References

p. 35) assert “nowadays, the country (Greece) is facing the most intense social, political, economic crisis of her history, and a series of political issues over the decade have caused widespread public mistrust, which has in turn contributed the long-standing tendencies of cynicism, cronyism, political clientelism, civic disengagement and finally a deep disappointment and the inefficiencies of public administration.”

Public–Private PartnershiP Maintaining the public–private partnership is one of the major challenges of globalization. Collaboration between organizations of different sectors has become an important theme in public sector reform (Wettenhall 2003). Partnerships between government and organizations in other sectors of the economy are used as opportunities to take advantage of the financial, human, and technological resources in partnerships with other sectors (Bovaird 2004; Savas 2000; O’Looney 1992; Linder 1999; Rosenau 2000). Globalization and changes in technology require an innovative initiative from the partnerships (Kinnock 1998; Bovaird 2004; Halachmi 2010). Public--Private Partnerships (PPPs) are advocated to enhance not only efficiency and quality, but also for promoting effectiveness, transferring or sharing risk, promoting coordination, and expanding resources for the attainment of goals in the interest of the public (Wettenhall 2003; Linder 1999; Halachmi 2010).

Successful Public–Private Partnership (PPPs) requires shared decision making (Forrer et al. 2010; Allan 1999). Still the government is responsible for the outcomes despite the partnerships (Halachmi 2005). Ghere (2001) argues that “the public partner should seek a leadership role that defines the tenor of the partnership” (p. 448). The government has different goals rather than concentrating on efficiency alone. In Australia, there are examples of the diffusion of responsibilities because of the partnerships (Wettenhall 2003; Johnston and Gudergan 2007).

Performance manaGement Global competition has brought the issue of performance management to the forefront. Friedrich (1940) emphasized that public administrators should internalize public values in order to promote the public good. Kettl (2002) suggested that a performance measure is essential for accountability and to ensure responsibility of the government. Unlike the private

sector, however, it is difficult to measure performance in the public sector due to the lack of the bottom line (Halachmi 2002).

Performance measurement is the most important way to understand organizational performance. Holzer and Lee (1993) argue, “Public sector goals are more complex, and therefore progress is more difficult to measure; motivational bases of public employees are different; layers of rules and regulations often prevent public employees from improving the general public welfare in a timely manner” (1993, p. 2). Buntz (1981) emphasizes the importance of the feedback for performance measurement.

Hood (1995) views the NPM as a framework by which different values could be pursued effectively and suggest the opportunity for many functions in public administration to establish measurable standards. Evan Berman (2006) proposes initiatives to improve government performance. These initiatives are important elements in responding to external and internal changes. Kee et al. (2007) emphasize the clarity of goals for performance measures, which are important for ensuring transparency, legitimacy, and trust (Halachmi 2010). In the absence of clear measurement in the public sector, it is difficult to implement performance management. Therefore, the challenge is to develop performance management tools that will reward efficiency.

caPacity buildinG and challenGes Public administration needs to develop the capacity to deal with the challenges of globalization which requires multipronged strategies. Farazmand (2004) advocates for capacity building by emphasizing development: “Development means “striving” for better conditions in economic and social environments and standards of living and creating opportunities for sustainable growth and advancement in science and technology to help lift a society upward. It also means eliminating or reducing poverty, disease, and injustice as sources of crime and insecurity, terrorism, conflict, and war; it means building sound capacity in “administration” (Farazmand 2004). The present-day world is constantly changing global dynamics that are difficult, if not impossible, to predict or control (Handy 1998; Morgan 2006).

The United Nations (2005) suggest that public administration must be revitalized and the institutions, organizations, processes, and values reinstitutionalized (UN 2005). It can be accomplished by laws, legislation, and enhancing the role of the government. Cooper (1998) and Denhardt (2004) advocate civic engagement and building trust through transparency.

Capacity building requires a strengthening of the institutions of public agencies. The public agencies need the financial, technical, and human resources to build their capacity. In an age of budget deficits, it is difficult to raise finances to develop institutional capacity. Most of the reactions to the financial crisis are limited to improving the productivity of the organizations. However, in the absence of financial backing, there is a limit to productivity improvement. Similarly, technological improvement cannot take place without financial backing. The improvement of human resources and technology require a huge amount of money. Of course, with investment in human resources and technology, much greater strides can be made in productivity improvement. The public agencies need to have well-developed rules and regulations to promote the capacity.

references Allan, J. R. (1999). Public–Private Partnerships: A Review of the Literature and

Practice (Public Policy Paper No. 4). Regina Saskatchewan Institute of Public

Policy, University of Regina. Andres, A. R. (2011). Sustainable Development, State Sovereignty and

International Justice. In W. Lafferty & O. Langhelle (Eds.), Sustainable

Development on the Aims of Development and Conditions of Sustainability.

Houndmills: Macmillan. Belloubet-Frier, N., & Timsit, G. (1993). Administration Transfigured: A New

Administrative Paradigm? International Review of Administrative Sciences, 59(4), 531–568. Berman, E. M. (2006). Dealing with Cynical Citizens. Public Administration

Review, 57(2), 105–112. Bernstein, S., & Cashore, B. (2000). Can Non-state Global Governance Be

Legitimate? An Analytical Framework. Regulation and Governance, 1(1), 347–371. Bovaird, T. (2004). Public-Private Contested Concepts to Prevalent Practice.

International Review of Administrative Sciences, 70(2), 199–215. Bovaird, T., & Löffler, E. (2002). Understanding Public Management and

Governance. In T. Bovaird & E. Löffler (Eds.), Public Management and

Governance (pp. 3–14). London: Routledge. Buntz, С. G. (1981). Problems and Service Productivity Improvement. Public

Productivity Review, 5(4), 299–320. Collins, H. M., & Evans, R. (2002). The Third Wave of Science Studies: Studies of Expertise and Experience. Social Studies of Science, 32(2), 235–296. Cooper, T. L. (1998). Responsible Administrator: An Approach to Ethics for the

Administrative Role. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Denhardt, R. B. (2004). Trust as Capacity: The Role of Integrity and

Responsiveness. In A. I. Farazmand (Ed.), Sound Governance: Policy and

Administrative Innovations (pp. 99–111). Westport: Praeger. Farazmand, A. (2004). Sound Governance: Policy and Administrative Innovations.

Westport: Praeger. Forrer, J., Kee, J. E., Newcomer, K. E., & Boyer, E. (2010). Public–Private

Partnerships and the Public Accountability Question. Public Administration

Review, 70(3), 475–484. Frederickson, H. G. (2002). Confucius and the Moral Basis of Bureaucracy.

Administration and Society, 33(4), 610–628. Friedrich, C. J. (1940). Public Policy and the Nature of Administrative

Responsibility. In C. J. Friedrich & E. S. Mason (Eds.), Public Policy: A Yearbook of the Graduate School of Public Administration (pp. 3–24). Cambridge, MA:

Harvard University Press. Ganguli, P. (2007). Advantagesglobalization. Retrieved September 4, 2014, from https://www.jwu.edu/AdvantagesandDisadvantagesofGlobalization.doc Ghere, R. K. (2001). Probing the Strategic Intricacies of Public–Private

Partnership: The Patent as a Comparative Reference. Public Administration

Review, 61(4), 441–445. Gordon, G. J. (1986). Public Administration in America. New York: St. Marion’s

Press. Halachmi, A. (2002). Performance Measurement, Accountability, and Improved

Performance. Public Performance & Management Review, 25(4), 370–374. Halachmi, A. (2003). The Principal-Agent Perspective. In J. Rabin (Ed.),

Encyclopedia of Public Administration and Public Policy (Vol. 2). New York:

Marcel Dekker. Halachmi, A. (2005). Governance and Risk Management: Challenges and Public

Productivity. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 18(4), 300–317. Halachmi, A. (2010). Public-Private a Reality Check and the Limits Theory. Paper

Presented at the Conference on Public Management Century: Opportunities and China. Halachmi, A., & Bouckaert, G. (1995). Re-engineering in the Public Sector.

International Review of Administrative Sciences, 61(3), 323–327. Handy, C. (1998). Beyond Certainty: The Changing Worlds of Organizations.

Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Hanf, K., & Scharf, F. W. (1978). Inter-Organizational Policy Making: Limits to

Coordination and Central Control. London: Sage Publications. Holzer, M., & Lee, K. (1993). Public Productivity Handbook. New York: Marcel

Dekker, Inc. Hood, C. (1995). The “New Public Management” in the 1980s: Variations on a

Theme. Accounting Organizations and Society, 20(2/3), 93–109.

Johnston, J., & Gudergan, S. P. (2007). Public-Private Partnerships: Lessons

Australian Case? International Review of Administrative Sciences, 73(4), 569–579. Jreisat, J. (2005). Comparative Public Administration Is Back in Prudently. Public

Administration Review, 65(2), 231–242. Karamagioli, E., Staiou, E.-R., & Gouscos, D. (2014). Can Open-Government

Models Contribute to More Collaborative Ways of Governance? An Assessment of the Greek OpenGov Initiative. Public Administration and Information

Technology, 4(1), 37–50. Kee, J. E., Newcomer, K. E., Trent, D. L., Oster, V., & Rosen, S. (2007). Keeping the Public Interest in Public-Private Partnerships (Working Paper No. 5). Center for Innovation in Public Service, George Washington University. Keohane, R. O., & Nye, J. S. (2000). Introduction. In J. S. Nye & J. D. Donahue (Eds.), Governance in a Globalization World. Washington, DC: Brookings

Institution Press. Kettl, D. F. (2002). Managing Indirect Government. In L. M. Salamon (Ed.), The

Tools of Government: A Guide to the New Governance (pp. 490–510). New York:

Oxford University Press. Kettl, D. F. (2003). The Global Public Management Revolution: A Report on

Transformation of Governance. Washington, DC: Brookings Press. Khan, A. (2007). Introduction: Reinventing Public Enterprises. In UN,

Department of Economic and Social Affairs (Ed.), Public Enterprises: Unresolved

Challenges and New Opportunities. New York: United Nations. Kickert, W. J. M., Klijn, E. H., & Koppenjan, J. F. M. (Eds.). (1997). Managing

Complex Networks: Strategies for the Public Sector. London: Sage. Kinnock, N. (1998). Using Public-Private Parternships to Develop Transport

Infrastructure. Retrieved July 10, 2011, from http://europa.eu.int/en/ comm/dgQ7/speech/sp9837.htm Klijn, E., & Koppenjan, J. (2012). Governance Network Theory: Past, Present and Future. Policy and Politics, 40(4), 187–206. Kooiman, J. (2003). Governing as Governance. London: Sage. Koppenjan, J. F. M., & Klijn, E. (2004). Managing Uncertainties in Networks.

A Network Approach to Problem Solving and Decision-Making. London:

Routledge. Kouzmin, A., & Dixon, J. (2006). Neoliberal Economics, Public Domains, and

Organizations: Is There Any Organizational Design After “Privatization?”. In

T. D. Lynch & P. L. Cruise (Eds.), Handbook of Organizational Theory and

Management: The Philosophical Approach (pp. 667–728). Boca Raton: CRC

Press/Taylor & Francis Group. Linder, S. H. (1999). Coming to Terms with the Public-Private Partnership:

A Grammar of Multiple Meanings. American Behavioral Scientist, 43(1), 35–51.

Lyne, M. M., Nielson, D. L., & Tierney, M. J. (2006). Who Delegates? Alternative

Models of Principals in Development Aid. In D. G. Hawkins, D. A. Lake, D. L.

Nielson, & M. J. Tierney (Eds.), Delegation and Agency in International

Organizations (pp. 39–41). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Marsh, D., & Rhodes, R. A. W. (1992). Policy Networks in British Government.

Oxford: Clarendon. Morgan, G. (2006). Images of Organization (Updated ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage

Publications. O’Looney, J. (1992). Public-Private Partnerships in Economic Development:

Negotiating the Trade-Off Between Flexibility and Accountability. Economic

Development Review, 10(4), 14–31. OECD. (1997). In Search of Results: Performance Management Practices. Paris:

OECD. Olsen, J. P. (2006). Maybe It Is Time to Rediscover Bureaucracy. Journal of Public

Administration Research and Theory, 16(1), 1–24. Ostrom, E. (1986). An Agenda for the Study of Institutions. Public Choice, 48(1), 3–25. Peters, B. G. (2009). The Politics of Bureaucracy (6th ed.). London: Routledge. Pierre, J., & Peters, B. G. (2000). Governance, Politics and the State. Basingstoke:

Macmillan. Raadschelders, J. B. (1992). Definition of Smallness: A Comparative Study. In

R. Baker (Ed.), Public Administration in Small and Island States (pp. 26–33).

West Hart: Kumarian Press. Rhodes, R. A. W. (1996). The New Governance: Governing Without Government.

Political Studies, 44(4), 652–657. Ritzer, G. (2010). Globalization: A Basic Text. Malden: Blackwell. Robinson, W. I. (2008). Latin America and Global Capitalism: A Critical

Globalization Perspective. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University. Rondinelli, D. A. (2007). Can Public Enterprises Contribute to Development?

A Critical Assessment and Alternatives for Management Improvement. In

Public Enterprises: Unresolved Challenges and New Opportunities. New York:

United Nations. Rosenau, P. V. (2000). Public-Private Policy Partnerships. Cambridge, MA: MIT

Press. Salamon, L. M. (Ed.). (2002). In the Tools of Government: A Guide to the New

Governance. New York: Oxford University Press. Saul, J. R. (2005). The Collapse of Globalism and the Reinvention of the World.

New York: Viking. Savas, E. S. (2000). Privatization and Public-Private Partnerships. New York:

Seven Bridges Press.