Advertisement

Explaining Civil Service Reform in Asia

  • John P. Burns
Chapter

Abstract

Scholarly accounts of civil service (or public sector) reform in Asia generally emphasize the limited scope of the reforms (Cheung and Scott, 2003). Indeed, Asia, of all continents, has seen the lowest levels of downsizing (Cheung and Scott, 2003: 11). Efforts to privatize, they argue, have also been stalled. Studies of specific Asian countries, such as Japan, conclude that the reform process has been hesitant and slow and that little of substance has actually changed (Beeson, 2003: 26). Real reform of the civil service in Vietnam, to take another example, has been ‘very slow’ (Painter, 2003: 225). In general, scholarly accounts conclude that in spite of ambitious public sector and/or civil service reform programs not much has happened.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barnett, A. Doak (1967) Cadres, Bureaucracy, and Political Power in Communist China (New York: Columbia University Press).Google Scholar
  2. Beeson, Mark (2003) ‘Japan’s Reluctant Reformers and the Legacy of the Developmental State,’ in Anthony B.L. Cheung and Ian Scott (eds) Governance and Public Sector Reform in Asia: Paradigm Shifts or Business as Usual? (London: Routledge Curzon), pp. 25–43.Google Scholar
  3. Berman, Evan M., M. Jae Moon and Heungsuk Choi (eds) (2010) Public Administration in East Asia: Mainland China, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press).Google Scholar
  4. Burns, John P. (2005) ‘Civil Service Reform,’ in OECD (ed.) Governance in China (Paris: OECD), pp. 49–75.Google Scholar
  5. Cheung, Anthony B.L. (2003a) ‘Government Reinvention in Taiwan: Administrative Modernization and Regime Transition,’ in Anthony B.L. Cheung and Ian Scott (eds) Governance and Public Sector Reform in Asia: Paradigm Shifts or Business as Usual? (London: Routledge Curzon), pp. 90–116.Google Scholar
  6. Cheung, Anthony B.L. (2003b) ‘Public Service Reform in Singapore: Reinventing Government in a Global Age,’ in Anthony B.L. Cheung and Ian Scott (eds) Governance and Public Sector Reform in Asia: Paradigm Shifts or Business as Usual? (London: Routledge Curzon), pp. 138–162.Google Scholar
  7. Cheung, Anthony B.L. and Ian Scott (2003) ‘Governance and Public Sector Reforms in Asia: Paradigms, Paradoxes and Dilemmas,’ in Anthony B.L. Cheung and Ian Scott (eds) Governance and Public Sector Reform in Asia: Paradigm Shifts or Business as Usual? (London: Routledge Curzon), pp. 1–24.Google Scholar
  8. Council for Economic Planning and Development (2002) ‘Methods for Managing Privatization’ (December 12).Google Scholar
  9. Evans, Peter (1995) Embedded Autonomy: States and Industrial Transformation (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
  10. Harding, H. (1981) Organizing China: The Problem of Bureaucracy1949–1976 (Stanford: Stanford University Press).Google Scholar
  11. He, Baogang (2003) ‘The Making of a Nascent Civil Society in China,’ in David C. Schak and Wayne Hudson (eds) Civil Society in Asia (Burlington, VT: Ashgate), pp. 114–139.Google Scholar
  12. Hsiao, Hsin-hyang Michael (2003) ‘NGOs and Democratization in Taiwan: Their Interactive Roles in Building a Viable Civil Society,’ in David C. Schak and Wayne Hudson (eds) Civil Society in Asia (Burlington, VT: Ashgate), pp. 180–191.Google Scholar
  13. Johnson, Chalmers (1982) MITI and the Japanese Miracle: The Growth of Industrial Policy, 1925–1975 (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press).Google Scholar
  14. Johnson, Chalmers (1999) ‘The Developmental State: Odyssey of a Concept,’ in Meredith Woo-Cumings (ed.) The Developmental State (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press), pp. 32–60.Google Scholar
  15. Kim, Hyuk-Rae (2003) ‘Unraveling Civil Society in South Korea: Old Discourses and New Visions,’ in David C. Schak and Wayne Hudson (eds) Civil Society in Asia (Burlington, VT: Ashgate), pp. 192–208.Google Scholar
  16. Knill, Christoph (1999) ‘Explaining Cross-National Variance in Administrative Reform: Autonomous versus Instrumental Bureaucracies,’ Journal of Public Policy, 19, 113–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lampton, David (1992) ‘Water: Challenge to a Fragmented Political System,’ in Kenneth Lieberthal and David Lampton (eds) Bureaucracy, Politics, and Decision making in Post-Mao China (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press).Google Scholar
  18. Li, Eliza (2005) ‘The New Public Management Reform and Governance: Hong Kong and Singapore Compared.’ Presentation, Hong Kong University, July.Google Scholar
  19. Lieberthal, Kenneth (2004) Governing China: From Revolution through Reform, 2nd edn (New York: Norton).Google Scholar
  20. Moon, Myung-Jae and Patricia Ingraham (1998) ‘Shaping Administrative Reform and Governance: An Examination of the Political Nexus Triads in Three Asian Countries,’ Governance, 11, 77–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mouer, Ross E. and Yoshio Sugimoto (2003) ‘Civil Society in Japan,’ in David C. Schak and Wayne Hudson (eds) Civil Society in Asia (Burlington, VT: Ashgate), pp. 209–224.Google Scholar
  22. Nakamura, Akira (2003) ‘The Debilitating Power of Japan’s Central Government Bureaucrats in Civil Service Reform: Reality or Fallacy?’ in Anthony B.L. Cheung (ed.) Public Sector Reform in East Asia: Reform Issues and Challenges in Japan, Korea, Singapore and Hong Kong (Hong Kong: Chinese University Press), pp. 19–38.Google Scholar
  23. National Bureau of Statistics (2005) China Statistical Yearbook2004 (Beijing: China Statistics Press).Google Scholar
  24. Painter, Martin (2003) ‘Public Administration Reform in Vietnam,’ in Anthony B.L. Cheung and Ian Scott (eds) Governance and Public Sector Reform in Asia: Paradigm Shifts or Business as Usual? (London: Routledge Curzon), pp. 208–226.Google Scholar
  25. Painter, Martin (2005) ‘Bureaucratic Autonomy and Administrative Reform Capacity in East and Southeast Asia,’ in Anthony B.L. Cheung (ed.) Public Sector Reform in East Asia: Reform Issues and Challenges in Japan, Korea, Singapore and Hong Kong (Hong Kong: Chinese University Press), pp. 231–256.Google Scholar
  26. Quah, Jon S.T. (2010) Public Administration Singapore Style (Singapore: Talisman).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Reporters Without Borders (2004) ‘Index of Press Freedom.’ http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=11715 (accessed May 4, 2007).Google Scholar
  28. Reporters Without Borders (2013) ‘Index of Press Freedom.’ http://en.rsf.org/press-freedom-index-2013,1054.html.Google Scholar
  29. Schurmann, Franz (1971) Ideology and Organization in Communist China, 2nd edn (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press).Google Scholar
  30. Taiwan Confederation of Trade Unions (2005) ‘Taiwan Workers and Privatization’.Google Scholar
  31. Transparency International (2014a) Corruption Perception Index 2004. http://www.transparency.org/research/cpi/cpI_2004 (accessed October 1, 2014).Google Scholar
  32. Transparency International (2014b) Corruption Perception Index 2013. http://cpi.transparency.org/cpi2013/ (accessed October 1, 2014).Google Scholar
  33. UNDP (2005) Human Development Report (New York: United Nations).Google Scholar
  34. Vogel, Ezra (1969) Canton Under Communism: Programs and Politics in a Provincial Capital (New York: Harper and Row).Google Scholar
  35. Wade, Robert (1990) Governing the Market: Economic Theory and the Role of Government in East Asian Industrialization (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1990).Google Scholar
  36. World Bank (2002) World Development Indicators2002 (Washington, DC: World Bank).Google Scholar
  37. World Bank (2013) World Development Indicators2012 (Washington, DC: World Bank).Google Scholar
  38. World Economic Forum, Global Competitiveness Report, 2004–05, http://www.ieseinsight.com/casos/study_0035.pdf.
  39. Worthington, Ross (2003) Governance in Singapore (London: Routledge Curzon).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© John P. Burns 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • John P. Burns

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations