ABSTRACT
Scholars, donors, the media, and critical practitioners have regularly called for greater accountability for international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs). The accountability agenda has had a profound influence on the way that leading INGOs conceive of their mission, design their programs, and evaluate the impact of their activities. There is an increasing acceptance that INGOs must demonstrate willingness to be held accountable if they are to be regarded as credible organizations. However, INGO accountability is not easy to define, since INGOs have relationships with multiple stakeholders that incur different accountability responsibilities. It is frequently asserted by practitioners and academics that INGO accountability can be understood in terms of four dimensions. First, INGOs are accountable “upward” to governments and their donors. Second, they are accountable “downward” to the people and communities that they claim to represent and serve. Third, they are accountable “inward” to their staff and members. Fourth, there is “horizontal accountability” to the wider INGO sector. This entry provides an overview of the main drivers of the accountability debate, and then explores each dimension of accountability in turn. It argues that the sector has generally made important progress, particularly in terms of establishing self-regulation mechanisms, albeit the process of change has been erratic and uneven. However, there are valid concerns about some aspects of this reform process, and there are even allegations that accountability practices can lead to unintended consequences that are directly detrimental to the norms that INGOs proclaim to uphold.
