The question of accountability in historical perspective: From Jackson to contemporary grassroots ecosystem management

Grassroots ecosystem management (GREM), and the reinventing government move ment, more generally, suggest that the American polity is on the verge of r edefining a broadly acceptable system of democratic accountability The prob lem is: What does an effective system of accountability look like in a worl d of decentralized governance, shared power, collaborative decision process es, results-oriented management, and broad civic participation? This articl e examines how the theory of accountability has been reconfigured to fit th e new paradigm for governance and places accountability in historical conte xt to gain perspective for contemporary discussions of bureaucracy in a dem ocracy. It finds that the conceptualization of democratic accountability va ries dramatically over time. The Jacksonian, Progressives/New Deal, public- interest-egalitarian, neoconservative efficiency and GREM models are all di stinct conceptualizations of accountability. Each emphasizes different inst itutions and locates the authority for accountability in differing combinat ions and types of sectors (public,private, intermediary), processes, decisi on rules, knowledge, and values.