Click here to download

Evolution of public management: From the "prince" to public value
Journal Title: ECONOMIA PUBBLICA  
Author/s: Stefano Lorusso 
Year:  2021 Issue: Language: Italian 
Pages:  22 Pg. 33-54 FullText PDF:  879 KB
DOI:  10.3280/EP2021-003002
(DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation:  clicca qui   and here 


This contribution aims at providing a systemic analysis of the approaches that have characterized the evolution of public management. The different ap-proaches are reported chronologically, after briefly mentioning some relevant points of Machiavelli’s thinking. Each of these approaches, whose most repre-sentative conceptual aspects are highlighted, is influenced by the institutional framework that defines priorities and purposes. The evolution of context, from the constitutional to the so-called relational state, has changed the focus of pub-lic action over time. Initially, the respect of procedures and rules was essential. Then, the aim of public management has gradually evolved towards a search for efficiency. In recent years, the requests coming from the various intermediate social actors have become remarkable. The main perspective is now the con-struction of relationships, collaborative interactions and partnerships between public and private subjects. Through the metaphor of systemic analysis, this work highlights the element of the public or-ganization (structure, operating mechanisms and processes) which is predomi-nant in each approach. In conclusion, the work focuses on the evolution of the role of citizens on public administration - from mere customers to coproducers - and tries to represent the great role of public organizations in generating value
Keywords: Public administration, public management, value
Jel Code: H83, H11, M10

  1. Mitchell R.K., Agle B.R. e Wood D.J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22: 853-886.
  2. O’Flynn J. (2007). From New Public Management to Public Value: Paradigmatic Change and Managerial Implications. The Australian Journal of Public Administration, 66(3): 353-366.
  3. Ostrom E. (1996). Crossing the Great Divide: Coproduction, Synergy and Development. World Development, 24(6): 1073-1087.
  4. Parks R.B. (1995). Do we really want to consolidate urban areas? Polycentric Circles Newsletter, 1(2), Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis, Bloomington: Indiana University.
  5. Pollitt C. (1995). Justification by works or by faith? Evaluating the new public management. Evaluation, 1(2): 133-145.
  6. Pollitt C., Bouckaert G. (2004) Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  7. Post J.E., Preston L.E. & Sauter-Sachs S. (2002). Redefining the corporation: Stakeholder management and organizational wealth. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
  8. Rebora G. (2018). Public Management: una prospettiva di scienza dell’organizzazione. Rivista italiana di public management, 1.
  9. Simon H.A. (1947). Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organizations. New York: Macmillan.
  10. Sharp E. B. (1980). Toward a New Understanding of urban Services and Citizen Participation: the Coproduction Concept. Midwest Review of Public Administration, 14: 105-118.
  11. Strazza M. (2007). Lezioni di Diritto Pubblico. Melfi: Tarsia Editore.
  12. Alford J. (2008). The limits to traditional public administration, or rescuing public value from misrepresentation. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 67(3): 357-366.
  13. Adinolfi P. (2005). Il mito dell’azienda. L’innovazione gestionale e organizzativa nelle amministrazioni pubbliche. Milano: McGraw-Hill.
  14. Moore H.M. (1997). Creating Public Value. Strategic Management in Government. Harvard University Press.
  15. Bish P. e Neubert N. M. (1976). A Preliminary Inquiry into Citizen Contributions to Community Safety and Security, Workshop in Political Theory and policy Analysis, Indiana University, Bloomington -- https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=45672.
  16. Bocci F. (2014), Valore Pubblico e outcome. Performance e Management Review. -- https://www.performancemanagementreview.org/valore-pubblico-e-outcome/.
  17. Bonazzi G. (2002). Come studiare l’organizzazione. Bologna: il Mulino.
  18. Borgonovi E. (1996). Principi e sistemi aziendali per le amministrazioni pubbliche. Milano: Egea.
  19. Borgonovi G. (2018). Management pubblico: evoluzione della disciplina e delle riforme. Rivista italiana di public management, 1.
  20. Brudney J.L. e England R.E. (1983). Toward a Definition of the Coproduction Concept. Public Administration Review, 43(1): 59-65.
  21. Buchanan J.M. (2003). Public Choice: The Origins and Development of a Research program. Fairfax, Va.: Center for Study of Public Choice, George Mason University.
  22. Brandsen T., Pestoff V., Verschuere B. (2012). Coproduction as a maturing concept. In Pestoff V., Brandsen T., Verschuere B. (a cura di). New Public Governance, the Third Sector and Co-production. London: Routledge.
  23. Cataldi L (2012). La partecipazione civica alla creazione del valore, Atti XXVI Convegno SISP.
  24. Coese R. (1960). The problem of social cost. Journal of Law and Economics 3: 1-44.
  25. Constable S., Passmore E., Coats D. (2008). Public Value and Local Accountability in the NHS. London: Work Foundation.
  26. Costa G. e De Martino S. (1985). Management pubblico. Milano: Etaslibri.
  27. Deidda Gagliardo E. (2015). il Valore pubblico la nuova frontiera delle performance. Roma: Rirea.
  28. Drucker P. (1954). The Practice of Management. New York: Harper.
  29. Funicello A. (2019). Il metodo Machiavelli. Bologna: Rizzoli.
  30. Giannini M.S (1970). Diritto Amministrativo, Vol. I. Milano: Giuffré.
  31. Giannini M.S(1986). Il pubblico potere. Stati e amministrazioni pubbliche.
  32. Guerzoni G. (2017). Le politiche di intervento nel campo del Corporate Giving. --www.abi.it.
  33. Hood C. (1991). A public management for all seasons?. Public Administration, 69(1).
  34. Kelly G., Mulgan G. and Muers S. (2002). Creating Public Value: an analytical framework for public service reform. London: Prime Minister’s Strategy Unit.
  35. Kikeri S., Nellis J. (2002). Privatization in Competitive Sectors: The Record to Date. Policy, Research working paper -- (https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/ 10986/14257).
  36. Jenkis K, Caines K. e Jackson A. (1988). Improving Management in Government: The Next Steps Agencies.
  37. Kelman S. (2007). Public Administration and Organization Studies. The Academy of Management Annals, 1(1).
  38. Kiser L. e Percy S. L. (1980). The Concept of Coproduction and Its implication for Public Service Delivery, paper presentato all’Annual Meeting dell’American Society for Public Administration, San Francisco, 13-16 aprile.
  39. Mazur S., Kopycinskie P. (2017). Public Policy and the Neo-Weberian State. Routledge.
  40. Mendoza Mayordomo X. (1997). Le trasformazioni del settore pubblico nelle democrazie avanzate: dallo Stato del benessere allo Stato relazionale. Azienda pubblica, 5.
  41. Megginson W.L., Jeffry M. N. (2001). From State to Market: A Survey of Empirical Studies on Privatization. Journal of Economic Literature, 39(2): 321-389.
  42. Weber M. (1921). Gemeinschaft e Gesellschaft (traduzione Economia e Società a cura di Massimo Palma. Roma: Doninzelli).
  43. Woodward. J. (1958). Management and Technology. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.
  44. Williamson O.E. (1981). The Economics of Organization: The Transaction Cost Approach. The American Journal of Sociology, 87(3): 548-577.
  45. Williams I., Shearer H. (2011). Appraising public values: past, present and futures. Public Administration, 89(4).
  46. Whitaker G.P. (1980), Coproduction: Citizen Participation in Service Delivery. Public Administration Review, 40: 240-246.

Stefano Lorusso, Evolution of public management: From the "prince" to public value in "ECONOMIA PUBBLICA " 3/2021, pp. 33-54, DOI:10.3280/EP2021-003002

   

FrancoAngeli is a member of Publishers International Linking Association a not for profit orgasnization wich runs the CrossRef service, enabing links to and from online scholarly content