Typologies of accountability

Accountability is a relationship that involves four types based on the nature of the:

1. forum (political, legal, administrative, professional and social accountability),


2. actor (corporate, hierarchical, collective and individual accountability),


3. conduct (financial, procedural and product) and


4. obligation (vertical, diagonal and horizontal accountability) (Bovens, 2007).

Table 1: types of accountability

Types of accountability
Based on the nature of the
forum	actor	conduct	obligation
political	corporate	financial	vertical
legal	hierarchical	procedural	diagonal
administrative	collective	product	horizontal
professional	individual	.	.
social	.	.	.

This multi-dimensional model allows 120 combinations (5 forums x 5 actors x 3 conducts x 3 obligations). These types help to define accountability as a four dimensioned collection of types. Assuming one-to-one matches, there are so many combinations, that accountability must be complicated. However, the types differ from each other in that some are mutually exclusive and others can be several. For example, accountability might be legal or political, but not necessarily both, whereas the obligation may be vertical and diagonal and horizontal.
The nature of the obligation involves vertical, diagonal and horizontal accountability, which implies different stakeholders and relates to the nature of the actor, which could be corporate, hierarchical, collective or individual. That implies simultaneously different stakeholders existing – “many eyes” to whom the actor is obliged to explain conduct. However, the actor may not be singular. Bovens (2007) indicates there may be “many hands” involved in corporate or collective accountability.


Bovens, M. (2007) 'Analysing and Assessing Accountability: A Conceptual Framework', European Law Journal, 13 (4), pp. 447-468. Available at http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1468-0386.2007.00378.x