TY - CHAP A1 - Kuhlmann, Sabine ED - Wang, Yukai ED - Färber, Gisela T1 - Local Government in Germany BT - Key Features and Current Reforms T2 - Comparative Studies on Vertical Administration Reforms in China and Germany (Speyerer Forschungsberichte ; 285) KW - China KW - Deutschland KW - Verwaltungsreform KW - China KW - Germany KW - administrative reform Y1 - 2016 SN - 978-3-941738-23-2 SP - 51 EP - 67 PB - Deutsches Forschungsinstitut für öffentliche Verwaltung CY - Speyer ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Kuhlmann, Sabine A1 - Wayenberg, Ellen T1 - Institutional impact assessment in multi-level systems: conceptualizing decentralization effects from a comparative perspective JF - International review of administrative sciences : an international journal of comparative public administration N2 - 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. KW - administrative reform KW - comparison KW - coordination KW - effectiveness KW - efficiency KW - impact assessment KW - institutional reform KW - local government Y1 - 2016 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852315583194 SN - 0020-8523 SN - 1461-7226 VL - 82 IS - 2 SP - 233 EP - 272 PB - Sage CY - London ER - TY - GEN A1 - Kuhlmann, Sabine A1 - Wayenberg, Ellen T1 - Institutional impact assessment in multi-level systems BT - conceptualizing decentralization effects from a comparative perspective T2 - International review of administrative sciences N2 - 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. T3 - Zweitveröffentlichungen der Universität Potsdam : Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe - 91 KW - administrative reform KW - comparison KW - coordination KW - effectiveness KW - efficiency KW - impact assessment KW - institutional reform, KW - local government Y1 - 2018 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-405314 VL - 82 IS - 2 ER - TY - CHAP A1 - Kuhlmann, Sabine A1 - Veit, Sylvia ED - Varone, Frédéric ED - Jacob, Steve ED - Bundi, Pirmin T1 - Evaluation of and in public administration T2 - Handbook of public policy evaluation N2 - 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. KW - administrative reform KW - new public management KW - public administration KW - institutionalization of evaluation KW - typology of evaluation KW - better regulation Y1 - 2023 SN - 9781800884892 U6 - https://doi.org/10.4337/9781800884892.00023 SP - 220 EP - 237 PB - Edward Elgar Publishing CY - Cheltenham, UK ER -