Back in the OECD...an oblique comment on the World Bank's "Better results from public sector institutions

Most of my thinking and experience has been focused on the developed world, rather than developing countries. Thus I bring an outsider’s perspective to the World Bank’s 2012 document, Better results from public institutions. I am grateful to Nick Manning and Willy McCourt for their invitation to peer over one of the many walls which subdivide the territory of public administration, Since at least the 1950s ‘development administration’ has been a separate academic subfield; one often characterised, tightly or loosely, explicitly or implicitly, with the notion that its mission is to export the good practices of the developed world to replace the bad practices of the underdeveloped one. It is easy to understand why this should appear to be a core mission

Politics, Administration and Performance: A continuing search, but no one best way?

Introduction: I have been tasked with the following question: how do relations between politics and administration shift when performance-improving reforms are introduced? As always, there is more than one way of interpreting the question, and of trying to answer. There are also strong normative aspects – for example, who should lead performance reforms, politicians or administrators? I will address this complexity by offering a number of different perspectives on performance management, and by making copius references to relevant work by scholars in many countries. Thus, for example, I will look at what we know of past performance-oriented reforms; at why a particular reform may work well in one context but not in another; at how relations between politicians and administrators have been shifting over the past few decades, and at what impacts current conditions of austerity may be having on these key relationships. Throughout I will also be emphasizing a paradox – that we have a huge literature on these issues, and yet this mountain of words leaves us without any clear or sure general answer. I attempt to show why generalisations are so difficult, and what kind of answers we may be able to develope once we abandon the perenially seductive idea that there is, if only we can find it, ’one best way’

The magic of good governance

__Abstract__ Governance is a widely used concept, in both the study and practice of public administration. Particularly in conjunction with the adjective good it serves as a normative standard against which the actual situation in countries across the world is claimed to be measured. In analytical terms, however, the concept shows shortcomings. It is, for instance, broad, and seems to imply or suggest consensus and uniformity. Yet these characteristics hardly seem to hinder an almost universal appeal and a widespread usage. Governance appears to function as a ‘magic concept’. Therefore, before it can be used in theory and research, considerable specification and elaboration are needed. At the same time its ‘magic’ character does make it useful, particularly in a rhetorical sense

NPM Can Work: An optimistic review of the impact of New Public Management reforms in central and eastern Europe

This article reviews the New Public Management (NPM) literature in central and eastern Europe (CEE) with the aim of assessing whether reforms have 'worked'. Increasingly, academics have tended to argue against the suitability of NPM instruments in this region. To understand the impact of this much-debated policy, we first propose a classification of the impacts of NPM geared to the realities of central and eastern European states. Then, we use this classification to carefully review empirical studies across the region over the past 10 years. Unlike much of the recent academic literature, we suggest that NPM can work. NPM policy has not always been successful to the extent expected and promoted, but there is enough evidence to show that some of the central ideas in NPM have led to improvements in public service organization or provision across different organizational settings. An adequate degree of administrative capacity, sustained reform over time and a 'fitting context' are the main factors that can tip the scale for the success of these management instruments. The article provides a fresh and transparent assessment of a major administrative development in a growing region with implications for other parts of the world that experience similar challenges and opportunities

New Public Management in Europe

New Public Management (NPM) is the label which many academics have given to a series of reforms from the 1980s onwards, to improve the efficiency and performance of western governments and/or public sector organizations. Examples are the development of performance indicators and benchmarking, personnel reforms aimed at ‘normalising’ public sector employment on private sector models, placing executive bodies at arms’ length from ministries, establishing public private partnerships and introducing new management techniques and instruments. Continental European governments have adapted and re-interpreted many of the Anglo-American ideas underpinning the NPM, to adjust them to their own national politico-administrative contexts. As a consequence, reforms of the public sector may have the same labels in different countries but need not be the same in practice or in meaning; there is both convergence and divergence

Agentschappen en de verzelfstandigingsparadox

Verzelfstandiging van overheidsorganisaties leidt tot een paradox. Enerzijds krijgen de organisaties meer zelfstandi

Effects of privatization and agencification on citizens and citizenship: an international comparison

This study has been compiled as an internationally comparative contribution to the parliamentary inquiry by the Dutch Senate into the effects of privatization and agencification on the relationship between citizens and the (national) government. Knowledge on this topic is scarce and scattered across different sources. Therefore, this paper consists of three different sections. Each section deals with a different question and uses different sources. In this overview we summarize the main findings of the three sections

Is prioritisation of funding in elite sport effective? An analysis of the investment strategies in 16 countries

Abstract Research question: This paper explores the extent to which nations prioritise elite sport funding; whether such nations are more successful than those whose funding is more diversified; and, if the sports that receive the most funding are also the most successful. Research methods: Data on public expenditure for elite sport programmes (2011/2012) were collected on a sport-specific basis in 16 nations (n=445 funded sports). The Herfindahl index and concentration ratios of the four/eight most funded sports (CR4/CR8) are used as proxies for prioritization. Success was measured using top 3 and top 8 places during the Olympic Games and World Championships. Descriptive analysis and linear regression are applied to identify the relationship between the distribution of funding and success. Results and findings: Generally, all sample nations are prioritisers. Nations with smaller total elite sport budgets tended to prioritise more. There is a slight negative association between the distribution of funding within a country and subsequent success, indicating that the sample countries that prioritise more tended to be less successful. Sample nations that diversify their funding more, are found to be successful in a wider range of sports. In addition, the data illustrated only low allocative efficiency for some nations. Implications: The study produced ambiguous conclusions that prioritisation as a deliberate strategic choice is an efficient way to invest funding. The findings have important implications for high performance managers and suggests that a more diverse resource allocation policy may help to avoid unintended negative consequences. Keywords: Targeted funding; elite sport policy; allocative efficiency; prioritisation; SPLIS

Health inequalities in Germany: do regional-level variables explain differentials in cardiovascular risk?

Breckenkamp J, Mielck A, Razum O. Health inequalities in Germany: do regional-level variables explain differentials in cardiovascular risk? BMC Public Health. 2007;7(1): 132.Background: Socioeconomic status is a predictor not only of mortality, but also of cardiovascular risk and morbidity. An ongoing debate in the field of social inequalities and health focuses on two questions: 1) Is individual health status associated with individual income as well as with income inequality at the aggregate (e. g. regional) level? 2) If there is such an association, does it operate via a psychosocial pathway (e.g. stress) or via a ´´neo-materialistic´´ pathway (e.g. systematic under-investment in societal infrastructures)? For the first time in Germany, we here investigate the association between cardiovascular health status and income inequality at the area level, controlling for individual socio-economic status. Methods: Individual-level explanatory variables (age, socio-economic status) and outcome data (body mass index, blood pressure, cholesterol level) as well as the regional-level variable (proportion of relative poverty) were taken from the baseline survey of the German Cardiovascular Prevention Study, a cross-sectional, community-based, multi-center intervention study, comprising six socio-economically diverse intervention regions, each with about 1800 participants aged 25–69 years. Multilevel modeling was used to examine the effects of individual and regional level variables. Results: Regional effects are small compared to individual effects for all risk factors analyzed. Most of the total variance is explained at the individual level. Only for diastolic blood pressure in men and for cholesterol in both men and women is a statistically significant effect visible at the regional level. Conclusion: Our analysis does not support the assumption that in Germany cardiovascular risk factors were to a large extent associated with income inequality at regional level