Administrative philosophies in the discourse and decisions of the New Zealand public service: is post-New Public Management still a myth?

Abstract

New Zealand is frequently cited as the archetypical example of New Public Management (NPM), having gone ‘further and faster’ than other jurisdictions in radically reforming their public service in the late 1980s. These reforms have been credited with significant gains in efficiency and responsiveness, while introducing new challenges. Successive reforms over the past 30 years tinkered with the model without fundamentally altering the underlying paradigm, such that authors refer to the ‘myth of post-NPM in New Zealand’. In 2020, New Zealand repealed and replaced its main public service legislation. By textually analysing government documents, this article explores the different theoretical roots of New Zealand's ongoing administrative reforms and debates the extent of their theoretical coherence. The Act directly dialogues with and draws inspiration from recent academic debates, drawing from a range of sources (such as New Public Governance, Digital Era Governance, and the New Public Service). Points for practitioners New Zealand has long been regarded as the purest example of New Public Management (NPM). Legislation passed in 2020 saw New Zealand adopt a range of reforms described in the literature as ‘post-NPM’, while also reaffirming features associated with Traditional Public Administration (TPA). While New Zealand has moved away from a pure NPM model and adopted features associated with Post-NPM, Post-NPM is not a coherent doctrine and it may only be possible to identify administrative doctrines retrospectively. We may be entering a period of ‘New Public Complexity’, where administrative doctrines are blended and layered.

The Role of Public Management in the Achievement of Sustainable Development Goals

“…It aims to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of the public services that are provided. In the context of sustainable development, the application of NPM principles like performance-based budgeting and outcome-oriented assessments has the potential to improve both the distribution of resources and the efficacy of public policies (Scott et al, 2023). In addition, public-private partnerships have the potential to address issues relating to sustainability by drawing on the knowledge and resources available in the private sector.…”

(Non) rationality and choice architecture: a behavioural approach to public administrative discretion in New Zealand

“…The other side of the debate argues that conventions cannot and should not be observed as part of law for the simple reason that no court will take notice if they are broken (Dicey, 1959). This is an interesting consideration in the context of bounds for administrative behaviour, for which most jurisdictions seem content to have no legal enforceability (Scott et al , 2022).…”

“…These reforms were implemented through the State Sector Act 1988 and Public Finance Act 1989, both based on strongly rational assumptions of public servants as self-maximisers (Schick, 1996). The Public Service Act 2020 repeals and replaces the State Sector Act 1988 and instead designs a choice architecture combining rational (formal and explicit responsibility of administrative agents to their political principles), boundedly rational (less formal but still explicit administrative principles and conventions) and non-rational influences (symbolic motivations and identities) on administration behaviour (Scott et al , 2022). We examine recent decisions, discourse and decision-making processes to explore how policymakers conceived of the motivations behind administrative behaviour.…”

Agents, ideas and microprocesses: What happens in the early stage of a public service reform?

“…Public service chief executive contracts with the Commissioner were then amended to include the four requirements, and each chief executive would be rated annually on their Ownership performance. 1 The rationale of Ownership (Interdepartmental Working Group on Ownership, 1995b, p. 4) was the impartial public service providing assurance to Ministers that, under the devolved state sector model, all agencies would remain sustainable over the longer term and be capable of delivering what was required, not only by the current Government but also future governments. The purpose of 'ownership', as later described in 1998 by the State Services…”

“…Seven years later, New Zealand's Public Service Act 2020 enshrined five "public service principles" with stewardship as the fifth principle (R. J. Scott, Macaulay, & Merton, 2020). Although the term was undefined in the 2020 legislation, the public service was expected to 'proactively' promote stewardship through long term management of capability, systems and processes, knowledge, legislation, and assets.…”