Pub Date : 2021-09-17DOI: 10.1080/23276665.2021.1963996
Jinhyuk Jang
ABSTRACT How does power-sharing in governments influence the control of corruption in Asia Pacific democracies? Studies find that voters can more easily hold elected officials accountable, providing them with incentives to control corruption, if levels of clarity of responsibility are sufficiently high. Most of these studies have focused on European countries, and have tended to measure power-sharing, which lowers clarity of responsibility, in terms of coalition governments. The wide variation in institutional arrangements across the democracies in the Asia Pacific region calls for a more nuanced evaluation of the conditions under which we should expect to find clarity of responsibility. Using original data on government characteristics in 19 Asia Pacific democracies from 1996 to 2019 and data on control of corruption from the World Bank, I find that higher levels of clarity of responsibility, captured by presidentialism and a higher share of decision-making power held by the head of government’s party, promote higher levels of corruption control.
{"title":"Power-sharing in governments, clarity of responsibility, and the control of corruption","authors":"Jinhyuk Jang","doi":"10.1080/23276665.2021.1963996","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23276665.2021.1963996","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT How does power-sharing in governments influence the control of corruption in Asia Pacific democracies? Studies find that voters can more easily hold elected officials accountable, providing them with incentives to control corruption, if levels of clarity of responsibility are sufficiently high. Most of these studies have focused on European countries, and have tended to measure power-sharing, which lowers clarity of responsibility, in terms of coalition governments. The wide variation in institutional arrangements across the democracies in the Asia Pacific region calls for a more nuanced evaluation of the conditions under which we should expect to find clarity of responsibility. Using original data on government characteristics in 19 Asia Pacific democracies from 1996 to 2019 and data on control of corruption from the World Bank, I find that higher levels of clarity of responsibility, captured by presidentialism and a higher share of decision-making power held by the head of government’s party, promote higher levels of corruption control.","PeriodicalId":43945,"journal":{"name":"Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration","volume":"55 1","pages":"131 - 151"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2021-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75538901","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-16DOI: 10.1080/23276665.2021.1963995
Aneeqa Suhail, T. Steen
ABSTRACT This article explores the assumption that the level of human resource (HR) autonomy of an organisation influences line managers’ participation in HR decision-making, and it seeks to understand to what extent such a participation affects the effective implementation of HR practices. The results of an empirical study of HR policies and practices in three public hospitals in Pakistan reveal that greater level of HR autonomy of an organisation, with less pressure to comply with public personnel policies, leads to increased participation of middle managers in HR decision-making. This, in turn, helps to reduce the gap between the intended and implemented HR practices, which is important for human resource management (HRM) – organisational performance linkage. These findings contribute to ongoing discussions related to HRM in the public sector context and line management enactment of HR practices by highlighting the profound implications of the institutional context on the HR management of public hospitals. Additionally, this research proposes a bottom-up approach to HR practices, through its focus on the participation of managers in HR decision-making as a possible solution to better implementation of HR practices.
{"title":"Exploring the implementation gap: organizational autonomy and line managers’ participation in human resource decision–making","authors":"Aneeqa Suhail, T. Steen","doi":"10.1080/23276665.2021.1963995","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23276665.2021.1963995","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article explores the assumption that the level of human resource (HR) autonomy of an organisation influences line managers’ participation in HR decision-making, and it seeks to understand to what extent such a participation affects the effective implementation of HR practices. The results of an empirical study of HR policies and practices in three public hospitals in Pakistan reveal that greater level of HR autonomy of an organisation, with less pressure to comply with public personnel policies, leads to increased participation of middle managers in HR decision-making. This, in turn, helps to reduce the gap between the intended and implemented HR practices, which is important for human resource management (HRM) – organisational performance linkage. These findings contribute to ongoing discussions related to HRM in the public sector context and line management enactment of HR practices by highlighting the profound implications of the institutional context on the HR management of public hospitals. Additionally, this research proposes a bottom-up approach to HR practices, through its focus on the participation of managers in HR decision-making as a possible solution to better implementation of HR practices.","PeriodicalId":43945,"journal":{"name":"Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration","volume":"22 1","pages":"276 - 297"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2021-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84404582","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-15DOI: 10.1080/23276665.2021.1958353
Ayca Kusseven, Mete Yildiz
ABSTRACT The last two decades witnessed a significant rise in the use of behavioural insights in the design and successful implementation of public policies. This creative method of policy design and implementation, also known as “nudging”, makes use of biases in individual decision-making processes to increase the success of policy interventions. As of 2021, there are more than 200 nudge units in the world, some located in governments. This is a detailed case study of the creation and development of the behavioural public policy/nudge unit in the Turkish government, which is located in the Ministry of Trade. This unit emerged as a result of a successful policy experiment via knowledge transfer from the United Kingdom’s Behavioural Insights Team with help from the UK Embassy in Ankara. A detailed account of the creation process, organisational structure, activities, and future objectives of this unit is presented by using John Kingdon’s multiple streams model, reviewing the literature, analysing official documents, and conducting in-depth interviews. Lessons drawn from this case study can be helpful to actors from the public policy community in developing countries.
{"title":"Emergence & development of behavioral public policy units in government: the case of Turkey","authors":"Ayca Kusseven, Mete Yildiz","doi":"10.1080/23276665.2021.1958353","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23276665.2021.1958353","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The last two decades witnessed a significant rise in the use of behavioural insights in the design and successful implementation of public policies. This creative method of policy design and implementation, also known as “nudging”, makes use of biases in individual decision-making processes to increase the success of policy interventions. As of 2021, there are more than 200 nudge units in the world, some located in governments. This is a detailed case study of the creation and development of the behavioural public policy/nudge unit in the Turkish government, which is located in the Ministry of Trade. This unit emerged as a result of a successful policy experiment via knowledge transfer from the United Kingdom’s Behavioural Insights Team with help from the UK Embassy in Ankara. A detailed account of the creation process, organisational structure, activities, and future objectives of this unit is presented by using John Kingdon’s multiple streams model, reviewing the literature, analysing official documents, and conducting in-depth interviews. Lessons drawn from this case study can be helpful to actors from the public policy community in developing countries.","PeriodicalId":43945,"journal":{"name":"Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration","volume":"62 1","pages":"66 - 80"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2021-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74207206","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-15DOI: 10.1080/23276665.2021.1945468
Hsini Huang, Kyoung-Cheol Kim, Matthew M. Young, Justin B. Bullock
ABSTRACT This article tests whether managers and staff evaluate artificial intelligence (AI)-based process innovations differently. Scholars have argued perceptions of innovation vary systematically as a function of an individual’s position within organisations. We test for attitudinal differences between managers and staff via an online experimental simulation fielded among working-age Taiwanese citizens employed in public sector employment (n = 600). Respondents engage in a 12-round simulation. We experimentally vary whether the respondent receives support from an AI decision support tool. We assess pre-intervention and post-intervention attitudes towards the use of AI for a suite of organisational tasks, using a difference-in-difference estimation approach to identify the causal effect of organisational position on innovation evaluation. Our findings suggest managers are more supportive of AI as a decision support tool than staff, and remain so after the simulation. Managers also increased their support of AI tools to a larger degree than staff.
{"title":"A matter of perspective: differential evaluations of artificial intelligence between managers and staff in an experimental simulation","authors":"Hsini Huang, Kyoung-Cheol Kim, Matthew M. Young, Justin B. Bullock","doi":"10.1080/23276665.2021.1945468","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23276665.2021.1945468","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article tests whether managers and staff evaluate artificial intelligence (AI)-based process innovations differently. Scholars have argued perceptions of innovation vary systematically as a function of an individual’s position within organisations. We test for attitudinal differences between managers and staff via an online experimental simulation fielded among working-age Taiwanese citizens employed in public sector employment (n = 600). Respondents engage in a 12-round simulation. We experimentally vary whether the respondent receives support from an AI decision support tool. We assess pre-intervention and post-intervention attitudes towards the use of AI for a suite of organisational tasks, using a difference-in-difference estimation approach to identify the causal effect of organisational position on innovation evaluation. Our findings suggest managers are more supportive of AI as a decision support tool than staff, and remain so after the simulation. Managers also increased their support of AI tools to a larger degree than staff.","PeriodicalId":43945,"journal":{"name":"Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration","volume":"1 1","pages":"47 - 65"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2021-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88722804","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-11DOI: 10.1080/23276665.2021.1945470
Wenna Chen, Binzizi Dong, C. Hsieh, Ning Liu, R. Walker, Yao Wang, Bo Wen, Peiyi Wu, Jiasheng Zhang
ABSTRACT Scholars of public administration are increasingly using experimental research to develop more robust causal inferences and greater methodological capacity. Against this backdrop, we examine the extent to which experimental research has taken hold in the Asia-Pacific region and assess regional capacity. Our review of 30 articles published by scholars based in the Asia-Pacific region in the public administration section of the Web of Science’s Journal Citation Reports finds that the regional capacity for experimental research is concentrated in a small number of institutions and strongly supplemented through international collaboration. Topics studied reflect the advent of behavioural public administration. Although progress is being made in reporting experimental designs, much work is needed in the region to bring greater transparency to scholarship. We conclude by encouraging scholars to more robustly implement and report experimental research and by outlining future directions.
公共行政学者越来越多地使用实验研究来发展更有力的因果推理和更大的方法能力。在此背景下，我们考察了实验性研究在亚太地区开展的程度，并评估了该地区的能力。我们对Web of Science的期刊引文报告(Journal Citation Reports)公共管理板块中亚太地区学者发表的30篇文章的回顾发现，该地区的实验研究能力集中在少数机构中，并通过国际合作得到有力补充。所研究的主题反映了行为公共行政的出现。尽管在报告实验设计方面正在取得进展，但该地区还需要做大量工作，以提高学术研究的透明度。最后，我们鼓励学者们更有力地实施和报告实验研究，并概述未来的发展方向。
{"title":"Experimental research in the Asia-Pacific region: review and assessment of regional capacity","authors":"Wenna Chen, Binzizi Dong, C. Hsieh, Ning Liu, R. Walker, Yao Wang, Bo Wen, Peiyi Wu, Jiasheng Zhang","doi":"10.1080/23276665.2021.1945470","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23276665.2021.1945470","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Scholars of public administration are increasingly using experimental research to develop more robust causal inferences and greater methodological capacity. Against this backdrop, we examine the extent to which experimental research has taken hold in the Asia-Pacific region and assess regional capacity. Our review of 30 articles published by scholars based in the Asia-Pacific region in the public administration section of the Web of Science’s Journal Citation Reports finds that the regional capacity for experimental research is concentrated in a small number of institutions and strongly supplemented through international collaboration. Topics studied reflect the advent of behavioural public administration. Although progress is being made in reporting experimental designs, much work is needed in the region to bring greater transparency to scholarship. We conclude by encouraging scholars to more robustly implement and report experimental research and by outlining future directions.","PeriodicalId":43945,"journal":{"name":"Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration","volume":"44 5 1","pages":"4 - 25"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2021-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90425070","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-06DOI: 10.1080/23276665.2021.1945469
Y. Kinoshita, B. Dollery
ABSTRACT Across the developed world food insecurity has become a growing problem, including in contemporary Japan. A common response to food insecurity has been the development of food banks typically run by voluntary associations often in partnership with public agencies and private firms. Considerable ingenuity exists in the Japanese food bank sector that can inform public policymaking in addressing the problem of food insecurity. Adopting the conceptual prism offered by the co-production literature, we study three food banks: Second Harvest Nagoya, Food Bank Iwate and Food Bank Kanagawa. While the modus operandi employed by the three food banks differs considerably, a common thread underpinning their success resides in the fact that they all combine the comparative institutional advantages of their collaborating partner organisations in the local public and the private sectors.
{"title":"Local co-production and food insecurity: leveraging institutional advantages of partner organisations","authors":"Y. Kinoshita, B. Dollery","doi":"10.1080/23276665.2021.1945469","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23276665.2021.1945469","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Across the developed world food insecurity has become a growing problem, including in contemporary Japan. A common response to food insecurity has been the development of food banks typically run by voluntary associations often in partnership with public agencies and private firms. Considerable ingenuity exists in the Japanese food bank sector that can inform public policymaking in addressing the problem of food insecurity. Adopting the conceptual prism offered by the co-production literature, we study three food banks: Second Harvest Nagoya, Food Bank Iwate and Food Bank Kanagawa. While the modus operandi employed by the three food banks differs considerably, a common thread underpinning their success resides in the fact that they all combine the comparative institutional advantages of their collaborating partner organisations in the local public and the private sectors.","PeriodicalId":43945,"journal":{"name":"Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration","volume":"31 1","pages":"258 - 275"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2021-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77966822","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-06DOI: 10.1080/23276665.2021.1939744
G. Hodge, C. Greve
ABSTRACT Public-Private Partnership (PPP) is the label often applied to long-term contractual arrangements when the private sector provides management and operating services for public infrastructure and puts private finance at risk. Political and economic logics have long been applied when analysing the success of such infrastructure delivery mechanisms. Mixed empirical performance results has been a recurring theme. Decades of PPP implementation experience has improved our knowledge of the political and policy “logic” of PPP success, but public administration scholars know less about the logic of the economist, about how economic thinking has evolved and its effects on PPP evaluation. This article explores discussions and debates analysing the economics of PPPs. It challenges the PPP economic efficiency argument, not from the perspective of public administration or public policy (which now repeat well-rehearsed arguments) but from the perspective of economics itself. The article argues overall that there are strongly competing economics logics relevant to PPPs, and that public administration scholars need to be more aware of these internal economics controversies and debates rather than assuming that economics is a settled homogenous discipline. Furthermore, it argues that this heterogeneity of economic logics is a central reason why PPP performance debates continue to be unresolved.
{"title":"What can public administration scholars learn from the economics controversies in public-private partnerships?","authors":"G. Hodge, C. Greve","doi":"10.1080/23276665.2021.1939744","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23276665.2021.1939744","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Public-Private Partnership (PPP) is the label often applied to long-term contractual arrangements when the private sector provides management and operating services for public infrastructure and puts private finance at risk. Political and economic logics have long been applied when analysing the success of such infrastructure delivery mechanisms. Mixed empirical performance results has been a recurring theme. Decades of PPP implementation experience has improved our knowledge of the political and policy “logic” of PPP success, but public administration scholars know less about the logic of the economist, about how economic thinking has evolved and its effects on PPP evaluation. This article explores discussions and debates analysing the economics of PPPs. It challenges the PPP economic efficiency argument, not from the perspective of public administration or public policy (which now repeat well-rehearsed arguments) but from the perspective of economics itself. The article argues overall that there are strongly competing economics logics relevant to PPPs, and that public administration scholars need to be more aware of these internal economics controversies and debates rather than assuming that economics is a settled homogenous discipline. Furthermore, it argues that this heterogeneity of economic logics is a central reason why PPP performance debates continue to be unresolved.","PeriodicalId":43945,"journal":{"name":"Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration","volume":"1 1","pages":"219 - 235"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2021-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83355952","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/23276665.2021.1957957
J. Perry, W. Lam
The year 2020 will be remembered for the first global pandemic in more than a century. Although it is far too early to assess the lasting consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic, the disruptions it t...
{"title":"Symposium: COVID-19 and Big Questions of Public Administration","authors":"J. Perry, W. Lam","doi":"10.1080/23276665.2021.1957957","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23276665.2021.1957957","url":null,"abstract":"The year 2020 will be remembered for the first global pandemic in more than a century. Although it is far too early to assess the lasting consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic, the disruptions it t...","PeriodicalId":43945,"journal":{"name":"Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration","volume":"22 1","pages":"130 - 130"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88915900","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/23276665.2021.1947862
Ting-An-Xu Liu, G. Wightman, E. Lee, J. Hunter
ABSTRACT The COVID-19 pandemic has imposed changes on governments across the world. Scholars responded to this crisis with a wide range of comparative studies and theoretical alternatives that addressed “big questions” of public administration. To summarise what we now know about governments, citizens, and civil society as a result of this pandemic, we conduct a systematic review of 188 articles using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. While the range of topics addressed was broad, we began our review by narrowing our focus ex-ante to studies that addressed three “big questions” of public administration: (1) What are the instruments of collective action?; (2) How shall tensions between national and subnational governments be resolved?; and (3) How can processes of societal learning be improved? Two additional “big questions” later emerged from the review process itself: (4) How can public trust in governments be fostered? and (5) Do public services enhance social equity? Answers to each of these questions are reviewed in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.
{"title":"Revisiting “big questions” of public administration after COVID-19: a systematic review","authors":"Ting-An-Xu Liu, G. Wightman, E. Lee, J. Hunter","doi":"10.1080/23276665.2021.1947862","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23276665.2021.1947862","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The COVID-19 pandemic has imposed changes on governments across the world. Scholars responded to this crisis with a wide range of comparative studies and theoretical alternatives that addressed “big questions” of public administration. To summarise what we now know about governments, citizens, and civil society as a result of this pandemic, we conduct a systematic review of 188 articles using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. While the range of topics addressed was broad, we began our review by narrowing our focus ex-ante to studies that addressed three “big questions” of public administration: (1) What are the instruments of collective action?; (2) How shall tensions between national and subnational governments be resolved?; and (3) How can processes of societal learning be improved? Two additional “big questions” later emerged from the review process itself: (4) How can public trust in governments be fostered? and (5) Do public services enhance social equity? Answers to each of these questions are reviewed in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.","PeriodicalId":43945,"journal":{"name":"Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration","volume":"125 1 1","pages":"131 - 168"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89333390","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/23276665.2021.1941155
Taki Sarantakis
ABSTRACT What happens when the qualities that have served the administrative state - thoughtful, careful, deliberative actions - meet the demands of a world that is connected and increasingly operating in real time? Public administration systems must increasingly consider pace as a factor of success going forward.
{"title":"Guardians in a connected world: pace matters","authors":"Taki Sarantakis","doi":"10.1080/23276665.2021.1941155","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23276665.2021.1941155","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT What happens when the qualities that have served the administrative state - thoughtful, careful, deliberative actions - meet the demands of a world that is connected and increasingly operating in real time? Public administration systems must increasingly consider pace as a factor of success going forward.","PeriodicalId":43945,"journal":{"name":"Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration","volume":"26 1","pages":"125 - 129"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85075372","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：