![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Despite their vast relevance to democracy, scholars have paid little systematic attention to the scrutiny function of local councils. To stimulate such research, this study theorises the concept of council scrutiny. First, we outline the rationale, wider policy context, and conceptualisations. Next, we present and discuss an actor-centred institutionalist approach to introduce an analytical framework that depicts council scrutiny as a loop comprising eight interrelated parts. These parts include the institutional context and policy environment, intrinsic motivations and actor properties, scrutiny objects, objectives, constellations, the scrutiny process as such, and its effects and personal rewards. Finally, we explain how this analytical framework may serve as a vehicle for a more comprehensive and detailed study of the various aspects of council scrutiny.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1. The title is inspired by Ogul and Rockman (Citation1990).
2. Common synonyms are legislative oversight (e.g., Onyango Citation2020) and control (e.g., Steen and Wille Citation2005; Klok and Denters Citation2013). These concepts are used interchangeably to denote the general function.
3. Councillors can also utilise both channels as a final resort to lodge complaints against government decisions in the opposite direction.
4. Local governance broadly refers to fragmented decision-making and policy delivery through agencies, organisations, and networks (Caulfield and Larsen Citation2002). Scrutinising governance networks is part of the concept of metagovernance aimed at securing the accountability of these networks (Gjaltema, Biesbroek, and Termeer Citation2020) while promoting legitimate and effective decision-making therein (Sörensen and Torfing Citation2009).
5. In many systems, the executive has competencies in its own right, including policy preparation and implementation, daily administration, and delegated tasks (Steen and Wille Citation2005). Scrutinising the legislative process is termed ‘legislative scrutiny’ (Martin and Vanberg Citation2005).
6. In the UK, scrutiny committees may suspend executive decisions until they are discussed and approved (or amended or rejected) by the committee (Sandford and Maer Citation2004).
7. Ideally, constructive agendas should prompt scrutiny. Delegitimising political motives (‘attacking the messenger’) is a common strategy employed by people under scrutiny to disregard the findings of this process (IPU Citation2017).