{"id":164,"date":"2026-05-01T10:59:51","date_gmt":"2026-05-01T07:59:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/projects.snau.edu.ua\/eutrust\/?page_id=164"},"modified":"2026-05-02T18:12:15","modified_gmt":"2026-05-02T15:12:15","slug":"164-2","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/projects.snau.edu.ua\/eutrust\/platforma-znan\/164-2\/","title":{"rendered":"Research Insight # 2"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

\ud83c\uddec\ud83c\udde7 ENGLISH VERSION<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Research Insight #2<\/strong>
Supreme Audit Institutions as Pillars of Accountability: What a 189-Country Dataset Reveals About Governance and Oversight<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Based on: Rom\u00e3o, A. L., Fernandes, G. A. de A. L., Borrego, P., Firmino, S. I., & Caldeira, D. M. (2026). Mapping supreme audit institutions, accountability, and good governance: A global comparative analysis. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1080\/13876988.2026.2638858<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs) — national bodies mandated to audit government activities and public accounts — are among the most structurally diverse yet universally present governance mechanisms in the world. Despite their ubiquity, empirical knowledge of how SAI design correlates with accountability outcomes and good governance has remained fragmented, largely confined to single-country or regional studies. Rom\u00e3o et al. (2026) address this gap by constructing the most comprehensive global dataset on SAI attributes to date, covering 189 countries<\/strong> and drawing on INTOSAI membership data for 2022\u20132023<\/strong>.<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Research Design: A Global Matrix of Governance<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The study combined cluster analysis<\/strong> and statistical modelling to segment countries into homogeneous groups based on two parallel dimensions: (A) SAI institutional attributes and varieties of democracy, and (B) country-level characteristics across accountability and good governance indicators. Governance variables were drawn from internationally established indices — including the World Bank’s Worldwide Governance Indicators \u2014 capturing dimensions such as rule of law, government effectiveness, control of corruption, political stability, and voice and accountability. This dual segmentation yielded four institutional SAI profiles<\/strong> and three country-based governance profiles<\/strong>, creating a global accountability and good governance matrix.<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Key Findings: Heterogeneity, Clusters, and Critical Correlations<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The most robust finding is empirically straightforward yet institutionally significant: accountability and good governance are positively correlated globally<\/strong>. Countries with higher good governance scores consistently exhibit stronger accountability performance, and vice versa — confirming that SAI effectiveness is not a standalone institutional achievement but a function of the broader governance ecosystem in which it operates.<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The country-based clustering reveals five meaningful patterns:<\/p>\n\n\n\n