加拿大政府独立机构的绩效趋势

IF 1.1 4区 管理学 Q3 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Carey Doberstein
{"title":"加拿大政府独立机构的绩效趋势","authors":"Carey Doberstein","doi":"10.1111/capa.12536","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Canada mirrors developments in most countries with the growth of government agencies created to deliver public goods—whether it is service delivery, adjudication of disputes, regulatory oversight, enforcement activities—purported to benefit from an arms-length relationship to cabinet. There is a robust comparative literature documenting the “agencification” of the state, yet Canadian studies remain mostly absent. This article draws on the Government of Canada's Public Service Employee Survey (PSES) microdata from 2017, 2011, 2005, and 1999 to test key hypotheses advanced by proponents of agencification, specifically that agencies are more innovative, autonomous, and efficient public organizations. We find that those working in enforcement agencies exhibit few of the purported advantages of agencification. We also observe that in recent years regulatory, adjudicative, and parliamentary agencies consistently surpass conventional department organizations on these metrics. Future research avenues are proposed to explore how governance and oversight reforms may explain this shift.</p>","PeriodicalId":46145,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Public Administration-Administration Publique Du Canada","volume":"66 3","pages":"319-340"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/capa.12536","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Trends in the performance of arms-length agencies in the Government of Canada\",\"authors\":\"Carey Doberstein\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/capa.12536\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Canada mirrors developments in most countries with the growth of government agencies created to deliver public goods—whether it is service delivery, adjudication of disputes, regulatory oversight, enforcement activities—purported to benefit from an arms-length relationship to cabinet. There is a robust comparative literature documenting the “agencification” of the state, yet Canadian studies remain mostly absent. This article draws on the Government of Canada's Public Service Employee Survey (PSES) microdata from 2017, 2011, 2005, and 1999 to test key hypotheses advanced by proponents of agencification, specifically that agencies are more innovative, autonomous, and efficient public organizations. We find that those working in enforcement agencies exhibit few of the purported advantages of agencification. We also observe that in recent years regulatory, adjudicative, and parliamentary agencies consistently surpass conventional department organizations on these metrics. Future research avenues are proposed to explore how governance and oversight reforms may explain this shift.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46145,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Canadian Public Administration-Administration Publique Du Canada\",\"volume\":\"66 3\",\"pages\":\"319-340\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/capa.12536\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Canadian Public Administration-Administration Publique Du Canada\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/capa.12536\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Public Administration-Administration Publique Du Canada","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/capa.12536","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

加拿大反映了大多数国家的发展,为提供公共产品而设立的政府机构不断增加,无论是服务提供、争端裁决、监管监督还是执法活动,都声称受益于与内阁的公平关系。有大量的比较文献记录了该州的“机构化”,但加拿大的研究大多缺失。本文借鉴了2017年、2011年、2005年和1999年加拿大政府公共服务雇员调查(PSES)的微观数据,以检验机构指定支持者提出的关键假设,特别是机构是更具创新性、自主性和效率的公共组织。我们发现,那些在执法机构工作的人几乎没有表现出所谓的代理优势。我们还观察到,近年来,监管、裁决和议会机构在这些指标上一直超过传统的部门组织。提出了未来的研究途径,以探索治理和监督改革如何解释这种转变。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Trends in the performance of arms-length agencies in the Government of Canada

Trends in the performance of arms-length agencies in the Government of Canada

Canada mirrors developments in most countries with the growth of government agencies created to deliver public goods—whether it is service delivery, adjudication of disputes, regulatory oversight, enforcement activities—purported to benefit from an arms-length relationship to cabinet. There is a robust comparative literature documenting the “agencification” of the state, yet Canadian studies remain mostly absent. This article draws on the Government of Canada's Public Service Employee Survey (PSES) microdata from 2017, 2011, 2005, and 1999 to test key hypotheses advanced by proponents of agencification, specifically that agencies are more innovative, autonomous, and efficient public organizations. We find that those working in enforcement agencies exhibit few of the purported advantages of agencification. We also observe that in recent years regulatory, adjudicative, and parliamentary agencies consistently surpass conventional department organizations on these metrics. Future research avenues are proposed to explore how governance and oversight reforms may explain this shift.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
20.00%
发文量
43
期刊介绍: Canadian Public Administration/Administration publique du Canada is the refereed scholarly publication of the Institute of Public Administration of Canada (IPAC). It covers executive, legislative, judicial and quasi-judicial functions at all three levels of Canadian government. Published quarterly, the journal focuses mainly on Canadian issues but also welcomes manuscripts which compare Canadian public sector institutions and practices with those in other countries or examine issues in other countries or international organizations which are of interest to the public administration community in Canada.
×
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