Politicization has an ambivalent reputation among public administration scholars. While considered an effective instrument to safeguard political control over ministerial bureaucracy, partisanship of senior civil servants is likewise associated with patronage and is deemed detrimental to professionalism and meritocracy. To scrutinize this contradiction, the article examines how the party‐political background of senior civil servants influences their decision‐making behaviour. Two theoretically derived conceptions of loyalty are therefore put to the test: responsiveness and responsibility. Effects are captured by using the vignette technique in 40 in‐depth interviews with former senior civil servants from ministerial departments at federal and state level in Germany. The results are surprising in so far as they reveal that politicized senior civil servants act neither more responsively nor less responsibly than their non‐politicized peers. These findings challenge common assumptions and call for a more refined analysis of the conditions under which politicization leads to negative effects.

Territorial reform is the most radical and contested reorganisation of local government. A sound evaluation of the outcome of such reforms is hence an important step to ensure the legitimation of any decision on the subject. However, in our view the discourse on the subject appears to be one sided, focusing primarily on overall fiscal effects scrutinised by economists. The contribution of this paper is hence threefold: Firstly, we provide an overview off territorial reforms in Europe, with a special focus on Eastern Germany as a promising case for crosscountry comparisons. Secondly, we provide an overview of the analytical classifications of these reforms and context factors to be considered in their evaluation. And thirdly, we analyse the literature on qualitative performance effects of these reforms. The results show that territorial reforms have a significant positive impact on functional performance, while the effects on participation and integration are indeed ambivalent. In doing so, we provide substantial arguments for a broader, more inclusive discussion on the success of territorial reforms.

No abstract

The aim 0/ this paper is to evaluate the impact of differing decentralisa tion strategies political, administrative and horizontal on administrative performance subsequent to reform. In this respect, the paper presents core results from a comprehensive research project that has been carried out between 2006 and 2009 on the impact of decentralisation in three European countries. The aim of the project has been to develop and apply an analytical framework for the measurement of the e.ffects of national decentralisation policies on local government pedormance. A total of six reform ventures were scrutinised in French , German and English local communities applying a multidimensional set of performance measures. Surprisingly, many of the theoretical assumptions about the effects of decentralisation strategies could not be confirmed. Moreover, straightforward relations were not discovered between decen tralisation strategies and pefjormance ef/ects but between policy field'S, political interests and the time elapsed since the reform and performance.

Shifts in competencies between levels of government fundamentally changed public policymaking not only in France -with its two 'Actes' of decentralization but also in a similar vein in Germany and England. The effects of these reforms, however, have so far remained largely understudied. This analysis traces national decentralization strategies and compares their impacts on public service performance in person-related services. The results of the empirical case studies are astonishing, as the often considered unique French case seems to share substantial features with its neighbors: Local government performance is largely determined by the properties of the policy area under consideration the potential to reap synergies between relevant actors at place and the capacity to built up professional expertise at the local level turn out to be decisive factors for the 'success' of decentralization as a multi-level governance strategy.

No abstract

Dieser Beitrag präsentiert die Befunde der Elitestudie Politisch-Administrative Elite 2013 (PAE 2013) über Zusammensetzung und Politisierung der bundesdeutschen Verwaltungseliten. Diese vierte nationale Replikation der Comparative Elite Studies zum Ende der 17. Legislaturperiode bringt überraschende Entwicklungen ans Licht: Hinsichtlich der Zusammensetzung des Personals schreitet zwar die Feminisierung auch auf den Leitungsebenen fort und eine Berufsvererbung kann nicht mehr festgestellt werden, allerdings erlebt die Juristendominanz mit erstmals seit Jahrzehnten steigenden Werten ein Wiedererstarken. Der Grad an formaler Politisierung überrascht: Trotz des Verbleibs der CDU/CSU an der Macht findet ein umfassender Personalaustausch statt. Diese teils im Widerspruch zu etablierten Trends und Theorien stehenden Entwicklungen zeigen, dass das Feld der administrativen Elitenforschung auch zukünftig besondere Aufmerksamkeit verdient.

In the last 10 years, the governments of most of the German Länder initiated administrative reforms. All of these ventures included the municipalization of substantial sets of tasks. As elsewhere, governments argue that service delivery by communes is more cost-efficient, effective and responsive. Empirical evidence to back these claims is inconsistent at best: a considerable number of case studies cast doubt on unconditionally positive appraisals. Decentralization effects seem to vary depending on the performance dimension and task considered. However, questions of generalizability arise as these findings have not yet been backed by more 'objective' archival data. We provide empirical evidence on decentralization effects for two different policy fields based on two studies. Thereby, the article presents alternative avenues for research on decentralization effects and matches the theoretical expectations on decentralization effects with more robust results. The analysis confirms that overly positive assertions concerning decentralization effects are only partially warranted. As previous case studies suggested, effects have to be looked at in a much more differentiated way, including starting conditions and distinguishing between the various relevant performance dimensions and policy fields. Points for practitionersIn multi-level systems, reformers of public administration have to decide which level is most appropriate for the implementation of a certain task. In the last years, reformers have often decided to decentralize state functions in the hope of creating an effective and efficient government. Yet, in reality, the claim to deliver public tasks better and, at Sciences ; 82 (2016), 2. -S. 291-314 https://dx.doi.org/10.1177 the same time, cheaper in decentralized units proves unfeasible. We provide empirical evidence on the performance effects of decentralization and show that it has other advantages and other disadvantages compared to state service delivery. Reformers of public administration have to ponder these pros and cons in each particular case.