@article{EbingerRichter2016,
  author    = {Ebinger, Falk and Richter, Philipp},
  title     = {Decentralizing for performance? A quantitative assessment of functional reforms in the German Lander},
  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},
  publisher = {Sage Publ.},
  address   = {London},
  issn      = {0020-8523},
  doi       = {10.1177/0020852315586916},
  pages     = {291 -- 314},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {In the last 10 years, the governments of most of the German L{\"a}nder initiated administrative reforms. All of these ventures included the municipalization of substantial sets of tasks. As elsewhere, governments argue that service delivery by communes is more cost-efficient, effective and responsive. Empirical evidence to back these claims is inconsistent at best: a considerable number of case studies cast doubt on unconditionally positive appraisals. Decentralization effects seem to vary depending on the performance dimension and task considered. However, questions of generalizability arise as these findings have not yet been backed by more 'objective' archival data. We provide empirical evidence on decentralization effects for two different policy fields based on two studies. Thereby, the article presents alternative avenues for research on decentralization effects and matches the theoretical expectations on decentralization effects with more robust results. The analysis confirms that overly positive assertions concerning decentralization effects are only partially warranted. As previous case studies suggested, effects have to be looked at in a much more differentiated way, including starting conditions and distinguishing between the various relevant performance dimensions and policy fields.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{KuhlmannWayenberg2016,
  author    = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Wayenberg, Ellen},
  title     = {Institutional impact assessment in multi-level systems},
  series = {International review of administrative sciences},
  volume    = {82},
  journal   = {International review of administrative sciences},
  number    = {2},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-405314},
  pages     = {22},
  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 policyoriented 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.},
  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{GrossiReichardRuggiero2016,
  author    = {Grossi, Giuseppe and Reichard, Christoph and Ruggiero, Pasquale},
  title     = {Appropriateness and Use of Performance Information in the Budgeting Process: Some Experiences from German and Italian Municipalities},
  series = {Sports medicine},
  volume    = {39},
  journal   = {Sports medicine},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address   = {Abingdon},
  issn      = {1530-9576},
  doi       = {10.1080/15309576.2015.1137770},
  pages     = {581 -- 606},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {This article contributes to the debate on the use of performance information in the context of public sector performance management. Based on case studies, the authors analyze the appropriateness of the performance information provided in the newly established performance budgets of municipalities in Germany and Italy. They also examine the interest of politicians and senior managers in using such information for decision-making and monitoring within the municipal budget cycle. They find that the use of performance information is generally quite modest, and that the interest of different local actors varies to a great extent. Politicians are generally less interested in such information than top managers, particularly chief financial officers. The results are discussed by applying a theoretical framework based on institutional and legitimacy theories, and are compared with the literature on performance information use.},
  language  = {en}
}