@article{Kuhlmann2015, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine}, title = {Administrative Reforms in the Intergovernmental Setting}, series = {Multi-Level Governance: The Missing Linkages (Critical Perspectives on International Public Sector Management)}, volume = {4}, journal = {Multi-Level Governance: The Missing Linkages (Critical Perspectives on International Public Sector Management)}, publisher = {Emerald Group Publishing Limited}, address = {Bingley}, isbn = {978-1-78441-874-8 (print)}, issn = {2045-7944}, doi = {10.1108/S2045-794420150000004008}, pages = {183 -- 215}, year = {2015}, abstract = {Purpose This chapter is aimed at contributing to the question of how institutional reforms affect multi-level governance (MLG) capacities and thus the performance of public task fulfillment with a particular focus on the local level of government in England, France, and Germany. Methodology/approach Drawing on concepts of institutional evaluation, we analytically distinguish six dimensions of impact assessment: vertical coordination; horizontal coordination; efficiency/savings; effectiveness/quality; political accountability/democratic control; equity of service standards. Methodologically, we rely on document analysis and expert judgments that could be gleaned from case studies in the three countries and a comprehensive evaluation of the available secondary data in the respective national and local contexts. Findings Institutional reforms in the intergovernmental setting have exerted a significant influence on task fulfillment and the performance of service delivery. Irrespective of whether MLG practice corresponds to type I or type II, task devolution (decentralization/de-concentration) furthers the interlocal variation and makes the equity of service delivery shrink. There is a general tendency of improved horizontal/MLG type I coordination capacities, especially after political decentralization, less in the case of administrative decentralization. However, decentralization often entails considerable additional costs which sometimes overload local governments. Research implications The distinction between multi-purpose territorial organization/MLG I and single-purpose functional organization/MLG II provides a suitable analytical frame for institutional evaluation and impact assessment of reforms in the intergovernmental setting. Furthermore, comparative research into the relationship between MLG and institutional reforms is needed to reveal the explanatory power of intervening factors, such as the local budgetary and staff situation, local policy preferences, and political interests in conjunction with the salience of the transferred tasks. Practical implications The findings provide evidence on the causal relationship between specific types of (vertical) institutional reforms, performance, and task-related characteristics. Policy-makers and government actors may use this information when drafting institutional reform programs and determining the allocation of public tasks in the intergovernmental setting. Social implications In general, the euphoric expectations placed upon decentralization strategies in modern societies cannot straightforwardly be justified. Our findings show that any type of task transfer to lower levels of government exacerbates existing disparities or creates new ones. However, the integration of tasks within multi-functional, politically accountable local governments may help to improve MLG type I coordination in favor of local communities and territorially based societal actors, while the opposite may be said with regard to de-concentration and the strengthening of MLG type II coordination. Originality/value The chapter addresses a missing linkage in the existing MLG literature which has hitherto predominantly been focused on the political decision-making and on the implementation of reforms in the intergovernmental settings of European countries, whereas the impact of such reforms and of their consequences for MLG has remained largely ignored.}, language = {en} } @article{KuhlmannBogumil2021, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Bogumil, J{\"o}rg}, title = {Administrative Reforms in the Multilevel System}, series = {Public Administration in Germany}, journal = {Public Administration in Germany}, publisher = {Palgrave Macmillan}, address = {Cham}, isbn = {978-3-030-53696-1}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-030-53697-8_16}, pages = {271 -- 289}, year = {2021}, abstract = {The chapter analyses recent reforms in the multilevel system of the L{\"a}nder, specifically territorial, functional and structural reforms, which represent three of the most crucial and closely interconnected reform trajectories at the subnational level. It sheds light on the variety of reform approaches pursued in the different L{\"a}nder and also highlights some factors that account for these differences. The transfer of state functions to local governments is addressed as well as the restructuring of L{\"a}nder administrations (e.g. abolishment of the meso level of the L{\"a}nder administration and of single-purpose state agencies) and the rescaling of territorial boundaries at county and municipal levels, including a brief review of the recently failed (territorial) reforms in Eastern Germany.}, language = {en} } @incollection{Kuhlmann2016, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine}, title = {Benchmarking in der {\"o}ffentlichen Verwaltung}, series = {Praxishandbuch Public Management}, booktitle = {Praxishandbuch Public Management}, publisher = {WEKA}, address = {Z{\"u}rich}, isbn = {978-3-297-00936-9}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {321 -- 339}, year = {2016}, language = {de} } @incollection{Kuhlmann2020, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine}, title = {Bessere Verwaltung durch Dezentralisierung? Eine l{\"a}ndervergleichende Analyse institutioneller Reformeffekte}, series = {Leidenschaft und Augenmaß : sozialwissenschaftliche Perspektiven auf Entwicklung, Verwaltung, Umwelt und Klima : Festschrift f{\"u}r Harald Fuhr}, booktitle = {Leidenschaft und Augenmaß : sozialwissenschaftliche Perspektiven auf Entwicklung, Verwaltung, Umwelt und Klima : Festschrift f{\"u}r Harald Fuhr}, publisher = {Nomos}, address = {Bade-Baden}, isbn = {978-3-8487-5249-2}, doi = {10.5771/9783845294292-39}, pages = {39 -- 57}, year = {2020}, language = {de} } @book{BogumilKuhlmannHeubergeretal.2022, author = {Bogumil, J{\"o}rg and Kuhlmann, Sabine and Heuberger, Moritz and Marienfeldt, Justine}, title = {B{\"u}rgernahe Verwaltung digital? I-Kfz und digitaler Kombiantrag}, series = {FES Diskurs}, journal = {FES Diskurs}, publisher = {Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung}, address = {Bonn}, isbn = {978-3-98628-187-8}, pages = {39}, year = {2022}, language = {de} } @article{KuhlmannSeyfried2020, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Seyfried, Markus}, title = {Comparatice methods B}, series = {Handbook of research methods in public administration, management and policy}, journal = {Handbook of research methods in public administration, management and policy}, publisher = {Edward Elgar Publishing}, address = {Cheltenham}, isbn = {978-1-78990-347-8}, pages = {181 -- 196}, year = {2020}, language = {en} } @incollection{KuhlmannSeyfried2020, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Seyfried, Markus}, title = {Comparative methods B}, series = {Handbook of research methods in public administration, management and policy}, booktitle = {Handbook of research methods in public administration, management and policy}, editor = {Vigoda-Gadot, Eran and Vashdi, Dana R.}, publisher = {Edward Elgar Publishing}, address = {Cheltenham, UK}, isbn = {978-1-78990-347-8}, doi = {10.4337/9781789903485.00017}, pages = {181 -- 196}, year = {2020}, abstract = {This chapter outlines the relevance and value of comparative approaches and methods in studying Public Administration (PA). It discusses the roots and current developments of comparative research in PA and discusses various methodological venues for cross-country comparisons, such as most similar/dissimilar systems designs, the method of concomitant variation and the difference-in-difference method. Besides the description of these approaches, we highlight their conceptual value for theory-driven empirical comparative research. Drawing on selected pieces of comparative research, the chapter furthermore provides examples for the application of comparative methods in practice presenting empirical findings and highlighting strengths and weaknesses. The chapter finally emphasizes that the methodological development in comparative PA research has by far not yet reached its end, and that some future challenges need to be addressed, such as the issues of causality, generalizability, and mixed-methods approaches.}, language = {en} } @incollection{KuhlmannMarienfeldt2023, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Marienfeldt, Justine}, title = {Comparing local government systems and reforms in Europe}, series = {Handbook on local and regional governance}, booktitle = {Handbook on local and regional governance}, editor = {Teles, Filipe}, publisher = {Edward Elgar Publishing}, address = {Cheltenham, UK}, isbn = {978-1-80037-119-4}, doi = {10.4337/9781800371200.00033}, pages = {313 -- 329}, year = {2023}, abstract = {The study of subnational and local government systems and reforms has become an increasingly salient topic in comparative public administration. In many European countries, policy implementation, the execution of public tasks and the delivery of services to citizens are largely carried out by local governments, which, at the same time, have been subjected to multiple reforms and sometimes comprehensive institutional re-organizations. This chapter discusses analytical key concepts and outcomes of the comparative study of local governments and local government reforms. It outlines frameworks and analytical tools to capture the variety of institutional settings and developments at the local level of government. It provides an introduction into crucial comparative dimensions, such as functional, territorial and political profiles of local governments, and analyses current reform approaches and outcomes based on recent empirical findings. Finally, the chapter addresses salient issues to be taken up in future comparative studies about local government.}, 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} } @incollection{KuhlmannBouckaert2016, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Bouckaert, Geert}, title = {Conclusion : Tensions, Challenges, and Future "Flags" of Local Public Sector Reforms and Comparative}, series = {Local Public Sector Reforms in Times of Crisis : national trajectories and international comparisons}, booktitle = {Local Public Sector Reforms in Times of Crisis : national trajectories and international comparisons}, publisher = {Palgrave Macmillan}, address = {London}, isbn = {978-1-137-52547-5}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {347 -- 354}, year = {2016}, language = {en} } @techreport{KuhlmannFranzkeDumasetal.2021, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Franzke, Jochen and Dumas, Beno{\^i}t Paul and Heine, Moreen}, title = {Daten als Grundlage f{\"u}r wissenschaftliche Politikberatung}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-51968}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-519683}, pages = {67}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Die vorliegende Studie zeigt, dass Daten in der Krise eine herausragende Bedeutung f{\"u}r die wissenschaftliche Politikberatung, administrative Entscheidungsvorbereitung und politische Entscheidungsfindung haben. In der Krise gab es jedoch gravierende Kommunikationsprobleme und Unsicherheiten in der wechselseitigen Erwartungshaltung von wissenschaftlichen Datengebern und politisch-administrativen Datennutzern. Die Wissensakkumulation und Entscheidungsabw{\"a}gung wurde außerdem durch eine unsichere und volatile Datenlage zum Pandemiegeschehen, verbunden mit einer dynamischen Lageentwicklung, erschwert. Nach wie vor sind das Bewusstsein und wechselseitige Verst{\"a}ndnis f{\"u}r die spezifischen Rollenprofile der am wissenschaftlichen Politikberatungsprozess beteiligten Akteure sowie insbesondere deren Abgrenzung als unzureichend einzusch{\"a}tzen. Die Studie hat dar{\"u}ber hinaus vielf{\"a}ltige Defizite hinsichtlich der Verf{\"u}gbarkeit, Qualit{\"a}t, Zug{\"a}nglichkeit, Teilbarkeit und Nutzbarkeit von Daten identifiziert, die Datenproduzenten und -verwender vor erhebliche Herausforderungen stellen und einen umfangreichen Reformbedarf aufzeigen, da zum einen wichtige Datenbest{\"a}nde f{\"u}r eine krisenbezogene Politikberatung fehlen. Zum anderen sind die Tiefensch{\"a}rfe und Differenziertheit des verf{\"u}gbaren Datenbestandes teilweise unzureichend. Dies gilt z.B. f{\"u}r sozialstrukturelle Daten zur Schwere der Pandemiebetroffenheit verschiedener Gruppen oder f{\"u}r kleinr{\"a}umige Daten {\"u}ber Belastungs- und Kapazit{\"a}tsparameter, etwa zur Personalabdeckung auf Intensivstationen, in Gesundheits{\"a}mtern und Pflegeeinrichtungen. Datendefizite sind ferner im Hinblick auf eine ganzheitliche Pandemiebeurteilung festzustellen, zum Beispiel bez{\"u}glich der Gesundheitseffekte im weiteren Sinne, die aufgrund der ergriffenen Maßnahmen entstanden sind (Verschiebung oder Wegfall von Operationen, Behandlungen und Pr{\"a}vention, aber auch h{\"a}usliche Gewalt und psychische Belastungen). Mangels systematischer Begleitstudien und evaluativer Untersuchungen, u.a. auch zu lokalen Pilotprojekten und Experimenten, bestehen außerdem Datendefizite im Hinblick auf die Wirkungen von Eind{\"a}mmungsmaßnahmen oder deren Aufhebung auf der gebietsk{\"o}rperschaftlichen Ebene. Insgesamt belegt die Studie, dass es zur Optimierung der datenbasierten Politikberatung und politischen Entscheidungsfindung in und außerhalb von Krisen nicht nur darum gehen kann, ein „Mehr" an Daten zu produzieren sowie deren Qualit{\"a}t, Verkn{\"u}pfung und Teilung zu verbessern. Vielmehr m{\"u}ssen auch die Anreizstrukturen und Interessenlagen in Politik, Verwaltung und Wissenschaft sowie die Kompetenzen, Handlungsorientierungen und kognitiv-kulturellen Pr{\"a}gungen der verschiedenen Akteure in den Blick genommen werden. Es m{\"u}ssten also Anreize gesetzt und Strukturen geschaffen werden, um das Interesse, den Willen und das K{\"o}nnen (will and skill) zur Datennutzung auf Seiten politisch-administrativer Entscheider und zur Dateneinspeisung auf Seiten von Wissenschaftlern zu st{\"a}rken. Neben adressatengerechter Informationsaufbereitung geht es dabei auch um die Gestaltung eines normativen und institutionellen Rahmens, innerhalb dessen die Nutzung von Daten f{\"u}r Entscheidungen effektiver, qualifizierter, aber auch transparenter, nachvollziehbarer und damit demokratisch legitimer erfolgen kann. Vor dem Hintergrund dieser empirischen Befunde werden acht Cluster von Optimierungsmaßnahmen vorgeschlagen: (1) Etablierung von Datenstrecken und Datenteams, (2) Schaffung regionaler Datenkompetenzzentren, (3) St{\"a}rkung von Data Literacy und Beschleunigung des Kulturwandels in der {\"o}ffentlichen Verwaltung, (4) Datenstandardisierung, Interoperabilit{\"a}t und Registermodernisierung, (5) Ausbau von Public Data Pools und Open Data Nutzung, (6) Effektivere Verbindung von Datenschutz und Datennutzung, (7) Entwicklung eines hochfrequenten, repr{\"a}sentativen Datensatzes, (8) F{\"o}rderung der europ{\"a}ischen Daten-Zusammenarbeit.}, language = {de} } @article{KuhlmannReiter2016, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Reiter, Renate}, title = {Decentralization of the French welfare state: from 'big bang' to 'muddling through'}, series = {International Review of Administrative Sciences}, volume = {82}, journal = {International Review of Administrative Sciences}, number = {2}, publisher = {Sage}, address = {London}, issn = {0020-8523}, doi = {0.1177/0020852315583194}, pages = {255 -- 272}, year = {2016}, abstract = {This article analyses the decentralization of the French welfare state focusing on the transfer of the Revenu minimum d'insertion (RMI) welfare benefit to the departments in 2003 and 2004. We map and explain the effects of the reform on the system and performance of the subnational provision of welfare tasks. To evaluate the impact of decentralization on the RMI-related action of the departments, we carry out a qualitative document analysis and use data from two case studies. The RMI decentralization offers an exemplary insight into the incremental implementation of French decentralization. We find many unintended effects in terms of the performance and outcome of the subnational welfare provision. This is traced back to the combining of institutional and policy reforms and the inadequate translation of high political expectations into an inadequate action programme both resulting in excessive demands on the local actors. Points for practitioners The decentralization of public tasks is associated with high expectations in terms of the effects on the performance of public services and public governance on the subnational levels. For an in-depth measure the range of administrative performance and political systems effects should be taken into account. We propose a five-dimensional scheme allowing for the determination of decentralization effects on the resource input to and the operative output of subnational public services, on the horizontal coordination between subnational task holders and the affected non-public stakeholders, on the vertical intergovernmental coordination, and on the democratic accountability of subnational authorities.}, language = {en} } @article{Kuhlmann2019, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine}, title = {Dezentralisierung, Kommunalisierung, Regionalisierung}, series = {Handbuch zur Verwaltungsreform}, journal = {Handbuch zur Verwaltungsreform}, edition = {5., vollst{\"a}ndig {\"u}berarb. Aufl.}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Wiesbaden}, isbn = {978-3-658-21562-0}, pages = {239 -- 250}, year = {2019}, language = {de} } @misc{KuhlmannRadtke2015, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Radtke, Ina}, title = {Die Bundesverwaltung als moderner Betrieb II : Teil 4}, publisher = {Hochschule des Bundes f{\"u}r {\"o}ffentliche Verwaltung}, address = {Br{\"u}hl}, pages = {67}, year = {2015}, language = {de} } @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} } @article{BogumilKuhlmann2021, author = {Bogumil, J{\"o}rg and Kuhlmann, Sabine}, title = {Digitale Transformation in deutschen Kommunen}, series = {Die Verwaltung}, volume = {54}, journal = {Die Verwaltung}, number = {1}, publisher = {Duncker \& Humblot}, address = {Berlin}, issn = {0042-4498}, doi = {10.3790/verw.54.1.105}, pages = {105 -- 132}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Deutschland landet in europ{\"a}ischen Rankings zur Verwaltungsdigitalisierung regelm{\"a}ßig im hinteren Mittelfeld. Die bisherige Bilanz der Digitalisierung f{\"u}r die deutsche {\"o}ffentliche Verwaltung ist trotz verst{\"a}rkter Anstrengungen aller f{\"o}deraler Ebenen, wie sie insbesondere in der Umsetzung des Onlinezugangsgesetzes (OZG) zum Ausdruck kommen, nach wie vor als eher ern{\"u}chternd einzusch{\"a}tzen. Vor diesem Hintergrund besch{\"a}ftigt sich der vorliegende Beitrag mit der Umsetzung, den H{\"u}rden und ausgew{\"a}hlten Wirkungsaspekten der Verwaltungsdigitalisierung auf kommunaler Ebene. Die empirische Basis bildet eine 2019 abgeschlossene Studie zur digitalen Transformation in einem Schl{\"u}sselbereich b{\"u}rgerbezogener Leistungserbringung, den st{\"a}dtischen B{\"u}rger{\"a}mtern, welche die am meisten nachgefragten kommunalen Dienstleistungen bereitstellen. Aus der Analyse lassen sich wichtige Erkenntnisse f{\"u}r die zuk{\"u}nftige Entwicklung der Digitalisierung {\"o}ffentlicher Leistungserbringung in Deutschland ableiten.}, language = {de} } @incollection{SchwabBogumilKuhlmannetal.2020, author = {Schwab, Christian and Bogumil, J{\"o}rg and Kuhlmann, Sabine and Gerber, Sascha}, title = {Digitalisierung von Verwaltungsleistungen in B{\"u}rger{\"a}mtern}, series = {Handbuch Digitalisierung in Staat und Verwaltung}, booktitle = {Handbuch Digitalisierung in Staat und Verwaltung}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Wiesbaden}, isbn = {978-3-658-23667-0}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-658-23668-7}, pages = {437 -- 448}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Die Digitalisierung der {\"o}ffentlichen Leistungserbringung f{\"u}r die B{\"u}rger bildet gegenw{\"a}rtig einen Schwerpunkt der Modernisierungsaktivit{\"a}ten in Staat und Verwaltung. Hinsichtlich der digitalen Informationsbereitstellung hat es zwar deutliche Fortschritte gegeben, insgesamt zeigt sich jedoch eine allenfalls moderate „E-Government-Performanz" bei der digitalen Kommunikation zwischen Verwaltung und B{\"u}rgern sowie bei Transaktionen, d. h. der medienbruchfreien Abschließbarkeit von Verwaltungsvorg{\"a}ngen. Als wesentliche Gr{\"u}nde f{\"u}r die ern{\"u}chternde Bilanz der lokalen Verwaltungsdigitalisierung sind neben technischen, rechtlichen, finanziellen und personellen Barrieren insbesondere politische und institutionelle H{\"u}rden zu nennen. Viele Probleme sind zudem auch bei E-Government-Funktionen (z. B. der Online-Formulare oder elektronischen Bezahlm{\"o}glichkeiten) zu verzeichnen. Positiv schneidet dagegen die elektronische Terminvergabe ab, die in den B{\"u}rger{\"a}mtern zu wesentlichen Prozess- und Serviceverbesserungen gef{\"u}hrt hat. Allerdings sind neben positiven Effekten, wie beispielsweise schnelleren Bearbeitungszeiten und k{\"u}rzeren Wartezeiten, auch dysfunktionale Digitalisierungseffekte zu verzeichnen, wie erh{\"o}hter Arbeitsstress aufgrund eines gestiegenen Kommunikationsaufkommens (v. a. durch Email) und der damit einhergehenden Verlagerung des Arbeitsaufkommens vom Frontoffice ins Backoffice.}, language = {de} } @article{BouckaertGalliKuhlmannetal.2020, author = {Bouckaert, Geert and Galli, Davide and Kuhlmann, Sabine and Reiter, Renate and van Hecke, Steven}, title = {European coronationalism?}, series = {Public administration review}, volume = {80}, journal = {Public administration review}, number = {5}, publisher = {Wiley-Blackwell}, address = {Oxford}, issn = {0033-3352}, doi = {10.1111/puar.13242}, pages = {765 -- 773}, year = {2020}, abstract = {The COVID-19 crisis has shown that European countries remain poorly prepared for dealing and coping with health crises and for responding in a coordinated way to a severe influenza pandemic. Within the European Union, the response to the COVID-19 pandemic has a striking diversity in its approach. By focusing on Belgium, France, Germany, and Italy—countries that represent different models of administrative systems in Europe—the analysis shows that major similarities and convergences have become apparent from a cross-country perspective. Moreover, coping with the crisis has been first and foremost an issue of the national states, whereas the European voice has been weak. Hence, the countries' immediate responses appear to be corona-nationalistic, which we label "coronationalism." This essay shows the extent to which the four countries adopted different crisis management strategies and which factors explain this variance, with a special focus on their institutional settings and administrative systems.}, language = {en} } @incollection{KuhlmannVeit2023, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Veit, Sylvia}, title = {Evaluation of and in public administration}, series = {Handbook of public policy evaluation}, booktitle = {Handbook of public policy evaluation}, editor = {Varone, Fr{\´e}d{\´e}ric and Jacob, Steve and Bundi, Pirmin}, publisher = {Edward Elgar Publishing}, address = {Cheltenham, UK}, isbn = {9781800884892}, doi = {10.4337/9781800884892.00023}, pages = {220 -- 237}, year = {2023}, abstract = {This chapter addresses the role of evaluation of and in public administration. We focus on two analytical key dimensions: a) the provider of the evaluation and b) the subject of the evaluation. Four major types of evaluation are distinguished: (1) external institutional evaluation, (2) internal institutional evaluation, (3) external evaluation of administrative action/results, (4) internal evaluation of administrative action/results. Type 1 and 2 refer to evaluation of administrative structures and processes as the subject of administrative reform. Type 3 and 4 represent different versions of evaluation in public administration, because the subject is administrative action and its outputs. The chapter highlights salient approaches and organizational settings of evaluation and provides insights into the institutionalization of an evaluation function in public administration. Finally, the chapter draws lessons regarding strengths and potentials but also remaining weaknesses and challenges of evaluation of and in public administration.}, language = {en} } @book{SchmidtWagnerSchwerdtfegeretal.2022, author = {Schmidt, Thorsten Ingo and Wagner, Dieter and Schwerdtfeger, Roswitha and Sch{\"a}fer, Andrea and Musil, Andreas and Edeling, Thomas and Bauer, Hartmut and Kinyakin, Andrey and Loladze, Besik and Nehls, Danny and Maaß, Christian and Kuhlmann, Sabine and Kuckei, Daniel A. and Hein, Victoria and Wille, Robert and Franzke, Jochen and B{\"u}chner, Christiane}, title = {Festschrift f{\"u}r Dr. Christiane B{\"u}chner in W{\"u}rdigung ihres Wirkens am Kommunalwissenschaftlichen Institut (1994-2022)}, series = {KWI Schriften}, journal = {KWI Schriften}, number = {13}, editor = {Franzke, Jochen}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, isbn = {978-3-86956-529-3}, issn = {1867-951X}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-54498}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-544987}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {125}, year = {2022}, abstract = {Diese eher ungew{\"o}hnliche, aber sehr pers{\"o}nlich gehaltene Festschrift ist dem lang­j{\"a}hrigen Wirken von Dr. Christiane B{\"u}chner als „Gesch{\"a}ftsf{\"u}hrerin" am Kommunal­wissenschaftlichen Institut (KWI) der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam gewidmet. Die von Prof. Jochen Franzke zusammengestellte und herausgegebene Publikation enth{\"a}lt im ersten Teil neben dem Grußwort des Gesch{\"a}ftsf{\"u}hrenden Direktors des KWI Herrn Prof. Thorsten Ingo Schmidt eine Reihe pers{\"o}nlicher W{\"u}rdigungen von Kolleginnen und Kollegen, Gastwissenschaftlern und Mitarbeitenden, die seit 1994 in verschiedenen Phasen der Entwicklung des KWIs mit Dr. Christiane B{\"u}chner eng zusammengearbeitet haben. Der abschließende Dokumentationsteil der Publikation enth{\"a}lt neben Ausz{\"u}gen aus dem Schriftenverzeichnis von Dr. Christiane B{\"u}chner auch zwei Nachdrucke aus deren Feder zum Thema der Kreisgebietsreform in Brandenburg (von 2001) sowie {\"u}ber den Landkreis Barnim (von 2019).}, language = {de} }