The State and Perceptions of Public Sector Reform in Europe (original) (raw)
Related papers
Public Administration Reform in Europe–Views and Experiences from Senior Executives in 10 Countries
In a work context generally characterized by low management autonomy, but rather high goal ambiguity and politicization (exceptions here are the Netherlands, Norway and the UK), executives clearly perceive factors limiting a full adoption of a managerial logic and performance management concepts: in fact managerial ideas and instruments such as clear targets, measurement and use of performance information are only moderately implemented across in European public administrations. The tide of typical, 'structural' NPM reforms (such as privatization, contracting out or agencification) has by now subsided, replaced by reform trends more closely connected to a networkoriented understanding of government: transparent, open and/or e-government, as well as collaboration and cooperation among different public sector actors. The ongoing fiscal crisis might account for other important trends, such as public sector downsizing, stronger focus on outcomes and results, and the reduction of internal bureaucracy. Overall, countries such as the UK, Estonia, Norway and the Netherlands appear to be more active, while Spain, France, Austria and Hungary are hesitant with regard to implementing management tools. Concerning the overall impact of public administration reforms, executives make a predominantly positive assessment in Norway, Netherlands, Estonia, Hungary and to a lesser extent in Germany; reforms are judged rather critically by executives in Spain and in the other survey countries (UK, France and, to a lesser extent, Italy and Austria), the assessment is mixed. Considering potential success factors, aiming at service improvements (as opposed to solely cost-cutting), and higher public involvement seems to positively influence the overall perception of reforms. At policy field level moderate improvement is seen in relation to managerial aspects such as cost and efficiency, service quality and innovation, but also concerning transparency and openness, fair treatment of citizens and ethical behavior among public servants. On the contrary, slight deteriorations are associated to issues of staff motivation, attractiveness of the public sector as an employer, social cohesion and especially citizen trust in government. Despite fears in this direction, we discover no clear evidence of negative impacts on internal cohesion dimensions as a result of reforms: in countries with more pronounced performance management we tend to find even somewhat higher levels of social capital and trust and work satisfaction, but also relatively lower organizational commitment, indicating the need for more detailed analysis. Executives in the employment and health sectors, also under the survey's focus, assess reforms rather similarly to their counterparts in central government, with the exception that management instruments are generally regarded as more relevant. Also, in both sectors we find that reforms assessed as more demanding are also considered more successful. Exceptionally, in health, we find a greater importance of downsizing than in central government and employment. While considerable variation can be identified between countries regarding reform intensity, those types of reform trends which are regarded as important are strikingly similar-which might indicate a shared sense of purpose across Europe with regards to public management reforms.
COCOPS Executive Survey on Public Sector Reform in Europe
2013
textabstractBackground and aims of the survey The COCOPS project aims to assess the impact of New Public Management-style (NPM) reforms on public administrations in Europe, as well as, more particularly, on public services attending to citizens’ service needs and on social cohesion. The research explores trends and development of future public sector reform strategies, especially given the context of the financial crisis, by drawing lessons from past experience, exploring trends and studying emerging public sector coordination practices. The research is comparative and evidence-based, drawing on both existing data and innovative new quantitative and qualitative data collection, at both national and policy sector levels. As one of the largest comparative public management research projects in Europe, the project therefore intends to provide a comprehensive picture of the challenges facing the European public sector of the future. The consortium implementing the research consists of a...
Public Sector Reform: How the EU budget is used to encourage it
The recent European crisis has put the issue of government efficiency high on national policy agendas. Policy measures that result in a reduction of bureaucratic slack or red tape can alleviate the trade-off between consolidation and public service provision. Since 2007 the role of the EU budget in support of administrative reforms has been strengthening, at least in formal terms. However, the extent to which the various EU budgetary instruments have encouraged public administration reforms is unclear. Against the background of the overall European approach towards public administration reforms, this study reviews the current budgetary instruments that directly or indirectly support such reforms, and analyses the coherence, EU added value and complementarities within them. Case studies on four Member States and an analysis of current networks and award initiatives to disseminate best practices complete the study. Based on extensive desk research and a set of semi-structured interviews, the analysis finds a positive but modest impact of the EU budget and existing networks on reform activity. Some of the key recommendations are to improve the consistency of Country Specific Recommendations related to administrative reforms, increase the effectiveness of the Structural Reform Support Programme, and to ensure coherence and complementarity between all EU-funded interventions as well as their monitoring and evaluation processes. As to the role of learning and policy-diffusion, the study recommends to promote focused peer-to-peer exchange among public sector managers, and to develop a more credible evaluation of public sector awards.
The paper seeks to explore and understand the relationship between two major contemporary public management reform doctrines: the New Public Management (NPM) and the post-NPM doctrines. In particular, we wish to identify and test competing hypotheses about the possible causal relationships between these two doctrines. These hypotheses centre around two questions. Firstly, whether post-NPM reforms are triggered by earlier NPM reforms (and, in particular, by the perceived problems and failures brought about by them) or, rather, by other factors largely unrelated to NPM. Secondly, whether post-NPM reforms can be conceived of as an anti-thesis of NPM aimed at undoing the changes of the previous epoch or, rather, post-NPM elements add up to a new, additional “layer” of public management reforms, leaving the earlier ones largely untouched. The empirical basis of the analysis is a recent large-scale questionnaire survey of senior public administration executives working in sixteen European countries.
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.
The European public sectors in the age of managerialism
Politics, 2018
During the past 50 years, European public sectors have undergone a profound process of organizational change, where managerial tools and principles from the private sector have permeated through governments and administrations of many countries. A substantial amount of academic literature has now been devoted to public management reforms. Many scholars have associated them with the diffusion of a managerialist ideology. However, the relationship between public management reforms, political ideology, and public expressions of support for these reforms by political parties has been a relatively under-explored topic within the literature and is the gap we address in this article. Using a longitudinal framework of study, our analysis shows how issues surrounding managerialist reforms have evolved across the electoral manifestos of European parties during the past 50 years. Our findings reveal that these reforms have enjoyed a growing political profile over time in many countries within Western and Eastern Europe. Furthermore, we also examine and discuss the differences and similarities of these reforms across countries.
2010
The reforms driven by New Public Management (NPM) led to the introduction of management principles in local governments, marketisation and outsourcing. They made the greatest impact in the United Kingdom, but were also put in place in other European countries such as Ireland, Sweden, Germany, and – to the least degree – in France (compared to other countries discussed in this paper). There is a risk that NPM-inspired reforms may come to lose sight of the underlying social purpose of public services. NPM has not however become a new, universal model for public sector management. Issues tackled in the debate concerning the reform of public services have moved (mostly in the UK) beyond the concerns of NPM towards the emerging concept of networked community governance.