为了认识到这些优先事项，公私伙伴关系已被确定为执行新政策方向的一个重要工具。自最近以来，一些供资机构采取了政策，以便有时在现有制度下有利地审议公私伙伴关系，而在其他情况下，则通过诸如ARC联系赠款等新的倡议。一般而言，公私伙伴关系是指非政府组织或私营部门组织之间为改善基础设施网络和加强提供的服务而作出的一系列合作安排(Coghill, 2007)。这包括使用捐赠、外包、外包或公共物品私有化等资源。一般来说，透明度可以被确定为有效治理的一个关键属性，它是在政治、公民和国家之间建立问责制的先决条件。在最基本的层面上，治理的透明度是指通过清晰的程序和流程，整个政府系统的开放性水平，以及通过信息共享，公共服务的简单可达性(Dooren, 2011)。这进一步支持确保在提供个人业绩和处理资源方面保持问责制。
因此，可以说，透明度是个人、组织、公司和政府在明确披露信息的行动、过程、计划和规则时所具有的开放性。另一方面，问责制可以被认为更加复杂，Tisne (2010, p. 2)给出的定义如下:“广义上讲，问责制是指要求行动者对其行为负责的过程。更具体地说，它是一个概念，个人，机构和组织(公共，私人和公民社会)被认为有责任执行他们的权力，根据一定的标准(无论相互设置或不)”(Tisne, 2010，第2页)。在理想的意义上，问责制包括可转向性和可执行性。可答性可以被确定为责任承担者在提供与其行为有关的理由和信息方面的责任。可执行性是指由于未能回答责任要求而产生的后果或处罚的可能性。问责制在可回答性方面反映了弱势类别。虽然公众或公民主导的行动往往涉及声誉或软的同行压力，很少涉及强有力的执行力。
In order to perceive these priorities, PPPs have been identified as a significant tool in the implementation of orientations regarding the new policy. Since recent times, there has been an adoption of policy by a number of funding bodies for the favourable consideration of PPPs, at times under the existence of system, while in other cases, by new initiatives such as the ARC Linkage Grants. In general sense, PPPs are referred to as a number of cooperative arrangements between the non-governmental or private sector organization for the improvement of infrastructure networks and the enhancement of delivered service (Coghill, 2007). This involves the use of sources like donating, outsourcing, out-contracting or privatizing public goods.In general, transparency can be identified as a key attribute of effective governance and it is a prerequisite for the establishment of accountability in politics, among the citizens and the states. At the most basic level, transparency in governance is referred to as the level of openness across the system of government by clear procedures and processes, and simple accessibility of public service by information sharing (Dooren, 2011). This further supports ensuring the maintenance of accountability in delivering individual performance and handling resources.
Hence, it can be stated that transparency is an attribute of individuals, organizations, companies and governments to be open in disclosing clearly the actions, processes, plans and rules of information. On the other hand, accountability can be considered to be more complex, and the definition provided by Tisne (2010, p. 2) is as follows:“Broadly speaking, accountability refers to the process of holding actors responsible for their actions. More specifically, it is the concept that individuals, agencies and organisations (public, private and civil society) are held responsible for executing their powers according to a certain standard (whether set mutually or not)” (Tisne, 2010, p. 2).In the ideal sense, accountability is said to involve bothanswerability and enforceability. Answerability can be identified as the responsibility of duty bearers in providing justification and information related to their actions. Enforceability is referred to as the possibility of consequences or penalties due to failure in answering the claims of accountability. Accountability provides a reflection of weak category in terms of answerability. While public or citizen-led initiatives often tend to involve reputational or soft peer pressure, with rare involvement of strong enforceability.