This article summarises the results of a ‘broad brush’ global survey of ‘new forms’ of public management. The survey supports the view that the spread of the new forms cannot be seen as a global ‘paradigm shift’ in public management. However the new forms are increasingly found beyond the core set of OECD countries usually given as examples of reforming countries. The survey suggests that globalisation processes are increasing the amount of ‘lesson drawing’ between countries and contributing to the spread of new forms.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AucoinP. (1990), ‘Administrative Reform in Public Management: Paradigms, Principles, Paradoxes and Pendulums’Governance3(2).
2.
BarzelayM.ArmajaniB.J. (1992), Breaking Through Bureaucracy: A New Vision for Managing in GovernmentOxford: University of California Press.
3.
BennettC.J. (1991), ‘Review Article: What is Policy Convergence and What Causes it?’British Journal of Political Science21(2).
4.
Commonwealth Association for Public Administration and Management (1994), Government in Transition: Proceedings of the Commonwealth Association for Public Administration and Management Conference, August 1994, Charlottetown, Canada.
5.
Commonwealth Secretariat (1995), ‘Current Good Practices and New Developments in Public Service Management: Malaysia’The Public Service Country Profile Series No. 3London: Commonwealth Secretariat.
6.
DerlienH-USzablowskiG. (1993), ‘Special Issue: Regime Transitions, Elites and Bureaucracies in Eastern Europe’Governance6(1).
7.
DunleavyP.J. (1994), ‘The Globalization of Public Service Production: Can Government be “Best in World”?’Public Policy and Administration9 (2).
8.
HedeA, (1991), ‘Trends in the Higher Civil Services of Anglo-American Systems’, Governance4(4).
9.
HoodC.C. (1995), ‘The “New Public Management” in the 1980s: Variations on a Theme’, Accounting, Organisations and Society20 (2/3).
10.
HoodC.C. (1991), ‘A Public Management for All Seasons?’Public Administration69(1).
11.
IkenberryG. (1990), ‘The International Spread of Privatisation Policies: Inducements, Learning and “Policy Bandwagoning”’ in SuliemanE.N.WaterburyJ. (eds.) The Political Economy of Public Sector Reform and Privatization. Oxford: Westview Press.
12.
IslamN. (1991), ‘Managing the Public Service under Structural Adjustment’The Changing Role of Government: Proceedings of Commonwealth Roundtable. London: Commonwealth Secretariat.
13.
KitchenR. (1989), ‘Administrative Reform in Jamaica: A Component of Structural Adjustment’Public Administration and Development9.
14.
KonigK, (1992), ‘The Transformation of a “Real Socialist” Administrative System into a Conventional Western European System’International Review of Administrative Sciences58.
15.
NunbergB, (1992), Managing the Civil Service: What LDCs Can Learn from Developed Country Reforms. Washington: Country Economics Department, The World Bank.
16.
MartinB, (1993), In the Public Interest? Privatization and Public Sector ReformLondon: Zed Books.
17.
MohideenJ, (1994), ‘Challenges and Opportunities for Small States’Government in Transition: Proceedings of the Commonwealth Association for Public Administration and Management Conference, August 1994, Charlottetown, Canada.
Quah (1994), ‘Sustaining Quality in the Singapore Civil Service’Government in Transition: Proceedings of the Commonwealth Association for Public Administration and Management Conference, August 1994, Charlottetown, Canada.
23.
RoseR. (1993), Lesson-drawing in Public Policy: A Guide to Learning Across Time and Space. Chatham, New Jersey: Chatham House Publishers Inc.
24.
SankeyS, (1993), ‘Public Service Reform in Hong Kong’Hong Kong Public Administration2(1).
25.
SavoieD, (1994), Thatcher, Reagan, Mulroney: In Search of a New Bureaucracy.
26.
Yi-ChangL, (1992), ‘Reform: The Theme of the Development of Chinese Administrative Science’Governance5(4).
27.
ZifcakS, (1994), New Managerialism: Administrative Reform in Whitehall and CanberraBuckingham: Open University Press.
