From Discourses to Policy: Analyzing the Creation of an Accountability Discourse in Colombia

ABSTRACT

This article analyses the construction of a public discourse about accountability in Colombia. The article maps the different interpretations that actors make of political ideas related to accountability and their change over a period of 13 years (1991–2014). The article has an interpretive framework and uses content and discourse analysis techniques to identify meanings different actors give to the concept of “accountability” and changes in these meanings. It identifies an academic discourse on accountability, as well as external actors’ discourses that influenced the construction of a public and official discourse in Colombia. It concludes by identifying the effect of this process of building consensus about meaning on the resulting public policy.

Keywords:

• Accountability
• Colombia
• discursive institutionalism
• public policy

References

Primary sources

Public documents

Colombia. 1991. “Constitución Política de Colombia”.

Colombia. 1998. “Ley 489 de 1998. Por la cual se dictan normas sobre la organización y funcionamiento de las entidades del orden nacional”.

Colombia. 2003. “Ley 850 de 2003. Por medio de la cual se reglamentan las veedurías ciudadanas”.

Colombia. 2011. “Ley 1474 de 2011. Estatuto Anticorrupción”.

DAFP. 2005. “Guía para la rendición de cuentas de la AP a la ciudadanía”. Bogotá.

DAFP. 2006.“Participación de la ciudadanía en procesos de RC de la AP”. Bogotá.

DAFP, ESAP, Contraloría General de la Nación. 2009. “Audiencias públicas en la ruta de la rendición de cuentas”. Bogotá.

DNP. 2002. “Plan Nacional de Desarrollo 2002-2006”.

DNP. 2004. “Documento Conpes 3294 de 2004”.

DNP. 2006. “Plan Nacional de Desarrollo 2006-2010”.

DNP. 2010. “Documento Conpes 3654 de 2010”.

GTZ, DNP, Ocasa, DAFP, Transparencia por Colombia, PPLC, Contraloría General de la Nación. 2007. “Cartilla para tejer una rendición de cuentas con la gente”. Bogotá.

GTZ, DNP, Ocasa, DAFP, Transparencia por Colombia, PPLC, Contraloría General de la Nación. 2008.“La rendición de cuentas, una oportunidad para el diálogo entre ciudadanía y gobierno”. Bogotá.

Presidencia de la República-Secretaría de Transparencia, Departamento Administrativo de la Función Pública, Departamento Nacional de Planeación. 2014. “Manual Único de Rendi-ción de Cuentas”. Bogotá.

Interviews

1. Ex director, PPLC, 13/05/2010

2. Director, DAFP. (Participant). 19/05/2010

3. Ex Comptroller. 19/05/2010

4. Functionary, control organism.25/05/2010

5. Ex functionary, DNP (Management level). 10/06/2010

6. Vice-director, DNP. (Participant). 11/06/2010

7. Functionary, executive branch (Management level) 16/06/2010

8. Director, NGO. (Participant). 16/06/2010

9. Functionary, Judicial branch. 08/07/2010

10. Director, NGO. 22/07/2010

11. Functionary, executive branch. 26/07/2010

12. Functionary, control organism. (Participant). 12/09/2011

13. Functionary, Judicial branch. 5/10/2011

14. Ex functionary, SINERGIA (DNP). (Participant). 24/02/2014

15. Consultant. (Participant). 16/05/2014

16. Director, NGO. (Participant). 29/07/2014

Notes

¹ The document Conpes 3654, “Policy of accountability of the executive branch to the citizens”. The CONPES is a technical instance that approves public policies; it is a modified version of the Ministers Council.

² All quotations have been translated from Spanish by the author. In the original: “En materia de rendición de cuentas, estamos rindiendo la cuenta de: en qué nos gastamos la plata”.

³ Colombia. 2003. Law 850 of 2003. Art. 1.

⁴ There is an implicit assumption about the horizontal form of accountability being already in the Constitution, and therefore in no need of reinforcing. The participant observation by the researcher confirmed this assumption was strong in the policy actors when this decision was made. However, it is debatable, attending to the famous analysis by O’Donnell (2004) on Latin America’s horizontal accountability and to more recent developments, as a reform on the balance of powers is being discussed currently in the Colombian Congress.

⁵ This does not mean that the Latin American approach is different from the global discourse analyses; on the contrary, authors have a strong influence of mainstream literature on the subject and often have a connection to universities from northern countries. The same applies to Colombia.