Jeremy L. Hall, Staci M. Zavattaro, R. Paul Battaglio, Michael W. Hail
By April 2020, the United States had entered the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. We were observing the harrowing effects of the virus in China, Italy, and early hotspots in the United States. It was clear to us, as editors, that this crisis would upend traditional ways of operating in the public and nonprofit sectors. Once-clear administrative roles would be abandoned, and policies and procedures would be suspended, altered, or ignored to respond as nimbly as possible. The crisis has affected the private sector, individuals, families, schools, and—of course—the healthcare sector in ways that will be the subject of research for the ensuing decade and likely beyond. PAR has a responsibility to be at the leading edge of public administration research and practice, and as a service to our stakeholders, we decided that it was best to act quickly, provide a broad perspective, and capture what had already been learned around the world. We used our Viewpoint feature to frame the symposium because we felt it was too early to have access to complete data subject to rigorous analysis. Rather, we would offer lessons learned, best practices, and key problems that would serve to guide practitioners while also highlighting key areas that could be the focus of future research. The response to our call could not have been imagined; we received more than 200 manuscripts to consider, and we quickly realized that it is impossible to capture every perspective, every lesson, or even every country's experience in combatting this scourge. The crisis has highlighted learning opportunities that contrast centralized and decentralized systems and authoritarian versus democratic responses, as well as lessons in collaboration, leadership, intergovernmental relations, coproduction, health policy and management, immigration policy, transportation policy, budgeting and finance, economic development, and so on. While we are unable to present every possible perspective, the pieces included in this Viewpoint symposium highlight a diverse set of concerns that characterize our discipline's breadth of inquiry and global reach. It stands as a testament to the lessons our theories have long prescribed, to their limitations under conditions of extreme strain, and to their prospect for improvement in the world we now find ourselves making sense of each day. We encourage you to explore these perspectives, to draw from the lessons they provide, and allow them to inspire innovations in your own research or practice. There have been many crises throughout history, and the scale of this event is unrivaled in recent times, in part because the virus is invisible and ubiquitous—no city, county, state, or nation is immune to its infiltration and the myriad effects thereof, nor can they predict where it will next strike. Government bears the brunt of this burden, although after years of contracting out, collaboration, coproduction, and other networked service delivery mechanisms, nonprofit agencies and essential businesses have also played a role in the response. Exceptional factors such as a global economy with complex supply chains and interdependence, rapid information cycles that characterize the information age, and the most advanced science and healthcare systems in world history have risen to the occasion. Yet, the government structures and economic market systems have struggled to lead through seemingly antiquated legal, constitutional, and electoral institutions that continue to frame the structural foundation within which bureaucracy carries out its work (Hall and Battaglio 2020b; Meier 1997). We organize our questions for reflection based on themes we saw emerge—and continue to emerge—during the ongoing pandemic response. The essays in the Viewpoint symposium are meant to provide additional direction for future research, and we hope our questions do the same. We realize the list is not exhaustive, and many themes you see missing here will appear in the second installment of this Viewpoint symposium in issue 80(5). In the United States, the government response is framed through federalism—a historically divisive institutional framework. Indeed, Wilson (1995) proclaimed American Federalism to be a persistent source of political conflict in relations between the national and state governments since the constitution was ratified. The questions of sovereignty and the representation of governments, interests, civil liberties, and scientific expertise that are now emerging will all be framed by the constitutional foundations of federalism in the U.S. context (Hail and Lange 2010). Similar questions will arise to model governance systems around the world in explaining response to the virus, and explaining the performance thereof. Federalism affects nearly every major policy area (Marbach, Katz, and Smith 2006). In 2019, we mused about whether Federalism might be dead (Hall and Battaglio 2019); recent events have confirmed it is alive, well, and possibly mutating. As has been the case with major punctuations throughout history, the balance of power among nation and states is once again in question. What impetus has the pandemic generated to influence intergovernmental and intersectoral management? Will the policy roles begin to shift? Will a new model of federalism emerge? Just as the structure of the system matters, so will its political components. Political parties initially seemed to be acting as though they are together in the boat, but it has become clear that they are on journeys to different destinations. The pandemic pulled disparate ideologs together briefly to pass relief packages out of a sense of urgency, but discourse rapidly became tainted with the same rhetoric and hyperpoliticization we have recently lamented (Hall and Battaglio 2020a). Politics will influence policy and exert pressure on bureaucrats in ways that will affect performance. To fully understand the crisis and response, research will need to incorporate constructs that capture ideology or values of elected leaders and their constituents. If the fractured nature of American politics has crippled the government's ability to respond effectively, how can experts and professionals in bureaucracy—public administrators—take on the challenges of today that rightly deserve their attention? How can leaders summon the political will and political support to accomplish emergent policy goals resulting from the crisis? How do we move beyond extreme partisanship and gridlock to act effectively? How does the increasingly short public/political attention span affect the response? The public largely rallies around the flag in the wake of crises but then loses interest quickly. Will the policy window remain open long enough to bring about deep policy change? The response to COVID-19 has demonstrated the need for both leaders and professionals to put aside petty political differences and take advantage of each other's strengths to work collaboratively. Somewhat confounded by politics and ideology, leadership and crisis management will yield great lessons in explaining performance, or more likely perceived performance, in responding to the crisis. Some acts of leadership have been commended, but most have also been fiercely criticized as a result of the clear-cut side-taking that so characterizes our modern discourse. How leaders respond to chaos and uncertainty will clearly affect performance results but also reveal new ways of thinking about crisis response as entrepreneurial actions are subjected to further analysis (Battaglio and Hall 2019b). From a policy perspective, closely intertwined with leadership capabilities and ideologies, this pandemic is a punctuation that will manifest through a shift in popular attitudes toward policies at all levels (Roberts 2020). Drastic policy change has already been implemented in immigration, education, healthcare, transportation, economic development, agriculture/food production, elections, and others. Certainly, more changes will follow, and we are anxious to see whether those changes are temporary and short term or entrenched. As we reflect on the responses to the virus observed around the world, structure and culture must be considered in concert with—or in addition to—political persuasion and leadership. The degree of centralization versus decentralization shapes the speed with which responses can be made, the complexity of delivering the response, and the allocation of stored capacity at different levels. Authoritarian regimes have been able to act differently than leaders in democratic systems. Shared power moderates decisions. We also know that strategy matters (George et al. 2020). Excessive capacity is useless if it is used unwisely. While emergency management plans may have existed for many institutions, the nature of this crisis was unique in its effect on all organizations and geographic locations. Public health agencies and medical facilities dusted off aging plans to reign in the virus and treat its effects. Agencies in other functional areas were likely less prepared. At the core, one of the biggest challenges of this pandemic has not been changing the work that is done so much as adapting to new ways of implementing policy. If the past is an indicator, strategic planning will play an essential role as organizations adapt to their new realities (George 2020). Examining the central role of evidence in responding to the pandemic will also produce a new frontier in research. How is evidence useful when targets are seemingly nimble and subject to frequent movement? How has the rise of substantive experts in policy and management influenced the response strategy and performance? How has politicization of evidence impacted the response strategy, performance, and public perception (Hall and Battaglio 2018a)? Evidence-based practice (EBP), policy, and management will be a fruitful path for assessment in the aftermath of the crisis. Which approaches were effective? Which were not? Why were they effective in some locations and not others? The accumulation of data occurs quickly in the information age, and analysis of such data offers an opportunity to rapidly generate best practices and EBPs for agencies of every type (Hall and Jennings Jr. 2008). EBP provides a mechanism for integrating this knowledge into practice. Similar to the effective use of evidence in practice, we have also observed the utility of technology in tempering the crisis. Whether medical technology treating patients, medical research decoding the virus' genome and developing vaccines, or government agencies' use of cell phone apps to monitor individual movements, technology has been an integral part of the way we have responded to the crisis. Researchers may well investigate how technology mitigated the virus and how it could have done more. We remain curious as to whether there will now be political will to mobilize resources toward scientific and healthcare endeavors. Like the moon shot half a century ago, we have seen what can happen when leaders and professionals promote the use of technology to address a specific goal in a concerted effort. What role has capacity played in mitigating or worsening the crisis? While the federal government has the expertise and the resources essential to respond, states share constitutional and legal authority, and many have substantial public health capacity in their own right. As has been documented in the capacity/performance paradigm, the capacity to act is necessary but not sufficient to bring about desired performance (Hall 2008a, 2008b; Hall and Battaglio 2018b). Going forward, we may need to think about building and deploying capacity in different ways. Localized capacity is necessary because, when such an ubiquitous catastrophe strikes that affects literally every state and community, federal resources cannot be easily deployed to targeted areas of need. States should strengthen their capacities to take on a greater share in the burden of government to preserve a wide range of freedoms of action for jointly supported and administered programs (White 1953). Population centers will receive attention first, and cumulative federal capacity will likely prove insufficient to fulfill every need. Related to capacity is the unique nature of rural areas. There is a huge disparity between rural and urban areas in terms of preparedness, impact, and ability to respond. Research will do well to consider these differences as it seeks to understand the virus' impact and government responses. In 2019, we noted the importance of reduced boundary governance to modern public administration research and practice (Hall and Battaglio 2018b). Managing through partnerships, whether defined as public/private partnerships (PPP), collaboration, cooperation, networks, or joined-up government, is an essential aspect of modern governance, and the value of these partnerships within and across sectors has proven essential to the rapid and complex responses we have observed. The call for multiorganizational analysis is not new; Ostrom (1989) recognized it, and Elazar (1964) referred to it in observing the cooperative partnership between levels of government in American federalism. Of course, the involvement of multiple levels of government leads to increased complexity (O'Toole Jr. 2000), showing how deeply integrated many of these questions may be. Among the immediate federal responses was the collection of massive relief bills to be signed into law; this feel good action was fueled by fear more than evidence, by urgency rather than evidence of need. Throwing money at the problem will likely net unforeseen consequences; some of the strings attached to federal funding will likely result in the persistence of inefficient behaviors. How should managers balance urgency with accountability? Urgency increases complexity and uncertainty, which is a recipe for decreased rational analysis (Battaglio and Hall 2019a). As System I thinking dominates rapid-fire, gut-driven, managerial decisions to the exclusion of deliberate rational thinking characterized by System II, the potential for bias to influence outcomes will increase. To what extent is rational analysis warranted? Are different decision-making paradigms associated with different levels of performance? An enduring question for public administration is how much effort do we devote to accountability efforts versus mission-based activities (Battaglio and Hall 2018; Hall 2010). Rapid action often precludes transparency in the process, and under the unique constraints of social distancing employed during this pandemic, many previously open meetings have been held in a closed fashion or merely aired via social media platforms. This creates a potential barrier to accessibility based on access to computers and broadband internet. Has a lack of transparency impacted the quality of the response? As for accountability, there is clear tracking of the problem through infections, death counts, market losses, and unemployment. It is yet too soon to determine what efforts have been used to integrate performance measurement or management into the response. As you reflect on these structural and practical challenges, we encourage you to seek deeper understanding by reading the insights we have been able to compile from around the world. In this first installment of the symposium, we present 15 unique perspectives that reveal how deeply this crisis has challenged public and nonprofit managers around the world. Most provide lessons that can begin to help us shape our response. While we are only able to print half of the material in this issue, you can access the remaining pieces in our virtual symposium online (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/toc/10.1111/15406210.covid-19). Now, let us take a look at what PAR's dedicated authors deliver in this issue. To address the question of the federal response, Kettl (2020) details the variety of responses across states and the federal government. He details some of the reasons why, and ways in which, state responses varied and highlights variations. It is in these variations that future research lies. Applying Kettl's (2020) federalism logic, Curley and Federman (2020) collected and analyzed a variety of state executive orders dealing with the pandemic. The authors find differences in enforcement, restriction, and suspension, and within the essay, they outline future research that can explain the results of these variations. What role did the executive orders play in stopping the virus spread? What accounts for the variance? Thanks to the pandemic shock, Roberts (2020) explains what he calls the millennial paradigm that, in his argument, will collapse. He, too, details some of the elements of federalism that might not remain after the pandemic punctuation. The September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks; the 2008 financial crisis; and the pandemic are all exogenous shocks to the governing system as we know it, so the question becomes: will these predictions come true? Similar to Roberts (2020), Moon (2020) takes a big-picture approach to understanding the changes to governance practices as a result of the pandemic. Using South Korea as a case study, Moon argues that an agile-adaptive approach might be a path forward for responding to crises. His essay prompts future research about agile principles in government (see Mergel, Ganapati, and Whitford 2020 for more on agile principles that can inform future research). Like Moon (2020), Yang (2020) uses China's response in Wuhan, the virus epicenter, to argue that paradoxes often guide governance practices, and even in normal times, those paradoxes should be examined for competing values structures. Yang (2020) points out that the pandemic can be an equalizer for government and governance as there really is no preparation for something on this scale that fundamentally shakes our normal processes. Thinking of these paradoxes as either-or choices rather than both stifles our thinking, and future research can further explore the paradoxes Yang (2020) outlines. Keeping with the theme of punctuations and change, Van Dooren and Noordegraaf (2020) explain that what we call normal science might not hold in crisis situations. They argue that how we "do" science needs to change but caution putting too much reliance on science to solve all societal problems. The piece raises fundamental questions about the role of expertise, and those questions are ripe for additional research. The Viewpoint symposium then shifts toward more case-based understandings of the crisis, using varying theoretical lenses, countries, and practical findings to inform research and practice. Using the lens of cognition, coordination, communication, and control, Comfort et al. (2020) conduct a cross-cultural comparative case study to examine the response readiness in countries with different governmental, structural, and cultural elements. More comparative research with these underlying values will be needed. Comfort et al. (2020) use a networked approach to examine their cross-cultural response, and Grizzle, Goodin, and Robinson (2020) also detail the challenges with building and maintaining strong networks that can respond to system shocks such as the pandemic (Roberts 2020). Using the City of Norman, Oklahoma as a case study, Grizzle, Goodin, and Robinson (2020) detail ways in which strong networks are built and how well those efforts fared during the COVID-19 response. Future research can build on their recommendations for building strong, sustainable networks in public management. In addition to building resilient networks, governments also need to focus on fiscal resilience, and Dzigbede, Gehl, and Willoughby (2020) use data about local government weather-related fiscal resilience to draw lessons for the pandemic, which is another crisis that can (and likely will) financially drain many smaller governments. Future research can address the questions regarding building networks for financial resilience in government agencies. Similarly, Maher, Hoang, and Hindery (2020) argue that, from a financial perspective, the pandemic is adversely affecting smaller nonprofit organizations and local governments that might not qualify for federal relief funding. The authors suggest innovations in the sectors to protect fiscal integrity and reserves, and more research will be needed based on their findings to examine innovation and change in nonprofit organization, fundraising, and networking. The same will hold for governments suffering financially. Many essays in the symposium rely on countries as the unit of analysis. Huang (2020) uses Taiwan as a case study regarding the pandemic response, which relied on collaborative governance strategies with in a governing Using rhetoric to the United States, response on an invisible so into their roles in The factors that into the response, such as and cell phone are open for additional research in Using as their case study, and (2020) use a approach to understand the pandemic response. They also how federalism between the state and governments affected the response in and the key to was an ability to change response on the on action and those actions when to have what many consider a pandemic response and 2020). American countries as their et al. (2020) examine how the same problems in the world are by structural such as social across systems and social and political are among the that the response to the In this et al. highlight some practices emerging in and on the and institutions that or across what can we do with all these How can we use data from countries to strategic change? et al. (2020) offer a guide for these performance so they can be used This will into our call for policy and management in the ongoing pandemic response. thinking, et al. (2020) can help the power of these data for future In an essay that takes a different (2020) uses data from managers to understand how they can play a role in emergency management The pandemic has a management and many of the experts death are not included in emergency so (2020) offers points to consider when is in the planning and essays reflect the breadth of questions about government response in of crisis and the of authority, cooperation, networked governance, fiscal civil liberties, the role of expertise and science in and of In of the breadth of these manuscripts capture only a of the many questions that the crisis has enduring research questions are by these but our list merely the of what the work of around the world will soon
Endang Indartuti, V. Rudy Handoko, Handoko Wirawan, Uthe Ch
At the beginning of the reform era in Indonesia brings changes to the structure of the Government System in the regions, especially villages. This condition is marked by the transition from a change of the new order era with a centralized regime towards a reform era, a new and more open regime with decentralization. The wind of reform is carried over to the latest regulation (Law No.6 of 2014). This law seeks to restore village autonomy based on its origins and customs as a process of restoring state confidence in the village. On the other hand, to fulfill its political promise, the provision of village funds as a source of village income that aims to make the village independent shows that this law is still the same with the previous one, that in the village there is still supra village power. Village funds make all forms of implementation and management of village finances must be used in accordance with the village financial system. The existence of this system makes the village authority no longer in accordance with the principles of village autonomy, that village autonomy is in accordance with its origins and customs. Giving village autonomy with financial management through the Village Financial System (SISKEU) is felt that the portion of creativity and space for the village is limited. This triggers a lack of courage of the village officials to take the initiatives in making policies for a better village development. This situation is experienced by all villages in Indonesia, such as Pekarungan Village. This study uses a qualitative research method. The key informant is a Former Head of Pekarungan Village for 2 consecutive periods (1991-2006). He understands very well the changes in the laws governing the village. The result of the research shows that based on the principles of Kartohadikusumo's autonomy, autonomy can be implemented if there are inherent rights in the village, namely: "(1) the right to own territory with legal boundaries; (2) the right to elect and appoint the head or assembly of the village administration; (3) the right to administer and govern the village households; (4) the right to own and manage village assets and finance; (5) the rights to own village land; (6) the right to collect local taxes. Without the inherent rights mentioned above, autonomy is difficult to be implemented ".Based on the effectiveness of success in achieving the goals set and the relationship between the expected results and the results achieved, there are some rights that are not exercised as they should. In connection with village rights in Law No. 6 of 2014 concerning Villages, (1) the village regulates and manages community interests based on the origin, customs, social, and cultural values of the village community; (2) the village determines and manages its institution; and (3) the village receives sources of income, including village funds. All sources of village income, such as the Village Cash and village financial management, must be based on the village SISKEU as determined by the government bureaucracy. Keywords: Evaluation, Village Autonomy DOI: 10.7176/PPAR/10-6-08 Publication date: June 30th 2020
Performance measurement has attracted the attention of many researchers in the area of managerial accountability over the last two decades. However, most of them focus on measuring performance only in the private sector. Meanwhile, since several years, especially after the publication of the "New Public Management" doctrine, performance measurement has emerged as an important research priority in the public sector. This does not mean that it has not previously shown interest in the public sector's efficiency problem, but it has been limited in the context of the policy appraisal concept. This concept has functioned more as a tool for assessing public policy delineation and has eventually served to redraft existing policies or practices rather than a system of measurement and performance management of public institutions.Policy evaluation methodologies are very useful, but they can only be used within a framework that assumes the presence of managerial behavior in the public sector. Where legal laws and regulations serve as a basis for dealing with issues, it is very difficult to it is assumed that efficiency will be a fundamental priority. The concept of governance, recent decades, is closely related to the process of modeling assessment procedures. Governance, as such, generally refers to the tools that serve to direct, control and co-ordinate individuals and organizations, partly autonomous ones, in the name of the interests they contribute to (Lynn, Heinrich and Hill, 1999).Some of the recent problems in the area of governance include issues of formal control over authoritative decision-makers and decentralization; focusing on powerful interest groups or goals that are difficult to describe (eg "efficiency" and "high credibility"), as well as comparing different governance regimes.A full description and analysis of the governance model is a prerequisite for further study of performance measurement in public sector activity.The logic of governance in the public sector is simple: lawmakers create the legal framework, administrators deal with enforcement, and the public pays, at least in theory, enjoys the benefits. Lawmakers are elected to act during a mandate (usually four years), but also the administrators (bureaucrats and civil servants) are nominated and supposed to have a long-term career in implementing policies and legal acts. The latter should serve professionally and implement legal acts adopted by lawmakers, using the maximum of their knowledge. There is still an open discussion on how to evaluate the achievements of civil servants and the policy effectiveness they implement.Governance is a division of responsibilities, it should serve as a tool that facilitates the continuous improvement of work in the public sector. Only redistribution of formal authority can have little or no effect on the desirable consequences with all the opposing claims expressed by some administrative reformers.
Purpose There is no such thing as a truly centralized or decentralized management system. With regard to universities, most of the key areas in universities are centralized, e.g. finance, personnel, curriculum, management and quality. These key areas will exhibit a higher impact on learning and research by maintaining the appropriate balance between centralization and decentralization approaches. The purpose of this paper is to study the key features of balanced management implemented within the internal quality assurance system at the University of Bahrain. Areas of such balance will be explained while showing the pros and cons of each management approach. Design/methodology/approach In this paper, both quantitative and qualitative surveys were used to study this balanced approach. Findings The centralization approach at the university maintained systematic compliance through the development of policies and procedures, quality structure and a clear framework for quality enhancement. Centralization ensured consistency in quality, programmes and activities. It also maintained diffusion of innovation, for example, sharing and transferring the knowledge of international accreditation practices to other colleges. The balance of the centralized with the decentralized management approach provided additional advantages. For example, the management shared the vision of decentralization to raise the level of responsibility and accountability. The management provided an acceptable level of authority to take on spot decisions; hence, building expertise at the decentralized levels. However, this would require support and capacity building to ensure directly responsible persons, who can take on spot decisions. The ownership of the self-improvement cycles was implemented at the level of the departments and colleges. Practical implications This study showed that this balanced management had a great influence to maximize the benefits of the internal quality assurance (IQA) system, as it showed that 71.4 and 67.3 per cent of the academic and administrative staff, respectively, found that the IQA system was effective. Originality/value This balanced approach would guide the universities to enhance its quality system by organizing its structure, processes and systems in a harmonized nature.
주민자치를 기반으로 하는 자치분권의 핵심요소는 현재 정부 차원에서 추진되고 있는 주민자치위원회와 주민자치회이다. 본 연구에서는 주민자치조직으로 주민자치위원회 및 주민자치회의 운영 실태를 파악한다. 주민자치위원들의 의식조사에 기초하여 향후 자치분권에 부응할 수 있도록 역량을 강화하고 활성화 할 수 있는 전략을 수립하는데 목적을 두고 있다. 이에 주민자치조직의 운영 실태를 파악하기 위하여 춘천시 주민자치위원들을 대상으로 조직의 구성과 운영 부분을 조사하였다. 지방자치의 활성화와 주민자치의 중요성이 강화됨에 따라 현장 주민들이 직접 참여하여 서비스의 질을 높이고, 주민자치조직은 자율성과 투명성 및 책임성을 확보한다고 볼 때, 주어진 기능을 독자적으로 실행할 수 있는 주체가 되어야 할 것이다.An important element of the autonomy decentralization based on the residents autonomy is the residents ‘self-government committee and the residents’ self-government association which are now being promoted in government dimension. In this research, it is a residents autonomous organization, to grasp the actual situation of the residents ‘self-government committee and residents’ self-governing association. Based on the consciousness survey of residents self-governing committee members, we aim to formulate a strategy that can strengthen and revitalize our abilities to cope with future autonomy decentralization. In order to grasp the actual situation of the residents autonomous organizations management, we studied the composition and action parts of the organization for Chuncheon City residents autonomous committee members. By strengthening the importance of local autonomy and residents autonomy, people of the site will participate directly, improve the quality of the service and see residents autonomous organizations to secure autonomy, transparency and responsibility, There must be an entity that can perform the given function independently.
This research examines the link between fiscal decentralization and government capacity to service debt, while controlling for fiscal, institutional, economic, and ideological factors that are associated with capacity to service debt held or issued by local governments alone, by state governments alone, and by state and local government combined at the state level. Using panel data from all 50 states in the U.S. from 1962 to 2012, we find a link between fiscal decentralization and capacity to service long-term debt outstanding held by local governments alone and by state and local governments combined. That is, fiscal decentralization is positively associated with state and local government capacity to service debt outstanding. Nevertheless, we do not find that fiscal decentralization has any relationship with government capacity to service debt issuance. Statistical results show that capacity to service debt issuance is primarily affected by capital expenditure and alternative capital financing resources such as special assessment.
This study examines the relationship between decentralization, democratic governance, and the working of local self-government institutions in India. The 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments established Panchayats and Municipalities as constitutionally recognized bodies of grassroots governance, intended to promote participation, accountability, and locally responsive development. However, the quality of decentralization continues to vary because the transfer of authority, finance, and personnel remains uneven across states. The study adopts a descriptive and analytical design to assess how local self-government influences democratic participation, administrative responsiveness, and service satisfaction. For academic demonstration, a structured survey framework using a sample of 63 respondents was prepared, including elected representatives, officials, and citizens. Three dimensions were examined: the link between citizen participation and accountability, the relationship between fiscal decentralization and service delivery satisfaction, and differences in perceptions of responsiveness among stakeholder groups. The analysis applies Chi-square, Spearman rank correlation, one-way ANOVA, and multiple regression to interpret the data. The results indicate that decentralization improves democratic governance when it is accompanied by meaningful devolution, transparent institutions, trained local leadership, and active community engagement. The study concludes that local self-government can become a more effective instrument of inclusive development when constitutional design is supported by administrative capacity, fiscal autonomy, and regular citizen oversight.
Erik de Waard, Jori Pascal Kalkman, Myriame Bollen
Flexibility in organizations is important, especially when dealing with crises that develop in an unpredictable way. Existing management theory makes clear that organizations are confronted with different environmental dynamics and, therefore, need a mix of operational, structural and strategic flexible capabilities to remain viable. The present article uses this insight to analyze the flexibility potential of the Dutch Border Security Team Concept (BST). The BST concept has been developed by the Royal Netherlands Marechaussee as a practical answer to deal with the sudden migration crisis in the Eastern Mediterranean. The findings show that the composite BST unit has the potential to be really flexible. In sum, it has proven to be a comprehensive, semi-autonomous organizational element that possesses all the necessary capabilities to cover migration-related crisis situations well. Yet, the empirical results also bring to the front that the embeddedness of the BST within the overarching Frontex constellation affects the possibility to fully reap the benefits of organizational independence. Frontex’ standardized and highly formalized routines leave too little room for a customized decentralized organizational effort.
Given many potential obstacles, what types of strategic plans and measures for climate protection and/or energy sustainability are more likely than others to be adopted by cities? What are the key internal and external obstacles to adopting and implementing these plans and measures? Based on data obtained from a survey conducted from 2010 to 2011 and other sources, this paper develops a framework derived from political contracting theory and strategic orientation literature to examine how public management obstacles, socio-economic factors, and political factors influence a city's likelihood of having strategic energy sustainability plans and measures in place. Moreover, this paper finds that many California cities remain reluctant to require residents and businesses to comply with more challenging sustainability measures, such as smart-growth land-use practices, and that those cities with a strategic energy sustainability plan already in place tend to be more willing to adopt smart-growth land-use measures.
Abstract The smart partnership framework introduced in this article is derived from extensive, on-site interviews with nonprofit and public contract managers conducted in several grounded research projects between 2011 and 2015 and from the research literature on contracting. The framework demonstrates the continuing explanatory power of resource dependence theory that disentangles the formidable influence of the public policy environment on organizational action. It is intended to provide a coherent guide for practice by enabling nonprofit managers in the social services field to navigate the current intense environmental uncertainty in which cross-sector contracting relationships between government agencies and nonprofit organizations are embedded. By providing an accessible way to understand an extraordinarily complex set of inter-organizational dynamics, the model offers a research-based definition and clear visualization of what it means to be a smart partner. It highlights the necessity of understanding the norms, expectations, structures, processes, and culture within which sector counterpart contract managers operate. Fundamental to the range of managerial strategies that the framework calls for is the need explicitly to attend to relationship building, to patterns of variation in relationships over time, and to their probable consequences. The integrative model consists of three inter-related organizational competencies and a number of secondary competencies. Competency 1: understand the dynamic nature of contracting relationships; secondary competencies: recognize predictable variations in relationships; comprehend the importance of multiple institutional logics. Competency 2: develop and sustain capacity for strategic adaptation; secondary competencies: build external and internal learning capacity; discern power shifts in inter-organizational relationships; maintain capability for strategic repositioning. Competency 3: participate proactively in shaping policy change; secondary competencies: attend to relationship development and nurturance; build trust and credibility.
The contemporary public sector devotes most of its resources to financing private sector production and consumption. The transcending development is the intermingling between public and private activities, and between federal government and state and local government operations. A more effective form of competition among alternative recipients of federal funds is the approach for improving the future structure and performance of the public sector. The modern public sector that is developing is hardly something aloof and entirely separate from the private sector. Rather, in its usual pragmatic fashion, the United States is fashioning policy tools not for the sake of their intrinsic beauty, but to achieve a growing variety of difficult and far-reaching national objectives. The typical federal agency indeed will probably be a policy formulator and overseer of programs dealing with operations which have been decentralized in a variety of ways and over a wide span of the American economy.
BACKGROUND: The concept of decision space holds appeal as an approach to disaggregating the elements that may influence decision-making in decentralized systems. This narrative review aims to explore the functioning of decision space and the factors that influence decision space. METHODS: A narrative review of the literature was conducted with searches of online databases and academic journals including PubMed Central, Emerald, Wiley, Science Direct, JSTOR, and Sage. The articles were included in the review based on the criteria that they provided insight into the functioning of decision space either through the explicit application of or reference to decision space, or implicitly through discussion of decision-making related to organizational capacity or accountability mechanisms. RESULTS: The articles included in the review encompass literature related to decentralisation, management and decision space. The majority of the studies utilise qualitative methodologies to assess accountability mechanisms, organisational capacities such as finance, human resources and management, and the extent of decision space. Of the 138 articles retrieved, 76 articles were included in the final review. CONCLUSION: The literature supports Bossert's conceptualization of decision space as being related to organizational capacities and accountability mechanisms. These functions influence the decision space available within decentralized systems. The exact relationship between decision space and financial and human resource capacities needs to be explored in greater detail to determine the potential influence on system functioning.
Purpose: Administrative decentralization seeks to redistribute authority, responsibility and financial resources to provide public services among different levels of the government. It is the transfer of responsibility for the planning, financing and management of certain public functions from the central government and its agencies to field units of government agencies, subordinate units or levels of government, semi-autonomous public authorities or corporations, or area-wide, regional or functional authorities. When governments devolve functions, they transfer authority for decision-making, finances, and management to quasi-autonomous units of local government with corporate status. According to Article 3 of the Constitution of Malaysia, Islam is the country's official religion; therefore, studying the legal system of this country, which has a Muslim background, is essentially important to our country. In addition, given the importance of decentralization in Iran, it is of considerable importance to study the challenges of the decentralization system, even when they are formed in a federal system. The Malaysian legal system, modeled based on the English law, has, after independence of the former country, chosen federalism, and, consequently, the political decentralization system for their government. However, the important issue refers to whether the system of political decentralization has been achieved completely and properly in this country and what are its damages? Decentralization can be a way of improving access to services, tailoring government actions to private needs, and increasing the opportunities for state-society interactions. Design/Methodology/Approach: This paper is formed and based on the critical paradigm with the descriptive method, and has been conducted in two sections. The first section of the study investigated the levels of government, and, in the second part, the relationship between federal, state and local governments will be discussed. Findings: Malaysia is one of the three Asian countries and the only southeastern Asian country which has chosen a federal government. The important matter is whether the mentioned federal system results in decentralization? The Malaysian government includes three layers: the federal government, the government of provinces and local government. The provincial and local governments, as the symbol of decentralization in such countries, are determined in Malaysia’s Constitution with their duties, discretions and limitations. Actually, however, the federal government interferes in provincial activities. 91 percent of financial resources are controlled by the federal government. The independent activities of local governments are hindered by factors such as limited responsibilities, federal and provincial governments’ interference in local government affairs, the role of the national association and housing ministry parallel to the local government regarding law and policy-making, existence of unique obligatory policies for all local governments, limited financial resources, and the appointment of local authorities by the federal government. Consequently, the above explanations imply that federalism, as a governmental system, will not necessarily result in decentralization. Originality/Value: Given the large number of studies on the issue of decentralization in the Iranian legal system, this paper, with the aim of observing the originality principle, intends to conduct a comparative study on the legal systems of Malaysia and the United Kingdom.
This article aims at presenting trends in the state-local budget-cooperation system in Denmark, following the local government reform in 2007 and the fiscal rules in the budget law from 2012. The article investigates some of the characteristics of the development from 1980 until 2016. Evidence gives support to the hypothesis that the possibility for the municipalities’ organization to negotiate increasing expenditures has been narrowed, however accompanied by more liberal grant financing. The local government reform seems to have opened a window of opportunity for an elaborated system of collective and especially individual central government sanctions to strengthen the macroeconomic management of service expenditures of local governments. The identified trends in the Danish state-local relations may indicate that the decentralized model of local governments in Denmark is increasingly under pressure. However, the Danish municipal sector is still growing with respect to economic significance.
Government leaders' attention to participatory governance, public-private partnership, and community empowering has been increased in developing countries as well as developed countries as a way of enhancing public trust in government and overcoming economic and social challenges in governance. Korea is no exception. Especially, the evolution of participatory budgeting (PB) in the Republic of Korea shows very interesting dynamics in the context of democratization and decentralization. PB in Korea is a mandatory citizen participation program in local governments since enacting the Local Finance Act in 2011. The case of PB program in Korea presents an important policy diffusion process from a bottom-up approach to a top-down one concerning intergovernmental relations for implementing a citizen participation program. As PB has been implemented in all the local governments in Korea, it provides a great opportunity to conduct a nation-wide assessment study of the PB adoption and diffusion, local government capacity for the PB implementation, and the impacts of the PB on public administration and values in local governance. Focusing on local governments' experiences of PB implementation, "Participatory Governance and Policy Diffusion in Local Governments in Korea: Implementation of Participatory Budgeting," provides theoretical and practical insights for understanding policy diffusion, implementation capacity, impacts, and challenges. It further elaborates several policy recommendations for enhancing PB implementation capacity given the ongoing challenges of PB implementation, including weak financial independency of local governments, the relation between local government and local council, and the low level of citizen participation in the PB program.
The current financial predicament of Local Government Councils and constant pressure for increase allocation has been in the front burner of Local Governments Administration in Nigeria. The focus of this paper therefore is an examination of Local Government Finance in Nigeria using Iwo Local Government as a Case Study. Data for the study were gathered from face-to-face interview, available records in Iwo Local Government, text books, lecture notes, journals, reports, seminar presentation and internet materials. The data collected were subjected to descriptive statistics (simple percentage) and content analysis. The study explored various sources of financing local governments in Nigeria. It also explained financial relationship of Nigerian local government vis-a-vis State and Federal Government using theory of decentralization. The study went further to explain financial management in Iwo L.G. Result obtained from the analysis shows that financial transfers from federal government (Statutory Federal Allocation) are the most viable and reliable source of local government revenue and that without Federal Allocation no capital project can be embarked on. Therefore, to arrest this financial situation that local government find itself, that is over dependence on federal allocation, this work submitted that local government should increase their revenue base by laying more emphasis on the internal revenue sources, especially those areas that are hitherto neglected or not been fully exploited. Keywords: Local Government, Administration, Finance, Decentralization, Nigeria, Iwo
The purpose of this study is to analyze performance and constraint factors of local decentralization from the Kim Dae Joong Administration to the Lee Myung Bak Administration in three different parts: administrative affairs, personnel affairs, and finance, and to find out the changes of Central-Local Intergovernmental Relation by Administration. First of all, the administrative affairs decentralization has improved by the increase of autonomous affairs and distribution of affairs, even though autonomous administrative power have maintained. The personnel affairs decentralization has reinforced in autonomy personnel affairs power and personnel distribution. The finance decentralization has maintained or weakened by decrease in autonomy financial power and both revenue & expenditure of tax. The constraint factors of local decentralization were legal & institutional restrictions such as range of affairs, fixed base & rate of tax and local tax structure focused on property taxation, and fiscal neutralism of Ministry of Strategy and Finance. In conclusion, the local decentralization of Korean Government has been improved disproportionately in the aspects of administrative affairs, human resources affairs, and finance. The Kim Dae Joong Administration was inclusive authority model, and the Nho Moo Hyun Administration and the Lee Myung Bak Administration was in the middle between inclusive authority model and overlapping-authority model, so after revival of the local self-governing system, relations between central and local government has been developed.
This thesis asks whether the increased autonomy and decentralization associated with the New Public Management (NPM) have impacted on the coordination of organizations within the public sector. Ideas and practices once typical of the private sector have become increasingly common in public sectors around the world. Often times they have been promoted under the umbrella of fashionable terms such as rdquo;, “modernization” or New Public Management (NPM). Although not entirely new, these ideas gained momentum, starting in the early 1980s, in some Western democracies and then increasingly became promoted as a solution – and sometimes the solution nbsp;to public administration problems across the world. Great variation exists, however, in their spread and implementation across countries and sectors. Two of these proposals for change are the disaggregation of bureaucratic forms of organization and decentralization. The expectation has been that these reforms would improve operational flexibility, responsiveness to the needs of service users and ultimately quality and performance. Following these reform proposals, administrators are supposed to make use of greater discretion in the application of managerial principles and techniques. Managers and the entities they lead are expected to exercise initiative, to be proactive, and to act rather than just to react to imperatives from politicians, as it was traditionally common in public administration. A second major reform that has been widely experimented with in the public sector is decentralization. Decisions, it is argued, ought to be made as close to the citizen as possible. In this way it is assumed that information and understanding of local needs improve, which can further translate into better decision making. There is also an ambition to reduce the overload and delay associated with highly centralized decisions. However, the trend towards decentralization is neither new nor uniform across public sectors. Some governments have taken steps to recentralize certain functions after earlier efforts to decentralize while others have been initially reluctant to decentralize, but recently have taken more confident steps in this direction. The specific setting of this doctoral dissertation comprises public hospital systems in selected European countries: 1)nbsp; a Nordic country – Norway 2)nbsp; nbsp;Baltic, EU member state since 2003, formerly part of the Soviet Union – Estonia 3) a nation in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE), a former communist state and an EU member state since 2007 – Romania. The thesis comprises eight chapters. Chapter 1 introduces the subject matter and motivates its academic and social relevance. Chapter 2 reviews the literature and shows how the subject matter of the thesis is embedded in the broad academic discourse. This consists of the public administration and management literature – particularly New Public Management, governance and coordination – on the one hand, and healthcare and hospital management and governance, on the other hand. It provides a theoretical review of the concept of coordination, and shows how different theories have dealt with coordination in a public sector context. The chapter also reviews existing analytical and empirical approaches to coordination. In chapter 3 we propose an analytical framework geared to the central coordination of publicly-owned hospitals. The framework builds on two theories – principal-agent theory and sociological institutionalism – and seeks to explain why coordination problems occur across the three cases. Chapter 4 includes the research design: the case selection and methods. The thesis uses an explanatory comparative case study approach to understand how reform affects coordination in hospital systems in the three country cases: Estonia, Norway and Romania. We use congruence analysis as a specific type of case study research. Congruence analysis connects empirical observations to expectations derived from theory. The main source of empirical material comprises of a program of semi-structured interviews conducted in all three countries with various stakeholders – both in central institutions and public hospitals. This evidence is supplemented with relevant documentary data and statistical information. Chapters 5 through 7 constitute the core of the thesis and they describe, evaluate and explain the relationship between organizational reform in public hospitals and coordination problems. Each of these three country chapters ends by discussing the compatibility between empirical findings and the theoretical propositions derived from the two theories. In each country chapter we seek to explain the relationship between organizational reform in public hospitals and central coordination by means of the theoretical framework introduced in Chapter 3. Chapter 8 concludes by comparing the empirical and theoretical findings across the three cases and discusses the implications of the results for theory and practice. The research has reached the following conclusions: nbsp; Organizational reform in public hospitals has constituted an important component of healthcare policy in all three countries in the past 10 to 15 years. All three countries have experimented with structural reform (including decentralization or centralization) and have grappled with granting management autonomy to public hospitals while seeking to solidify policy-making and coordination capacity at the center of government nbsp; This administrative change across the three hospital systems has not been marginal only – it has involved major resources and has received considerable attention from different stakeholders •nbsp; Although hospital decentralization and autonomy reform constitute on-going processes that may constantly undergo some degree of change, we have observed that in two of our three cases, Estonia and Norway, the reform model proposed more than 10 years ago has essentially endured to the present. While ideas for change to the model have been put forward, in Norway for example, it is unlikely that this change would radically reshape the type of reform model adopted years ago. Romania, while clearly experimenting with the same types of international ideas, has thus far only implemented decentralization. Granting greater autonomy to hospital management is still an idea that is being considered by central policy makers in Romania, but it is uncertain if, when and how it will be implemented nbsp; In the face of organizational reform the state capacity to coordinate the decentralized and autonomous hospitals has been put to the test nbsp; We have observed a reconsideration of the role of central institutions, most notably the ministries of health, but also health insurance funds in social insurance systems or other central bodies in tax-based systems nbsp; Hospital autonomy has overall posed serious challenges to the central coordination of autonomous hospitals in Estonia, much more so than in the case of Norway and Romania nbsp; However, the autonomy of hospitals is not the only factor that affects the effectiveness of coordination. Hospitals that enjoy a lower degree of autonomy, as in Romania for example, are not necessarily more effectively coordinated than hospitals that enjoy a high degree of decision-making discretion nbsp; nbsp;Norway, a high-trust society that is compliant with government regulation, coordination problems exist in more specific areas of ICT and in the case of elite medical specialties in the Oslo University Hospital. Overall, coordination in Norway has significantly improved following the 2002 hospital reform, but this does not necessarily mean that coordination in the public hospital sector is problem-free nbsp; Hospital system culture and principal-agent theory offer complementary insights into the dynamics of public hospital coordination. Conflicting interests and goals and cultural factors are particularly relevant in understanding the effectiveness of central coordination of public hospitals nbsp; There is more evidence for some propositions of principal-agent theory than for othersnbsp;more evidence was found in favour of conflicting interests and goals than in the case of imperfect information. Positive and negative incentives are situated in the middle with more evidence in some cases than in others. The thesis contributes to the existing literature in the following ways: nbsp; Directly compares two eastern and one western European system and shows that such comparison, although it does not follow a most similar research design, is both feasible and productive. This research finds that problems of coordination can occur in different systems and therefore to study public sector coordination comparatively one can choose to select cases that display differences between them and look for factors that can explain a similar outcome nbsp; Covers one country where only very limited research on hospital reforms has previously been published (Romania) •nbsp; Sets out new primary evidence in the form of original interviews and documentary evidence which has not previously been cited in academic research nbsp; Employs two theoretical approaches in a comparative and complementary way, and argues that conflicting interests and goals and hospital system culture help explain coordination in European public hospital systems nbsp; Proposes an analytical framework for analyzing coordination in public hospital systems and finds the framework to be useful in that it encourages researchers and practitioners to think specifically about the implications of coordination; that is, the problems and effects of coordination problems.
Open access
Healthcare Policy and Management
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Social media comprises a set of new technologies that enable richer data exchange in highly decentralized, dynamic, and loosely structured versatile virtual environments. Social media technology is expected to enhance participation, learning, and knowledge production in government settings, aligning traditional structural and authority boundaries while also challenging them. We examine the extent to which local governments in the United States are coupling social media technology with two types of participative tasks: collaborative work inside the organization and participative interaction with external stakeholders. We also explore how these two technology–task couples are associated with managerial perceptions of the positive and negative outcomes of technology use. We use survey data from five departments—community development, finance, police, mayor’s office, and parks and recreation—in 500 U.S. cities. Findings show that social media and their use for specific tasks have limited impact on either positive or negative perceived outcomes. These non-findings may demonstrate that the implementation cost of social media technologies outweighs the managerial benefits they realize; that technology–task applications substitute for traditional approaches to the same task, but no effect is incurred; or that social media technologies are relatively new to local governments, and efforts to effectively utilize them for internal work tasks and external engagement are in their infancy.