Search results

The aim of this paper is to outline the sets of factors influential on the implementation of public management reform in the politico‐administrative context of Italy.

Provides a combination of different research designs, multiple case studies on regional governments.

Some broad sets of factors affecting implementation of public management reform have been identified They include: characteristics of the administrative tradition and features of the politico‐administrative context; the design of the reform package and the coalition of interests sustaining the reform; behavioural triggers; and the building over the time of management capacity at the level of individual public sector organisations.

Research limitations include the availability of empirical evidence given the width of the phenomenon under investigation, as well as the broader caveats that apply to researching vast and complex problems like those concerning management reforms at nation‐wide level. Some implications for the development of a broader comparative research agenda on countries in the Napoleonic administrative tradition are proposed.

Provides an interpretation of the dynamics of the process of implementation of public management reforms in Italy by combining a plurality of theoretical sources.

This paper aims to outline the contents of the special issue on public management reform in countries in the Napoleonic administrative tradition, discussing alternative explanatory frameworks, and proposing paths for future research.

This article provides reviews of the papers in the special issue.

Some broad sets of factor affecting implementation of public management reform in Napoleonic countries are outlined, schematised in a specific table, and discussed in the light of potential alternative frameworks, like cultural analysis.

Research limitations include the availability of empirical evidence given the width of the phenomenon under investigation (public management reform in five countries). Implications for the development of a broader comparative research agenda on countries in the Napoleonic administrative tradition (and others) are proposed.

The special issue, of which this paper provides an overview, fills a gap in the literature by providing systematic and comparative analysis of public management reform in five under‐investigated countries in the Napoleonic administrative tradition, arguably an important contribution to the widening of the comparative research agenda in public management.

The chapter furnishes empirical evidence about the extent and profiles of autonomy of EU agencies, the modalities whereby they are steered and controlled, and the interactions they have in EU policy networks. It thus provides the bases for a more complete picture of the EU multi-level administration.

The research is a survey-based design. A questionnaire was administered between July 2009 and April 2010 to 30 EU agencies included in the study population. The questionnaire was sent to the executive director of all the agencies included in the study. Questions were closed-ended, either in the form of multiple choices – with one answer or with check-all-that-apply and an option for ‘other’ to be filled – or in scale format. The resulting data set included ratio, interval, ordinal, and nominal scales. The reference model employed for the investigation relies on the analytical model developed within the framework of the research project COST Action IS0651 CRIPO (Comparative Research into Current Trends in Public Sector Organization – see also ‘Acknowledgements’) for the study of public agencies in Europe (Verhoest, Van Thiel, Bouckaert, & Lægreid, 2012).

EU agencies display a rather low level of managerial, especially financial, autonomy; conversely, they enjoy relatively high policy autonomy. As to the way in which multiple ‘parent’ administration steer EU agencies, it emerges a composite picture, in which the crossroads of steering and control by the parent administrations and accountability by the agency lies in the executive director. In terms of interactions within policy networks, EU agencies interact in a significant way with the European Commission, with national-level agencies in the pertinent policy field, and with specific technical bodies where they are part of the configuration of the policy sector, whilst interactions with national ministries as well as with other EU agencies are rare. No single model can capture in full the overall features of EU agencies, although the ‘community level institution’ model seems to capture a number of the profiles of these agencies.

Both the literature on EU multi-level administration and research agendas in public management can benefit from inclusion of – and in-depth empirical knowledge about – EU agencies. The chapter provides important empirical evidence to these purposes.

EU agencies are actors in European public policy-making, albeit to a varied extent depending on the sector. The extent of autonomy and the way in which they are held to account are crucial aspects for an enhanced understanding of their influence on European public policy-making, as is their location in European policy networks.

Research presented in this chapter is the first systematic empirical investigation of EU agencies encompassing networking, steering and control and autonomy of EU agencies, based on primary data.

Purpose – This chapter addresses a range of questions about public management reform in ‘Napoleonic’ administrative systems. It starts by addressing the descriptive question about what trajectories of reform occurred, and then explores what has been the fundamental stance toward new public management (NPM) (rejected, imported and implemented, or filtered and translated). I also discuss how reforms have changed the relative power base and role interpretation of the main actors in public management reform, and analyze the strategic approaches employed toward the reform of public management in these countries. Finally, I assess some key strategic alternatives for policy-makers as regards the reform of public management in the face of the long-term effects of the fiscal crisis that has struck these countries since 2010.

Design/Methodology/Approach – This chapter is based on a combination of literature reviews and opinions from the experts in the field who are surveyed – selected experts are all renowned scholars or leading practitioners, knowledgeable of public sector reform in the countries subject to investigation.

Findings – The chapter concludes that NPM-inspired reforms have to some extent been attempted; particularly, the role of tenured officials seems to have changed substantially, especially in their relationship with elected officials. However, NPM doctrines have been mainly filtered and translated into the local politico-administrative dynamics and codes of interpretation, and quite often they have been hollowed out. Particularly, the role of tenured officials seems to have changed substantially, especially in their relationship with elected officials. In terms of strategic approaches, there seems to have been much “maintaining” and some “modernizing,” although with important differences between countries (Italy being an especially difficult case to classify). The fiscal crisis and the changes in European governance might lead to a profoundly different state of affairs in which the interconnection between changes in European Union (EU) governance and public sector reform might become more closely interconnected than they used to be.

Research limitations/Implications – The contribution is mainly speculative, and urges for empirical research to be undertaken, particularly on the issue of the interconnection between changes in EU governance and public sector reform.

Originality/Value – The contribution provides a distinctive and critical perspective on public sector reform in an underinvestigated cluster of countries.

The explanatory power of Multi-Level Governance (MLG) has been and is being questioned. Two main criticisms have been raised: first, that MLG is ultimately descriptive, not explanatory; second, that MLG is a case of concept stretching, that it is ultimately an umbrella notion rather than a theory. This chapter outlines what ripostes may be provided to such critiques and argues that the progress of the study of MLG and its usage in political science and public policy and management may lie to an important extent in fostering the dialogue with other streams of research (thus filling the gap of some ‘missing linkages’ in the extant MLG literature), like network governance; policy learning; the analysis of policy tools and the tools of government in complex systems; models in strategic management like stakeholder analysis and others.

This volume is a collective contribution by authors from different disciplinary backgrounds who all address, from different angles and by using a variety of research methods, the key question of how to bring into the MLG research agenda a range of disciplines and applied fields of inquiry that have so far only limitedly been used in the MLG stream of research and literature more systematically.

It arises from the volume that theoretical frames like network governance; policy learning; policy tools analysis; stakeholder analysis and others have important potential to further the MLG research agenda. A number of contributions address the transformation of MLG in the European Union (EU), the polity where MLG arrangements where first detected and labelled as such (Marks, 1993). Others apply MLG frames to other institutional settings, including non-democratic regimes.

This volume is a collective attempt to suggest ‘cross-fertilisations’ from other disciplines or applied fields that may lead to unleash more of the potential and promises of the MLG agenda. It is hoped that this work lays some of the foundations for building bridges between the MLG literature and disciplines and theoretical frames that may be effectively brought into the MLG research agenda.

MLG has long gone beyond the academic debate, to become an analytical lens employed by EU and other institutions across the globe. MLG informs the practice of policy-making. By addressing some key gaps in the extant literature and furnishing perspectives to link MLG to disciplines that may provide theories and models to further its analytical potential, this volume aims at contributing to improving the practice of MLG.

The volume is – to our knowledge – the first systematic attempt to bring into the MLG literature a whole range of theories and models that may provide ways forward to the understanding and usage of MLG.

This paper aims to give an overview of the public management process in France and tries to explain why it is specific as compared to other countries.

The paper is based upon a sociological and comparative methodology. It reports the empirical findings of a European survey.

Management reforms in France are fragmented and do not fit in a general doctrine or a new philosophy of the state. The French managerial reform style is due to the domestication of management tools by Napoleonic structures. Nevertheless, management innovations are used in order to draw new frontiers within public administration between what is the centre and what is the periphery.

The methodology as well as the findings of the paper could be used for a more systematic comparative work in order to understand why and how public management tools fit in national political as well as professional traditions. There is scope for connecting public management research with broader historical and sociological studies of public administration.

The paper shows that both political values and work practices have to be taken into account in order to understand why public sector management reforms are easier in some countries even within the Napoleonic tradition.

This paper aims to show that the Spanish central administration, as a representative of the Napoleonic tradition, has undergone considerable managerial changes in non‐autonomous and semi‐autonomous agencies characterised by their direct involvement in service delivery in spite of the failure of macro‐changes and radical reforms of public administration.

This paper provides case studies of “paths” of changes in three organisations.

Through “layering” and “diffusion” of institutions as social mechanisms included in the historical new institutionalism account for innovation, specific organisations like the tax agency, social security and property registry have become more managerial in a state dominated by public law.

More in‐depth case studies would make possible generalisation of how small changes can produce similar impacts or results than reform efforts at the macro‐level.

The use of historical neo‐institutionalism and the exam of mechanisms as “layering” and “diffusion” for explaining change is presented.

The purpose of the paper is to address the question of the influence of the administrative tradition and the politico‐administrative context on the formulation and implementation of public management reform in Portugal.

The paper is based on empirical evidence collected from various sources. It reflects the personal experience of the author, who was personally involved in the reform process, and is also the result of a wide‐ranging review of literature on public administration and public management reform in Portugal and other European countries.

The paper identifies different phases of reform, and acknowledges the existence of a recurrent problem with public expenditure and increasing public employment. It concludes that there has been no lack of great reforms, and suggests a different approach – one that does not require special speeches or special doctrine, but is based on discreet work by politicians and managers seeking to fulfil the traditional values of the public service.

Mainly due to a lack of both studies and evaluation practices – make it difficult to assess the actual impact of the different waves of reforms. However, administration has managed to cope with the process of change while maintaining a key orientation towards the citizen and society.

The value of the paper is that it is the first time the whole cycle of reforms, from 1974 until 2007, has been covered and also related to the politico‐administrative tradition. It contains summarised but complete information and suggests a new approach based on the ethical values of the public service.

The paper attempts to assess the impact of reforms of the last 25 years on Greek administration and more specifically on its Napoleonic features. Given that those have been reshaped by country specific socio‐political dynamics, the analysis starts by pointing out the Napoleonic features but also specific features its Greek variant. These form the context of reforms undertaken and determine their trajectories as well as their limitations.

This paper examines four basic reform areas linked to important features of Napoleonic states: centrality of the state, centralised bureaucratic structures, labour relations in the public sector, and citizens‐administration relations. The rationale of reforms is discussed in relation to NPM trends but also to domestic challenges and priorities.

The significance of reforms undertaken varies. The state's presence in the economy has been significantly reduced and decentralisation reforms are more important politically than administratively. Citizens' rights and service delivery have been conceived rather as forms of democratisation and modernisation than as managerial reforms. Only recently labour relations in the public sector have been partly challenged while other reform aspects such as “agencification”, systematically by‐passing existing bureaucratic structures start to be part of the picture. Change has been incremental and followed pre‐established paths. The “Napoleonic” features of the state have not been seriously affected and reforms have hardly been reshaped by the new managerial paradigm. While the state remains the main reform actor and the law a typical policy instrument, a distinctive reform path emerges in Greece, as defined by the apparently contradictory rationale of a number of initiatives responding to old as much to new challenges.

Provides a brief account of important aspects of the Greek variant of the Napoleonic state and the context of recent reforms. Features and limits of reforms are also discussed. Finally, a tentative assessment answers the central question of the paper.