Conclusions: The Direction and Entity of Austerity in Mediterranean Local Public Services

  • Andrea LippiEmail author
  • Theodore N. Tsekos
Part of the Governance and Public Management book series (GPM)


The concluding chapter summarizes the findings and trends collected in the countries’ chapters. Seven cases of austerity policies in the local public sector (Greece, Portugal, Spain, Italy, Cyprus, Croatia and Albania) are presented. In consequence, this chapter aims at analysing the scrutinized countries by a set of analytic dimensions concerning policy transfer, the outcomes of austerity and their impact on Local Public Service management and delivery. Henceforth, a comparison among the seven Mediterranean austerities is provided looking for classification of different types of austerity. Finally, the chapter provides a discussion on the commonalities and variance resulting from a comparison and specific recommendation for policy-makers about the adoption of austerity measures and the future of Local Public Service (LPS) in Mediterranean Europe.


Types of policy transfer Austerity by recommendation Austerity by prescription Types of austerity 


  1. Bennett, C. J. (1991). Review Article: What Is Policy Convergence and What Causes It? British Journal of Political Science, 21, 215–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Benson, D., & Jordan, A. (2011). What Have We Learned from Policy Transfer Research? Dolowitz and Marsh Revisited. Political Studies, 9, 366–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Christensen, T. (2012). Global Ideas and Modern Public Sector Reforms: A Theoretical Elaboration and Empirical Discussion of a Neo-Institutional Theory. American Review of Public Administration, 42(6), 635–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Kickert, W., Randma-Liiv, T., & Savi, R. (2013). Fiscal Consolidation in Europe: A Comparative Analysis. COCOPS Report, Deliverable 7.2., Brussels, EU Commission.Google Scholar
  6. McCann, E., & Ward, D. (2013). A Multi-disciplinary Approach to Policy Transfer Research: Geographies, Assemblages, Mobilities and Mutations. Policy Studies, 34(1), 2–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Overmans, J. F. A., & Noordegraaf, M. (2014). Managing Austerity: Rhetorical and Real Responses to Fiscal Stress in Local Government. Public Money and Management, 34(2), 99–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Silva, C., & Bucek, J. (Eds.). (2014). Fiscal Austerity and Innovation in Local Governance in Europe. Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Political and Social SciencesUniversity of FlorenceFirenzeItaly
  2. 2.Department of Business and Public AdministrationTechnological Education Institute of PeloponneseKalamataGreece

Personalised recommendations