Accountability For Refugee Resettlement In New Zealand

ACCOUNTABILITY FOR REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT IN NEW ZEALAND by THUY THI THU TRAN A thesis submitted to the Victoria University of Wellington in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor in Philosophy Victoria University of Wellington 2021 i ABSTRACT Public governance in many countries has been moving toward a model called New Public Governance (NPG) to deal with the increasing complexity in the provision of public services NPG adopts a new perspective that emphasises the importance of managing the interaction between and among organisations within and outside the government to achieve efficiency and effectiveness of public policy and service delivery The interdependent relationships of these cross-working organisations are reflected in their accountability processes Thus, a robust accountability system is central to managing public governance However, accountability is complicated, and its definition is regularly debated Accountability is even more intricate in network relationships where it is challenging to identify who has contributed in what way However, research on accountability in networks is limited To contribute to the understanding of the problems of accountability in public governance, this study examines the nature of accountability and evaluates the discharge of accountability in the provision of public services in practice, using a case study of refugee resettlement in New Zealand The following research question is addressed, “What is the nature of the accountability relationships between different parties involved in, or affected by, the provision of social services to former refugees in New Zealand?” In answering this question, the study developed a research framework that was built on insights from prior literature and stakeholder theories and employed a case study approach that analysed 32 semi-structured interviews and a range of documents related to refugee resettlement in New Zealand The study finds that the current accountability system has not reflected the broader conception of multiple and interrelated accountability relationships identified in the literature on NPG Upward accountability to powerful stakeholders is mostly prioritised, downward accountability to beneficiaries has not significantly improved, and horizontal accountability to cross-working partners is limited The tensions between a bureaucratic need for control and a more devolved governance model that allows for the recognition of multiple contributions to both policy formation and implementation are still strong Moving from the New Public Management (NPM) perspective involving control over public money, still codified in the Public Finance Act 1989, to something closer to NPG is evidently not easy ii The key academic contribution of this study is in adding an important piece to the nearly “empty land” of horizontal accountability research, providing an understanding of how accountability mechanisms are used in practice, and raising the voices of less powerful stakeholders about the discharge of accountability by social service providers Regarding its practical contributions, the study provides a typical case study for research on accountability of non-government organisations (NGOs) in an NPG context, which can be valuable for policymakers wishing to develop policies that lead to an improvement in the appropriate expectations in NPG and accountability relationships between different parties in the delivery of social services It also provides recommendations for the government, NGOs, and refugee communities for achieving greater accountability iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Finally, it comes to the stage that I can express my gratitude to the special people who strongly supported me to complete this thesis Looking back on the long journey I have been going through, this moment is so meaningful and touching to me First and foremost, I would like to express my deepest thanks to my amazing supervisors, Professor Rachel Baskerville, Dr Rodney Dormer, and Associate Professor Carolyn Fowler for their devoted academic guidance and support throughout the process of my PhD study Each of you has brought different strengths to this thesis My knowledge and research skills has significantly developed from your insightful feedback, thank you I am highly appreciative of the people who were willing to participate in my research Without their generosity in giving their time and sharing information, this thesis would not have progressed to its conclusion My thanks next go to the Vietnamese Government and Victoria University of Wellington for all the financial support throughout my PhD journey in the forms of the VUW–VIED Scholarship (Project 911) and the Submission Scholarship Without this support, the journey would not have been possible I also would like to thank the Banking University of Ho Chi Minh City, where I work in Vietnam, for their documental support during the time I have been overseas My gratitude goes to my family, my close friends, and PhD friends in Wellington and Vietnam Spending precious time with them makes my PhD life more balanced and colourful Also, I would like to take this chance to especially thank my big brother He is always there when I need him His care and invaluable support throughout my study encouraged me to move forward and achieve my dreams Thanks, brother I hope you feel proud of me My biggest thanks go to my husband and my daughter for being with me always through the ups and downs with their unconditional love Words are not enough to express my heartfelt gratitude to you for all the support you have given me on this journey Thank you, hubby Cà Rốt, you are my sunshine, my photographer, and my best buddy We have been spending a wonderful and unforgettable time together on this long adventure Without you, I would never have reached this stage Thank you, darling I love you so much iv v Table of Contents ABSTRACT II ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS IV LIST OF TABLES XII LIST OF FIGURES XIV LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS XVI CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Vignette – Why I chose to study accountability in the New Zealand context 1.2 Background of the research 1.2.1 Public governance and accountability in public governance 1.2.2 Refugee resettlement in New Zealand 1.3 Motivations 1.4 Research aims and research questions 1.5 Research framework 1.5.1 Relevant theories 1.5.2 Key accountability frameworks and models 1.5.3 Analytical framework 11 1.6 Research methodology 13 1.7 Structure of the thesis 13 CHAPTER 2: PUBLIC GOVERNANCE 15 2.1 Introduction 15 2.2 Historic shift in public governance from government-managed to subcontracting to non-government organisations .15 2.2.1 Traditional Public Administration .15 2.2.2 New Public Management 16 2.2.3 Moving towards New Public Governance 21 2.3 Contracting-out .24 2.4 Non-government organisations 26 2.5 Guidance on contracting relationship between government agencies and nongovernment organisations 29 2.6 Networks and network governance .33 2.6.1 Networks 33 2.6.2 Network governance 35 2.7 Summary 38 vi CHAPTER 3: ACCOUNTABILITY IN PUBLIC GOVERNANCE 39 3.1 Introduction 39 3.2 Definition of accountability 40 3.3 Accountability vs Responsibility 45 3.4 Accountability vs Trust 47 3.5 To whom is accountability owed? 50 3.5.1 Upward accountability 50 3.5.2 Inward and downward accountability 51 3.5.3 Diagonal accountability .53 3.5.4 Horizontal accountability 54 3.6 For what is accountability demanded? 56 3.6.1 Accountability for outputs 58 3.6.2 Accountability for outcomes .59 3.6.3 Accountability for wellbeing .59 3.7 How is accountability discharged? 62 3.7.1 Disclosure statements and reports 64 3.7.2 Performance assessment and evaluation 66 3.7.3 Participation 67 3.7.4 Self-regulation 69 3.7.5 Social auditing 69 3.8 Emerging accountability challenges .71 3.8.1 The dominance of upward accountability 72 3.8.2 The problems of “many eyes” and “many hands” 72 3.8.3 The complexity of accountability in practice compared to theory 73 3.8.4 The lack of a framework and guidance on accountability in public governance 73 3.9 Gaps for this research .74 3.10 Summary .76 CHAPTER 4: REFUGEE RESETTLEMENT 79 4.1 Introduction 79 4.2 Refugees globally – key information 79 4.2.1 Definition 79 4.2.2 Sub-categories of refugees .80 4.2.3 The rationale for refugee resettlement policies .81 4.2.4 Principles for establishing roles and responsibilities related to refugee resettlement .81 4.2.5 Models for the reception of resettled refugees .81 4.3 Refugee resettlement in New Zealand 82 4.3.1 Who can come to New Zealand as a refugee? 82 4.3.2 The scope of this study in terms of refugee classification 89 vii 4.3.3 The New Zealand Refugee Resettlement Strategy programme .90 4.4 Summary .104 CHAPTER 5: RESEARCH FRAMEWORK 105 5.1 Introduction 105 5.2 Applicable theories and justification 105 5.2.1 Stakeholder theory – a citizenship perspective 106 5.2.2 Stakeholder salience .108 5.2.3 Salient stakeholder cultures 111 5.3 Key accountability frameworks and models in the prior literature and the justification for using them .115 5.3.1 Dubnick and Justice’s (2004) framework for analysing accountability 115 5.3.2 Provan and Kenis's (2008) network governance 116 5.3.3 Ebrahim's (2003a) accountability mechanisms 117 5.3.4 Klijn and Koppenjan's (2014) horizontal accountability mechanisms 118 5.4 Analytical framework 121 5.5 Summary .129 CHAPTER 6: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .131 6.1 Introduction 131 6.2 Philosophical assumptions 131 6.3 Qualitative research .133 6.4 A case study approach 135 6.5 Reflection methods 137 6.6 Triangulation methods 140 6.7 Data collection 143 6.7.1 Documents 143 6.7.2 Semi-structured interview 147 6.8 Data analysis 151 6.9 Ethical considerations 156 6.10 Summary .157 CHAPTER 7: SERVICE PROVISION TO FORMER REFUGEES .159 7.1 Introduction 159 7.2 The parties involved in the provision of social services to former refugees 159 7.2.1 Government agencies .160 7.2.2 Non-government organisations 167 7.2.3 Volunteers .173 7.3 The networks and network governance models governing the parties involved in social service delivery to former refugees 175 7.3.1 The networks involved in social service delivery to former refugees 175 viii 7.3.2 The lead organisation governance model .178 7.4 Discussion .181 7.5 Summary .184 CHAPTER 8: PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTABILITY 185 8.1 Introduction 185 8.2 Accountability – perspectives of the interview participants 185 8.2.1 Accountability from the viewpoints of government agencies 186 8.2.2 Accountability from the viewpoints of non-government organisations 187 8.3 Discussion .189 8.4 Summary .193 CHAPTER 9: STAKEHOLDER PRIORITISATION OF REFUGEE SERVICE PROVIDERS AND VOICES OF LESS POWERFUL STAKEHOLDERS .195 9.1 Introduction 195 9.2 To whom are refugee service providers accountable? 195 9.2.1 Who, theoretically, are stakeholders of refugee service providers? 195 9.2.2 Which stakeholders refugee service providers think they are accountable to? 197 9.2.3 Which stakeholders are not mentioned by the refugee service providers? 201 9.2.4 Discussion: to whom they are accountable 204 9.2.5 Who are the refugee service providers’ salient stakeholders? 209 9.2.6 Discussion: salient stakeholders .221 9.3 How are less powerful stakeholders (the beneficiaries) given voices? .223 9.3.1 In what ways can former refugees receive relevant information and raise their voices? .223 9.3.2 Constraints on former refugees raising their voices .230 9.3.3 Discussion: the voices of former refugees 239 9.4 Summary .241 CHAPTER 10: REFUGEE SERVICE PROVIDER ACCOUNTABILITY MECHANISMS 243 10.1 Introduction 243 10.2 Empirical analysis of the accountability mechanisms used by government agencies and non-government organisations 243 10.2.1 Reports and disclosure statements .243 10.2.2 Performance evaluation 258 10.2.3 Participation 263 10.2.4 Self-regulation .270 10.2.5 Social auditing .270 10.2.6 Summary of the findings on the use of accountability mechanism by government agencies and non-government organisations 271 ix 10.3 Discussion 272 10.3.1 The use of reports and disclosure statements, performance, and participation mechanisms by government agencies and non-government organisations 272 10.3.2 Horizonal accountability mechanisms 285 10.4 Summary .287 CHAPTER 11: CONCLUSION 289 11.1 Introduction 289 11.2 Key findings: overall evaluation 290 11.3 Contributions 297 11.3.1 Contribution to academic knowledge 297 11.3.2 Contributions to practice 300 11.4 Limitations and future research 304 11.5 Concluding remarks 306 REFERENCES* 309 APPENDICES 327 Appendix A: Traditional Public Administration, New Public Management, New Public Governance: Comparing perspectives 327 Appendix B: Key points of the four government guidance documents 328 Appendix C: Red Cross Fundamental Principles 331 Appendix D: Success Indicators and Measures – 2017/2018 332 Appendix E: Indicator of success (MBIE – Red Cross Outcome Agreement) 333 Appendix F: Interview participant list 334 Appendix G: Information sheet for participants 335 Appendix H: Sample semi-structured interview questions 336 Appendix I: Consent to interview 338 x ... resettled refugees .81 4.3 Refugee resettlement in New Zealand 82 4.3.1 Who can come to New Zealand as a refugee? 82 4.3.2 The scope of this study in terms of refugee classification... nature of the accountability relationships between different parties involved in, or affected by, the provision of social services to former refugees in New Zealand? ” In answering this question,... and evaluates the discharge of accountability in the provision of public services in practice, using a case study of refugee resettlement in New Zealand The following research question is addressed,