Public sector modernization trends of the member states of European Union: Trajectories of reforms in Italy and Romania

Meneguzzo, Marco and Fiorani, Gloria and Mititelu, Cristina and Matei, Lucica and Matei, Ani and Cipolleta, Germano (2010): Public sector modernization trends of the member states of European Union: Trajectories of reforms in Italy and Romania. Forthcoming in: Conference on “Reforming the Public Sector: How to Make the Difference, December 2-3, 2010”

Abstract

Research on administrative reform in Europe has demonstrated a significant variation among countries in how they choose reform strategy. We know very little about what explains the variation with regard to the extent with which the countries conduct the reforms and how they effectively influenced modernization process. Since 1980s, reactions of countries have been to maintain, modernise, marketise or minimise their public sector (Pollitt, Bouckaert 2004).

The paper investigates the markedly features of reform trends, similarities and differences in design and implementation, taking into consideration the effects of Europeanization and the multi-level governance of Public Management reforms; identifies conditions for lasting success of local governments reforms and the reasons for lack of success of different trends of modernisation and proposes a new perspective on the trajectories of modernization in public sector, through a comparative analyses between one of the founder member of EU (Italy) and a new EU member country (Romania).

Therefore, the paper will: undertake an in-depth evaluation of public management modernization trends in both countries explaining the significant variation in the objectives and ‘trajectories' of reforms on the basis of historical-institutional context dependency variable, contents and scope of reforms; perform an analysis of experiences of implementing policies and projects of modernization through programmers and common initiatives mostly carried out by the central government. The rewarding initiative '100 Projects' both in Romania and Italy sets an example of cooperation regarding the implementation of activities within the scope of the national programs for modernization and innovation of the public sector.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Modernization, Public Administration Reforms, Italy, Romania
• Subjects: D - Microeconomics > D7 - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making > D73 - Bureaucracy ; Administrative Processes in Public Organizations ; Corruption; D - Microeconomics > D7 - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making > D78 - Positive Analysis of Policy Formulation and Implementation

References

Alexandru I., “Public Administration. Theories, realities, perspectives”, 2002, Bucureşti: Lumina Lex;

Brandsen T. and Kim S., ‘Contextualizing the meaning of public management reforms: a comparison of the Netherlands and South Korea’, 2010, International Review of Administrative Sciences 76: 367;

Brown R. H., ‘Bureaucracy as Praxis: Toward a Political Phenomenology of Formal Organizations’, 1978, Administrative Science Quarterly, 1978, 23, pp. 365-382;

Cepiku D., ‘Public governance: Overcoming the ambiguity’, in Ken Coghill (ed.), Integrated Governance: Linking up Government, Business & Civil Society, Monash Governance Research Unit, Monash University, Caulfield East, Melbourne, Australia, 2005;

Cepiku D. and Meneguzzo M.,“Public administration and management reform in Italy: domestic patterns and influences from abroad”, in Hermann Hill, Current Trends in Public Sector Modernization,German University of Administrative Sciences,2007,Baden & Baden, Speyer;

Cepiku D., Meneguzzo M., Senese M., Innovation in Public Management and Modernization policies, 2008,Aracne;

Cepiku D., Mititelu C., Public Administration reforms in transition countries: Albania and Romania between the Weberian model and the New Public Management, 2010,TRAS, Romania;

Demmke C., Hammerschmid G., Meyer R., “Decentralization and Accountability: as focus of public administration modernization”, 2006;

Dente B. "Le politiche locali nel mezzogiorno: Modelli di legittimazione e meccanismi di policy making",1992,Istituto per la ricerca sociale;

Drechsler W."The Rise and Demise of the New Public Management", Post-autistic economics review, 33,2005,17- 28;

Dunn W. N., Miller, David Y., "A Critique of the New Public Management and the NWS: Advancing a Critical Theory of Administrative Reform", 2007, Public Organization Review, 7, pp. 345-358;

Giannini M.S.,"Rapporto sui principali problemi dell’Amministrazione dello Stato",1979, Tipografia del Senato, Roma;

Goetz K. H., "Making Sense of Post-Communist Central Administration: Modernization, Europeanization or Latinization?", 2001, Journal of European Public Policy 8 (6), S. 1032-1051;

Hintea C., "Country Public Management Profile: Romania", in NISPAcee 14th Annual Conference 11-13 May 2006”;

Hood C.,"A Public Management for All Seasons", 1991, Public Administration, Vol. 69, pp. 3-19;

Idu N. ,"Comparative analysis of the status of negotiations for accession to the European Union of candidate countries of Central and Eastern Europe"(in Romanian), 2001,Bucureşti: Institutul European din România;

Jacobs C., ‘The challenge of public sector reform in EC accession countries: reflections from the Baltics, especially Latvia’ , 2004, Public Administration and Development, 24, pp. 321-331;

Jones L. R., Schedler K., Mussari M., eds., ‘Strategies for Public Management Reform’, 2004, Research in Public Policy Analysis and Management, vol.13, Elsevier-JAI Press Oxford;

Kettl D.F., ’Modernising Government: The Way Forward-A Comment’, 2006, International Review of Administrative Sciences, 72(3), pp. 313-7;

Kickert W.J. M., “Public Management in the United Syayes and Europe” in Kickert W.J.M.(ed.), Public Management and administrative reform in Europe, Aldershot, Edward Elgar,1997;

Kickert W.J.M."Distinctiveness in the study of public management in Europe: A historica institutional analysis of France, Germany and Italy",2005,Public Management Review, 7(4);

Lægreid P., ’The New Public Management and Beyond: Towards a Whole-of-Government or a Neo-Weberian Model?’, International conference “Challenges of governance in South Asia”, Nepal, December 15-16, 2008;

Lapsley I., ’New Public Management: the cruellest invention of the human spirit?’, 2009, Abacus: Accounting, finance and business studies, vol.45, N. 1, pp. 1-21;

Lippert B.,Umbach, G."The Pressure of Europeanisation: From post-communist state administrations to normal players in the EU system",2005, Institut für Europäische Politik, Berlin;

Lynn L. E., Jr., ‘What is a Neo-Weberian State? Reflections on a Concept and its Implications’, online at http://fsv.cuni.cz/ISS-50-version1-080227_TED1_Lynn_Whats_neoweberian_state.pdf, 2008;

Manning N., ‘The legacy of the New Public Management in developing countries’, 2001, International Review of Administrative Sciences, 67, pp. 296-310;

Matei L., Romanian Public Management Reform, Volume 1, Administration and Public Services, Volume 2, Civil Service,2009, Economica Publishing House, Bucharest, Romania;

Matheson A.,Know H. S.,’Public Sector modernisation: A new agenda’, 2003, OECD Journal on Budgeting,Vol.3, No.1, Paris: OECD;

Meneguzzo M., Cepiku D., Senese M.,"Innovations in Public management and Governance in Italy", Aracne, 2008, pp.108-110;

Mihai A. , Towards a Europeanized Public Administration-Assesement of the pre-accession period, 2009, Sfera politicii;

Milward H. B., K. Provan, 'How Networks Are Governed’ in C. Heinrich and L. Lynn, eds. Governance and Performance: Models, Methods and Results. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2000;

Ministry of Interior and Administrative Reform, The Operational Program for Development of the Administrative Capacity 2007-2013, September 2007, p.11-13;

Nunberg B.,"The State after Communism: Administrative Transitions in Central and Eastern Europe", Washington D.C: World Bank, 1999;

OECD Public Management Service (PUMA), “Service Quality Initiatives in OECD Member Countries”, Background paper for eponymous symposium p 3, Paris, November 1994;

OECD PUMA, Governance in Transition, Paris, 1996;

OECD/PUMA, ‘Public sector modernisation: A new agenda’, OECD Journal on Budgeting, 2003, 3;

Ongaro E. “Public Management Reform & Modernization – Trajectories of Administrative change in Italy, France, Greece, Portugal & Spain, 2009, Edward Elgar Publishing Limited;

Osborne S. P., ’The New Public Governance?’, 2006, Public Management Review, 8: 3, pp. 377 — 387;

Osborn D., Gaebler T., “Reinventing Government: How the entrepreneurial spirit is transforming public sector”,1992, Addison-Wesley Publ. Co;

Panozzo F.,‘Management by decree. Paradoxes in the reform of the Italian public sector’,2000,Scandinavian Journal of Management, 16, 4: 357-73;

Papadimitriou D.,Phinnemore, D., "Europeanisation, Conditionality and Domestic Change: the Twinning exercise and administrative reform in Romania." Journal of Common Market Studies 42, no. 3 (2004): 619-639;

Peters B. G.,J. Pierre, 'Governance Without Government? Rethinking Public Administration’, 1998, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 223-243;

Peters G., Administrative traditions, in www.worldbank.org/publicsector, 2000;

Pierre J.,Rothstein B., ‘How should the State Behave? The New Public Management versus the New Weberianism’, http://www.gog.pol,gu.se/.../Pierre%20&%20Rothstein%20%20SOG%20Conference%20Nov08.pdf, 2008;

Pollitt C., Bouckaert G.,"Public management reform. A comparative analysis", Oxford University Press, Oxford,2000;

Pollitt C. , ‘Clarifying convergence: striking similarities and durable differences in public management reform’,2001, Public Management Review, 4:1, pp.471-492;

Pollitt, C.,Bouckaert G.,"Public Management Reform: A comparative Analysis", 2nd ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004;

Pollitt,C.,Bouckaert,G.,Randma-Liiv,T.,Wolfgang,D. (eds). 2009. A Distinctive European Model? The Neo-Weberian State.Bratislava: NISPA;

Profiroiu M., Profiroiu A., ‘Decentralisation process in Romania’, 2006, Revista Transilvana de stiinte politice administrative, nr 16E/February/2006;

Putnam R., Leonardi A.,Nanetti R. Y.,"Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy",1994, Princeton: Princeton University Press;

Rebora G., Un decenio di riforme. Nuovi modelli organizzativi e processi di cambiamento delle amministrazioni pubbliche (1990-1999),Guerini e Associati, Milano, 1999;

SIGMA, ’Support for Improvement in Governance and Management. Romania Public Expenditure Management System-Assessment’, online at www.sigmaweb.org, 2005;

Stoker G., ’Governance as Theory: Five Propositions’, 1998, International Social Science Journal, Vol. 50, No. 1: 17-28;

Turner,M.,Hulme,D., “Governance, Administration and Development: Making the state work”, 1997,Kumarian Press;

Weber M., Economy and Society: an outline of interpretive Sociology, Berkely, University of California Press, 1922;

Wolf A.,'Trends and Themes in Public Management Today,“2000, Keynote Speech Manuscript for PUMA, Portugal, 9 May;

World Bank, Reforming Public Institutions and Strengthening Governance, 2000, Washington D.C.