320 Politikwissenschaft
Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (32) (remove)
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (17)
- Part of a Book (10)
- Monograph/Edited Volume (4)
- Other (1)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (32) (remove)
Keywords
- Germany (3)
- digitalization (3)
- local government (3)
- territorial reforms (3)
- new public management (2)
- (post) new public management (1)
- Administration (1)
- Administrative reform (1)
- Arbeitsmarkt (1)
- Ausländerbehörde (1)
- Benchmarking (1)
- Comparative Public Administration (1)
- DACH countries (1)
- DACH-Länder (1)
- Dezentralisierung (1)
- Digitalisierung (1)
- Europe (1)
- Flüchtlingskrise (1)
- France (1)
- Integration (1)
- Kommunale Selbstverwaltung (1)
- Kommune (1)
- Kommunen (1)
- Local administrative systems (1)
- Local government reform (1)
- Mehrebenensystem (1)
- Migration (1)
- New public management (1)
- Organisation (1)
- Poland (1)
- Public-private partnerships (1)
- Sweden (1)
- United Kingdom (1)
- Verflechtung (1)
- Vergleich (1)
- Verwaltung (1)
- Verwaltungsreform (1)
- Verwaltungswissenschaft (1)
- actor constellations (1)
- administrative culture (1)
- administrative reform (1)
- administrative reforms (1)
- comparative case study (1)
- comparative public administration (1)
- containment (1)
- crisis (1)
- crisis management (1)
- decentralization (1)
- governance (1)
- institutional change (1)
- institutional policy (1)
- intergovernmental reforms (1)
- intergovernmental relations (1)
- local autonomy (1)
- local government systems (1)
- managerial reforms (1)
- meso-level of government (1)
- micro-politics (1)
- multi-level system (1)
- neo weberian state (1)
- pandemic (1)
- policy advice (1)
- polycrisis (1)
- public administration (1)
- public health (1)
- public sector reform (1)
- self-governance (1)
- territorial administration (1)
- window of opportunity (1)
- Öffentlicher Dienst (1)
Der Beitrag untersucht das Wechsel- und Zusammenspiel von öffentlichem Verwaltungshandeln und Legitimität. Ausgegangen wird davon, dass in den letzten Jahren sowohl die Input- als auch die Outputdimension staatlicher Legitimationsbeschaffung signifikante Veränderungen durchlaufen haben, die die öffentliche Verwaltung intensiv berühren. Mit Rückgriff auf die anderen Beiträge des Schwerpunktheftes und unter Hinzuziehung weiterer Erkenntnisse wird überblicksartig untersucht, ob sich die Legitimationsproduktion durch Verwaltungshandeln verändert hat und wenn ja, inwiefern. Im Ergebnis ergibt sich ein partieller Wandel hinsichtlich der Legitimationsquellen von Verwaltungshandeln. Sowohl im Input-Bereich (Transparenzgesetze, vorgezogene Bürgerbeteiligung) als auch im Output-Bereich (z.B. Normenkontrollrat) gibt es neue bzw. einen stärkeren Einsatz schon bekannter Instrumente (Expertenkommissionen). Ob dieser Wandel der Instrumente und der potenziellen Quellen von Legitimation allerdings tatsächlich die Legitimität des Verwaltungshandelns verändert, also zu einer Legitimitätssteigerung führt, wird teils skeptisch beurteilt und bedarf daher weiterer empirischer Untersuchung.
Die international vergleichende Verwaltungswissenschaft (Comparative Public Administration) ist in den vergangenen Jahrzehnten zu einem wichtigen Teilsegment der vergleichenden Politikwissenschaft geworden. Im vorliegenden Beitrag wird am Beispiel wesentlicher Typologien, Begriffe und Forschungserträge herausgearbeitet, welche Rolle das Vergleichen in der Verwaltungswissenschaft und die öffentliche Verwaltung als Gegenstandsbereich der vergleichenden Politikwissenschaft spielen. Es werden zentrale Befunde zur Wirkungsweise und zum Erklärungsbeitrag unterschiedlicher Verwaltungssysteme in vergleichender Perspektive vorgestellt.
Conclusion : Tensions, Challenges, and Future "Flags" of Local Public Sector Reforms and Comparative
(2016)
In recent decades, a wave of administrative reforms has changed local governance in many European countries. However, our knowledge about differences as well as similarities between the countries, driving forces, impacts, perceptions, and evaluation of these reforms is still limited. In the chapter, the authors give an overview about mayors’ perceptions and evaluations of two major reform trajectories: (a) re-organisation of local service delivery and (b) internal administrative/managerial reforms. Furthermore, differences between (groups of) countries as well as similarities among them are shown in these two fields of administrative reform. Finally, the authors tried to identify explanatory factors for specific perceptions of administrative reforms at the local level.
Sub-municipal units (SMUs) in Germany differ in German Länder. In Berlin, Hamburg and München 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 Länder, 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.
Foreword
(2018)
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.