Envisioning Accountability through a Mobile Application: a Theoretical Framework

https://doi.org/10.35912/jgas.v5i2.2706
Published: Jul 7, 2025

Abstract:

Purpose: The accountability of public officials is a cornerstone of democratic systems; however, citizens often struggle to oversee delegated authorities effectively because of population growth and governance complexity. This study proposes a mobile application designed to bridge this gap by enabling direct citizen engagement, real-time oversight, and transparency through an autonomous accountability committee.

Methods: This theoretical study employed a qualitative, hypothesis-driven approach that integrated governance principles, technological feasibility assessments, and comparative analyses.

Results: The proposed framework enables structured citizen participation in accountability processes through features such as complaint submission, voting, data audits, oversight, and investigative reporting. By aligning governance processes with democratic principles, the system fosters transparency, trust, and public administration responsibility.

Conclusion: The framework for an accountability mobile application leverages technology to improve transparency, citizen engagement, and government oversight. It addresses inefficiencies in traditional systems while overcoming challenges such as data security and legal recognition. Compared with existing digital tools, this system offers stronger engagement and enforcement. Future research should focus on pilot implementations to assess their impact on governance and public trust.

Limitations: As the research is entirely theoretical, practical challenges such as government adoption, cyber security risks, legal compliance, and technological scalability remain untested. The feasibility of implementation depends on institutional cooperation and regulatory adaptation.

Contributions: This research advances the discourse on democratic oversight, digital accountability, and citizen empowerment in public administration. Key features include AI monitoring, blockchain security, decentralized participation, and technology-based digital mechanisms, along with existing methods to ensure an effective accountability system.

Keywords:
1. Accountability
2. Autonomous accountability committee
3. Citizen participation
4. e-Governance
5. Mobile Application
6. Transparency
Authors:
1 . Md. Yeasir Arafat
Undergraduate student, Department of Political Science, University of Rajshahi.
2 . Fahmida
Undergraduate student, Department of Bangla, Rajshahi College, Bangladesh
View PDF
How to Cite
Arafat, M. Y., & Fahmida. (2025). Envisioning Accountability through a Mobile Application: a Theoretical Framework . Journal of Governance and Accountability Studies, 5(2), 93–111. https://doi.org/10.35912/jgas.v5i2.2706
Download Citation
  1. Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
  2. BibTeX

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Issue & Section
Vol. 5 No. 2 (2025): July
Articles
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

References

    Aldiabat, K., Harb, Y., & Gharaibeh, M. K. (2025). The impact of e-government dimensions on trust in government: Transparency as a mediator. Calitatea, 26(205), 144–152. https://doi.org/10.47750/QAS/26.205.15

    Antovski, L., & Gusev, M. (2005). M-government framework. Proceedings Euro mGov, 36–44.

    Asimakopoulos, G., Antonopoulou, H., Giotopoulos, K., & Halkiopoulos, C. (2025). Impact of information and communication technologies on democratic processes and citizen participation. Societies, 15(2), 40. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc15020040

    Ball, C. (2009). What is transparency? Public Integrity, 11(4), 293–308. https://doi.org/10.2753/PIN1099-9922110400

    Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T., & Grimes, J. M. (2010). Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies. Government Information Quarterly, 27(3), 264–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2010.03.001

    Bovens, M. (2007). Analysing and assessing accountability: A conceptual framework. European Law Journal, 13(4), 447–468. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0386.2007.00378.x

    Braman, S. (2009). Change of state: Information, policy, and power. MIT Press.

    Castilla, R., Pacheco, A., & Franco, J. (2023). Digital government: Mobile applications and their impact on access to public information. SoftwareX, 22, 101382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.softx.2023.101382

    Cho, Y. H., & Choi, B.-D. (2004). E-government to combat corruption: The case of Seoul Metropolitan Government. International Journal of Public Administration, 27(10), 719–735. https://doi.org/10.1081/PAD-200029114

    de Boer, T. (2023). Updating public accountability: A conceptual framework of voluntary accountability. Public Management Review, 25(6), 1128–1151. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2021.2006973

    de Carvalho, H. A., & Caldas, P. M. R. (2024). The impact of the implementation of information and communication technologies – ICT – for the transparency of government acts in the Brazilian public administration. LUMEN ET VIRTUS, 15(39), 1882–1903. https://doi.org/10.56238/levv15n39-023

    Fernández?i?Marín, X., Hinterleitner, M., Knill, C., & Steinebach, Y. (2024). Bureaucratic overburdening in advanced democracies. Public Administration Review, 84(4), 696–709. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13725

    Filgueiras, F., & Almeida, V. (2021). Governance for digital technologies. In Governance for the digital world (pp. 77–104). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55248-0_4

    Fox, J. (2007). Accountability politics: Power and voice in rural Mexico. Oxford University Press.

    Goldstein, J., & Rotich, J. (2008). Digitally networked technology in Kenya’s 2007–2008 post-election crisis. Berkman Center Research Publication, 9, 1–10.

    Ho, A. T.-K., & Ni, A. Y. (2004). Explaining the adoption of e-government features: A case study of Iowa County treasurers’ offices. The American Review of Public Administration, 34(2), 164–180. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074004264355

    Ieraci, S. (2007). Responsibility versus accountability in a risk-averse culture. Emergency Medicine Australasia, 19(1), 63–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-6723.2006.00935.x

    Jaeger, P. T., & Matteson, M. (2009). E-government and technology acceptance: The case of the implementation of Section 508 guidelines for websites. Electronic Journal of e-Government, 7(1), 87–98. http://www.ejeg.com

    Joshi, A. (2010). Annex 1: Service delivery – Review of impact and effectiveness of transparency and accountability initiatives. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2188164

    Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., & Mastruzzi, M. (2011). The worldwide governance indicators: Methodology and analytical issues. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 3(2), 220–246. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1876404511200046

    Kushchu, I., & Kuscu, H. (2003). From e-government to m-government: Facing the inevitable. 3rd European Conference on e-Government.

    Li, Y., & Shang, H. (2023). How does e-government use affect citizens’ trust in government? Empirical evidence from China. Information & Management, 60(7), 103844.

    Lin, N. (2002). Social capital: A theory of social structure and action (Vol. 19). Cambridge University Press.

    Lindquist, E. A., & Huse, I. (2017). Accountability and monitoring government in the digital era: Promise, realism and research for digital?era governance. Canadian Public Administration, 60(4), 627–656. https://doi.org/10.1111/capa.12243

    Mahler, J., & Regan, P. M. (2002). Learning to govern online: Federal agency Internet use. The American Review of Public Administration, 32(3), 326–349. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074002032003004

    McGrath, S. K., & Whitty, S. J. (2018). Accountability and responsibility defined. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 11(3), 687–707. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMPB-06-2017-0058

    Meijer, A. (2015). Government transparency in historical perspective: From the ancient regime to open data in the Netherlands. International Journal of Public Administration, 38(3), 189–199. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2014.934837

    Mulgan, R. (2003). Holding power to account: Accountability in modern democracies. Springer.

    Mukhlis, M., Makhya, S., Yulianto, Y., & Aviv, M. (2025). The challenges of digital governance in the regions: Study in Central Lampung Regency, Indonesia. Journal of Governance and Accountability Studies, 5(1), 33–46. https://doi.org/10.35912/jgas.v5i1.2448

    Pham, S., Dang, D., Hoang, S., & Yoon, B. (2025). Towards a framework for enterprise architecture in mobile government: A case study. arXiv preprint. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2501.09401

    Raudava, V. (2022). Challenges of accountability: The case of post-Soviet Estonian rural local governments. Journal of Sociology, 10(1), 8–18. https://doi.org/10.15640/jssw.v10n1a2

    Rose-Ackerman, S., & Palifka, B. J. (2016). Corruption and government: Causes, consequences, and reform. Cambridge University Press.

    Royo, S., Bellò, B., Torres, L., & Downe, J. (2024). The success of e?participation: Learning lessons from Decide Madrid and We Asked, You Said, We Did in Scotland. Policy & Internet, 16(1), 65–82. https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.363

    Salat, J., Ichsan, M., Setiawati, C. L., Nuzula, M., Fazira, Z., & Diana, C. P. (2024). Development of an Android-based application for transparency and accountability in Zakat management at Baitul Mal, Aceh Province. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Educational Technology and Social Science (ICoETS 2024).

    Sharmin, S., & Chowdhury, R. H. (2025). Digital transformation in governance: The impact of e-governance on public administration and transparency. Journal of Computer Science and Technology Studies, 7(1), 362–379. https://doi.org/10.32996/jcsts.2025.7.1.27

    Shim, D. C., & Eom, T. H. (2008). E-government and anti-corruption: Empirical analysis of international data. International Journal of Public Administration, 31(3), 298–316. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900690701590553

    Shim, D. C., & Eom, T. H. (2009). Anticorruption effects of information communication and technology (ICT) and social capital. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 75(1), 99–116. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852308099508

    Trimi, S., & Sheng, H. (2008). Emerging trends in m-government. Communications of the ACM, 51(5), 53–58. https://doi.org/10.1145/1342327.1342338

  1. Aldiabat, K., Harb, Y., & Gharaibeh, M. K. (2025). The impact of e-government dimensions on trust in government: Transparency as a mediator. Calitatea, 26(205), 144–152. https://doi.org/10.47750/QAS/26.205.15
  2. Antovski, L., & Gusev, M. (2005). M-government framework. Proceedings Euro mGov, 36–44.
  3. Asimakopoulos, G., Antonopoulou, H., Giotopoulos, K., & Halkiopoulos, C. (2025). Impact of information and communication technologies on democratic processes and citizen participation. Societies, 15(2), 40. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc15020040
  4. Ball, C. (2009). What is transparency? Public Integrity, 11(4), 293–308. https://doi.org/10.2753/PIN1099-9922110400
  5. Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T., & Grimes, J. M. (2010). Using ICTs to create a culture of transparency: E-government and social media as openness and anti-corruption tools for societies. Government Information Quarterly, 27(3), 264–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2010.03.001
  6. Bovens, M. (2007). Analysing and assessing accountability: A conceptual framework. European Law Journal, 13(4), 447–468. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0386.2007.00378.x
  7. Braman, S. (2009). Change of state: Information, policy, and power. MIT Press.
  8. Castilla, R., Pacheco, A., & Franco, J. (2023). Digital government: Mobile applications and their impact on access to public information. SoftwareX, 22, 101382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.softx.2023.101382
  9. Cho, Y. H., & Choi, B.-D. (2004). E-government to combat corruption: The case of Seoul Metropolitan Government. International Journal of Public Administration, 27(10), 719–735. https://doi.org/10.1081/PAD-200029114
  10. de Boer, T. (2023). Updating public accountability: A conceptual framework of voluntary accountability. Public Management Review, 25(6), 1128–1151. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2021.2006973
  11. de Carvalho, H. A., & Caldas, P. M. R. (2024). The impact of the implementation of information and communication technologies – ICT – for the transparency of government acts in the Brazilian public administration. LUMEN ET VIRTUS, 15(39), 1882–1903. https://doi.org/10.56238/levv15n39-023
  12. Fernández?i?Marín, X., Hinterleitner, M., Knill, C., & Steinebach, Y. (2024). Bureaucratic overburdening in advanced democracies. Public Administration Review, 84(4), 696–709. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13725
  13. Filgueiras, F., & Almeida, V. (2021). Governance for digital technologies. In Governance for the digital world (pp. 77–104). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55248-0_4
  14. Fox, J. (2007). Accountability politics: Power and voice in rural Mexico. Oxford University Press.
  15. Goldstein, J., & Rotich, J. (2008). Digitally networked technology in Kenya’s 2007–2008 post-election crisis. Berkman Center Research Publication, 9, 1–10.
  16. Ho, A. T.-K., & Ni, A. Y. (2004). Explaining the adoption of e-government features: A case study of Iowa County treasurers’ offices. The American Review of Public Administration, 34(2), 164–180. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074004264355
  17. Ieraci, S. (2007). Responsibility versus accountability in a risk-averse culture. Emergency Medicine Australasia, 19(1), 63–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-6723.2006.00935.x
  18. Jaeger, P. T., & Matteson, M. (2009). E-government and technology acceptance: The case of the implementation of Section 508 guidelines for websites. Electronic Journal of e-Government, 7(1), 87–98. http://www.ejeg.com
  19. Joshi, A. (2010). Annex 1: Service delivery – Review of impact and effectiveness of transparency and accountability initiatives. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2188164
  20. Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., & Mastruzzi, M. (2011). The worldwide governance indicators: Methodology and analytical issues. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 3(2), 220–246. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1876404511200046
  21. Kushchu, I., & Kuscu, H. (2003). From e-government to m-government: Facing the inevitable. 3rd European Conference on e-Government.
  22. Li, Y., & Shang, H. (2023). How does e-government use affect citizens’ trust in government? Empirical evidence from China. Information & Management, 60(7), 103844.
  23. Lin, N. (2002). Social capital: A theory of social structure and action (Vol. 19). Cambridge University Press.
  24. Lindquist, E. A., & Huse, I. (2017). Accountability and monitoring government in the digital era: Promise, realism and research for digital?era governance. Canadian Public Administration, 60(4), 627–656. https://doi.org/10.1111/capa.12243
  25. Mahler, J., & Regan, P. M. (2002). Learning to govern online: Federal agency Internet use. The American Review of Public Administration, 32(3), 326–349. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074002032003004
  26. McGrath, S. K., & Whitty, S. J. (2018). Accountability and responsibility defined. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 11(3), 687–707. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMPB-06-2017-0058
  27. Meijer, A. (2015). Government transparency in historical perspective: From the ancient regime to open data in the Netherlands. International Journal of Public Administration, 38(3), 189–199. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2014.934837
  28. Mulgan, R. (2003). Holding power to account: Accountability in modern democracies. Springer.
  29. Mukhlis, M., Makhya, S., Yulianto, Y., & Aviv, M. (2025). The challenges of digital governance in the regions: Study in Central Lampung Regency, Indonesia. Journal of Governance and Accountability Studies, 5(1), 33–46. https://doi.org/10.35912/jgas.v5i1.2448
  30. Pham, S., Dang, D., Hoang, S., & Yoon, B. (2025). Towards a framework for enterprise architecture in mobile government: A case study. arXiv preprint. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2501.09401
  31. Raudava, V. (2022). Challenges of accountability: The case of post-Soviet Estonian rural local governments. Journal of Sociology, 10(1), 8–18. https://doi.org/10.15640/jssw.v10n1a2
  32. Rose-Ackerman, S., & Palifka, B. J. (2016). Corruption and government: Causes, consequences, and reform. Cambridge University Press.
  33. Royo, S., Bellò, B., Torres, L., & Downe, J. (2024). The success of e?participation: Learning lessons from Decide Madrid and We Asked, You Said, We Did in Scotland. Policy & Internet, 16(1), 65–82. https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.363
  34. Salat, J., Ichsan, M., Setiawati, C. L., Nuzula, M., Fazira, Z., & Diana, C. P. (2024). Development of an Android-based application for transparency and accountability in Zakat management at Baitul Mal, Aceh Province. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Educational Technology and Social Science (ICoETS 2024).
  35. Sharmin, S., & Chowdhury, R. H. (2025). Digital transformation in governance: The impact of e-governance on public administration and transparency. Journal of Computer Science and Technology Studies, 7(1), 362–379. https://doi.org/10.32996/jcsts.2025.7.1.27
  36. Shim, D. C., & Eom, T. H. (2008). E-government and anti-corruption: Empirical analysis of international data. International Journal of Public Administration, 31(3), 298–316. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900690701590553
  37. Shim, D. C., & Eom, T. H. (2009). Anticorruption effects of information communication and technology (ICT) and social capital. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 75(1), 99–116. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852308099508
  38. Trimi, S., & Sheng, H. (2008). Emerging trends in m-government. Communications of the ACM, 51(5), 53–58. https://doi.org/10.1145/1342327.1342338