Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (115)
- Monograph/Edited Volume (16)
- Part of a Book (3)
- Review (3)
- Doctoral Thesis (2)
- Postprint (2)
- Part of Periodical (1)
Language
- German (107)
- English (34)
- Portuguese (1)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (142)
Keywords
- Germany (3)
- Denmark (2)
- Kommunalwissenschaft (2)
- Norway (2)
- accountability (2)
- labour market administration (2)
- public employment service (2)
- welfare state reform (2)
- Administrative federalism (1)
- Brandenburg (1)
- Bürokratisierung (1)
- Civil service career (1)
- European Union (EU) (1)
- Federal Constitutional Court (1)
- German administrative system (1)
- German public administration (1)
- Institut (1)
- Länder (1)
- Ministerialverwaltung (1)
- Open Access (1)
- Political civil servant (1)
- Political craft (1)
- Politicisation (1)
- Politikwissenschaft (1)
- Politisierung (1)
- Potsdam (1)
- Spitzenbeamte (1)
- Universität (1)
- Verwaltungswissenschaft (1)
- Weberian bureaucracy (1)
- Wissenschaft (1)
- buraucratisation (1)
- core executive (1)
- decentralisation (1)
- federal administration (1)
- governance (1)
- institutions (1)
- multilevel governance (1)
- politicisation (1)
- public administration (1)
- reforms (1)
- self-government (1)
- social security (1)
- the Basic Law (1)
- the Federal Ministry of the Interior (BMI) (1)
- the German Constitution (1)
- the German federal architecture (1)
- the Länder (1)
- top bureaucrats (1)
Institute
- Sozialwissenschaften (117)
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften (17)
- An-Institute (2)
- Fachgruppe Betriebswirtschaftslehre (2)
- Kommunalwissenschaftliches Institut (2)
- Extern (1)
- Fachgruppe Politik- & Verwaltungswissenschaft (1)
- Referat für Presse- und Öffentlichkeitsarbeit (1)
- Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Fakultät (1)
This open access book presents a topical, comprehensive and differentiated analysis of Germany’s public administration and reforms. It provides an overview on key elements of German public administration at the federal, Länder and local levels of government as well as on current reform activities of the public sector. It examines the key institutional features of German public administration; the changing relationships between public administration, society and the private sector; the administrative reforms at different levels of the federal system and numerous sectors; and new challenges and modernization approaches like digitalization, Open Government and Better Regulation. Each chapter offers a combination of descriptive information and problem-oriented analysis, presenting key topical issues in Germany which are relevant to an international readership.
Zum dreißigjährigen Bestehen des Kommunalwissenschaftlichen Instituts an der Universität Potsdam vereint dieser Jubiläumsband kurze Aufsätze von ehemaligen und aktuellen Vorstandsmitgliedern, von Ehrenmitgliedern des Vorstands, langjährigen wissenschaftlichen Mitarbeitern des Instituts und aktuellen wissenschaftlichen Kooperationspartnern. Die insgesamt zwölf Beiträge befassen sich mit den Kommunalwissenschaften und der Geschichte des Kommunalwissenschaftlichen Instituts, mit aktuellen kommunalwissenschaftlichen Fragestellungen und wissenschaftlichen Kooperationen des KWI. Der vom KWI-Vorstand herausgegebene Band soll einen breiten Blick auf 30 Jahre Kommunalwissenschaften in Brandenburg und an der Universität Potsdam werfen und einen Ausblick auf zukünftige kommunalwissenschaftliche Forschung geben.
Brandenburg
(1997)
The article explores how recent changes in the governance of employment services in three European countries (Denmark, Germany and Norway) have influenced accountability relationships. The overall assumption in the growing literature about accountability is that the number of actors involved in accountability arrangements is rising, that accountability relationships are becoming more numerous and complex, and that these changes may lead to contradictory accountability relationships, and finally to multi accountability disorder'. The article tries to explore these assumptions by analysing the different actors involved and the information requested in the new governance arrangements in all three countries. It concludes that the considerable changes in organizational arrangements and more managerial information demanded and provided have led to more shared forms of accountability. Nevertheless, a clear development towards less political or administrative accountability could not be observed.
The article explores how recent changes in the governance of employment services in three European countries (Denmark, Germany and Norway) have influenced accountability relationships. The overall assumption in the growing literature about accountability is that the number of actors involved in accountability arrangements is rising, that accountability relationships are becoming more numerous and complex, and that these changes may lead to contradictory accountability relationships, and finally to ‘multi accountability disorder’. The article tries to explore these assumptions by analysing the different actors involved and the information requested in the new governance arrangements in all three countries. It concludes that the considerable changes in organizational arrangements and more managerial information demanded and provided have led to more shared forms of accountability. Nevertheless, a clear development towards less political or administrative accountability could not be observed.
This article contributes to the politics of policy‐making in executive government. It introduces the analytical distinction between generalists and specialists as antagonistic players in executive politics and develops the claim that policy specialists are in a structurally advantaged position to succeed in executive politics and to fend off attempts by generalists to influence policy choices through cross‐cutting reform measures. Contrary to traditional textbook public administration, we explain the views of generalists and specialists not through their training but their positions within an organization. We combine established approaches from public policy and organization theory to substantiate this claim and to define the dilemma that generalists face when developing government‐wide reform policies (‘meta‐policies’) as well as strategies to address this problem. The article suggests that the conceptual distinction between generalists and specialists allows for a more precise analysis of the challenges for policy‐making across government organizations than established approaches.
Das verbreitete Stereotyp Deutschlands als übermäßig bürokratisierter Staat kann einer nüchternen empirischen Bestandsaufnahme kaum standhalten. Im internationalen Vergleich zeigt sich vielmehr ein unterschiedliches Ausmaß der „Bürokratisierung“ entlang von drei zentralen Dimensionen der häufig undifferenziert betrachteten Bürokratieproblematik. Einer intelligenten Strategie der Entbürokratisierung muss daher eine systematische Analyse der Mechanismen der Bürokratisierung in einzelnen Dimensionen der Bürokratiekritik – zu viel Staat, zu viel Regulierung, zu bürokratische Organisation – zugrunde liegen. Der Beitrag stellt einen zentralen Mechanismus für die Regulierungsproblematik als derzeit besonders intensiv diskutiertes Bürokratieproblem dar: Das relative politische Kräfteverhältnis von „Generalisten“ und „Spezialisten“ wird als entscheidend für den Erfolg von Initiativen zur Deregulierung und „besseren Regulierung“ identifiziert. Diskutiert wird der Beitrag unterschiedlicher theoretischer Perspektiven zur konzeptionellen Begründung dieser Generalisten-Spezialisten-These. Hieraus ergeben sich schließlich handlungsrelevante Hypothesen zur Wirksamkeit von verbreiteten Ansätzen der „besseren Regulierung“.
Although German bureaucracy is typically categorised as Weberian, a clear distinction between politics and administration has never been a defining characteristic of the German political-administrative system. Many close interrelations and interactions between elected politicians and appointed civil servants can be observed at all levels of administration. Higher-ranking civil servants in Germany are used to and generally appreciate the functional politicisation of their jobs, that is their close involvement in all stages of the policy process, from policy formation, goal definition, negotiation within and outside government to the implementation and evaluation of policies. For top positions, therefore, a class of ‘political civil servants’ is a special feature of the German system, and obtaining ‘political craft’ has become an important part of the learning and job experience of higher-ranking civil servants.
Switches between political and administrative positions seem to be quite common in today’s politics, or at least not so unusual any longer. Nevertheless, up-to-date empirical studies on this issue are lacking. This paper investigates the presumption, that in recent years top bureaucrats have become more politicised, while at the same time more politicians stem from a bureaucratic background, by looking at the career paths of both. For this purpose, we present new empirical evidence on career patterns of top bureaucrats and executive politicians both at Federal and at Länder level. The data was collected from authorized biographies published at the websites of the Federal and Länder ministries for all Ministers, Parliamentary State Secretaries and Administrative State Secretaries who held office in June 2009.