Definition
Public management reform can be defined as deliberate changes to the structure and processes of public sector organizations with the objective of getting them (in some sense) to run better (Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2017). Public management reform became a prominent issue at the global level in the late 1970s and 1980s, an era marked by the spreading belief that governments had become overloaded and that Western welfare states had become unaffordable and overly constraining on employees and citizens alike. The drive for greater efficiency and improved service quality spread to more and more countries and lasted well into the 1990s. This global wave of reforms has stimulated a reflection concerning the validity of using in the field of public management the notion of paradigm in order to highlight the existence of coherent and comprehensive ideas about the appropriate ways of structuring and operating the public sector at a particular point in time. There is wide consensus that...
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Anzia, S. F., & Moe, T. M. (2015). Public sector unions and the costs of government. The Journal of Politics, 77(1), 114–127.
Aucoin, P. (1990). Administrative reforms in public management: Paradigms, principles, paradoxes and pendulums. Governance, 3(2), 115–137.
Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Bloomberg, L. (2014). Public value governance: Moving beyond traditional public administration and new public management. Public Administration Review, 74(4), 445–456.
Capano, G. (2003). Administrative tradition and policy change: When policy paradigms matter. The case of Italian administrative reform during the 1990s. Public Administration, 81(4), 781–801.
Di Mascio, F., Natalini, A., & Cacciatore, F. (2020). Public administration and creeping crises: Insights from COVID-19 pandemic in Italy. The American Review of Public Administration, 50(6–7), 621–627.
Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S., & Tinkler, J. (2006). New public management is dead – Long live digital-era governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16(3), 467–494.
Goldfinch, S., & Wallis, J. (2010). Two myths of convergence in public management reform. Public Administration, 88(4), 1099–1115.
Gow, J., & Dufour, C. (2000). Is the new public management a paradigm? Does it matter? International Review of Administrative Sciences, 66(4), 573–593.
Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons? Public Administration, 63(1), 3–19.
Ingrams, A., Piotrowski, S., & Berliner, D. (2020). Learning from our mistakes: Public management reform and the hope of open government. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 3(4), 257–272.
Kim, Y. (2020). Searching for newness in management paradigms: An analysis of intellectual history in U.S. public administration. The American Review of Public Administration, 51(2), 79–106.
Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lapuente, V., & Van de Walle, S. (2020). The effects of new public management on the quality of public services. Governance, 33(3), 461–475.
Mahoney, J., & Thelen, K. (Eds.). (2010). Explaining institutional change: Ambiguity, agency, and power. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Margetts, H., & Dunleavy, P. (2013). The second wave of digital-era governance: A quasi-paradigm for government on the web. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 371. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2012.0382.
Merton, R. K. (1968). Social theory and social structure (3rd ed.). New York: Free Press.
Osborne, S. P. (Ed.). (2010). The new public governance. London/New York: Routledge.
Osborne, S. P., Radnor, Z., & Nasi, G. (2013). A new theory of public service management? Toward a (public) service-dominant approach. The American Review of Public Administration, 43(2), 135–158.
Peters, B. G. (2021). Administrative traditions: Understanding the roots of contemporary administrative behavior. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Peters, B. G., & Pierre, J. (2019). Populism and public administration: Confronting the administrative state. Administration and Society, 55(10), 1521–1545.
Pollitt, C. (2008). Time, policy, management: Governing with the past. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Pollitt, C. (2016). Managerialism redux? Financial Accountability and Management, 32(4), 429–447.
Pollitt, C. (Ed.). (2013). Context in public policy and management: The missing link? Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2017). Public management reform: A comparative analysis – Into the age of austerity. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Reiter, R., & Klenkl, T. (2019). The manifold meanings of “post-New Public Management” – A systematic literature review. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 85(1), 11–27.
Roberts, A. (2020). The third and fatal shock: How pandemic killed the millenial paradigm. Public Administration Review, 80(4), 603–609.
Torfing, J., Andersen, L. B., Greve, C., & Klausen, K. K. (2020). Public governance paradigms: Competing and co-existing. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Section Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this entry
Cite this entry
Natalini, A., Di Mascio, F. (2021). Public Management (Paradigms). In: Harris, P., Bitonti, A., Fleisher, C.S., Skorkjær Binderkrantz, A. (eds) The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Interest Groups, Lobbying and Public Affairs . Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13895-0_132-1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13895-0_132-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-13895-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-13895-0
eBook Packages: Springer Reference Political Science and International StudiesReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences