Public administration modernization: regularities of normative concept application

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2024.304594

Keywords:

administrative modernization, new public governance, neo-Weberian state, comparative public administration

Abstract

The object of this study is to assess administrative reforms and change from the point of view of theoretical administrative models of hierarchical (traditional) administration, New Public Management (NPM), and New Public Governance (NPG) in Latvia, Lithuania, and Slovakia. Normative models offer a critique of legacy administrative practices; their wholesale implementation is seldom practical or successful. Reforms framed as “modernization” in these countries over the past three decades have generally followed the principles of NPM. Although policy arguments for introducing elements of NPG can be observed in the studied cases, the paper argues that NPG’s rhetorical attractiveness for resolving perceived shortcomings of other models lacks specific implementation mechanisms that would be viable within the existing institutional framework of the studied countries. Factors, such as the relatively small size of Latvia, Lithuania, and Slovakia, and obvious benefits of EU integration, appear to have moderated reforms to a point that core institutional features have become stable, and are also similar among the three countries: the dominance of hierarchical administrative model with rigid separation of powers structure and strong courts that can adjudicate administrative decisions, with numerous NPM inspired “modernization” measures, including the introduction of various interactive public services. The paper’s findings support the idea that Latvia, Lithuania, and Slovakia are administrative systems that have stable core governance institutions, and national public administrations modernize various aspects of their operation by introducing elements of NPM and NPG within the executive, but not reviewing the basic setup of these institutions. From this point of view, the findings are in line with the assumptions of the normative model of Neo-Weberian State (NWS)

Author Biographies

Arvydas Guogis, Mykolas Romeris University

Professor

Institute of Public Administration

Vainius Smalskys, Mykolas Romeris University

Professor

Institute of Public Administration

Iveta Reinholde, University of Latvia

Professor

Department of Political Science

Mantas Bileišis, General Jonas Zemaitis Military Academy of Lithuania

Vice-Rector for Studies and Research

Daniel Klimovsky, Comenius University

Associate Professor

Department of Political Science

Nataliia Gavkalova, Warsaw University of Technology

Professor

Institute of Organization of Production Systems

References

  1. Pollitt, C., Bouckaert, G. (2017). Public management reform: A comparative analysis-into the age of austerity. Oxford University Press, 410. Available at: https://global.oup.com/academic/product/public-management-reform-9780198795186?cc=lt&lang=en&
  2. Sanders, A., von Danwitz, L. (2018). Selecting Judges in Poland and Germany: Challenges to the Rule of law in Europe and Propositions for a new Approach to Judicial Legitimacy. German Law Journal, 19 (4), 769–816. https://doi.org/10.1017/s2071832200022872
  3. Bogaards, M. (2018). De-democratization in Hungary: diffusely defective democracy. Democratization, 25 (8), 1481–1499. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2018.1485015
  4. Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons? Public Administration, 69 (1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.1991.tb00779.x
  5. Rhodes, R. A. W. (1994). The hollowing out of the state: the changing nature of the public service in Britain. The Political Quarterly, 65 (2), 138–151. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-923x.1994.tb00441.x
  6. Pollitt, C., Bouckaert, G. (2011). Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis - New Public Management, Governance, and the Neo-Weberian State. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 367. Available at: https://books.google.lt/books/about/Public_Management_Reform.html?id=epPWAutxrFQC&redir_esc=y
  7. Jessop, B. (2011). Metagovernance. The SAGE Handbook of Governance, 106–123. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446200964.n8
  8. Bouckaert, G. (2023). The neo-Weberian state: From ideal type model to reality? Max Weber Studies, 23 (1), 13–59. https://doi.org/10.1353/max.2023.0002
  9. Christensen, T., Lægreid, P. (2007). The Whole‐of‐Government Approach to Public Sector Reform. Public Administration Review, 67 (6), 1059–1066. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00797.x
  10. Floyd, K. H. (2021). Whole-of-Government Crisis Management: From Research to Practice. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.1966
  11. Førde, J. S. (2022). Performance Management of Coordinating Agencies: The Importance of Administrative Capacity in the Field of Societal Security. International Journal of Public Administration, 46 (14), 1006–1019. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2022.2063332
  12. Drechsler, W., Kattel, R. (2008). Conclusion: Towards the Neo-Weberian State? Perhaps, but Certainly Adieu, NPM! The NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, 1 (2), 95–99. Available at: https://www.nispa.org/files/publications/ebooks/nispacee-journal.1.2.pdf
  13. Drechsler, W. (2009). The rise and demise of the New Public Management: Lessons and opportunities for South East Europe. Central European Public Administration Review, 7 (3). https://doi.org/10.17573/cepar.v7i3.131
  14. Drechsler, W. et al. (Eds.) (2013). The Past, Present and the Future of Public Administration in Central and Eastern Europe. Bratislava: NISPAcee.
  15. Malíková, Ľ., Jacko, T., Bajusová, D., Staroňová, K., Staňová, Ľ., Mužik, R. et al. (Eds.) (2013). New Public Management a Slovensko: Podoby a aplikácia princípov. Bratislava: Univerzita Komenského. Available at: https://sekarl.euba.sk/arl-eu/sk/detail-eu_un_cat.1-0231078-New-public-management-a-Slovensko/
  16. Klimovský, D. (2009). Kameralizmus v perspektíve dnešného poznávania verejnej správy. Slovenská politologická revue, 9 (1), 76–88. Available at: https://sjps.fsvucm.sk/Articles/09_1_4.pdf
  17. Hausner, J. (2008). Zarządzanie publiczne. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo naukowe SCHOLAR. Available at: https://www.ibuk.pl/fiszka/26683/zarzadzanie-publiczne.html
  18. Goetz, K. H. (2001). Making sense of post-communist central administration: modernization, Europeanization or Latinization? Journal of European Public Policy, 8 (6), 1032–1051. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760110098332
  19. Klimovský, D. (2008). Politics and its impact on the reform processes: The case of public administration reform in Slovakia (1989-2006). Space and Historical Time as Dimensions of Social Change. Praha: Charles University, 45–64. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236681372_Politics_and_Its_Impact_on_the_Reform_Processes_The_Case_of_Public_Administration_Reform_in_Slovakia_1989-2006
  20. Koht, H., Reinholde, I. (2015). From Pre-Weber to Post-NPM: Challenges to Modernization of Public Administration in Latvia and Norway. Contemporary governance modes and practices in Central and Eastern Europe. Bratislava: NISPAcee Press, 75–95. Available at: https://oda.oslomet.no/oda-xmlui/handle/10642/2910
  21. Latvijā augstākais bezdarba līmenis ES. Ekonomika. Available at: https://www.ekonomika.lv/latvija-augstakais-bezdarba-limenis-es/
  22. Latvia 'to find more budget cuts' (2009). BBC. Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8298272.stm
  23. Informācija par NVO un Ministru kabineta sadarbibas memorandu. Available at: https://www.sam.gov.lv/lv/sadarbiba-ar-sabiedribas-parstavjiem?utm_source=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F
  24. Wallace, J., Mathias, M., Brotchie, B. (2013). Weathering the storm? A look at small countries’ public services in times of austerity. Carnegie UK Trust. http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.1780.1442
  25. Smalskys, V., Bileišis, M., Domeikienė, J., Stasiukynas, A. (2017). Public Sector Reforms in Lithuania Since 1990. In Public Administration Reforms in Eastern European Union Member States. Post-Accession Convergence and Divergence. Vilnius. Available at: https://cris.mruni.eu/server/api/core/bitstreams/bd07a18e-d5b2-4d98-a5a4-77a859cd0076/content
  26. Public administration reforms in Eastern European Union Member States. Post-accession convergence and divergence (2017). Vilnius, 501. Available at: https://cris.mruni.eu/cris/entities/publication/63523459-6cbb-4183-9ceb-4ac0ddb95e12
  27. Nakrošis, V., Bankauskaitė-Grigaliūnienė, S. (2015). The impact of the eu on agencification and depoliticisation in Lithuania. Baltic Journal of Political Science, 3 (3), 7. https://doi.org/10.15388/bjps.2014.3.4873
  28. Gudžinskas, L. (2015). Europeanisation and the Welfare State in Lithuania: Institutional Intersections. Politologija, 76 (4), 124–155. https://doi.org/10.15388/Polit.2014.76.4878
  29. Drechsler, W., Randma-Liiv, T. (2014). The New Public Management Then and Now: Lessons from the Transition in Central and Eastern Europe. TUT Ragnar Nurkse School of Innovation and Governance, 57. Available at: https://www.academia.edu/7795236/The_New_Public_Management_Then_and_Now_Lessons_from_the_Transition_in_Central_and_Eastern_Europe
  30. Commission Staff Working Document. Country Report Lithuania 2017. Accompanying the document. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Central Bank and the Eurogroup. 2017 European Semester: Assessment of progress on structural reforms, prevention and correction of macroeconomic imbalances, and results of in-depth reviews under Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011 {COM(2017) 90 final} {SWD(2017) 67 final to SWD(2017) 93 final}. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52017SC0080
  31. Pollitt, C. (2013). 40 Years of public management reform in UK central government – promises, promises …. Policy & Politics, 41 (4), 465–480. https://doi.org/10.1332/030557312x655710
  32. Bileišis, M., Petukauskas, J. (2011). Subnacionalinio valdymo reformų prielaidos Lietuvoje politikos ir administravimo dichotomijos bei administracinių vertybių modelių požiūriu. Viešoji Politika ir Administravimas, 10 (4), 548–564. Available at: https://cris.mruni.eu/cris/entities/publication/c8c9ec86-6196-4036-85aa-4a5e205d1386
  33. Tumėnas, A. (2010). Valstybinių organizacijų pokyčių ir reformų teorinė analizė. Kaunas: Lithuanian Academic Libraries Network (LABT). Available at: https://cris.mruni.eu/cris/entities/etd/739fe814-db54-4406-85b1-5f984d1a3163
  34. Klimovský, D. (2008). Reform of the Public Administration System at the Local and Regional Levels in the Slovak Republic. University of Iceland: Centre for Small State Studies. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228378449_Reform_of_the_Public_Administration_System_at_the_Local_and_Regional_Levels_in_the_Slovak_Republic
  35. Szomolányi, S. (2004). The Slovak Path to Democracy: From a Deviant Case to a Standard New Democracy. Slovakia: Ten Years of Independence and a Year of Reforms. Available at: https://www.ivo.sk/3188/en/books/slovakia-ten-years-of-independence-and-a-year-of-reforms
  36. Ágh, A. (1999). Early and Mature Consolidation in East Central Europe: The Case of Europeanization in Hungary. Success or Failure? Ten Years after. Praha. Available at: https://library.fes.de/pdf-files/bueros/vifaost/a00-00393.pdf
  37. Klimovský, D. (2005). Úloha tretieho sektora v demokratickej konsolidácii Slovenska. Medzi občanom a štátom: kontexty slobody, demokracie a spravodlivosti. Košice: Univerzita P. J. Šafárika, 263–290. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267927719_Uloha_tretieho_sektora_v_demokratickej_konsolidacii_Slovenska
  38. Novotný, L., Csachová, S., Kulla, M., Nestorová-Dická, J., Pregi, L. (2016). Development Trajectories of Small Towns in East Slovakia. European Countryside, 8 (4), 373–394. https://doi.org/10.1515/euco-2016-0026
  39. Čavojec, J., Sloboda, D. (2005). Fiškálna decentralizácia a obce. Konzervatívny inštitút M. R. Štefánika. Available at: https://konzervativizmus.sk/wp-content/upload/pdf/fisk_dec.pdf
  40. Kling, J., Nižňanský, V. (2003). Public Administration. Slovakia 2002: A Global Report on the State of Society. Bratislava: Inštitút pre verejné otázky, 183–200. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269435627_PUBLIC_ADMINISTRATION_REFORM_IN_SLOVAKIA_AFTER_THE_PARLIAMENTARY_ELECTION_IN_1998
  41. Klimovský, D. (2016). Experience with Managerial and Political Reform Measures at the Local Level in Slovakia. Advances in Public Policy and Administration, 135–160. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-0320-0.ch007
  42. Schick, A. (1998). Why Most Developing Countries Should Not Try New Zealand’s Reforms. The World Bank Research Observer, 13 (1), 123–131. https://doi.org/10.1093/wbro/13.1.123
  43. Osborne, S. P. (2006). The New Public Governance? Public Management Review, 8 (3), 377–387. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719030600853022
  44. Brandsen, T., Trommel, W., Verschuere, B. (2015). The state and the reconstruction of civil society. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 83 (4), 676–693. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852315592467
Public administration modernization: regularities of normative concept application

Downloads

Published

2024-06-28

How to Cite

Guogis, A., Smalskys, V., Reinholde, I., Bileišis, M., Klimovsky, D., & Gavkalova, N. (2024). Public administration modernization: regularities of normative concept application. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 3(13 (129), 70–78. https://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2024.304594

Issue

Vol. 3 No. 13 (129) (2024): Transfer of technologies: industry, energy, nanotechnology

Section

Transfer of technologies: industry, energy, nanotechnology

License

Copyright (c) 2024 Arvydas Guogis, Vainius Smalskys, Iveta Reinholde, Mantas Bileišis, Daniel Klimovsky, Nataliia Gavkalova

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The consolidation and conditions for the transfer of copyright (identification of authorship) is carried out in the License Agreement. In particular, the authors reserve the right to the authorship of their manuscript and transfer the first publication of this work to the journal under the terms of the Creative Commons CC BY license. At the same time, they have the right to conclude on their own additional agreements concerning the non-exclusive distribution of the work in the form in which it was published by this journal, but provided that the link to the first publication of the article in this journal is preserved.

A license agreement is a document in which the author warrants that he/she owns all copyright for the work (manuscript, article, etc.).
The authors, signing the License Agreement with TECHNOLOGY CENTER PC, have all rights to the further use of their work, provided that they link to our edition in which the work was published.
According to the terms of the License Agreement, the Publisher TECHNOLOGY CENTER PC does not take away your copyrights and receives permission from the authors to use and dissemination of the publication through the world's scientific resources (own electronic resources, scientometric databases, repositories, libraries, etc.).
In the absence of a signed License Agreement or in the absence of this agreement of identifiers allowing to identify the identity of the author, the editors have no right to work with the manuscript.
It is important to remember that there is another type of agreement between authors and publishers – when copyright is transferred from the authors to the publisher. In this case, the authors lose ownership of their work and may not use it in any way.