Advertisement

Introduction: The Puzzle of Administrative Change

  • Sabrina CavatortoEmail author
  • Antonio La Spina
Chapter
  • 5 Downloads

Abstract

This introductory chapter develops the theoretical framework of the book, placing the country case study of Italy on main trajectories of administrative change in Europe. The variety of administrative traditions and models of innovation are at the core of our reflection about possible new policy trends: in the way reform options have been incrementally shaped, we examine how New Public Management (NPM)-oriented approaches have been taken into consideration, together with the development of post-NPM narratives. The peculiarity of an empirical science of public administration is put forward.

Keywords

Policy change New Public Management Neo-Weberian state Public governance Implementation Italy 

References

  1. Bassanini, F. (2000). Overview of Administrative Reform and Implementation in Italy: Organization, Personnel, Procedures and Delivery of Public Services. International Journal of Public Administration, 23(2–3), 229–252.Google Scholar
  2. Bassanini, F. (2002, October 2–4). The Dynamics of Public Sector Reform. Reflections from the Italian Experience. Presentation at the 2nd Quality Conference for Public Administrations, Copenhagen, pp. 1–88. Retrieved March, 2018, from http://www.bassanini.it/the-dynamics-of-p-a-reform/.
  3. Bassanini, F. (2010). Vent’anni di riforme del sistema amministrativo italiano (1990–2010). Astrid Rassegna, 4 (English version). Retrieved from http://www.bassanini.it/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Twenty-years-of-administrative-reform-in-Italy.pdf.
  4. Bauer, M. W. (2018). Public Administration and Political Science. In E. Ongaro & S. Van Thiel (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Public Administration and Management in Europe (pp. 1049–1065). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  5. Blöndal, J., von Trapp, L., & Hammer, E. (2016). Budgeting in Italy. OECD Journal on Budgeting, 15(3), 1–28.Google Scholar
  6. Bull, M., & Rhodes, M. (Eds.). (1997). Crisis and Transition in Italian Politics (1st ed.). London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Bull, M., & Rhodes, M. (2007). Introduction—Italy: A Contested Polity. West European Politics, 30(4), 657–669.Google Scholar
  8. Brunetta, R. (2009). Reforming the Public Administration to make Italy grow. Review of the economic conditions in Italy, 3, 339–367.Google Scholar
  9. Byrkjeflot, H., du Gay, P., & Greve, C. (2018). What is the ‘Neo-Weberian State’ as a Regime of Public Administration? In E. Ongaro & S. Van Thiel (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Public Administration and Management (pp. 991–1009). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  10. Capano, G. (1992). L’improbabile riforma. Le politiche di riforma amministrativa nell’Italia repubblicana. Bologna: il Mulino.Google Scholar
  11. Capano, G. (2003). Administrative Traditions and Policy Change: When Policy Paradigms Matter. The Case of Italian Administrative Reform During the 1990s. Public Administration, 81(4), 781–801.Google Scholar
  12. Capano, G. (2009). Understanding Policy Change as an Epistemological and Theoretical Problem. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis, 11(1), 7–31.Google Scholar
  13. Capano, G., Howlett, M., & Ramesh, M. (2015). Bringing Governments Back In: Governance and Governing in Comparative Policy Analysis. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis, 17(4), 311–321.Google Scholar
  14. Capoccia, G. (2015). Critical Junctures and Institutional Change. In J. Mahoney & K. Thelen (Eds.), Advances in Comparative-Historical Analysis (pp. 147–179). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Capoccia, G. (2016). When Do Institutions “Bite”? Historical Institutionalism and the Politics of Institutional Change. Comparative Political Studies, 49(8), 1095–1127.Google Scholar
  16. Capoccia, G., & Kelemen, R. D. (2007). The Study of Critical Junctures: Theory, Narrative, and Counterfactuals in Historical Institutionalism. World Politics, 59(3), 341–369.Google Scholar
  17. Cassese, S. (1994). La riforma amministrativa all’inizio della quinta Costituzione dell’Italia unita. Il Foro Italiano, 117, 249–272.Google Scholar
  18. Cassese, S. (2002). Il nuovo regime dei dirigenti pubblici italiani: una modificazione costituzionale. Giornale di Diritto amministrativo, 12, 1341–1347.Google Scholar
  19. Cassese, S. (2003). The Age of Administrative Reforms. In J. Hayward & A. Menon (Eds.), Governing Europe (pp. 128–138). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Cepiku, D., & Meneguzzo, M. (2011). Public Administration Reform in Italy: A Shopping-Basket Approach to the New Public Management or the New Weberianism? International Journal of Public Administration, 34(1–2), 19–25.Google Scholar
  21. Christensen, T., & Lægreid, P. (2011). Complexity and Hybrid Public Administration—Theoretical and Empirical Challenges. Public Organization Review, 11(4), 407–423.Google Scholar
  22. Dahl, R. A. (1947). The Science of Public Administration: Three Problems. Public Administration Review, 7(1), 1–11.Google Scholar
  23. Di Mascio, F., & Natalini, A. (2014). Austerity and Public Administration: Italy Between Modernization and Spending Cuts. American Behavioral Scientist, 58(12), 1634–1656.Google Scholar
  24. Di Mascio, F., & Natalini, A. (2015). Fiscal Retrenchment in Southern Europe: Changing patterns of public management in Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain. Public Management Review, 17(1), 129–148.Google Scholar
  25. Di Mascio, F., Natalini, A., & Stolfi, F. (2013). The Ghost of Crises Past: Analyzing Reform Sequences to Understand Italy’s Response to the Global Crisis. Public Administration, 91(1), 17–31.Google Scholar
  26. Goldfinch, S., & Wallis, J. (2010). Two Myths of Convergence in Public Management Reform. Public Administration, 88(4), 1099–1115.Google Scholar
  27. Gustafsson, G., & Richardson, J. (1980). Post-Industrial Changes in Policy Style. Scandinavian Political Studies, 3(1), 21–37.Google Scholar
  28. Gustavsson, S. (1980). Types of Policy and Types of Politics. Scandinavian Political Studies, 3(2), 123–142.Google Scholar
  29. Howlett, M., & Mukherjee, I. (2017). Policy Design: From Tools to Patches. Canadian Public Administration, 60(1), 140–144.Google Scholar
  30. Kettl, D. F. (2000). Public Administration at the Millennium: The State of the Field. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(1), 7–34.Google Scholar
  31. Kickert, W. (2011). Distinctiveness of Administrative Reform in Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain. Common Characteristics of Context, Administrations and Reforms. Public Administration, 89(3), 801–818.Google Scholar
  32. Kingdom, J. (1990). Public Administration or Public Implementation—A Discipline in Crisis. Public Policy and Administration, 5(2), 5–29.Google Scholar
  33. Lenschow, A., Liefferink, D., & Veenman, S. (2005). When the Birds Sing. A Framework for Analysing Domestic Factors Behind Policy Convergence. Journal of European Public Policy, 12(5), 797–816.Google Scholar
  34. Liddle, J. (2018). Public Value Management and New Public Governance: Key Traits, Issues and Developments. In E. Ongaro & S. Van Thiel (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Public Administration and Management (pp. 967–990). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  35. Lowi, T. J. (1970). Decision Making vs. Policy Making: Toward an Antidote for Technocracy. Public Administration Review, 30(3), 314–325.Google Scholar
  36. Lowi, T. J. (1972). Four Systems of Policy, Politics, and Choice. Public Administration Review, 32(4), 298–310.Google Scholar
  37. Lowi, T. J. (1985). The State in Politics: The Relation Between Policy and Administration. In R. N. Noll (Ed.), Regulatory Policy and Social Sciences (pp. 67–105). Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  38. Lupo, N. (2015). I ‘governi tecnici’: gli esecutivi Ciampi, Dini e Monti nel difficile equilibrio tra tecnica e politica. Rassegna parlamentare, 1, 57–120.Google Scholar
  39. Massey, A. (2018). Persistent Public Management Reform: An Egregore of Liberal Authoritarianism? Public Money & Management, 39(1), 9–17.Google Scholar
  40. Mele, V. (2010). Innovation policy in Italy (1993–2002): Understanding the Invention and Persistence of a Public Management Reform. Governance, 23(2), 251–276.Google Scholar
  41. Mele, V., & Ongaro, E. (2014). Public Sector Reform in a Context of Political Instability: Italy 1992–2007. International Public Management Journal, 17(1), 111–142.Google Scholar
  42. Melis, G. (2003). Rapporto sull’evoluzione recente e i problemi aperti dell’amministrazione italiana. Formez. Retrieved March, 2018, from http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/caimed/unpan026875.pdf.
  43. Merloni, F. (2018). Costituzione repubblicana, riforme amministrative e riforme del sistema amministrativo. Diritto pubblico, 1, 81–120.Google Scholar
  44. OECD. (2010). Modernising the Public Administration: A Study on Italy. Retrieved February, 2018, from http://www.oecd.org/governance/ministerial/48455315.pdf.
  45. Ongaro, E. (2009). Public Management Reform and Modernization: Trajectories of Administrative Change in Italy, France, Greece, Portugal and Spain. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  46. Ongaro, E. (2011). The Role of Politics and Institutions in the Italian Administrative Reform Trajectory. Public Administration, 89(3), 738–755.Google Scholar
  47. Ongaro, E., Ferré, F., Galli, D., & Longo, F. (2016). Italy: Set Along a Neo-Weberian Trajectory of Administrative Reform? In G. Hammerschmid, S. Van de Walle, R. Andrews, & P. Bezes (Eds.), Public Administration Reforms in Europe. The View from the Top (pp. 185–193). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  48. Osborne, S. P. (2010). Introduction: The (New) Public Governance: A Suitable Case for Treatment?, in S.P. Osborne (Ed.) The New Public Governance? Emerging Perspectives on the Theory and Practice of Public Governance (pp. 1–16). New York and Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  49. Peters, B. G. (2008). The Napoleonic Tradition. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 21(2), 118–132.Google Scholar
  50. Pollitt, C. (2010). Envisioning Public Administration as a Scholarly Field in 2020. Public Administration Review, 70(1), 292–294.Google Scholar
  51. Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2017). Public Management Reform. A Comparative Analysis—Into The Age of Austerity (4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Pollitt, C., Van Thiel, S., & Homburg, V. (Eds.). (2007). New Public Management in Europe. Adaptation and Alternatives. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  53. Richardson, J. (Ed.). (1982). Policy Styles in Western Europe. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  54. Salisbury, R. H. (1968). The Analysis of Public Policy: A Search for Theories and Roles. In A. Ranney (Ed.), Political Science and Public Policy (pp. 151–175). Chicago: Markham.Google Scholar
  55. Spitzer, R. (1987). Promoting Policy Theory: Revising the Arenas of Power. Policy Studies Journal, 15, 675–689.Google Scholar
  56. Stillman, R. (2016). Two Varieties of Administrative Reform: US vs. Europe. In S. Van de Walle & S. Groenveld (Eds.), Theory and practice of Public Sector Reform (pp. 248–264). New York and Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  57. Tolbert, C. J. (2002). Rethinking Lowi’s Constituent Policy: Governance Policy and Direct Democracy. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 20(4), 75–93.Google Scholar
  58. Torres, L. (2004). Trajectories in Public Administration Reforms in European Continental Countries. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 63(3), 99–112.Google Scholar
  59. Verzichelli, L., & Cotta, M. (2018). Shades of Technocracy: The Variable Use of Non-partisan Ministers in Italy. In A. Costa Pinto, M. Cotta, & P. Tavares de Almeida (Eds.), Technocratic Ministers and Political Leadership in European Democracies (pp. 77–110). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  60. Wilson, J. Q. (Ed.). (1980). The Politics of Regulation. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  61. Wright, B. E. (2011). Public Administration as an Interdisciplinary Field: Assessing Its Relationship with the Fields of Law, Management, and Political Science. Public Administration Review, 71(1), 96–101.Google Scholar
  62. Wright, B. E. (2015). The Science of Public Administration: Problems, Presumptions, Progress, and Possibilities. Public Administration Review, 75(6), 795–805.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of SienaSienaItaly
  2. 2.Luiss Guido CarliFree International University of Social StudiesRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations