1. Introduction

These programs were allocated 14.75 % of the total budget in 2010–2011 (The Daily Star, 2011).

EGPHPs, Vulnerable Group Development (VGD), Food for Work (FFW), and Test Relief (TR) are employment generation programmes that potentially have a major welfare benefit for the poor, especially for an agriculture-dependent country like Bangladesh.

OAA is in the direct support category. Other examples of direct support include funds for widowed, deserted and destitute women, an honorarium for insolvent freedom fighters, assistance to the fully retarded, a fund for migrating risk due to natural disaster, a fund for the rehabilitation of the acid victims/burnt women and the disabled and a maternity allowance for poverty-stricken, lactating mother etc.

VGF and Open Market Sale (OMS) are targeted to the victims of natural disasters and the poorest section in the category of emergency relief.

One of Upazila of the Nilphamari District of Bangladesh.

Some practitioners supplement this classification by (1) horizontal accountability and (2) vertical accountability mechanism. Horizontal accountability mechanisms are imposed internally through institutional mechanisms for overseeing actions. It is the capacity of state institutions to check the abuse of power by other public agencies and branches of the government. Vertical accountability in the context of the present study refers to the process of accountability between the electorates and the people’s representatives.

Political accountability is an important type of accountability in democratic societies where political executives are held accountable for their actions and for those of their subordinates. It is also known as Ministerial responsibility. In Parliamentary systems with Ministerial responsibility, civil servants act in the name of Ministers. Thus, civil servants and their organisations are accountable to the Ministers concerned who, in turn, are accountable to the Parliament. Ministers, being representatives of the public, are political heads of the Government and, accordingly, are accountable to the Parliament. So, political accountability is concerned with ensuring accountability of elected and/or appointed officials.

Administrative accountability assumes that public officials are held accountable to citizens for actions taken by such officials. Administrative accountability refers to mechanisms, such as rules and regulations and instructions, supervision, hierarchy etc., by which government officials act and by which they are held accountable for the discharge of their actions (cited in Younis & Mostafa, 2000). In addition, internal rules and standards, as well as some independent commission, are responsible to hold civil servants, within the administration of government, accountable. Behavior of the civil servants, in their respective departments, is bound by rules and regulations. Moreover, they are subordinates in a hierarchy and accountable to superiors.

Financial accountability concerns tracking and reporting on the allocation, disbursement, and utilization of financial resources and it is ensured through auditing, budgeting, and accounting.

Legal accountability is usually based on specific responsibilities which are formally or legally conferred upon authorities. Hence, actions and decisions made by the public officials are placed under judicial review when they act outside the scope of legal power or without legal power and, most importantly, they abuse the given power. Apart from personal ethics and commitment to accountability, the most important mechanism for ensuring legal accountability is effective judicial review (Younis & Mostafa, 2000).

In 1970 Hirschmann (1970) introduced the concept of “voice” in private goods consumption. This is a tool that consumers use if private production of goods and services is not satisfactory. Paul (1992) and others utilized this concept in the public sector. They argued that “public voice” is necessary for public institutions to be accountable, responsive and efficient in-service delivery systems (cited in Andrews & Shah, 2002).

Channels are lines through which messages pass from sender to receiver. A network is defined as a system of criss-crossing lines of channel.

Unlike other research strategies that include experimental research strategy, which requires control over behavioral events, survey research does not ask “why” type questions, or do historical and archival analysis (may/may not), nor does it focus on contemporary events (Yin, 1994).

Different types of structured questionnaires were used, with both closed and open-ended questions. A limited number of Likert-scaling type questions were used in the questionnaire. One type was used for UP functionaries (Chairman, Members, and Secretary as administrative unit) and another type was used for local people who have participated in both OBM and WS. In addition to these, one more type of questionnaire was used for Key Informants (KI) including Ward Committee (WC) members, UDCC members, PIO, Chair and Vice-chair of Upazila Parishad, Social Welfare officer, Upazila Nirbahi Officer (UNO), Upazila women Affair Officer and NGO officers etc. Altogether 150 respondents were interviewed through questionnaires. Among these, six were chairmen, six were UP secretaries, 18 (6 × 3) were ward members, 18 (6 × 3) were female members from reserved seats, 72 (12 from each UP including two males and two females from each three ward) were general people who participated WS and OBM, and 30 (five from each UP including Ward Committee members, UDCC members, Project Implementation Officer (PIO), Chairmen and Vice-chairmen of Upazila Parishad, Upazila Nirbahi Officer (UNO)) were Local Political Leaders and other).

The study also carried out a Focus Group Discussion (FGD) at the Union Parishad level for those who did not participate at WS and OBM. In each ward, two FGD sessions (one with males and another with females) were conducted for better understanding of the issues of why general people do not participate in that process. Homogeneity of participants was maintained in FGD sessions and each FGD session included 8–12 poor local inhabitants, depending upon their availability for this purpose.

A direct observation was made of the functioning of various WSs in Hariyan and Kakina UP and OBMs of Gogram, Hariyan, Ghurka and Hatikumrul UPs. The entire meeting was observed. The meeting time, place, and information transmission medium were also noted for a better understanding of the process of planning. How information regarding planning and budgeting was disseminated in the UP’s premises and locality was taken into consideration. The rising demands of the poor people, as well as the style of answerability and responsiveness of UP functionaries, were also observed.