While frontrunners like the United Kingdom (UK) under Thatcher, the United States under Reagan and the New Zealand began New Public Management (NPM) reforms in the 1980s, Germany’s federal government level only showed movement toward modernization in the late 1990s, and efforts still have not gone far enough to be evaluated with confidence. The most notable government reforms were, undertaken by the local governments, which engaged in incremental reforms in the 1980s, and only began engaging in NPM after a ten-year delay in the 1990s, when the UK and other countries had started concentrating government reform efforts on engaging multi-stakeholder networks through local and public governance measures.
Focusing on the local level of government I attempt to explain the puzzle as to why Germany was a decade behind in adopting NPM measures, and why the initiative to reform public management started primarily at the local level and remains mainly limited to the local level of government. Subsequently, the purpose of this paper is to illustrate to what extent local government reforms in Germany vary from those perused by the NPM pioneer, the UK. A focus will be on institutional and ideological particularities of the German NPM response, and detailed information about the NPM contents implemented in the Federal Republic will only be mentioned if they support comparative claims. Further, I will provide a broad assessment to what extent German reform feature can be ascribed directly to internation NPM influences.
Relevant information about the UK, its governmental structure and reform efforts will be given. Moreover, the structure of the German government system, and local government reforms since the 1960s will be elucidated, followed by an evaluation of reasons as well as initiators behind reform efforts. Lastly, the reform effort in Germany will be broadly compared to those in the UK in order to classify the local administrative reforms in the Federal Republic.
Table of Contents
1 Introduction
2 The United Kingdom
2.1 Government Structure
2.2 NPM Reform Endeavors
2.2.1 NPM Influences on Local Governments
3 German Government System
4 Local Reforms in Germany
4.1. Participatory revolution in the 1960s and 1970s
4.2. Incremental Change in the 1980s
4.3. Wave of Changes in the 1990s
5 Reasons for Local Reform
5.1. Incrementalist Reform Efforts
5.2.Delayed NSM Reforms
6 Influences for NPM Style Reform
6.1. The Dutch Reform Paradigm
6.2. National Advocates
7 Differences in Implementation
8 Conclusion
Research Objectives and Themes
This paper explores the puzzle of why Germany lagged behind in adopting New Public Management (NPM) measures compared to pioneers like the United Kingdom, and why reform initiatives in Germany originated primarily at the local level. It aims to illustrate the extent to which local government reforms in Germany deviate from the Anglo-Saxon model by examining institutional particularities and the specific "Neo-Weberian" approach taken.
- The divergence between German local administrative reforms and the British NPM model.
- The impact of institutional and ideological constraints within the German Rechtsstaat system.
- The bottom-up nature of German reform initiatives, driven by local practitioners and the KGSt.
- The role of the Dutch "Tilburg-Model" as a primary external influence on German administrative change.
Excerpt from the Book
4.1. Participatory revolution in the 1960s and 1970s
Administrative reforms began in the late 1960s under social-democratic influence, and concentrated on employing planning and evaluation concepts as well as modernizing government and administration. Levers for the 1960s and 1970s local government modernization were set both by top-down federal and Länder interventions as well as by bottom-up initiatives from municipalities. As the reforms focused on “departing from old bureaucratic styles of administering and managing the public sector and at finding a new, more active style of policy making and governing” they are labeled by Reichard and others as “compressive and vigorous”, (Reichard 2003:347). Wollmann even counts 1960s West Germany to the frontrunners of “large-scale institutional reform policy […] [which] probably ventured furthest among European countries into social experimentation as an instrument of […] policy making” (Wollmann 2000:920).
Simultaneously, as the focus on democracy and citizen participation has always been present in Germany, pressures from citizens resulted in numerous local Citizen Initiatives (Bürgerinitiativen), prompted deep changes for the country’s post-war political culture, and through a participatory revolution achieved involvement in decision-making and public planning. Therefore, the 1960s and 1970s are also referred to as the era of public involvement and pluralism (920f) with a strong focus on “democratic, participatory, public administration” (Pollitt, Bouckaert 2004:257).
Summary of Chapters
1 Introduction: Introduces the research puzzle regarding Germany's late adoption of NPM and outlines the study's scope.
2 The United Kingdom: Details the UK's centralized government structure and its early, comprehensive adoption of NPM reforms.
2.1 Government Structure: Describes the transition of the UK into a highly centralized state with limited local government discretion.
2.2 NPM Reform Endeavors: Explains the theoretical framework and drivers behind the Thatcherite reform efforts in the UK.
2.2.1 NPM Influences on Local Governments: Examines how central government interventions marginalized local authorities through performance management and market testing.
3 German Government System: Outlines the complex, decentralized nature of German federalism and the role of the Rechtsstaat model.
4 Local Reforms in Germany: Provides an overview of the three major stages of modernization in postwar German local government.
4.1. Participatory revolution in the 1960s and 1970s: Discusses the early era of social experimentation and citizen-led administrative changes.
4.2. Incremental Change in the 1980s: Analyzes the adaptive, fragmented nature of German administrative reform during the initial global NPM wave.
4.3. Wave of Changes in the 1990s: Details the emergence of the New Steering Model (NSM) and the role of the KGSt.
5 Reasons for Local Reform: Explores the motivations behind the cautious and incremental approach to administrative reform in Germany.
5.1. Incrementalist Reform Efforts: Examines why German administration remained indifferent to NPM due to traditional reliance on legality and professionalism.
5.2.Delayed NSM Reforms: Investigates the interplay of fiscal pressures and management needs that triggered late reforms in the 1990s.
6 Influences for NPM Style Reform: Identifies the primary drivers and intellectual influences behind the shift toward NSM.
6.1. The Dutch Reform Paradigm: Explains the significant role of Dutch models, particularly the Tilburg-Model, in shaping German reform thinking.
6.2. National Advocates: Highlights the central role of the KGSt and municipal practitioners in driving modernization.
7 Differences in Implementation: Compares the divergent paths of reform in Germany and the UK through a detailed analysis of their administrative systems.
8 Conclusion: Synthesizes the findings, characterizing the German path as a Neo-Weberian State rather than a shift toward NPM marketization.
Keywords
New Public Management, New Steering Model, Local Government, Germany, United Kingdom, Rechtsstaat, Administrative Reform, Decentralization, Public Sector, KGSt, Tilburg-Model, Neo-Weberian State, Modernization, Municipalities, Subsidiarity.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this paper?
The paper examines the local government reform processes in Germany, specifically why the country was significantly delayed in adopting New Public Management (NPM) compared to the UK and how the reforms were implemented.
What are the central themes of the work?
Key themes include the comparison between the German "Rechtsstaat" model and the British "Public Interest" model, the bottom-up development of the "New Steering Model" (NSM), and the influence of institutional conservatism on administrative change.
What is the main research question?
The primary research question addresses why Germany lagged by a decade in adopting NPM measures and why reform initiatives were localized rather than initiated by the federal government.
Which scientific methods are employed?
The work utilizes a comparative analysis approach, contrasting the institutional frameworks, reform trajectories, and ideological foundations of public administration in Germany and the United Kingdom.
What does the main body cover?
The main body covers the history of administrative reforms in both nations, the theoretical underpinnings of NPM and NSM, the specific roles of institutions like the KGSt, and the driving forces behind municipal reform.
Which keywords characterize this research?
Essential keywords include New Public Management, New Steering Model, Neo-Weberian State, administrative reform, decentralization, and local government.
How did the German administrative model affect the adoption of NPM?
The German "Rechtsstaat" model, characterized by legalism and path-dependency, acted as a constraint, making the nation more resistant to the market-based, ideological reforms prevalent in the Anglo-Saxon world.
What role did the KGSt play in German administrative reform?
The KGSt acted as a major consultant and forum for German municipalities, providing the conceptual guidance for the "New Steering Model," which served as the German variant of NPM.
Why is the German model described as a "Neo-Weberian State"?
Pollitt and Bouckaert used this term because German reforms focused on modernizing and tightening the existing bureaucracy rather than replacing it with market-oriented, lean-state mechanisms like those implemented in the UK.
- Quote paper
- Janna Lüttmann (Author), 2007, Local Government Reforms in Germany, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/81226
