This study introduces a cross-country comparative analysis of the role of News Ombudsperson in the public media corporations in Spain and France. It investigates the specific media self-regulatory processes established to reduce reputational risks and increase the trust and credibility of the media organisations. It aims to fill in the gaps in prior research by applying a qualitative framework developed using indicators derived from scholarly work on regulation and governance and media management. The variables selected for the analysis are extracted from prior interdisciplinary research and focus on media self-regulatory processes, complaints management mechanisms, election, reporting procedures, checks and balances, roles, visibility and transparency of News Ombudspersons in two countries which represent the Polarised Pluralist media system category. Research questions are raised in relation to the main variables identified for the comparative analysis. Data were collected from multiple publicly available international sources, including public media organizations databases, national media regulatory authorities, and academic studies. Results reveal cross-country variations. The systematic investigation of different forms of self-regulatory procedures might lead to concrete recommendations and best practice models for media organizations beyond the European Union. Further research could address the role of media audiences as relevant stakeholders in media governance processes.

While there has been much discussion about the large infrastructure needs in Asia and the Pacific, less attention has been paid to public expenditure efficiency in infrastructure services delivery. New constructions are not the only solution, especially when governments have limited capital to invest. Globally, new infrastructure projects face delays and cost overruns, leading to an inefficient use of public resources. The root causes include the lack of transparency in project selection, the lack of project preparation, the silo approach by public entities in assessing feasibility studies, and the lack of public sector capacity to fully develop a bankable pipeline of projects. To tackle these issues, governments need a smarter investment approach and to do so, enhancing public service efficiency is very crucial. The paper suggests a “whole life cycle” (WLC) approach as the main strategic solution for the discussed issues and challenges. We expand the definition of WLC to include the entire life cycle of the infrastructure asset from need identification to its disposal. The stages comprise planning, preparation, procurement, design, construction, operation and maintenance, and disposal. This is because we believe any efficient or inefficient decision throughout such a wide life cycle influences the quality of public services. Hence, in this holistic approach, infrastructure life cycle consists of four phases: planning, preparation, procurement, and implementation. Governments could enhance public efficiency and thus improve access to finance throughout the WLC by several solutions. These are (i) preparing infrastructure master plan and pipelines and long-term budgeting during the planning phase; (ii) establishing framework and guidelines and improving governance during preparation phase; (iii) promoting standardization, transparency, open government, and contractual consistency during the procurement phase; and finally (iv) continued role of government and total asset management during the implementation phase. In addition to these phase-specific means, key WLC solutions include proper use of technology, capacity building, and private participation in general and public-private partnership (PPP) in particular.