PL EN


2011 | 1(15) | 110-122
Article title

Dwie wizje rządzenia decentracją i recentracja procesów rządzenia

Authors
Content
Title variants
EN
he Two Futures of Governing : Decentering and recentering Processes in Governing
Languages of publication
PL
Abstracts
PL
Reformy sektora publicznego, prowadząc do wzrostu jego efektywności i skuteczności, wywołują zarazem wiele problemów. Zarówno Nowe Zarządzanie Publiczne (New Public Management), jak i reformy współzarządzania (Governance) przyczyniły się do ich zaistnienia. W znaczącej mierze mają one charakter polityczny. Odzwierciedlają skłonność do nadmiernego eksponowania administracyjnych aspektów tych reform kosztem wartości demokratycznych. Dostrzegając te problemy, rządy wielu krajów reagują na nie poprzez tworzenie instrumentów metawspółzarządzania, które mogą okazać się pomocne w sterowaniu organizacjami publicznymi. Zastosowanie tych instrumentów wiąże się z wykonywaniem mniej bezpośredniego nadzoru i kontroli. W tekście tym poruszono zagadnienie przywracania kontroli politycznej nad politykami publicznymi w sposób respektujący autonomię organizacji publicznych, a zarazem zapewniający zaangażowanie sieci politycznych w procesy rządzenia.
EN
Reforms of the public sector have helped create a more eicient and efective public sector, but also have created a number of problems. Both, the New Public Management and "governance" reforms have contributed to the contemporary problems in governing. hese problems have been political to a great extent, relecting the tendency to emphasize administrative rather than democratic values. Governments have begun to react to the real and perceived problems within the public sector by developing a number of "meta-governance" instruments that can help steer public organizations but which involve less direct command and control. his paper addresses the contemporary governance tasks of restoring political direction and policy coherence while at the same supporting the autonomy of public organizations, and the involvement of policy networks, in governing.
Contributors
author
  • Institute for Advanced Studies, Vienna
References
  • Adler E. (1992). "h e emergence of cooperation: National epistemic communities and the international evolution of the idea of nuclear arms control", International Organization, nr 46.
  • Bakvis H., Juillet L. (2004). h e Horizontal Challenge: Line Departments, Central Agencies and Leadership. Ottawa: Canadian School of Governance.
  • Bouckaert G., Ormond D., Peters B.G. (2000). A Possible Governance Agenda for Sweden. Helsinki: Ministry of Finance.
  • Buchanan J.M., Tullock G. (1962). h e Calculus of Consent. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
  • Caplan B. (2007). h e Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  • Christensen T., Laegreid P. (2001). New Public Management: Transformation of Ideas and Practice. Aldershot: Ashgate.
  • Christensen T., Laegreid P. (2007). Transcending New Public Management: h e Transformation of Public Sector Reforms. Aldershot: Ashgate.
  • Dente B., Bobbio L., Spada A. (2003). "Government or governance of urban innovation?", DISP, nr 162(3).
  • Dilulio J.J. (1994). Deregulating Government. Washington, DC: h e Brookings Institution.
  • Gregory R. (2004). "All the king's horses and all the king's men: Putting the New Zealand public sector together again", International Public Management Journal, nr 4(2).
  • Hef ernan R. (2003). "Prime Ministerial predominance? Core executive politics in the United Kingdom", British Journal of Politics and International Relations, nr 5.
  • Helmke G., Levitsky S. (2004). "Informal institutions and comparative politics: A research agenda", Perspectives on Politics, nr 2.
  • Hood C. (1991). "A public management for all seasons?", Public Administration, nr 69(1).
  • Huber J.D., Shipan C.R. (2002). Deliberate Discretion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Jensen L. (2004). Den store koordinator. Kobenhavn: Juristog Okonomi.
  • Klijn E.H., Koppenjan J. (2005). Managing Uncertainties in Networks. London: Routledge.
  • Leat P.D., Setzler K., Stoker G. (2002). Toward Holistic Governance: h e New Reform Agenda. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Marinetto M. (2003). "Governing beyond the centre: A critique of the Anglo-governance school", Political Studies, nr 51.
  • Meyers M.K., Vorsanger S. (2004). "Street-level bureaucrats and the implementation of public policy", w: B.G. Peters, J. Pierre (red.), h e Handbook of Public Administration. London: Sage.
  • Morth U. (2003). Soft Law in Governance and Regulation: An Interdisciplinary Analysis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
  • Mulgan G. (2000). "Accountability: An ever-expanding concept", Public Administration, nr 78.
  • Niskanen W. (1971). Representative Government and Bureaucracy. Chicago: Aldine/Atherton.
  • OECD (2007). Performance Management in the OECD Countries. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
  • Olsen J.P. (2008). "h e ups and downs of bureaucratic organization", Annual Review of Political Science, t. 11, nr 1.
  • Osborne D., Gaebler T. (1991). Reinventing Government. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
  • O'Toole L.J. (2007). "Governing outputs and outcomes of governance networks", w: E. Sorenson, J. Toring (red.), Theories of Democratic Network Governance. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Peters B.G. (2001). h e Future of Governing (wyd. 2). Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
  • Peters B.G. (2004a). "Back to the centre? Rebuilding the state", h e Political Quarterly, t. 75, nr 1.
  • Peters B.G. (2004b). "Governance and public bureaucracy: New forms of democracy or new forms of control?", Asia-Pacific Journal of Public Administration nr 26.
  • Peters B.G. (2007a). Central Agencies and Executive Governance, Paper presented at Joint Workshops of the European Consortium for Political Research, 7-12 maja.
  • Peters B.G. (2007b). Performance Management in the Nordic Countries, Paper prepared for Annual RAKO Conference, Lidingö, Sweden, wrzesień.
  • Peters B.G., J. Pierre (2004). Politicization of the Public Service: h e Quest for Control. London: Routledge.
  • Pierre J. (2000). Governance, Politics and the State. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Pollack J.K. (1951). "The primacy of politics", American Political Science Review, nr 45.
  • Pollitt C. (2003). "Joined up government: A survey", Political Studies Review, nr 1.
  • Pollitt C., Talbot C. (red.) (2004). Unbundled Government: A Critical Analysis of the Global Trends to Agencies, Quangos and Contractualisation. London: Routledge.
  • Rokkan S. (1967). "Norway: Corporate pluralism", w: R.A. Dahl (red.), Political Oppositions in Western Democracies. New Haven: Yale University Press.
  • Rose R. (1974). The Problem of Party Government. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Salamon L.M. (2001). "Introduction", w: L.M. Salamon (red.), The Handbook of Policy Instruments. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Savoie D.J. (2004). Governing from the Centre. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
  • Scharpf F.W. (1988). "The joint-decision trap: Lessons from German federalism and European integration", Public Administration, nr 66.
  • Schoield J. (2001). "The old ways are the best? The durability and usefulness of bureaucracy in public sector management", Organization, nr 8.
  • Sorenson E., Toring J. (2006). heories of Democratic Network Governance. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Verhoest K., Humphreys P., Rubecksen K. (2007). "The autonomy of public agencies: A comparative analysis" (tekst nieopublikowany). Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium.
  • Von Mettenheim K. (1997). Presidential Institutions and Democratic Politics: Comparing Regional and National Contexts. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
  • Walsh H., Stewart J. (1992). "Change in the management of the public service", Public Administration, nr 70.
  • Wanna J., Jensen L., De Vries J. (2003). Controlling Public Expenditure: h e Changing Role of Central Budget Agencies - Better Guardians? Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
  • Whitford A.B. (2002). "Decentralization and political control in bureaucracy", Journal of Theoretical Politics, nr 14.
  • Yesilkagit K. (2007). Whose Regulators? Competing Perspectives on Bureaucratic Autonomy, Paper presented at Biannual Meeting of the European Consortium for Political Research, Pisa, Italy, 6-8 września.
Document Type
Publication order reference
Identifiers
YADDA identifier
bwmeta1.element.desklight-adafe33c-3fca-46f5-a261-5eec3673ce2e
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.