Search results

During the first half of the twentieth century, “accounting theory,” developed primarily by accounting scholars and academics, provided the primary basis for the practice and teaching of financial accounting in the United States. Since the creation of the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) in the early 1970s, the FASB conceptual framework has provided the primary basis for accounting standards setting as well as for the practice and teaching of financial accounting. While the purpose of creating a conceptual framework has been to develop an agreed upon set of concepts and principles to guide accounting standards setting, a related goal has been to reduce diversity in accounting practice and to move toward greater uniformity. This chapter traces the influence of accounting theory on the conceptual framework and explores some of the consequences of this influence.

The purpose of this chapter is to discuss theory-based evaluation of public–private partnership (PPP) projects/programmes and to develop an intervention logical framework. It aims to draw attention to the need to go beyond the measurement of project/programme results to address not only the question of whether or not the project/programme worked but also the how and why questions. The study follows an interpretative methodology. It analytically discloses the mechanics of theory-based evaluation in relation to a ‘PPP theory’ and describes a theory-based analytical framework that portrays an explicit path towards ultimate impacts so as to assess, in a more systematic and integrated way, the success or failure of a PPP. Theory-based evaluation is a promising evaluation approach that would fit into the complexities of PPP projects/programmes and would expand the available toolbox of evaluators. Proper use of theory-based evaluation in PPP interventions contributes to better policy formulation and project implementation, thus leading to improved socio-economic benefits derived from PPP projects and programmes. The main contribution of the study is that it develops a ‘PPP theory’ and a related logical intervention framework drawing on theory-based approaches. Although the framework is developed for a representative sector, transport, it can easily be applied to any other PPP intervention.

The purpose of the chapter is to develop the pragmatic logical framework for safeguarding successful Public–Private Partnership (PPP) implementations in water supply in emerging markets. The case analysis related to the research question of how efficacy of PPP implementations could be improved revealed considerable shortfalls within the current modus operandi. The research was limited to urban water utilities of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan with implications most relevant for emerging markets conditions. The proposed logical framework could improve efficacy and sustainability of PPP undertakings in water supply in developing countries. The framework is centred on the simple question: ‘What would constitute a meaningful quid pro quo within the envisioned PPP arrangement to eligible counterparts?’ The framework would necessitate properly answering many complex and uncomfortable questions of PPP arrangements, especially in terms of performance management, public accountability and underlying benefits to the parties. PPP in water utilities is a popular notion amongst governments and the international financial institutions (IFIs). PPP is commonly considered to be a tool for providing an optimal solution to chronic problems of water utilities in terms of underperformance and underinvestment. In-spite of massive efforts of modernization and institutional upgrade of the water utilities in Central Asia, success rate with PPP modalities is still rather low.

In an era of unprecedented technological innovation and evolving user expectations and information seeking behaviour, we are arguably now an online society, with digital services increasingly common and increasingly preferred. As a trusted information provider, libraries are in an advantageous position to respond, but this requires integrated strategic and enterprise architecture planning, for information technology (IT) has evolved from a support role to a strategic role, providing the core management systems, communication networks and delivery channels of the modern library. Furthermore, IT components do not function in isolation from one another but are interdependent elements of distributed and multidimensional systems encompassing people, processes and technologies, which must consider social, economic, legal, organisational and ergonomic requirements and relationships, as well as being logically sound from a technical perspective. Strategic planning provides direction, while enterprise architecture strategically aligns and holistically integrates business and information system architectures. While challenging, such integrated planning should be regarded as an opportunity for the library to evolve as an enterprise in the digital age, or at minimum, to simply keep pace with societal change and alternative service providers. Without strategy, a library risks being directed by outside forces with independent motivations and inadequate understanding of its broader societal role. Without enterprise architecture, it risks technological disparity, redundancy and obsolescence. Adopting an interdisciplinary approach, this conceptual chapter provides an integrated framework for strategic and architectural planning of digital library services. The concept of the library as an enterprise is also introduced.

Many Australasian-Anglo-American jurisdictions including Queensland, other Australian states, the Australian Commonwealth, central government in Britain, the U.S., Canada and New Zealand (Department of Finance and Administration, 2000; NZ Treasury/State Services Commission, 2002; Queensland Treasury, 1997; Treasury Board of Canada, 2000), are presently debating over “managing for outcomes.” Throughout this chapter, the acronym MFO is used to stand for this whole movement even though it implies greater coherence than exists. There is a definite movement in this direction in Australasian public services with the emergence of widespread rethinking about its purposes and characteristics. It is driven in some jurisdictions by ministers wanting to know about actual policy outcomes and less about the shiny-chrome management systems behind them and, in other jurisdictions, by senior managers in central agencies and some line agencies who are rediscovering the real purposes constituting public management. There is also some back-pedaling in relation to some aspects of the economic reform agenda that was applied too hard during the late 1980s and 1990s in this part of the world. There are also some that claim that MFO is a logical extension of the first stage of reform undertaken during the 1980s and 1990s – one in which outputs rather than outcomes was the primary focus.

Development organisations today are faced with a new set of challenges around the use of research. They are charged with generating credible knowledge, moving it around, using it in policy, and acting on it in partnership with others. Several Northern and Southern development NGOs are attempting to shift from being “service providers” to “knowledge brokers”, for example, in the quest to find new roles and relevance for themselves (Lewis & Wallace, 2000). There has thus been a lot of focus recently on the relationship between research, policy, and practice. Many questions within this field centre on how development organisations can use research in practice, in their work. In this chapter, however, I wish to turn the question around and ask: how does the research fare when it is done on development organisations themselves? And what is the relationship between research and practice in that situation?