@misc{HlepasKerstingKuhlmannetal.2018, author = {Hlepas, Nikos and Kersting, Norbert and Kuhlmann, Sabine and Swianiewicz, Pawel and Teles, Filipe}, title = {Introduction: Decentralization beyond the municipal tier}, series = {Sub-Municipal Governance in Europe}, journal = {Sub-Municipal Governance in Europe}, publisher = {Palgrave}, address = {Basingstoke}, isbn = {978-3-319-64725-8}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-64725-8_1}, pages = {1 -- 24}, year = {2018}, abstract = {In Europe, different countries developed a rich variety of sub-municipal institutions. Out of the plethora of intra- and sub-municipal decentralization forms (reaching from local outposts of city administration to "quasi-federal" structures), this book focuses on territorial sub-municipal units (SMUs) which combine multipurpose territorial responsibility with democratic legitimacy and can be seen as institutions promoting the articulation and realization of collective choices at a sub-municipal level. Country chapters follow a common pattern that is facilitating systematic comparisons, while at the same time leaving enough space for national peculiarities and priorities chosen and highlighted by the authors, who also take advantage of the eventually existing empirical surveys and case studies.}, language = {en} } @article{KerstingKuhlmann2018, author = {Kersting, Norbert and Kuhlmann, Sabine}, title = {Sub-municipal Units in Germany}, series = {Sub-municipal Units in Germany: Municipal and Metropolitan Districts}, journal = {Sub-municipal Units in Germany: Municipal and Metropolitan Districts}, publisher = {Palgrave}, address = {Basingstoke}, isbn = {978-3-319-64725-8}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-64725-8_5}, pages = {93 -- 118}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Sub-municipal units (SMUs) in Germany differ in German L{\"a}nder. In Berlin, Hamburg and M{\"u}nchen Metropole Districts fulfill a number of quasi-municipal self-government rights and functions. They have their own budget and strong councils, as well as mayors. In all other L{\"a}nder, most sub-municipal councils were subordinated under the municipal council and directly elected mayor heading the administration. SMUs were introduced as a kind of compensation with different territorial reforms in the 1970s. Although directly elected, sub-municipal councilors are weak, and their advisory role competes with other newly established advisory boards. Here the focus remains on traffic and town planning. Some sub-municipal councils fulfill smaller administrative functions and become more relevant and important in recent decentralization strategies of neighborhood development.}, language = {en} } @misc{BouckaertKuhlmann2018, author = {Bouckaert, Geert and Kuhlmann, Sabine}, title = {Foreword}, series = {Sub-Municipal Governance in Europe: Decentralization Beyond the Municipal Tier}, journal = {Sub-Municipal Governance in Europe: Decentralization Beyond the Municipal Tier}, publisher = {Palgrave}, address = {Basingstoke}, isbn = {978-3-319-64725-8}, pages = {V -- VI}, year = {2018}, language = {en} } @article{KuhlmannBogumil2018, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Bogumil, J{\"o}rg}, title = {Performance measurement and benchmarking as "reflexive institutions" for local governments}, series = {International journal of public sector management}, volume = {31}, journal = {International journal of public sector management}, number = {4}, publisher = {Emerald Group Publishing Limited}, address = {Bingley}, issn = {0951-3558}, doi = {10.1108/IJPSM-01-2017-0004}, pages = {543 -- 562}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Purpose The purpose of this paper is to discuss different approaches of performance measurement and benchmarking as reflexive institutions for local governments in England, Germany and Sweden from a comparative perspective. Design/methodology/approach These three countries have been selected because they represent typical (most different) cases of European local government systems and reforms. The existing theories on institutional reflexivity point to the potential contribution of benchmarking to public sector innovation and organizational learning. Based on survey findings, in-depth case studies, interviews and document analyses in these three countries, the paper addresses the major research question as to what extent and why benchmarking regimes vary across countries. It derives hypotheses about the impacts of benchmarking on institutional learning and innovation. Findings The outcomes suggest that the combination of three key features of benchmarking, namely - obligation, sanctions and benchmarking authority - in conjunction with country-specific administrative context conditions and local actor constellations - influences the impact of benchmarking as a reflexive institution. Originality/value It is shown in the paper that compulsory benchmarking on its own does not lead to reflexivity and learning, but that there is a need for autonomy and leeway for local actors to cope with benchmarking results. These findings are relevant because policy makers must decide upon the specific governance mix of benchmarking exercises taking their national and local contexts into account if they want them to promote institutional learning and innovation.}, 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{KuhlmannLaffinWayenberg2018, author = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Laffin, Martin and Wayenberg, Ellen}, title = {Subnational Government in the Research Spotlight}, series = {Public Administration in Europe : The Contribution of EGPA}, journal = {Public Administration in Europe : The Contribution of EGPA}, publisher = {Springer}, address = {Cham}, isbn = {978-3-319-92855-5}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-92856-2_15}, pages = {147 -- 165}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Kuhlmann, Laffin and Wayenberg point out three main strands of subnational changes that have significantly dominated the research field and focus of Permanent Study Group 5. Elaborating upon the Study Group's contributions, the chapter overviews relevant research questions, approaches and findings that have been touched upon concerning local and regional government systems, subnational reforms and their evaluation in a multi-level governance setting. The chapter concludes with zooming in on austerity as a main driver of future developments upon and amongst all levels of government.}, 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} } @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} }