Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Governing Public Service Organizations: A Review and Research Agenda

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Governance Structures and Mechanisms in Public Service Organizations

Part of the book series: Contributions to Management Science ((MANAGEMENT SC.))

Abstract

Critical issues and problem areas in governing public service organizations are increasingly discussed and the challenge is to develop good governance systems. However, the concept of governance is monopolizing the debate on Public Administration and Management. As a result, there are often overlaps, misuse and superficiality. The aim of this systematic literature review is to assess the state of the art on public service organizations governance structures and mechanisms analysing past, present and future evolutions. The arguments advanced in Osborne’s article (2006) that Public Administration and Management has actually passed through three dominant modes (Public Administration, New Public Management, and New Public Governance) are used. Drawing on this classification, 184 published (from 1970 to 2009) journal articles are quantitatively analysed. The results show significant associations between theories, research settings, sources of data, countries of analysis, and different governance regimes. Thus, moving from what has already been done, we identify critical areas that need further attention and insightful introspection.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    A longer, pre-eminent one of Public Administration, from the late nineteenth century through to the late 1970s/early 1980s; a second mode, of the New Public Management, through to the start of the twenty-first century; and an emergent third one, of the New Public Governance, since then (Osborne 2006).

  2. 2.

    Econlit, Web of Science (ISI), ABI Inform and Elsevier Science Direct.

  3. 3.

    However, it seems important to underline that since the end of the 1970s, alternatives to internal government production of public services have assumed increasing prominence. The most important has been contracting out, but a less travelled road has been co-production: the involvement of citizens, volunteers and clients in producing public services as well as consuming them (Alford 1998).

  4. 4.

    David and Han (2004) and Newbert (2007).

  5. 5.

    Keywords are searched in the title and in the topic instead of the abstract. Moreover, we included journals directly linked to social science (in particular with PA).

  6. 6.

    Asterisks at the end of the word account for variations in this root word (e.g., by using servic*, the results will be all verses containing the word servic and its derivatives such as services, servicing, etc.).

  7. 7.

    EndNote automatically identifies duplicates.

  8. 8.

    By using EndNote it has been possible to automatically delete duplicates in an early stage of the review process.

  9. 9.

    Public Administration (29 articles), Public Money and Management (28 articles), Australian Journal of Public Administration (15 articles), Public Administration Review (14 articles), Public Management Review (12 articles), and Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory (10 articles).

  10. 10.

    Most of these articles are grounded on NPG theoretical debate (N = 23; 44%).

  11. 11.

    Efficiency, cost savings, and effectiveness improvement first and foremost relate to the passage from the old bureaucratic State to new managerial logic from the private sector (NPM) and aiming at improving public services production/provision (Osborne 2006).

  12. 12.

    A high involvement of the State in public services results also from partial privatization processes (Bel and Fageda 2010).

References

  • Alexander, J., & Nank, R. (2009). Public-nonprofit partnership realizing the new public service. Administration and Society, 41(3), 364–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alford, J. (1998). A public management road less travelled: Clients as co-producers of public services. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 57(4), 128–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alford, J., & Hughes, O. (2008). Public value pragmatism as the next phase of public management. American Review of Public Administration, 38(2), 130–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersen, O. J. (2004). Public-private partnerships: Organizational hybrids as channels for local mobilization and participation? Scandinavian Political Studies, 27(1), 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, P. (1997). Performance standards and evaluation. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 56(3), 96–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bel, G., & Fageda, X. (2010). Partial privatisation in local services delivery: An empirical analysis of the choice of mixed firms. Local Government Studies, 36(1), 129–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benington, J. (2000). The modernization and improvement of government and public services. Public Money and Management, 20(2), 3–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boaz, A., Hayden, C., & Bernard, M. (1999). Attitudes and aspirations of older people: Reviews of the literature. Social security report no 101. Leeds: Department of Social Security.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bognetti, G., & Robotti, L. (2007). The provision of local public services through mixed enterprises: The Italian case. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 78(3), 415–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourgon, J. (2008). The future of public service: A search for a new balance. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 67(4), 390–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bovaird, T. (2007). Beyond engagement and participation: User and community co-production of public services. Public Administration Review, 67(5), 846–860.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowman, J. S., Berman, E. M., & West, J. P. (2001). The profession of public administration: An ethics edge in introductory textbooks? Public Administration Review, 61(2), 194–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyne, G. A. (2003). Sources of public service improvement: A critical review and research agenda. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 13(1), 367–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyne, G., & Walker, R. (2004). Strategy content and public service organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 14(2), 231–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B. (2009). Public values theory: Three big questions. International Journal of Public Policy, 4(5), 369–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brandsen, T., & Pestoff, V. (2006). Co-production, the third sector and the delivery of public services: An introduction. Public Management Review, 8(4), 493–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T. L., & Potoski, M. (2003). Contract-management capacity in municipal and county governments. Public Administration Review, 63(2), 153–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T. L., Potoski, M., & Van Slyke, D. M. (2006). Managing public service contracts: Aligning values, institutions, and markets. Public Administration Review, 66(3), 323–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cafferata, R. (1995). Italian state-owned holdings, privatization and the single market. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 66(4), 401–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cafferata, R. (2008). L’ impresa pubblica nell’Unione europea. Roma: Aracne.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, J., & Duncan, G. (2007). Is there now a new “New Zealand model”? Public Management Review, 9(1), 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Checchi, D., Florio, M., & Carrera, J. (2009). Privatisation discontent and utility reform in Latin America. Journal of Development Studies, 45(3), 333–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chew, C., & Osborne, S. P. (2009). Exploring strategic positioning in the UK charitable sector: Emerging evidence from charitable organizations that provide public services. British Journal of Management, 20(1), 90–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, T. (2003). Narratives of Norwegian governance: Elaborating the strong state tradition. Public Administration, 81(1), 163–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, J., & Glendinning, C. (2002). Partnerships and the remaking of welfare governance. In C. Glendinning, M. Powell, & K. Rummery (Eds.), Partnerships, new labour and the governance of welfare. Bristol: Policy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coffey, A., & Atkinson, P. (1996). Making sense of qualitative data complementary research strategies. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 37–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collin, S. O., & Vagnoni, E. (2002). The governance of voluntary work in the public sector: Institutional differences and invariant traits. Journal of Management and Governance, 6(4), 323–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Considine, M. (2002). The end of the line? Accountable governance in the age of networks, partnerships, and joined-up services. Governance: an International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, 15(1), 21–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Considine, M. (2003). Governance and competition: The role of non-profit organisations in the delivery of public services. Australian Journal of Political Science, 38(1), 63–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Considine, M., & Lewis, J. M. (2003). Bureaucracy, network, or enterprise? Comparing models of governance in Australia, Britain, The Netherlands, and New Zealand. Public Administration Review, 63(2), 131–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, H. M. (1989). Integrating research: A guide for literature reviews. Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox, H. (2008). Public enterprises and service providers in institutional competition and undergoing structural change: New challenges to the theory of public economics and public services in Germany. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 79(3–4), 527–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Aveni, R. A., & MacMillan, I. C. (1994). Crisis and the content of managerial communications: A study of the focus of attention of top managers in surviving and failing firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(49), 643–657.

    Google Scholar 

  • David, R. J., & Han, S. K. (2004). A systematic assessment of the empirical support for transaction cost economics. Strategic Management Journal, 25(1), 39–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies, H., Nutley, S., & Smith, P. (2000). What works? The role of evidence in public sector policy and practice. Public Money and Management, 19(1), 3–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeLeon, L., & Denhardt, R. (2000). The political theory of reinvention. Public Administration Review, 59(2), 89–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, M. E. (1983). Coefficients of agreement. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 143(1), 487–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esmark, A. (2009). The functional differentiation of governance: Public governance beyond hierarchy, market and networks. Public Administration, 87(2), 351–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farrell, C. M. (2009). Governance, consumers and citizens: Agency and resistance in contemporary politics. Public Administration, 87(4), 986–987.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferlie, E., Hartley, J., & Martin, S. (2003). Changing public service organizations: Current perspectives and future prospects. British Journal of Management, 14(1), 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischbacher, M., & Beaumont, P. B. (2003). PFI, public-private partnerships and the neglected importance of process: Stakeholders and the employment dimension. Public Money and Management, 23(3), 171–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fung, A. (2004). Empowered participation: Reinventing urban democracy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerxhani, K. (2003). The informal sector in developed and less developed countries: A literature survey. Public Choice, 120(3–4), 267–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenhalgh, T., Robert, G., MacFarlane, F., Bate, P., & Kyriakidou, O. (2004). Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: Systematic review and recommendations. The Milbank Quarterly, 82(4), 581–629.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregory, R., & Hicks, C. (1999). Promoting public service integrity: A case for responsible accountability. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 58(4), 3–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grossi, G., & Mussari, R. (2009). The effects of corporatisation on financial reporting: The experience of the Italian local governments. International Journal of Public Policy, 4(3–4), 268–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grossi, G., & Reichard, C. (2008). Municipal corporatization in Germany and Italy. Public Management Review, 10(5), 597–617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grout, P. A., & Stevens, M. (2003). The assessment: Financing and managing public services. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 19(2), 215–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartley, J. (2005). Innovation in governance and public services: Past and present. Public Money and Management, 25(1), 27–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartley, J., Donaldson, C., Skelcher, C., & Wallace, M. (2008). Managing to improve public services. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hefetz, A., & Warner, M. (2004). Privatization and its reverse: Explaining the dynamics of the government contracting process. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 14(2), 171–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodges, R., Wright, M., & Keasey, K. (1996). Corporate governance in the public services: Concepts and issues. Public Money and Management, 16(2), 7–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hood, C. (1997). Which contract State? Four perspectives on over-outsourcing for public services. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 56(3), 120–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hood, J., & McGarvey, N. (2002). Managing the risks of public-private partnerships in Scottish local government. Policy Studies, 23(1), 21–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hood, C., Dixon, R., & Beeston, C. (2008). Rating the rankings: Assessing international rankings of public service performance. International Public Management Journal, 11(3), 298–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, J., & Lowe, S. (2004). Understanding the policy process: Analysing welfare policy and practice. Bristol: Policy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, B., Hardy, B., Henwood, M., & Wistow, G. (1999). In pursuit of inter-agency collaboration in the public sector: What is the contribution of theory and research? Public Management, 1(2), 235–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (1990). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hysing, E. (2009). Governing without government? The private governance of forest certification in Sweden. Public Administration, 87(2), 312–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joassart-Marcelli, P., & Musso, J. (2005). Municipal service provision choices within a metropolitan area. Urban Affairs Review, 40(4), 492–519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jorgensen, T. B., & Bozeman, B. (2007). Public values: An inventory. Administration and Society, 39(3), 354–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joshi, A., & Moore, M. (2004). Institutionalised co-production: Unorthodox public service delivery in challenging environments. Journal of Development Studies, 40(4), 31–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kakabadse, A., Korac-Kakabadse, N., & Kouzmin, A. (2003). Ethics, values and paradox: Comparison of three case studies examining the paucity of leadership in government. Public Administration, 81(3), 477–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, J. (2007). Reforming public services in the UK: Bringing in the third sector. Public Administration, 85(4), 1003–1022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kickert, W. J. M. (1997). Public governance in the Netherlands: An alternative to Anglo-American “managerialism”. Public Administration, 75(4), 731–752.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kickert, W. J. M. (2003). Beneath consensual corporatism: Traditions of governance in the Netherlands. Public Administration, 81(1), 119–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kinchin, N. (2007). More than writing on a wall: Evaluating the role that codes of ethics play in securing accountability of public sector decision-makers. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 66(1), 112–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klijn, E. H. (2008). Governance and governance networks in Europe: An assessment of ten years of research on the theme. Public Management Review, 10(4), 504–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klijn, E. H., & Koppenjan, J. (2000). Politicians and interactive decision making: Institutional spoilsports or playmakers. Public Administration, 78(2), 365–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klijn, E. H., & Skelcher, C. (2007). Democracy and governance networks: Compatible or not? Public Administration, 85(3), 587–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klijn, E. H., & Teisman, G. R. (2003). Institutional and strategic barriers to public-private partnership: An analysis of Dutch cases. Public Money and Management, 23(3), 137–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klijn, E. H., Koppenjan, J., & Termeer, K. (1995). Managing networks in the public sector: A theoretical study of management strategies in policy networks. Public Administration, 73(3), 437–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kooiman, J. (1996). Research and theory about new public services management: Review and agenda for the future. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 9(5–6), 7–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kooiman, J. (1999). Socio-political governance: Overview, reflections and design. Public Management, 1(1), 67–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lane, J. (2000). New public management. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lane, J. (2005). Public administration and public management the principal-agent perspective. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Light, R. J., & Pillemer, D. B. (1984). Summing up: The science of reviewing research. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lonti, Z., & Gregory, R. (2007). Accountability or countability? Performance measurement in the New Zealand public service, 1992-2002. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 66(4), 468–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lourdes, T., & Vicente, P. (2003). Changes in public service delivery in the EU countries. Public Money and Management, 22(4), 41–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundqvist, L. J. (2001). Implementing from above: The ecology of power in Sweden’s environmental governance. Governance, 14(3), 319–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meier, H. E. (2007). Strategic management and the performance of public organizations: Testing venerable ideas against recent theories. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 17(3), 357–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, M. H. (1995). Creating public value: Strategic management in government. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, M., & Hartley, J. (2008). Innovations in governance. Public Management Review, 10(1), 3–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, A., Nolan, J., & Segal, G. F. (2005). Putting out the trash: Measuring municipal service efficiency in U.S. cities. Urban Affairs Review, 41(2), 237–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulgan, R. (2006). Government accountability for outsourced services. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 65(2), 48–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newbert, S. L. (2007). Empirical research on the resource-based view of the firm: An assessment and suggestions for future research. Strategic Management Journal, 28(2), 121–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Toole, L. J. (1996). Rational choice and the public management of inter-organizational networks. In F. K. Donald & H. B. Milvard (Eds.), The state of public management. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Toole, L. J., Meier, K. J., & Nicholson-Crotty, S. (2005). Managing upward, downward and outward: Networks, hierarchical relationships and performance. Public Management Review, 7(1), 45–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, S. P. (1998). The innovative capacity of voluntary organisations: Managerial challenges for local government. Local Government Studies, 24(1), 19–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, S. P. (2006). The new public governance? Public Management Review, 8(3), 377–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, S. P. (2009). Debate: Delivering public services: Are we asking the right questions? Public Money and Management, 29(1), 5–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, S. P., & Kaposvari, A. (1998). Non-governmental organizations and the development of social services. Meeting social needs in local communities in post-communist Hungary. Public Administration and Development, 18(4), 365–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, S. P., & McLaughlin, K. (2004). The cross-cutting review of the voluntary sector: Where next for local government voluntary sector relationships? Regional Studies, 38(5), 573–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, S. P., Chew, C., & McLaughlin, K. (2008). The once and future pioneers? The innovative capacity of voluntary organisations and the provision of public services: A longitudinal approach. Public Management Review, 10(1), 51–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, S. P., Jenei, G., Fabian, G., & Kuti, E. (2005). Government/non-profit partnerships, public services delivery, and civil society in the transitional nations of Eastern Europe: Lessons from the Hungarian experience. International Journal of Public Administration, 28(9–10), 767–786.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Painter, M., & Mok, K. H. (2008). Reasserting the public in public service delivery: The de-privatization and de-marketization of education in China. Policy and Society, 27(2), 137–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perry, J. L. (2007). Democracy and the new public service. American Review of Public Administration, 37(1), 3–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pestoff, V. (2006). Citizens and co-production of welfare services: Childcare in eight European countries. Public Management Review, 8(4), 503–519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pestoff, V. (2008). A democratic architecture for the welfare state. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pestoff, V. (2009). Towards a paradigm of democratic participation: Citizen participation and co-production of personal social services in Sweden. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 80(2), 197–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pettigrew, A. (2005). The character and significance of management research on the public services. Academy of Management Journal, 48(6), 973–977.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pierre, J. (2009). Reinventing governance, reinventing democracy? Policy and Politics, 37(4), 591–609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pittaway, L., Robertson, M., Munir, K., Denyer, D., & Neely, A. (2004). Networking and innovation: A systematic review of the evidence. International Journal of Management Reviews, 5–6(3–4), 137–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollitt, C. (2009). Structural change and public service performance: International lessons? Public Money and Management, 29(5), 285–291.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2004). Public management reform: A comparative analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollitt, C., & Talbot, C. (2004). Unbundled government: A critical analysis of the global trend to agencies, quangos and contractualisation. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poulsen, B. (2009). Competing traditions of governance and dilemmas of administrative accountability: The case of Denmark. Public Administration, 87(1), 117–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pugliese, A., Bezemer, P. J., Zattoni, A., Huse, M., Van den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. (2009). Boards of directors’ contribution to strategy: A literature review and research agenda. Corporate Governance: an International Review, 17(3), 292–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ranade, W., & Hudson, B. (2003). Conceptual issues in inter-agency collaboration. Local Government Studies, 29(3), 32–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rashman, L., Withers, E., & Hartley, J. (2009). Organizational learning and knowledge in public service organizations: A systematic review of the literature. International Journal of Management Reviews, 11(4), 463–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reichard, C. (2006). Strengthening competitiveness of local public service providers in Germany. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 72(4), 473–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, R. A. W. (1997). Understanding governance: Policy networks, governance, reflexivity and accountability. Buckingham: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, R. A. W. (2002). Putting people back into networks. Australian Journal of Political Science, 37(3), 399–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, R. A. W. (2007). Understanding governance: Ten years on. Organization Studies, 28(8), 1243–1264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richter, B. D., Warner, A. T., Meyer, J. L., & Lutz, K. (2006). A collaborative and adaptive process for developing environmental flow recommendations. River Research and Applications, 22(1), 297–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, M. (2007). Does decentralisation improve equity and efficiency in public service delivery provision? Ids Bulletin-Institute of Development Studies, 38(1), 7–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruter, R. X., Sahr, K., & Waldersee, G. G. (2005). Public corporate governance. Ein Kodex für öffentliche Unternehmen. Wiesbaden: Gabler.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skelcher, C. (2007). Does democracy matter? A transatlantic research design on democratic performance and special purpose governments. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 17(1), 61–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skelcher, C. (2010). Fishing in muddy waters: Principals, agents, and democratic governance in Europe. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 20(1), 161–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skelcher, C., Mathur, N., & Smith, M. (2004). Effective partnership and good governance: Lessons for policy and practice. Birmingham: Institute of Local Government Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skelcher, C., Mathur, N., & Smith, M. (2005). The public governance of collaborative spaces: Discourse, design and democracy. Public Administration, 83(2), 573–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snape, S., & Taylor, P. (2004). Partnerships between health and local government. London: Frank Cass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorensen, E. (2002). Democratic theory and network governance. Administrative Theory and Praxis, 24(4), 693–720.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorensen, E. (2006). Metagovernance: The changing role of politicians in processes of democratic governance. American Review of Public Administration, 39(2), 98–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiglitz, J. (2002). Globalization and its discontents. London: Allen Lane.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone, M. M., & Sandfort, J. R. (2009). Building a policy fields framework to inform research on nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 38(6), 1054–1075.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, G., Frances, J., Levacic, R., & Mitchel, J. (1991). Markets, hierarchies and networks. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torres, L., Pina, V., & Acerete, B. (2005). E-government developments on delivering public services among EU cities. Government Information Quarterly, 22(2), 217–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management, 14(3), 207–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treib, O., Baehr, H., & Falkner, G. (2007). Modes of governance: A note towards conceptual clarification. Journal of European Public Policy, 14(1), 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warner, M. E., & Hefetz, A. (2008). Managing markets for public service: The role of mixed public-private delivery of city services. Public Administration Review, 68(1), 155–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, M., & Craig, G. (2002). New roles for old: Local authority members and partnership working. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woods, N. D. (2009). Promoting participation? An examination of rulemaking notification and access procedures. Public Administration Review, 69(3), 518–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, K., Hsieh, J. Y., & Li, T. S. (2009). Contracting capacity and perceived contracting performance: Nonlinear effects and the role of time. Public Administration Review, 69(4), 681–696.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yapp, C., & Skelcher, C. (2007). Improvement boards: Building capability for public service improvement through peer support. Public Money and Management, 27(4), 285–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Business Studies, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, Via Columbia 2, 00133, Rome, Italy

    Andrea Calabrò

Authors
  1. Andrea Calabrò
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrea Calabrò .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Calabrò, A. (2011). Governing Public Service Organizations: A Review and Research Agenda. In: Governance Structures and Mechanisms in Public Service Organizations. Contributions to Management Science. Physica-Verlag HD. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7908-2750-7_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation