Combining Centralization and Decentralization in Danish Public Administration

2016 ◽  
pp. 273-296 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sevasti Chatzopoulou ◽  
Birgitte Poulsen
Keyword(s):  
Public Administration ◽  
Centralization And Decentralization

scholarly journals Trailing back from quasi decentralisation to centralisation. Municipal reform in Hungary

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 117-137
Author(s):  
László Kákai
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Distribution ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Service Provision ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Direct Impact ◽  
Municipal Reform ◽  
Distribution Of Power ◽  
State Organization ◽  
Centralization And Decentralization

Trailing back from quasi decentralisation to centralisation. Municipal reform in Hungary It is very difficult to group countries and state structures according to the extent of their decentralization or the model they follow in the spatial distribution of power. The bounds of responsibility of local government and the state, the distribution of the roles and tasks between the two stakeholders and the question of centralization and decentralization are issues regularly debated in recent years and today. This topic is not merely a public administration, financial or state organization issue since these decisions have a direct impact on citizens’ lives through public services. In my study I wish to introduce this process via Hungary’s example. I also examine how and what those concerned by the financial and political changes, i.e. the population perceived of this most important structural transformation of the period since the transition in 1989. Can it be verified from the consumers’ point of view that the transformation of the local municipal system improves the quality of service provision?

An Information Technology Research Agenda for Public Administration

2011 ◽  
pp. 365-392 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. David Garson
Keyword(s):  
Information Technology ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
Success Factors ◽  
Remote Work ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Distribution Of Power ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Centralization And Decentralization

Research questions are outlined, forming the dimensions of a research agenda for the study of information technology in public administration. The dimensions selected as being the most theoretically important include the issues of the impact of information technology on governmental accountability, the impact of information technology on the distribution of power, the global governance of information technology, the issue of information resource equity and the “digital divide,” the implications of privatization as an IT business model, the issue of the impact of IT on organizational culture, the issue of the impact of IT on discretion, the issue of centralization and decentralization, the issue of restructuring the role of remote work, the issue of implementation success factors, the issue of the regulation of social vices mediated by IT and other regulatory issues.

scholarly journals EUROPEAN UNION BETWEEN THE CENTRALIZATION AND DECENTRALIZATION RHETORIC. BRIEF CONSIDERATION UPON THE EVOLUTION AND PERSPECTIVE OF THE “GOVERNANCE” EUROPEAN MODEL

2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Constanţa Mătuşescu
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
European Model ◽  
Centralization And Decentralization

The paper intend to achieve s brief incursion in the European model of the governanceon several levels, seen as an instrument of national public administration Europeanization.

Centralization and Decentralization: Compatible Governance Concepts and Practices

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eva M. Witesman
Keyword(s):  
Public Administration ◽  
Structural Reform ◽  
Public Institution ◽  
Governance Structures ◽  
Public Administrators ◽  
Public Values ◽  
Public Value ◽  
Dynamic Tension ◽  
Complex Structural ◽  
Centralization And Decentralization

The extent to which governance structures are centralized or decentralized is a key consideration for public administrators. While centralization and decentralization seem to represent opposite approaches to the structure of public organizations, the two frequently co-exist simultaneously in what is alternately deemed a comfortable coexistence or a paradoxical tension. Public institution reform efforts may call for increased centralizing forces (such as hierarchy, unification, and governance) or decentralizing ones (such as marketization, devolution of power, deconcentration, and diversification). Public administrators calling for structural reform are often driven toward either centralization or decentralization by particular sets of public values. Values such as accountability, power, and efficiency favor centralized governance, while values such as responsiveness, engagement, and innovation favor decentralization. Thus, the design of public administration structures and processes frequently exist as an expression of value-based norms. Both centralization and decentralization are associated with distinct advantages for achieving specific public value goals. Conversely, each approach has unique weaknesses that create opportunities for corruption. The pursuit of public value goals and the avoidance of corruption are two primary drivers that motivate structural reform. While structural reforms may be viewed as swings of a pendulum between two extreme ideal states (fully centralized or fully decentralized), a growing consensus in the scholarship suggests that centralized and decentralized structures are internally compatible and complementary. In other words, both centralized and decentralized structures frequently co-exist within the same institutions, often creating a dynamic tension between values. This creates an increasingly complex structural paradigm for the expression of public values. The result is that many governance structures appear to be evolving toward new models in which elements of both centralized and decentralized control are observed simultaneously.

scholarly journals Subsidiarity Principle: In Search of a Balance between Centralization and Decentralization (State Legal Aspect)

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (11) ◽  
pp. 160-171
Author(s):  
I. V. Irkhin
Keyword(s):  
Public Administration ◽  
Participatory Democracy ◽  
Legal Aspect ◽  
Correlation Relationship ◽  
Administration System ◽  
Domestic Relations ◽  
Territorial Structure ◽  
Subsidiarity Principle ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Centralization And Decentralization

The paper formulates the definition of the principle of subsidiarity, and indicates that this principle can be used as a tool to find and maintain an optimal balanced ratio between the volumes of centralization and decentralization in the regulation and implementation of domestic relations, as well as relations between supranational associations and their member-states. At the same time, it is emphasized that the organizational and functional-target variables of the principle of subsidiarity are oriented towards strengthening the decentralization of the public administration system (public authority) by fixing the presumption of priority right (along with guarantees) of lower units to exercise powers in specific subjects of competence. In addition, when applying the principle of subsidiarity, the strengthening of decentralization is due to the need to ensure the implementation of the resources of participatory democracy, as well as the focus on pluralization of the entire public administration system. The distinction between territorial and extraterritorial forms of decentralization is substantiated, the similarities and differences between the principle of subsidiarity and devolution, deconcentration and delegation of powers are revealed. The correlation relationship between the principle of subsidiarity and the characteristics of the state-territorial structure is analyzed. The author formulates the thesis that the subsidiarity principle can be implemented in any multi-level system of organization of public power, functioning on the basis of a synthesis of the principles of solidarity, adaptability, pluralism, autonomy, democracy. It is concluded that in its synthetic unity the achievement of efficiency, the establishment of pluralism and participatory democracy acts as a paradigm of the principle of subsidiarity.

Engineers or Lawyers? Institutions and Demand for Higher Education

2012 ◽  
pp. 30-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Natkhov ◽  
L. Polishchuk
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Transmission Channel ◽  
Demand For Education ◽  
Fields Of Study ◽  
Quality Of Institutions ◽  
Cross Country ◽  
Rules Of The Game

Law and public administration schools in Russia vastly exceed in their popularity sciences and engineering. We relate such lopsided demand for higher education to the quality of institutions setting “rules of the game” in economy and society. Cross-country and Russian interregional data indicate the quality of institutions (rule of law, protection of property rights etc.) is negatively associated with the demand for education in law, and positively — in sciences and engineering. More gifted younger people are particularly sensitive to the quality of institutions in choosing their fields of study, and such selection is an important transmission channel between institutions and economic growth.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document