{"title":"Administrative reforms in Portugal and Spain: From bureaucracy to digital transition","authors":"Leonardo Secchi, Joaquim Croca Caeiro, Ricardo Ramos Pinto, Manuel Arenilla Sáez","doi":"10.1177/00208523241250314","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article analyzes the administrative reforms that took place in the national governments of Portugal and Spain in the last 100 years. The shifts of administrative paradigms are the bureaucratic transition, the managerialist transition and the digital transition. The dimensions of analysis are the doctrines of the reforms; their justifications and underlying values; policy leadership, implementation styles and instruments; and resistance to change. We conducted a systematic literature review consulting 33 peer-reviewed articles on public management paradigms and 46 on administrative reforms in Portugal and Spain, and analyzed 32 official documents on the theme. The results show that the digital transition, compared with the two previous reforms, has relied on networked policy entrepreneurship, various instruments for policy change (beyond regulation), integration of values and a shift in the pattern of resistance to change. The article concludes that incremental changes occur between administrative reforms (punctuations), and the introduction of instruments inspired by one public management paradigm does not halt or replace the introduction of other instruments derived from other paradigms.Points for practitioners:Portugal and in Spain are vivid examples where public administration reforms have become more frequent and integrative of normative values. Over time, policy change leadership has moved down the organizational hierarchy and even been outsourced to external agents. Also, diversity of policy instruments has expanded, and the patterns of resistance to reforms shifted from a political/ideological type of resistance to a human/organizational type. The discursiveness of “new public governance” has ceded to the digital transformation of public administration.","PeriodicalId":47811,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Administrative Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Review of Administrative Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523241250314","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This article analyzes the administrative reforms that took place in the national governments of Portugal and Spain in the last 100 years. The shifts of administrative paradigms are the bureaucratic transition, the managerialist transition and the digital transition. The dimensions of analysis are the doctrines of the reforms; their justifications and underlying values; policy leadership, implementation styles and instruments; and resistance to change. We conducted a systematic literature review consulting 33 peer-reviewed articles on public management paradigms and 46 on administrative reforms in Portugal and Spain, and analyzed 32 official documents on the theme. The results show that the digital transition, compared with the two previous reforms, has relied on networked policy entrepreneurship, various instruments for policy change (beyond regulation), integration of values and a shift in the pattern of resistance to change. The article concludes that incremental changes occur between administrative reforms (punctuations), and the introduction of instruments inspired by one public management paradigm does not halt or replace the introduction of other instruments derived from other paradigms.Points for practitioners:Portugal and in Spain are vivid examples where public administration reforms have become more frequent and integrative of normative values. Over time, policy change leadership has moved down the organizational hierarchy and even been outsourced to external agents. Also, diversity of policy instruments has expanded, and the patterns of resistance to reforms shifted from a political/ideological type of resistance to a human/organizational type. The discursiveness of “new public governance” has ceded to the digital transformation of public administration.
期刊介绍:
IRAS is an international peer-reviewed journal devoted to academic and professional public administration. Founded in 1927 it is the oldest scholarly public administration journal specifically focused on comparative and international topics. IRAS seeks to shape the future agenda of public administration around the world by encouraging reflection on international comparisons, new techniques and approaches, the dialogue between academics and practitioners, and debates about the future of the field itself.