@article{KuhlmannHeuberger2021,
  author    = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Heuberger, Moritz},
  title     = {Digital transformation going local},
  series = {Public money \& management},
  volume    = {43},
  journal   = {Public money \& management},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {Taylor \& Francis},
  address   = {Abingdon},
  issn      = {0954-0962},
  doi       = {10.1080/09540962.2021.1939584},
  pages     = {147 -- 155},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {Digital government constitutes the most important trend of post-NPM reforms at the local level. Based on the results of a research project on local one-stop shops, this article analyses the current state of digitalization in German local authorities. The authors explain the hurdles of implementation as well as the impact on staff members and citizens, providing explanations and revealing general interrelations between institutional changes, impacts, and context factors of digital transformation.},
  language  = {en}
}
@book{KuhlmannDumasHeuberger2022,
  author    = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Dumas, Beno{\^i}t Paul and Heuberger, Moritz},
  title     = {The capacity of local governments in Europe},
  publisher = {Palgrave Macmillan},
  address   = {Cham},
  isbn      = {978-3-031-07961-0},
  doi       = {10.1007/978-3-031-07962-7},
  pages     = {7 -- 55},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {This book compares local self-government in Europe. It examines local institutional structures, autonomy, and capacities in six selected countries - France, Italy, Sweden, Hungary, Poland, and the United Kingdom - each of which represents a typical model of European local government. Within Europe, an overall trend towards more local government capacities and autonomy can be identified, but there are also some counter tendencies to this trend and major differences regarding local politico-administrative settings, functional responsibilities, and resources. The book demonstrates that a certain degree of local financial autonomy and fiscal discretion is necessary for effective service provision. Furthermore, a robust local organization, viable territorial structures, a professional public service, strong local leadership, and well-functioning tools of democratic participation are key aspects for local governments to effectively fulfill their tasks and ensure political accountability. The book will appeal to students and scholars of Public Administration and Public Management, as well as practitioners and policy-makers at different levels of government, in public enterprises, and in NGOs.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{KuhlmannWayenberg2016,
  author    = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Wayenberg, Ellen},
  title     = {Institutional impact assessment in multi-level systems: conceptualizing decentralization effects from a comparative perspective},
  series = {International review of administrative sciences : an international journal of comparative public administration},
  volume    = {82},
  journal   = {International review of administrative sciences : an international journal of comparative public administration},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {Sage},
  address   = {London},
  issn      = {0020-8523},
  doi       = {10.1177/0020852315583194},
  pages     = {233 -- 272},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Comparative literature on institutional reforms in multi-level systems proceeds from a global trend towards the decentralization of state functions. However, there is only scarce knowledge about the impact that decentralization has had, in particular, upon the sub-central governments involved. How does it affect regional and local governments? Do these reforms also have unintended outcomes on the sub-central level and how can this be explained? This article aims to develop a conceptual framework to assess the impacts of decentralization on the sub-central level from a comparative and policy-oriented perspective. This framework is intended to outline the major patterns and models of decentralization and the theoretical assumptions regarding de-/re-centralization impacts, as well as pertinent cross-country approaches meant to evaluate and compare institutional reforms. It will also serve as an analytical guideline and a structural basis for all the country-related articles in this Special Issue. Points for practitioners Decentralization reforms are approved as having a key role to play in the attainment of 'good governance'. Yet, there is also the enticement on the part of state governments to offload an ever-increasing amount of responsibilities to, and overtask, local levels of government, which can lead to increasing performance disparities within local sub-state jurisdictions. Against this background, the article provides a conceptual framework to assess reform impacts from a comparative perspective. The analytical framework can be used by practitioners to support their decisions about new decentralization strategies or necessary adjustments regarding ongoing reform measures.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{KuhlmannJaekel2013,
  author    = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and J{\"a}kel, Tim},
  title     = {Competing, collaborating or controlling? - Comparing benchmarking in European local government},
  series = {Public money \& management : integrating theory and practice in public management},
  volume    = {33},
  journal   = {Public money \& management : integrating theory and practice in public management},
  number    = {4},
  publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group},
  address   = {Abingdon},
  issn      = {0954-0962},
  doi       = {10.1080/09540962.2013.799815},
  pages     = {269 -- 276},
  year      = {2013},
  abstract  = {The way that local authorities in OECD countries compare and benchmark their performance varies widely. This paper explains some of the reasons behind the variations. The current local government benchmarking schemes in Europe their governance, coverage and impactlargely depend on the institutional characteristics of the respective administrative and local government systems (in other words, the starting conditions). There are signs that, as a result of the fiscal crisis in Europe and need to cut public sector costs, many countries (but not England and Wales) are leaning towards compulsory large-scale benchmarking projects.},
  language  = {en}
}