The most frequently cited difficulties associated with accountability in partnerships were the availability of and access to information, sectoral and personal differences, and frequent changes in personnel, resources, and partners.

Concentrated Hopes, Diffused Responsibilities: Accountability in Public-Private Partnerships

Public-private partnerships have emerged, in the last couple of decades, as a new institutional arrangement through which to deal with a variety of key societal concerns, such as environmental improvement, regional and urban economic development, and educational reforms. Despite the rapid growth in their number, scope, and influence, there is still a need for considerable theoretical and empirical work exploring the nature of these multi-sectoral collaborative arrangements. One area of inquiry in which little scholarly work has been conducted is the topic of accountability mechanisms in public-private partnerships. As the focus of this paper, we explore this topic by first identifying some of the basic properties of these partnerships as they differ from traditional hierarchical organizations. We then analyze five different accountability mechanisms that have been used to historically to enhance the accountability of public as well as private organizations. These mechanisms include bureaucratic, political, professional, legal, and market approaches to accountability. Our analysis summarizes the basic characteristics of these five approaches to accountability and examines the potential relevance of each for accountability in the context of public-private partnerships. In light of the various weaknesses of these traditional approaches, we then propose a number of guidelines regarding three alternative approaches to accountability that are more consistent with the basic nature and purpose of public-private partnerships. We conclude the paper with some brief comments regarding possible future directions for research on accountability in public-private partnerships.

Review of The Handbook of Public Administration

(2013). Review of The Handbook of Public Administration. Journal of Public Affairs Education: Vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 773-775.

Typologies of Environmental Partnerships

The widespread dissatisfaction with command-and-control approaches to environmental protection has led environmentalists, business, government agencies, and communities to identify and implement a set of new and more collaborative solutions to environmental problems. The use of environmental partnerships constitutes one example of such new approaches to environmental protection, and is the topic of this paper. The paper first reviews some of the existing typologies of environmental partnerships. It then proposes three new typologies of environmental partnerships. The first typology employs partnerships’ standing vis-a-vis environmental regulation as its parameter. The second typology utilizes James Q. Wilson’s (1989) description of four different political environments surrounding public bureaucracies. The third typology takes as its main dimensions the levels of public money and governmental authority involved in partnerships. The paper ends with a brief discussion.

The 'R's of Regional Collaboration

The number, scope and influence of regional collaborative arrangements have increased at a fascinating rate in the last decade, particularly within the array of EU regional policies and programs. The current paper thus aims to provide both scholars and practitioners with an “analytical tool”, or a “checklist” of sort to think thoroughly the critical determinants of “collaborative performance” as well as the most appropriate criteria for evaluating it.

The Diffusion of Public-Private Partnerships as a New Form of Governance: An Institutional Perspective

The current paper construes PPPs as an administrative/structural innovation, and analyses the diffusion of this innovation in urban and regional development in the USA. The paper first briefly informs the reader on the widespread use of public-private partnerships. It then reviews the literature on institutional perspectives, and moves on to discuss how a framework derived from institutional theory is both relevant and useful in exploring the reasons behind the diffusion of PPPs in American cities. The paper ends with a brief discussion.