Role of institutions in public management: developing case studies for divergent policy systems

IF 2.3 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Vaishali Singh
{"title":"Role of institutions in public management: developing case studies for divergent policy systems","authors":"Vaishali Singh","doi":"10.3389/fpos.2024.1258811","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Public policy management has an intractable nature, and the institutional complexity of governance further exacerbates its practice. Transnational learning cutting across countries and policy areas can contribute to this policy knowledge in dealing with multifarious issues in public management. Understanding the institutional mix in public management in various contexts enhances the existing comprehension of how the national pattern of public management works differently in different socio-economic, cultural, and political settings. The present research aims to study the institutional framework in the form of state structure (unitary or federal) and the nature of executive government (majoritarian or consensual) in delineating the influence of institutions on public management processes in divergent policy systems. The paper undertakes four in-depth country case studies and the public management reforms as a response to institutional pressure are examined using the 4 M strategy–Maintain (holding on to existing administrative structures and processes), Modernize (keeping service delivery and regulation up to date), Marketize (efficiency and user-responsive public management), and Minimize (reducing state-led regulation). The case studies highlight the differences in the broad direction and energy of implementation that characterize a particular policy style. The results of the study indicate that even though the institutional dimensions are not present in strict polarization, the impact of the institutional mix is evident in the dominant strategies of public management reforms adopted at the national level.","PeriodicalId":34431,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Political Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Political Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2024.1258811","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Public policy management has an intractable nature, and the institutional complexity of governance further exacerbates its practice. Transnational learning cutting across countries and policy areas can contribute to this policy knowledge in dealing with multifarious issues in public management. Understanding the institutional mix in public management in various contexts enhances the existing comprehension of how the national pattern of public management works differently in different socio-economic, cultural, and political settings. The present research aims to study the institutional framework in the form of state structure (unitary or federal) and the nature of executive government (majoritarian or consensual) in delineating the influence of institutions on public management processes in divergent policy systems. The paper undertakes four in-depth country case studies and the public management reforms as a response to institutional pressure are examined using the 4 M strategy–Maintain (holding on to existing administrative structures and processes), Modernize (keeping service delivery and regulation up to date), Marketize (efficiency and user-responsive public management), and Minimize (reducing state-led regulation). The case studies highlight the differences in the broad direction and energy of implementation that characterize a particular policy style. The results of the study indicate that even though the institutional dimensions are not present in strict polarization, the impact of the institutional mix is evident in the dominant strategies of public management reforms adopted at the national level.
机构在公共管理中的作用:针对不同政策体系开展案例研究
公共政策管理具有棘手的性质,而治理机构的复杂性又进一步加剧了其实践。跨国家和跨政策领域的跨国学习有助于在处理公共管理的各种问题时掌握政策知识。了解不同背景下公共管理的机构组合,可以加深对国家公共管理模式如何在不同社会经济、文化和政治环境下以不同方式发挥作用的理解。本研究旨在研究以国家结构(单一制或联邦制)和行政政府性质(多数派或协商一致)为形式的制度框架,以界定不同政策体系中制度对公共管理过程的影响。本文对四个国家进行了深入的案例研究,并采用 4 M 战略--保持(坚持现有的行政结构和程序)、现代化(保持服务提供和监管的与时俱进)、市场化(提高效率和响应用户的公共管理)和最小化(减少国家主导的监管)--对公共管理改革作为对体制压力的回应进行了研究。案例研究强调了特定政策风格在大方向和执行力度上的差异。研究结果表明,尽管制度层面没有出现严格的两极分化,但制度组合的影响在国家层面采取的公共管理改革主导战略中显而易见。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Frontiers in Political Science
Frontiers in Political Science Social Sciences-Political Science and International Relations
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
135
审稿时长
13 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信