Opening the curtains: Adoption of transparency policy for eliminating in confidentiality of the faith groups

Cihan Necmi Günal; Halil Peçe

doi:10.14687/jhs.v19i4.6316

Authors

Cihan Necmi Günal Kocaeli University https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6541-623X
Halil Peçe Erzurum Technical University https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3861-0651

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14687/jhs.v19i4.6316

Keywords:

Transparency, faith groups, public policy, policy adoption, policy diffusion

Abstract

Transparency policies, which have become increasingly important in recent years, have become one of the most important implementation tools of accountability, especially for public administrations. The main purpose of this study is to examine a public policy that can be planned to be implemented in Turkish public administration under the leadership of the Presidency of Religious Affairs (PRA). In the public policy literature, policy transfer and adoption processes are considered a quick solution for developing countries. Because developing countries have two important constraints, such as time and resources, to produce a solution. The adoption process of the policy that is planned to be implemented in Turkey, compared to the transparency policies in faith group services carried out by the UK public institutions, is the focus of this study. Although belief groups are important for the spread of civil society, they can cause certain social and political problems. It is not possible to produce qualified solutions to these problems by ignoring belief groups or making them illegal with a radical approach. The principle of transparency in public policies plays a key role in solving the problems encountered in civil society. This case study and content analysis will both provide the PRA with a theoretical assessment of its transparency policy and provide a roadmap for academics to work on different public policies.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Author Biographies

Cihan Necmi Günal, Kocaeli University

Research Assistant, Kocaeli University, Faculty of Political Sciences

Halil Peçe, Erzurum Technical University

Research Assistant, Erzurum Technical University, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences

References

Anti-Corruption Research Center. (2013) Key features of NGO accountability systems. Retrieved December 7, 2018 from: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/57a089ff40f0b652dd0004ea/expertanswer-358.pdf.

Aydın, Ö. (2019). Diyanet İşleri Başkanlığının Hukuki Statüsü Üzerine Tartışmalar. Akademik İncelemeler Dergisi, 14/2, s. 239-276.

Banisar, D. (2006). Freedom of information around the world 2006: A global survey of access to government information laws. Privacy International Report.

Bennett, C. J. (1997), Understanding Ripple Effects: The Cross–National Adoption of Policy Instruments for Bureaucratic Accountability. Governance, 10: 213–233

Berry, F.S., & Berry, W. D. (2007). Innovation and Diffusion Models in Policy Research. In Paul A. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the Policy Process (223-260) CO, USA: Westview Press.

Berry, W. D., & Baybeck, B. (2005). Using geographic information systems to study interstate competition. American Political Science Review, 99(04), 505-519.

Biesbroek, G. R., Klostermann, J. E., Termeer, C. J., & Kabat, P. (2013). On the nature of barriers to climate change adaptation. Regional Environmental Change, 13(5), 1119-1129.

Bouma Gray D. & Rod, L. (2012). “Dinî Çeşitlilik”. Din Sosyolojisi: Yaşadığımız Dünya İçinde. (317-339). Ankara: İmge Kitabevi.

Burger, R., & Owens, T. (2010). Promoting transparency in the NGO sector: Examining the availability and reliability of self-reported data. World development, 38(9), 1263-1277.

Carlo Bertot, J., Jaeger, P. T., & Grimes, J. M. (2012). Promoting transparency and accountability through ICTs, social media, and collaborative e-government. Transforming government: people, process and policy, 6(1), 78-91.

Ciliberti, F., De Haan, J., De Groot, G., & Pontrandolfo, P. (2011). CSR codes and the principal-agent problem in supply chains: four case studies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 19(8), 885-894.

Coşkuner, M. & Aslan, S. (2020). İktidarın Dinsellik Temsili: Dinsel İktidar Kurumu Olarak Diyanet İşleri Başkanlığının Alevilik Temsili, Ankara SBF Dergisi, Cilt:75, No:2, s. 463-487.

Davis, J. (1998) ‘Access to and Transmission of Information: Position of the Media’, in Veerle between Corruption and Citizen Satisfaction’, International Review of Administrative.

Deckmyn and Ian Thomson (eds) Openness and Transparency in the European Union, pp. 121–6. Maastricht: European Institute of Public Administration.

Department for International Development. (n.d.) Faith Partnership Principles. Retrieved February 7, 2020 from https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/67352/faith-partnership-principles.pdf

DiyanetHaber, (2018). DİB Başkanı Erbaş’tan Tarikat ve Cemaatler Açıklaması. https://www.diyanethaber.com.tr/diyanet/diyanet-isleri-baskani-erbas-tan-son-dakika-tarikat-ve-cemaatler-h1226.html

Eyestone, R. (1977). Confusion, Diffusion, and Innovation. The American Political Science Review, 71(2), 441–447.

Florini, A. M. (2002). Increasing transparency in government. International Journal on World Peace, 3-37.

Greiner, R., & Gregg, D. (2011). Farmers’ intrinsic motivations, barriers to the adoption of conservation practices and effectiveness of policy instruments: Empirical evidence from northern Australia. Land Use Policy, 28(1), 257-265.

Grimmelikhuijsen, S. G., & Meijer, A. J. (2014). Effects of transparency on the perceived trustworthiness of a government organization: Evidence from an online experiment. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24(1), 137-157.

Hale, T. N. (2008). Transparency, accountability, and global governance. Global governance, 14, 73.

Hollyer, James R., Rosendorff, Peter B., Vreeland, James R., ‘Democracy and transparency’,

Journal of Politics, 2011, Vol. 73, No. 4, pp.1191-1205

Kara, İ. (2000). Din ile Devlet Arasına Sıkışmış Bir Kurum: Diyanet İşleri Başkanlığı. 18. s.29-55.

Karch, A. (2007) Demoratic Laboratories: Policy Diffusion Among the American States. MI, USA: The University of Michigan Press.

Krippendorff, K. (2003). Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology 2nd Edition. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Meijer, A. (2009). Understanding modern transparency. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 75(2), 255-269.

Mülazımoğlu, M.E. (2017) Kamu Politikasında Aktörler. In Prof. Dr. Ramazan Şengül (Ed.), Kamu Politikası (p. 33-50). Umuttepe Yayınları.

Park, H., & Blenkinsopp, J. (2011). The roles of transparency and trust in the relationship between corruption and citizen satisfaction. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 77(2), 254-274.

Rose, R. (1993). Lesson-Drawing in Public Policy: A Guide to Learning across Space and Time. NJ, USA: Chatham House.

Shipan, C. R., & Volden, C. (2008). The mechanisms of policy diffusion. American journal of political science, 52(4), 840-857.

Stiglitz, J. 1999. On Liberty, the Right to Know, and Public Discourse: The Role of Transparency in Public Life, Oxford Amnesty Lecture, Oxford, U.K., January 27, 1999.

Transparency International UK. (n.d.) Guidance for NGOs. Retrieved February 7, 2020 from https://www.transparency.org.uk/our-work/business-integrity/bribery-act/guidance-for-ngos/

Walker, J. L. (1969). The diffusion of innovations among the American states. American political science review, 63(03), 880-899.

Yanardağ, A. (2012). Tevhid-i Tedrisat Kanunu Uygulamasında Diyanet İşleri Başkanlığının Rolü. Ankara Üniversitesi Türk İnkılap Tarihi Enstitüsü Atatürk Yolu Dergisi. No: 49. S. 241-264.