@article{FleischerReiners2021, author = {Fleischer, Julia and Reiners, Nina}, title = {Connecting international relations and public administration}, series = {International studies review}, volume = {23}, journal = {International studies review}, number = {4}, publisher = {Oxford Univ. Press}, address = {Oxford}, issn = {1521-9488}, doi = {10.1093/isr/viaa097}, pages = {1230 -- 1247}, year = {2021}, abstract = {The recent debate on administrative bodies in international organizations has brought forward multiple theoretical perspectives, analytical frameworks, and methodological approaches. Despite these efforts to advance knowledge on these actors, the research program on international public administrations (IPAs) has missed out on two important opportunities: reflection on scholarship in international relations (IR) and public administration and synergies between these disciplinary perspectives. Against this backdrop, the essay is a discussion of the literature on IPAs in IR and public administration. We found influence, authority, and autonomy of international bureaucracies have been widely addressed and helped to better understand the agency of such non-state actors in global policy-making. Less attention has been given to the crucial macro-level context of politics for administrative bodies, despite the importance in IR and public administration scholarship. We propose a focus on agency and politics as future avenues for a comprehensive, joint research agenda for international bureaucracies.}, language = {en} } @article{FleischerSeyfried2015, author = {Fleischer, Julia and Seyfried, Markus}, title = {Drawing from the bargaining pool: Determinants of ministerial selection in Germany}, series = {Party politics : an international journal for the study of political parties and political organizations}, volume = {21}, journal = {Party politics : an international journal for the study of political parties and political organizations}, number = {4}, publisher = {Sage Publ.}, address = {London}, issn = {1354-0688}, doi = {10.1177/1354068813487108}, pages = {503 -- 514}, year = {2015}, abstract = {This article expands our current knowledge about ministerial selection in coalition governments and analyses why ministerial candidates succeed in acquiring a cabinet position after general elections. It argues that political parties bargain over potential office-holders during government-formation processes, selecting future cabinet ministers from an emerging bargaining pool'. The article draws upon a new dataset comprising all ministrable candidates discussed by political parties during eight government-formation processes in Germany between 1983 and 2009. The conditional logit regression analysis reveals that temporal dynamics, such as the day she enters the pool, have a significant effect on her success in achieving a cabinet position. Other determinants of ministerial selection discussed in the existing literature, such as party and parliamentary expertise, are less relevant for achieving ministerial office. The article concludes that scholarship on ministerial selection requires a stronger emphasis for its endogenous nature in government-formation as well as the relevance of temporal dynamics in such processes.}, language = {en} } @article{RadtkeFleischer2018, author = {Radtke, Ina and Fleischer, Julia}, title = {The Refugee Crisis in Germany}, series = {Societal Security and Crisis Management}, journal = {Societal Security and Crisis Management}, publisher = {Palgrave Macmillan}, address = {Cham}, isbn = {978-3-319-92303-1}, doi = {10.1007/978-3-319-92303-1_14}, pages = {265 -- 283}, year = {2018}, abstract = {This chapter analyses the creation of novel cross-sectoral and multi-level coordination arrangements inside the German federal bureaucracy during the recent refugee crisis. We argue that the refugee crisis can be considered as an administrative crisis that challenged organisational legitimacy. Various novel coordination actors and arenas were set up in order to enhance governance capacity. Yet, all of them have been selected from a well-known pool of administrative arrangements. As a consequence, those novel coordination arrangements did not replace but rather complement pre-existing patterns of executive coordination. Hence, the recent refugee crisis exemplifies how bureaucracies effectively adapt to changes in their surroundings via limited and temporary adjustments that coexist with existing organisational arrangements. Thus, the observed changes in coordination structures contribute to repairing organisational legitimacy by increasing governance capacity.}, language = {en} } @article{Fleischer2021, author = {Fleischer, Julia}, title = {Federal Administration}, 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_5}, pages = {61 -- 79}, year = {2021}, abstract = {The federal administration is significantly small (around 10 percent of all public employees). This speciality of the German administrative system is based on the division of responsibilities: the central (federal) level drafts and adopts most of the laws and public programmes, and the state level (together with the municipal level) implements them. The administration of the federal level comprises the ministries, subordinated agencies for special and selected operational tasks (e.g. the authorisation of drugs, information security and registration of refugees) in distinct administrative sectors (e.g. foreign service, armed forces and federal police). The capacity for preparing and monitoring government bills and statutory instruments is well developed. Moreover, the instruments and tools of coordination are exemplary compared with other countries, although the recent digital turn has been adopted less advanced than elsewhere.}, language = {en} } @book{FleischerBertelsSchulzeGabrechten2018, author = {Fleischer, Julia and Bertels, Jana and Schulze-Gabrechten, Lena}, title = {Stabilit{\"a}t und Flexibilit{\"a}t}, publisher = {Nomos}, address = {Baden-Baden}, isbn = {978-3-8487-5258-4}, pages = {83}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Wie und warum {\"a}ndern sich die formalen Strukturen von Ministerien? Dieser Band pr{\"a}sentiert die Ergebnisse der ersten umfassenden formalen Organisationsstrukturanalyse der Bundesverwaltung zwischen 1980 und 2015. Neben einer Beschreibung der internen Dynamiken im Zeitverlauf, u.a. zur Anzahl und Verbreitung von Organisationseinheiten, zur Ver{\"a}nderungsintensit{\"a}t und zu den Arten der Ver{\"a}nderungsereignisse, werden zentrale politik- und verwaltungswissenschaftliche Erkl{\"a}rungsperspektiven er{\"o}rtert. Die empirische Analyse zeigt, dass sich die Bundesministerien in den letzten Jahrzehnten ausdifferenziert haben und dabei (partei-)politische aber auch politikfeldspezifische Motive relevant sind. Daneben wird in zahlreichen Beispielen illustriert, welche externen und internen Faktoren die strukturelle Entwicklung der Bundesverwaltung beeinflussen.}, language = {de} } @book{JannBachFleischeretal.2008, author = {Jann, Werner and Bach, Tobias and Fleischer, Julia and Jantz, Bastian and Hustedt, Thurid}, title = {Opportunity and feasibility of establishing common support services for EU agencies}, publisher = {Europ{\"a}isches Parlament}, address = {Br{\"u}ssel}, pages = {21 S.}, year = {2008}, language = {en} } @article{JannFleischer2011, author = {Jann, Werner and Fleischer, Julia}, title = {Shefting discourses, steady learning and sedimentation : the German reform trajectory in the long run}, isbn = {978-0-415-55721-4}, year = {2011}, language = {en} } @article{Fleischer2009, author = {Fleischer, Julia}, title = {Power resources of parliamentary executives : policy advice in the UK and Germany}, issn = {0140-2382}, doi = {10.1080/01402380802509941}, year = {2009}, language = {en} } @book{JannBachFleischeretal.2008, author = {Jann, Werner and Bach, Tobias and Fleischer, Julia and Hustedt, Thurid}, title = {Best practice in governance of agencies : a comparative study in view of identifying best practice for governing agencies carrying out activities on behalf of the European Union}, publisher = {Europ{\"a}isches Parlament}, address = {Br{\"u}ssel}, pages = {210 S., XLIX : graph. Darst.}, year = {2008}, language = {en} } @article{FleischerCarstens2021, author = {Fleischer, Julia and Carstens, Nora}, title = {Policy labs as arenas for boundary spanning}, series = {Public Management Review}, volume = {24}, journal = {Public Management Review}, number = {8}, publisher = {Routledge}, address = {London}, issn = {1470-1065}, doi = {10.1080/14719037.2021.1893803}, pages = {1208 -- 1225}, year = {2021}, abstract = {The recently adopted German Online Access Act triggered the creation of digitalization labs for designing digital services, bringing together federal, state, and local authorities; end-users; and private-sector actors. These labs provide opportunities for boundary spanning due to organizational field and lab features. Our comparative case studies on three digitalization labs show variations in boundary spanning and reveal lab members de-coupling from their parent organizations to a varying extent. We have concluded labs offer boundary spanning that supports safeguarding the legitimacy of innovative policy designs but also raise concerns over public accountability.}, language = {en} }