@article{KroppKuhlmann2014, author = {Kropp, Sabine and Kuhlmann, Sabine}, title = {Wissen und Expertise in Politik und Verwaltung : eine einleitende Zusammenfassung}, isbn = {978-3-8474-0117-9}, year = {2014}, language = {de} } @article{BogumilKuhlmann2006, author = {Bogumil, J{\"o}rg and Kuhlmann, Sabine}, title = {Wirkungen lokaler Verwaltungsreformen : M{\"o}glichkeiten und Probleme der Performanzevaluation}, isbn = {3-89404-776-3}, year = {2006}, language = {de} } @article{KuhlmannSeyfriedSiegel2018, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Seyfried, Markus and Siegel, John Philipp}, title = {Was bewirken Gebietsreformen?}, series = {Der moderne Staat : dms ; Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Public Policy, Recht und Management}, volume = {11}, journal = {Der moderne Staat : dms ; Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Public Policy, Recht und Management}, number = {1}, publisher = {Budrich}, address = {Leverkusen}, issn = {1865-7192}, pages = {119 -- 141}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Der vorliegende Beitrag fasst die bisherige Forschung {\"u}ber die Wirkungen von Gebietsreformen zusammen und analysiert diese aus inhaltlicher und methodischer Perspektive. Basierend auf einer Auswertung von ausgew{\"a}hlten nationalen und europ{\"a}ischen Studien werden Wirkungsbefunde in drei zentralen Dimensionen dargestellt: (1) Leistungsf{\"a}higkeit, Verwaltungs- und Veranstaltungskraft, (2) Einsparungen, Skalenertr{\"a}ge und Wirtschaftlichkeit und (3) Partizipation und demokratische Kontrolle. Im Ergebnis kann festgestellt werden, dass die Leistungs- und Handlungsf{\"a}higkeit kommunaler Verwaltungen durch Gebietsreformen {\"u}berwiegend positiv beeinflusst wird. Dagegen sind die empirischen Befunde bez{\"u}glich Wirtschaftlichkeit, Einsparungen und Skalenertr{\"a}ge sowie zur Partizipation und demokratischen Kontrolle nicht eindeutig.}, language = {de} } @article{Kuhlmann2019, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine}, title = {Verwaltungstraditionen und Verwaltungssysteme im Vergleich}, 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 = {39 -- 49}, year = {2019}, language = {de} } @article{KuhlmannBogumilHafner2016, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Bogumil, J{\"o}rg and Hafner, Jonas}, title = {Verwaltungshandeln in der Fl{\"u}chtlingskrise}, series = {Verwaltung \& Management : VM ; Zeitschrift f{\"u}r moderne Verwaltung}, journal = {Verwaltung \& Management : VM ; Zeitschrift f{\"u}r moderne Verwaltung}, number = {3}, publisher = {Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft}, address = {Baden-Baden}, issn = {0947-9856}, pages = {126 -- 136}, year = {2016}, abstract = {In dem Beitrag werden das Verwaltungshandeln in der Fl{\"u}chtlingskrise und m{\"o}gliche Ursachen der aufgetretenen Vollzugsprobleme untersucht. Im Fokus stehen vor allem die Vollzugsrealit{\"a}t und die Verwaltungsvarianz im Bereich der Erstaufnahme von Fl{\"u}chtlingen auf der L{\"a}nderebene sowie die durch das BAMF als auch die Bundes l{\"a}nder mittlerweile begonnenen Reformen im Verwaltungsvollzugssystem. Leitfrage des Aufsatzes ist, ob das bestehende Verwaltungsvollzugssystem nicht nur in den jeweiligen Zust{\"a}ndigkeiten reformbed{\"u}rftig ist, sondern ob es auch zu einer neuen Zust{\"a}ndigkeitsverteilung im Bundesstaat kommen sollte.}, language = {de} } @article{KuhlmannBogumilHafner2016, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Bogumil, J{\"o}rg and Hafner, Jonas}, title = {Verwaltungshandeln in der Fl{\"u}chtlingskrise}, series = {Die Verwaltung : Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Verwaltungsrecht und Verwaltungswissenschaften}, volume = {49}, journal = {Die Verwaltung : Zeitschrift f{\"u}r Verwaltungsrecht und Verwaltungswissenschaften}, number = {2}, publisher = {Duncker und Humblot}, address = {Berlin}, issn = {1865-5211}, doi = {10.3790/verw.49.2.289}, pages = {289 -- 300}, year = {2016}, language = {de} } @article{Kuhlmann2015, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine}, title = {Verwaltung und Verwaltungsrefomen im internationalen Vergleich}, series = {Modernisierung des {\"o}ffentlichen Sektors / Sonderband ; 45}, journal = {Modernisierung des {\"o}ffentlichen Sektors / Sonderband ; 45}, editor = {D{\"o}hler, Marian and Franzke, Jochen and Wegrich, Kai}, publisher = {Nomos, Ed. sigma}, address = {Baden-Baden}, isbn = {978-3-8487-2062-0}, issn = {0945-1072}, pages = {109 -- 132}, year = {2015}, language = {de} } @incollection{Kuhlmann2016, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine}, title = {Verwaltung in der Vergleichenden Politikwissenschaft}, series = {Handbuch Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft}, booktitle = {Handbuch Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft}, publisher = {Springer-VS}, address = {Wiesbaden}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {345 -- 359}, year = {2016}, abstract = {Die international vergleichende Verwaltungswissenschaft (Comparative Public Administration) ist in den vergangenen Jahrzehnten zu einem wichtigen Teilsegment der vergleichenden Politikwissenschaft geworden. Im vorliegenden Beitrag wird am Beispiel wesentlicher Typologien, Begriffe und Forschungsertr{\"a}ge herausgearbeitet, welche Rolle das Vergleichen in der Verwaltungswissenschaft und die {\"o}ffentliche Verwaltung als Gegenstandsbereich der vergleichenden Politikwissenschaft spielen. Es werden zentrale Befunde zur Wirkungsweise und zum Erkl{\"a}rungsbeitrag unterschiedlicher Verwaltungssysteme in vergleichender Perspektive vorgestellt.}, language = {de} } @article{KuhlmannWollmann2006, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Wollmann, Hellmut}, title = {Transaktionskosten von Verwaltungsreformen : ein missing link der Evaluationsforschung}, isbn = {3-89404-776-3}, year = {2006}, language = {de} } @article{KuhlmannHellstroemRambergetal.2021, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Hellstr{\"o}m, Mikael and Ramberg, Ulf and Reiter, Renate}, title = {Tracing divergence in crisis governance}, series = {International review of administrative sciences}, volume = {87}, journal = {International review of administrative sciences}, number = {3}, publisher = {Sage}, address = {Los Angeles, California}, issn = {0020-8523}, doi = {10.1177/0020852320979359}, pages = {556 -- 575}, year = {2021}, abstract = {This cross-country comparison of administrative responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in France, Germany and Sweden is aimed at exploring how institutional contexts and administrative cultures have shaped strategies of problem-solving and governance modes during the pandemic, and to what extent the crisis has been used for opportunity management. The article shows that in France, the central government reacted determinedly and hierarchically, with tough containment measures. By contrast, the response in Germany was characterized by an initial bottom-up approach that gave way to remarkable federal unity in the further course of the crisis, followed again by a return to regional variance and local discretion. In Sweden, there was a continuation of 'normal governance' and a strategy of relying on voluntary compliance largely based on recommendations and less - as in Germany and France - on a strategy of imposing legally binding regulations. The comparative analysis also reveals that relevant stakeholders in all three countries have used the crisis as an opportunity for changes in the institutional settings and administrative procedures.}, language = {en} } @article{KuhlmannHellstromRambergetal.2021, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Hellstrom, Mikael and Ramberg, Ulf and Reiter, Renate}, title = {Tracing divergence in crisis governance}, series = {International review of administrative sciences : an international journal of comparative public administration}, volume = {87}, journal = {International review of administrative sciences : an international journal of comparative public administration}, number = {3}, publisher = {Sage Publ.}, address = {London}, issn = {0020-8523}, doi = {10.1177/0020852320979359}, pages = {556 -- 575}, year = {2021}, abstract = {This cross-country comparison of administrative responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in France, Germany and Sweden is aimed at exploring how institutional contexts and administrative cultures have shaped strategies of problem-solving and governance modes during the pandemic, and to what extent the crisis has been used for opportunity management. The article shows that in France, the central government reacted determinedly and hierarchically, with tough containment measures. By contrast, the response in Germany was characterized by an initial bottom-up approach that gave way to remarkable federal unity in the further course of the crisis, followed again by a return to regional variance and local discretion. In Sweden, there was a continuation of 'normal governance' and a strategy of relying on voluntary compliance largely based on recommendations and less - as in Germany and France - on a strategy of imposing legally binding regulations. The comparative analysis also reveals that relevant stakeholders in all three countries have used the crisis as an opportunity for changes in the institutional settings and administrative procedures. Points for practitioners COVID-19 has shown that national political and administrative standard operating procedures in preparation for crises are, at best, partially helpful. Notwithstanding the fact that dealing with the unpredictable is a necessary part of crisis management, a need to further improve the institutional preparedness for pandemic crises in all three countries examined here has also become clear. This should be done particularly by way of shifting resources to the health and care sectors, strengthening the decentralized management of health emergencies, stocking and/or self-producing protection material, assessing the effects of crisis measures, and opening the scientific discourse to broader arenas of experts.}, language = {en} } @incollection{BogumilKuhlmann2022, author = {Bogumil, J{\"o}rg and Kuhlmann, Sabine}, title = {The politics of administrative reforms}, series = {Handbook on the politics of public administration}, booktitle = {Handbook on the politics of public administration}, editor = {Ladner, Andreas and Sager, Fritz}, publisher = {Edward Elgar Publishing}, address = {Cheltenham, UK}, isbn = {978-1-83910-943-0}, doi = {10.4337/9781839109447.00018}, pages = {125 -- 137}, year = {2022}, abstract = {Administrative reforms refer to conscious decisions about institution building and institutional change that are taken at the end of political processes and can be conceived as the attempt by politico-administrative actors to change the institutional order (polity) within which they make and implement decisions. In this paper we proceed from the assumption that the role of politics, the constellation of political actors and arenas vary according to the scope and objectives of administrative reforms. Depending on whether they refer to changes between organizational units/levels/sectors ('external institutional policy') or to an internal reorganization ('internal institutional policy'), different actor strategies, patterns of conflict and power constellations can be expected. As external administrative reforms are aimed at changing functional and/or territorial jurisdictions and thus always involve external actors, larger resistance, heavier political conflicts and generally more politicization are likely to occur than in the case of internal administrative reforms. Yet, for internal reforms, too, actor coalitions which support or block institutional changes, promotors, leaders, and moderators have revealed to shape processes and outcomes. Against this background, this chapter examines the influence of politics on various types of administrative reforms making a distinction between external and internal institutional policies. We analyse the role of politico-administrative actors, their strategies and influence on the formulation, trajectories and outcomes of administrative reforms. Our major focus will be on reforms in the multi-level system on the one hand and on (Post-) NPM reforms on the other as two major international trends. Drawing on reform experiences in different European countries, the chapter will reveal to what extent actors' interests and influences have triggered and shaped administrative reforms and which difference these have made for the reform outcome.}, language = {en} } @article{KuhlmannVeit2021, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Veit, Sylvia}, title = {The Federal Ministerial Bureaucracy, the Legislative Process and Better Regulation}, 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_20}, pages = {357 -- 373}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Over the last decades, Better Regulation has become a major reform topic at the federal and—in some cases—also at the L{\"a}nder level. Although the debate about improving regulatory quality and reducing unnecessary burdens created by bureaucracy and red tape date back to the 1960s and 1970s, the introduction by law in 2006 of a new independent institutionalised body for regulatory control at the federal level of government has brought a new quality to the discourse and practice of Better Regulation in Germany. This chapter introduces the basic features of the legislative process at the federal level in Germany, addresses the issue of Better Regulation and outlines the role of the National Regulatory Control Council (Nationaler Normenkontrollrat—NKR) as a 'watchdog' for compliance costs, red tape and regulatory impacts.}, language = {en} } @article{KuhlmannWayenbergBergstroemetal.2021, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Wayenberg, Ellen and Bergstr{\"o}m, Tomas and Franzke, Jochen}, title = {The Essence and Transformation of Local Self-Government in Western Europe}, series = {The Future of Local Self-Government : European Trends in Autonomy, Innovations and Central-Local Relations}, journal = {The Future of Local Self-Government : European Trends in Autonomy, Innovations and Central-Local Relations}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Cham}, isbn = {978-3-030-56059-1}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-030-56059-1_1}, pages = {1 -- 14}, year = {2021}, abstract = {All over Europe, cities and municipalities face new and numerous challenges to uphold their unique self-governing role in society. This intriguing reality underscores this volume's ambition of brightening the future of local self-government. After further elaborating on this relevant background and the approach taken, the first chapter introduces three main dimensions of analysis. They are key to the volume's subsequent parts on the essence of local government's autonomy, its transformations in the light of digitalisation, marketisation and amalgamation and, finally, its changing intergovernmental relations concerning supervision and subnational policy-making. This volume covers eight countries, spread over Europe. And so, this introductory chapter ends with highlighting main features of the different local government systems involved.}, language = {en} } @article{KuhlmannBogumil2021, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Bogumil, J{\"o}rg}, title = {The Digitalisation of Local Public Services}, series = {The Future of Local Self-Government : European Trends in Autonomy, Innovations and Central-Local Relations}, journal = {The Future of Local Self-Government : European Trends in Autonomy, Innovations and Central-Local Relations}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Cham}, isbn = {978-3-030-56058-4}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-030-56059-1_8}, pages = {101 -- 113}, year = {2021}, abstract = {The digital transformation of the local public sector is an important step towards making local service delivery more citizen-centred and user-oriented. The state of digitalisation in public administration in Germany is, however, well behind the far-reaching hopes associated with this modernisation theme. This chapter will explore the question as to what extent digital tools have been introduced in German local governments, more specifically in local one-stop shops (B{\"u}rger{\"a}mter), which hurdles local actors face when coping with the digital transformation, and which tools impact on citizens and local employees as well as have unintended effects and dysfunctionalities so far. A comprehensive and standardised survey amongst mayors and heads of staff councils in German municipalities as well as citizens and employees' surveys and case studies will form the empirical basis of this chapter.}, 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} } @misc{EbingerKuhlmannBogumil2018, author = {Ebinger, Falk and Kuhlmann, Sabine and Bogumil, J{\"o}rg}, title = {Territorial reforms in Europe}, series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe}, journal = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe}, number = {100}, issn = {1867-5808}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-420583}, pages = {24}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Territorial reform is the most radical and contested reorganisation of local government. A sound evaluation of the outcome of such reforms is hence an important step to ensure the legitimation of any decision on the subject. However, in our view the discourse on the subject appears to be one sided, focusing primarily on overall fiscal effects scrutinised by economists. The contribution of this paper is hence threefold: Firstly, we provide an overview off territorial reforms in Europe, with a special focus on Eastern Germany as a promising case for cross-country comparisons. Secondly, we provide an over-view of the analytical classifications of these reforms and context factors to be considered in their evaluation. And thirdly, we analyse the literature on qualitative performance effects of these reforms. The results show that territorial reforms have a significant positive impact on functional performance, while the effects on participation and integration are indeed ambivalent. In doing so, we provide substantial arguments for a broader, more inclusive discussion on the success of territorial reforms.}, language = {en} } @article{EbingerKuhlmannBogumil2018, author = {Ebinger, Falk and Kuhlmann, Sabine and Bogumil, J{\"o}rg}, title = {Territorial reforms in Europe}, series = {Local government studies}, volume = {45}, journal = {Local government studies}, number = {1}, publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group}, address = {Abingdon}, issn = {0300-3930}, doi = {10.1080/03003930.2018.1530660}, pages = {1 -- 23}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Territorial reform is the most radical and contested reorganisation of local government. A sound evaluation of the outcome of such reforms is hence an important step to ensure the legitimation of any decision on the subject. However, in our view the discourse on the subject appears to be one sided, focusing primarily on overall fiscal effects scrutinised by economists. The contribution of this paper is hence threefold: Firstly, we provide an overview off territorial reforms in Europe, with a special focus on Eastern Germany as a promising case for cross-country comparisons. Secondly, we provide an overview of the analytical classifications of these reforms and context factors to be considered in their evaluation. And thirdly, we analyse the literature on qualitative performance effects of these reforms. The results show that territorial reforms have a significant positive impact on functional performance, while the effects on participation and integration are indeed ambivalent. In doing so, we provide substantial arguments for a broader, more inclusive discussion on the success of territorial reforms.}, language = {en} } @incollection{BogumilKuhlmann2020, author = {Bogumil, J{\"o}rg and Kuhlmann, Sabine}, title = {Territorial administration in Germany}, series = {Prefects, governors and commissioners : territorial representatives of the state in Europe}, booktitle = {Prefects, governors and commissioners : territorial representatives of the state in Europe}, editor = {Tanguy, Gildas and Eymeri-Douzans, Jean-Michel}, publisher = {Palgrave Macmillan}, address = {Cham}, isbn = {978-3-030-59395-7}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-030-59396-4_15}, pages = {327 -- 352}, year = {2020}, abstract = {This chapter outlines the organization and allocation of functions at the meso-level of government in Germany (states/L{\"a}nder administrations). Furthermore, we shed light on the carriers and qualification profiles of the top bureaucrats in meso-level administrations. These high-rank territorial administrators/executives—state appointed heads of administrative districts (Regierungspr{\"a}sidenten) on the one hand, elected heads of county administrations (Landr{\"a}te) on the other hand—can be regarded as the German 'equivalents' of the prefects in countries with a Napoleonic administrative tradition. Finally, we analyse major reforms that have led to (at times, profound) transformations in territorial administrations, raising the question of to what extent alternative models of territorial bundling and coordination functions are sound and sustainable.}, language = {en} } @article{KuhlmannFranzkeDumas2022, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Franzke, Jochen and Dumas, Benoit Paul}, title = {Technocratic Decision-Making in Times of Crisis?}, series = {Public Organization Review}, volume = {22}, journal = {Public Organization Review}, number = {2}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Dordrecht}, issn = {1566-7170}, doi = {10.1007/s11115-022-00635-8}, pages = {269 -- 289}, year = {2022}, abstract = {COVID-19 has demonstrated the importance of data for scientific policy advice. Mechanisms by which data is generated, shared, and ultimately lead to policy responses are crucial for enhancing transparency and legitimacy of decisions. At the same time, the volume, complexity and volatility of data are growing. Against this background, mechanisms, actors, and problems of data-driven scientific policy advice are analysed. The study reveals role conflicts, ambiguities, and tensions in the interaction between scientific advisors and policy-makers. The assumption of a technocratic model, promoted by well-established structures and functioning processes of data-driven government, cannot be confirmed. Reality largely corresponds to the pragmatic model, in parts also the decisionist model, albeit with dysfunctional characteristics.}, language = {en} }