This paper first identifies the varied meanings and objectives of joined-up government (JUG). Subsequently it explores the costs and risks involved, and briefly reviews some of the relevant academic literature. Having thus clarified the key concepts and situated the current fashion for a 'holistic approach' within the broader literature on co-ordination, the paper also considers a range of approaches to the assessment of progress with JUG.

This article reports a study of performance management practices in four functions across four European Union member states (Finland, the Netherlands, Sweden, and the United Kingdom). The focus is on how and to what extent performance indicators influenced the top management of the agencies concerned and the degree to which performance data were used by ministries as steering instruments. The research uses a historical institutionalist perspective combined with a model that identifies primary task characteristics as a source of significant variation. Thus the design explores both the influence of task characteristics (through contrasts among the four different functions) and embedded national system characteristics (through contrasts among the four countries). I show that both primary task characteristics and national system characteristics had some of the theoretically predicted effects on the management regimes. Equally, however, certain general tendencies embraced all countries and most functions. These include, first, the incremental growth of more sophisticated performance indicator systems and, second, the feebleness of ministries in developing performance-based strategic steering. Over the past two decades the introduction of performance management and the creation of executive agencies have been two of the most widespread international trends in public management (

No abstract

This article examines research into the use of performance information by ministers, parliamentarians and citizens. These 'end users' are of crucial importance to the claim that performance information is not merely managerially useful, but also contributes to the quality of democratic debate and to the ability of citizens to make choices. A literature review indicates that research into use by these groups has been very patchy, and that much of what we do know suggests that evaluations and performance reports and audits are seldom highly valued by politicians or citizens. Possible reasons and remedies for this apparent state of affairs are discussed, and areas for further research are suggested. K E Y WO R D S : citizens; evaluation; performance information; politiciansEvaluation is so important to any democratic society. It benefits those who make decisions about policy, and it benefits the citizens who have to live with those decisions, once made. (Chelimsky, 1997: 52) The current focus on performance measurement at all levels of government . . . reflects citizen demands for evidence of program effectiveness that have been made around the world. (Wholey and Newcomer, 1997: 92) Evaluation

No abstract