Abstract The value of auditing as an instrument of accountability depends upon the independence of auditors. However, the extent to which auditors feel free to review the operation, compliance, and performance of public programs and objectively communicate findings to stakeholders has rarely been assessed. A Canadian public service reform in 2006 introduced institutional safeguards to bolster the independence of departmental internal auditors, but left legislative auditors working for the Auditor General's Office (i.e., Canada's Supreme Audit Institution) unaffected. We analyze and compare 2677 audit reports written by internal and legislative auditors before and after the reform. After the reform, the language used by internal auditors became more assertive and evaluative, but not more critical. This suggests that the safeguards had a meaningful impact on how auditors perform their accountability function but that factors other than independence may be driving their willingness to be more adversarial and critical when communicating audit findings.
{"title":"Does increasing auditors' independence lead to more forceful public auditing? A study of a Canadian internal audit reform","authors":"Catherine Liston‐Heyes, Luc Juillet","doi":"10.1111/padm.12964","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12964","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The value of auditing as an instrument of accountability depends upon the independence of auditors. However, the extent to which auditors feel free to review the operation, compliance, and performance of public programs and objectively communicate findings to stakeholders has rarely been assessed. A Canadian public service reform in 2006 introduced institutional safeguards to bolster the independence of departmental internal auditors, but left legislative auditors working for the Auditor General's Office (i.e., Canada's Supreme Audit Institution) unaffected. We analyze and compare 2677 audit reports written by internal and legislative auditors before and after the reform. After the reform, the language used by internal auditors became more assertive and evaluative, but not more critical. This suggests that the safeguards had a meaningful impact on how auditors perform their accountability function but that factors other than independence may be driving their willingness to be more adversarial and critical when communicating audit findings.","PeriodicalId":48284,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135482198","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Public service ecosystems are used to understand how multiple actors co‐produce public services and create public value. Especially interactions between public service providers and service users are essential. However, systematic examinations of these interactions and what roles the different actors play are rare. This study closes this gap by conducting a systematic literature review with three main findings. First, public service providers play an important role: they facilitate co‐production by micromanaging or facilitating collaboration, empowering service users, and translating the results of the process back into the organization. Second, service users contribute to co‐production by providing resources. Third, a new category of actors is proposed: the co‐production intermediary. Intermediaries are formal organizations whose primary role is to support service providers in service delivery. This study comprehensively analyzes the different actors and power constellations between them.
{"title":"Actor roles in co‐production—Introducing intermediaries: Findings from a systematic literature review","authors":"Nathalie Haug","doi":"10.1111/padm.12965","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12965","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Public service ecosystems are used to understand how multiple actors co‐produce public services and create public value. Especially interactions between public service providers and service users are essential. However, systematic examinations of these interactions and what roles the different actors play are rare. This study closes this gap by conducting a systematic literature review with three main findings. First, public service providers play an important role: they facilitate co‐production by micromanaging or facilitating collaboration, empowering service users, and translating the results of the process back into the organization. Second, service users contribute to co‐production by providing resources. Third, a new category of actors is proposed: the co‐production intermediary. Intermediaries are formal organizations whose primary role is to support service providers in service delivery. This study comprehensively analyzes the different actors and power constellations between them.","PeriodicalId":48284,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135482188","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The economic costs of environmental regulations are well documented, but their political cost is still unclear, especially in cases of substantial pollution reduction. This study presents empirical evidence for the unexpected political costs of China's war on air pollution. Using a clean energy regulation as a case, we demonstrate that it significantly reduces air pollutants over a short period; however, exposure to the regulation erodes local political support and trust in government officials. In addition, we show that stringent environmental regulations significantly reduce local political trust when it entails high policy costs for local residents and had weak policy participation. Our results indicate that stringent regulations may improve environmental quality at the cost of local political legitimacy.
{"title":"Blue sky, cold heart: The political cost of environmental regulations","authors":"Wenhui Yang, Jing Zhao","doi":"10.1111/padm.12961","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12961","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The economic costs of environmental regulations are well documented, but their political cost is still unclear, especially in cases of substantial pollution reduction. This study presents empirical evidence for the unexpected political costs of China's war on air pollution. Using a clean energy regulation as a case, we demonstrate that it significantly reduces air pollutants over a short period; however, exposure to the regulation erodes local political support and trust in government officials. In addition, we show that stringent environmental regulations significantly reduce local political trust when it entails high policy costs for local residents and had weak policy participation. Our results indicate that stringent regulations may improve environmental quality at the cost of local political legitimacy.","PeriodicalId":48284,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration","volume":"26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135926494","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Important research questions in public administration and management cannot be studied through the scientific method. A fundamental example is how public administrators utilize their discretion and judgment in their everyday work. Inquiring into the process of administrative practice has been characterized as “opening the black box” of public administration and policy implementation—that is, how people in public administration and management situations do what they do. This paper argues that expanding the menu of worthwhile research approaches from quantitative empiricism, the current “gold standard” in public administration, to include interpretivism makes it possible to view inside the black box of administrative process. After a brief narrative describing how the field lost the balance between quantitative and interpretive approaches it once had, the discussion lays out the philosophical grounding and methodology of interpretive research and offers phenomenology as illustration of how such an expansion will benefit both administrative theory and practice.
{"title":"Opening the “black box” of public administration: The need for interpretive research","authors":"María Verónica Elías","doi":"10.1111/padm.12959","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12959","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Important research questions in public administration and management cannot be studied through the scientific method. A fundamental example is how public administrators utilize their discretion and judgment in their everyday work. Inquiring into the process of administrative practice has been characterized as “opening the black box” of public administration and policy implementation—that is, how people in public administration and management situations do what they do. This paper argues that expanding the menu of worthwhile research approaches from quantitative empiricism, the current “gold standard” in public administration, to include interpretivism makes it possible to view inside the black box of administrative process. After a brief narrative describing how the field lost the balance between quantitative and interpretive approaches it once had, the discussion lays out the philosophical grounding and methodology of interpretive research and offers phenomenology as illustration of how such an expansion will benefit both administrative theory and practice.","PeriodicalId":48284,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136154364","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract In Hood's (1983) classic “NATO” scheme, nodality—centrality and visibility in information networks—is one of the four tools of government. Despite its potential as a resource to effect policy change, contemporary scholars have largely neglected this unique policy tool. However, the growing prominence of digital platforms in public life prompts a rediscovery of this concept. The decisive shift is the parallel growth of citizen nodality, which can increase societal capacity and enhance government nodality, partly by allowing citizens to challenge government nodality. Moreover, citizen nodality and government nodality can interact to promote more democratic government. With the aim of rediscovering and updating nodality, this article defines the concept, reviews how the modern digital landscape has transformed the practice of nodality, and proposes a conceptual and methodological toolkit. The goal is to understand how nodality may be more effectively used by policy‐makers while at the same time fostering democratic governance.
{"title":"How rediscovering nodality can improve democratic governance in a digital world","authors":"Helen Margetts, Peter John","doi":"10.1111/padm.12960","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12960","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In Hood's (1983) classic “NATO” scheme, nodality—centrality and visibility in information networks—is one of the four tools of government. Despite its potential as a resource to effect policy change, contemporary scholars have largely neglected this unique policy tool. However, the growing prominence of digital platforms in public life prompts a rediscovery of this concept. The decisive shift is the parallel growth of citizen nodality, which can increase societal capacity and enhance government nodality, partly by allowing citizens to challenge government nodality. Moreover, citizen nodality and government nodality can interact to promote more democratic government. With the aim of rediscovering and updating nodality, this article defines the concept, reviews how the modern digital landscape has transformed the practice of nodality, and proposes a conceptual and methodological toolkit. The goal is to understand how nodality may be more effectively used by policy‐makers while at the same time fostering democratic governance.","PeriodicalId":48284,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135308329","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Jan Boon, Jan Wynen, Walter Daelemans, Jens Lemmens, Koen Verhoest
Abstract The news media frame political debate about public agencies, and enable legislators with incomplete information to monitor and act upon agency (mal)performance. While studies show that the news media matters for parliamentary attention, the contingent nature of this relation has been understudied. Building on agenda‐setting theory, this study theorizes that the effect of newspaper coverage is contingent on the sentiment of coverage, the majority vs. opposition role of legislators, and the locus (committee vs. plenaries) of parliamentary questions. Supervised machine learning methods allow to code sentiment towards agencies in newspapers and parliament, after which a balanced panel relates these data to the questioning behavior of legislators in parliament over time. Results show that media attention for public agencies precedes parliamentary attention. Sentiment matters, as positive media attention, was related to (positive) parliamentary attention in the same month. Negative media attention had broader and more enduring influences on parliamentary questioning behavior.
{"title":"Agencies on the parliamentary radar: Exploring the relations between media attention and parliamentary attention for public agencies using machine learning methods","authors":"Jan Boon, Jan Wynen, Walter Daelemans, Jens Lemmens, Koen Verhoest","doi":"10.1111/padm.12963","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12963","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The news media frame political debate about public agencies, and enable legislators with incomplete information to monitor and act upon agency (mal)performance. While studies show that the news media matters for parliamentary attention, the contingent nature of this relation has been understudied. Building on agenda‐setting theory, this study theorizes that the effect of newspaper coverage is contingent on the sentiment of coverage, the majority vs. opposition role of legislators, and the locus (committee vs. plenaries) of parliamentary questions. Supervised machine learning methods allow to code sentiment towards agencies in newspapers and parliament, after which a balanced panel relates these data to the questioning behavior of legislators in parliament over time. Results show that media attention for public agencies precedes parliamentary attention. Sentiment matters, as positive media attention, was related to (positive) parliamentary attention in the same month. Negative media attention had broader and more enduring influences on parliamentary questioning behavior.","PeriodicalId":48284,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration","volume":"40 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135437453","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The COVID‐19 pandemic brought forward new questions about the efficient implementation of arduous public policies. Drawing evidence from the pandemic, this article argues that, during crises, policymakers will often opt for evidence‐informed policymaking, hoping for better results. In line with previous studies, we show that citizens trust more policies coming from experts rather than policymakers and elected politicians. We also add nuance to these claims as we attribute this tendency to the technocratic legitimacy thesis, referring to the symbolic significance of expert authority. Employing a public opinion survey conducted across four European countries, Germany, Greece, Sweden, and the United Kingdom, we show that independently of prior levels of political trust and each country's mortality rate, citizens welcomed evidence‐informed policies during the pandemic's first wave. Politicians can leverage these insights to increase public compliance with crisis management policies.
{"title":"Paths to trust: Explaining citizens' trust to experts and evidence‐informed policymaking during the <scp>COVID</scp>‐19 pandemic","authors":"Angelos Angelou, Stella Ladi, Dimitra Panagiotatou, Vasiliki Tsagkroni","doi":"10.1111/padm.12962","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12962","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The COVID‐19 pandemic brought forward new questions about the efficient implementation of arduous public policies. Drawing evidence from the pandemic, this article argues that, during crises, policymakers will often opt for evidence‐informed policymaking, hoping for better results. In line with previous studies, we show that citizens trust more policies coming from experts rather than policymakers and elected politicians. We also add nuance to these claims as we attribute this tendency to the technocratic legitimacy thesis, referring to the symbolic significance of expert authority. Employing a public opinion survey conducted across four European countries, Germany, Greece, Sweden, and the United Kingdom, we show that independently of prior levels of political trust and each country's mortality rate, citizens welcomed evidence‐informed policies during the pandemic's first wave. Politicians can leverage these insights to increase public compliance with crisis management policies.","PeriodicalId":48284,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135689874","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Recent innovation research in the public sector demonstrates the advantages of collaborative innovation, but also recognizes the complex character of collaborative innovation processes. These complexities might both stimulate and hinder collaborative innovation. Through a qualitative comparative analysis of empirical data from 19 public–private innovation partnerships (PPIs) in five European Countries, we show how particular types of complexity leadership (i.e., generative leadership and administrative leadership) act on these complexities in PPIs to produce highly innovative services. The results show that small partnerships use generative leadership in the presence of network complexities, and administrative leadership in the absence of network complexities to produce highly innovative services. However, large partnerships only use generative leadership, while abandoning administrative leadership, to produce highly innovative services. These findings bring about theoretical and practical insights as to how various forms of complexity leadership might be employed in varying contexts of partnership complexity.
{"title":"Achieving collaborative innovation by controlling or leveraging network complexities through complexity leadership","authors":"Chesney Callens","doi":"10.1111/padm.12958","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12958","url":null,"abstract":"Recent innovation research in the public sector demonstrates the advantages of collaborative innovation, but also recognizes the complex character of collaborative innovation processes. These complexities might both stimulate and hinder collaborative innovation. Through a qualitative comparative analysis of empirical data from 19 public–private innovation partnerships (PPIs) in five European Countries, we show how particular types of complexity leadership (i.e., generative leadership and administrative leadership) act on these complexities in PPIs to produce highly innovative services. The results show that small partnerships use generative leadership in the presence of network complexities, and administrative leadership in the absence of network complexities to produce highly innovative services. However, large partnerships only use generative leadership, while abandoning administrative leadership, to produce highly innovative services. These findings bring about theoretical and practical insights as to how various forms of complexity leadership might be employed in varying contexts of partnership complexity.","PeriodicalId":48284,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2023-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47058192","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Administrative burdens appear to influence citizens' perceptions of welfare policies and attitudes toward beneficiaries. However, empirical evidence that has disentangled different state actions' effects on policy perceptions is scarce. We applied a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial survey experiment and manipulated the conceptually distinct state actions implemented in German unemployment benefits. We investigated whether and how exposure to learning demands, compliance demands, and sanctions affected citizens' prejudices against beneficiaries, policy support, and perceived legitimacy. The results from a sample of 1602 German citizens indicate that those confronted with program sanctions exhibit less policy support and expect higher policy spending. Similarly, sanctions decreased the Federal Employment Agency's perceived legitimacy. These results have implications for administrative burden and policy feedback research. Distinguishing different state actions provides nuances to assess policy feedback effects. Practitioners should consider whether program sanctions are necessary because they evoke unintended policy feedback effects.
{"title":"Unpacking the effects of burdensome state actions on citizens' policy perceptions","authors":"Martin Sievert, Jonas Bruder","doi":"10.1111/padm.12957","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12957","url":null,"abstract":"Administrative burdens appear to influence citizens' perceptions of welfare policies and attitudes toward beneficiaries. However, empirical evidence that has disentangled different state actions' effects on policy perceptions is scarce. We applied a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial survey experiment and manipulated the conceptually distinct state actions implemented in German unemployment benefits. We investigated whether and how exposure to learning demands, compliance demands, and sanctions affected citizens' prejudices against beneficiaries, policy support, and perceived legitimacy. The results from a sample of 1602 German citizens indicate that those confronted with program sanctions exhibit less policy support and expect higher policy spending. Similarly, sanctions decreased the Federal Employment Agency's perceived legitimacy. These results have implications for administrative burden and policy feedback research. Distinguishing different state actions provides nuances to assess policy feedback effects. Practitioners should consider whether program sanctions are necessary because they evoke unintended policy feedback effects.","PeriodicalId":48284,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5,"publicationDate":"2023-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46952263","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Many government agencies operate with fewer personnel than they need to perform effectively. Yet little research has explored how agencies might allocate their personnel so as to maximize performance with the personnel they have. I address this gap through a study of Brazil's federal protected areas agency, which manages the world's third largest system of conservation areas. Based on 66 interviews and econometric analyses covering 322 administrative units, I find that three moderators influence the relationship between sub‐unit size and performance: the size of a sub‐unit's jurisdiction, a sub‐unit's likelihood of near‐term failure, and the strength of a sub‐unit's ties with local stakeholders. Personnel re‐allocation strategies informed by these factors may have reduced deforestation on the order of 26% over the agency's first decade. This study contributes a framework for analyzing the efficacy of personnel allocation strategies, with implications for management of one of the world's greatest natural assets.
{"title":"How personnel allocation affects performance: Evidence from Brazil's federal protected areas agency","authors":"Gus Greenstein","doi":"10.1111/padm.12954","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12954","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Many government agencies operate with fewer personnel than they need to perform effectively. Yet little research has explored how agencies might allocate their personnel so as to maximize performance with the personnel they have. I address this gap through a study of Brazil's federal protected areas agency, which manages the world's third largest system of conservation areas. Based on 66 interviews and econometric analyses covering 322 administrative units, I find that three moderators influence the relationship between sub‐unit size and performance: the size of a sub‐unit's jurisdiction, a sub‐unit's likelihood of near‐term failure, and the strength of a sub‐unit's ties with local stakeholders. Personnel re‐allocation strategies informed by these factors may have reduced deforestation on the order of 26% over the agency's first decade. This study contributes a framework for analyzing the efficacy of personnel allocation strategies, with implications for management of one of the world's greatest natural assets.","PeriodicalId":48284,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration","volume":"139 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136143415","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","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：