@incollection{Jann2016,
  author    = {Jann, Werner},
  title     = {Accountability, performance and legitimacy in the welfare state},
  series = {The Routledge Handbook to Accountability and Welfare State Reforms in Europe},
  booktitle = {The Routledge Handbook to Accountability and Welfare State Reforms in Europe},
  editor    = {L{\ae}greid, Per and Cristensen, Tom},
  publisher = {Routledge},
  address   = {London},
  isbn      = {978-1-4724-7059-1 (print)},
  publisher      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  pages     = {31 -- 44},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Accountability is one of the most widely discussed concepts of public administration research and teaching in the last decade. But why is this case? Obviously accountability is, like its counterpart transparency, a "magic concept", and an indispensable part of the prominent and omnipresent discourse on "good governance" as well as a significant element in debates about public sector reform. The same holds true for performance, which has been a magic and contested concept ever since New Public Management (NPM) entered the discourse about "modern" processes and structures of the public sector. But the third term in the title of this paper, legitimacy, even though it is one of the basic concepts of political science and democracy and is at the heart of Max Weber's theory of bureaucracy, has been surprisingly absent from current debates about the challenges of modern public administration, and for that sake also about the future of the welfare state. This chapter argues that different concepts of legitimacy lie at the heart of most debates about accountability and performance (input, output and throughput legitimacy), and that a better understanding of the relationships between accountability, performance and legitimacy can clarify some of the puzzles of contemporary research.},
  language  = {en}
}
@incollection{JannBouckaert2017,
  author    = {Jann, Werner and Bouckaert, Geert},
  title     = {Current and Future Trends in European Public Sector Research},
  series = {Starke Kommunen - wirksame Verwaltung : Fortschritte und Fallstricke der internationalen Verwaltungs- und Kommunalforschung},
  booktitle = {Starke Kommunen - wirksame Verwaltung : Fortschritte und Fallstricke der internationalen Verwaltungs- und Kommunalforschung},
  editor    = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Schwab, Oliver},
  publisher = {Springer VS},
  address   = {Wiesbaden},
  isbn      = {978-3-658-17134-6},
  doi       = {10.1007/978-3-658-17135-3_4},
  publisher      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  pages     = {43 -- 61},
  year      = {2017},
  abstract  = {Emmanuel Kant asked three important questions which will always be with us: What can we know? What should we do? What may we hope for? These three key existentialist questions are, of course, also relevant for a reflection on the future of Public Administration: What can we know, as researchers in the field of Public Administration, about our object of public administration? What should we do as researchers and teachers to make sure we remain part of a solution and to guarantee that we are ahead of reality and its future problems? What kind of improvement (or not) may we hope for a public sector in an increasingly complex society? This chapter tries to explore some possible answers to these three important questions for our field of Public Administration. The background is our common project about 'European Perspectives for Public Administration' (EPPA), which we hope to establish as a continuous dialogue and discourse in the context of European Public Administration and the 'European Group for Public Administration' (EGPA).},
  language  = {en}
}