Premium
Transparency and accountability in infrastructure stimulus spending: A comparison of C anadian, A ustralian and U . S . programs
Author(s) -
Stoney Christopher,
Krawchenko Tamara
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
canadian public administration
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.361
H-Index - 26
eISSN - 1754-7121
pISSN - 0008-4840
DOI - 10.1111/j.1754-7121.2012.00235.x
Subject(s) - stimulus (psychology) , accountability , transparency (behavior) , public spending , corporate governance , business , financial crisis , public economics , accounting , economics , finance , political science , psychology , macroeconomics , politics , law , psychotherapist
In response to the global financial crisis that began in late 2007, many countries took on significant levels of deficit financing in order to increase spending on public works and infrastructure. This rapid infusion of public funding has raised concerns about the accountability and transparency of stimulus measures, including how best to monitor and evaluate the allocation and impact of the funds and report back to citizens. While there is growing research on the macro‐economic impacts of stimulus spending, very little comparative work has been done on the approaches of different countries to the governance of infrastructure stimulus spending programs. This article focuses on the latter by identifying and explaining the different practices in C anada, A ustralia and the U nited S tates in order to highlight implications for future stimulus‐led investment.