Central Decisions, Decentralized Solutions: Comparing the Implications of Central Cutback Policy for the Agency Level in Estonia and Latvia

Savi, Riin; Cepilovs, Aleksandrs

doi:10.1080/13876988.2015.1126946

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This helps in building upon each other's work, for instance by studying the same concept in different sectors or countries. This can be seen by studies that use the new conceptualization (Rayner & Lawton, 2018;Savi & Cepilovs, 2017).…”

Section: Developing New Theories and Conceptsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Behavioral Public Administration

Tummers¹

2020

Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Behavioral public administration is an interdisciplinary research field that studies public administration topics by connecting insights from public administration with psychology and, more broadly, the behavioral sciences. Behavioral public administration scholars study important public problems such as discrimination, corruption, and burnout. Various public administration scholars—including Herbert Simon—have stressed the importance of connecting psychology and public administration. Yet until the early 2010s, public administration did not work systematically on this connection. This has changed profoundly with the development of various overview articles, dedicated special issues in general public administration journals, and development of new journals. Behavioral public administration has several uses. First, behavioral public administration tests and extends theories and concepts from psychology in political-administrative settings. Examples include tests of prospect theory and the choice overload hypothesis in public-administrative settings. Second, it tests and extends the micro-foundations of public administration theories and concepts, such as concerning co-production and isomorphism. Third, behavioral public administration scholars develop new theories and concepts. This has probably been less widespread than the previous two uses, but is nonetheless already apparent in, for instance, concepts such as public service motivation, policy alienation, and administrative burden. Fourth, behavioral public administration can help in tackling practical public problems. Insights from behavioral public administration have been used to increase diversity within public organizations and reduce burnout. The field of behavioral public administration can develop further. The field could move beyond one-shot single studies and aim to build cumulative knowledge. This can be done via large-scale collaborations and replications. In addition, it is also beneficial if behavioral public administration scholars broaden their methodological toolkit to answer different kinds of research questions. It should not only focus on causal inference questions but also on questions concerning description of societal problems (e.g. via representative surveys) or concerning prediction (e.g. by using machine learning).

show abstract

Section: Developing New Theories and Conceptsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Behavioral Public Administration

Tummers¹

2020

Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…During the retrenchment, organizations are likely to fall short on critically needed competencies but are at the same time unable to hire people with the necessary knowledge and skills. Furthermore, the cutback situation puts civil servants under pressure, as they need to fulfill extra tasks related to cutbacks and crisis more generally (see Lodge and Hood 2012;Savi and Cepilovs 2016) as well as to fill in the gaps left by layoffs or a hiring freeze. It is, therefore, difficult for civil servants to find the additional time and energy needed for the preparation and implementation of reforms.…”

Section: Human Resourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The comparative study of Estonian and Latvian executive agencies by Savi and Cepilovs (2016) turns attention to the impact of fiscal crisis on street-level bureaucrats. Both countries experienced sharp cuts in public personnel expenditures resulting in diverse public service gaps which eventually led to burdens on citizens, hence turning out neither equal nor fair for the target groups.…”

Section: Organizational Climatementioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of Fiscal Crisis on Public Administration Reforms in Europe

Randma‐Liiv

Kickert

2017

Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The world economy continues to grapple with the aftermath of the deepest and most widespread recession in over half a century. The global financial and economic crisis, followed by fiscal crisis, led most Western governments to plan and implement austerity measures in order to cope with the concurrent problems of lower revenues and high public deficit and debt. This did not only influence the delivery and quality of public services, but also the way public administration itself functions. Even though the economic figures show signs of restoring economic growth, the influence of fiscal stress on public administration and management is likely to continue for several years to come. This special issue aims to identify both systemic reform trends in public administration as well as changes in patterns of public management occurring during the retrenchment and immediate years following the cutbacks. Fiscal crisis can provide an opportunity for policy change since it delegitimizes long-standing policies underpinning the status quo. Europe offers an interesting context for examining the impact of the fiscal crisis on public administration because it involves countries which were hit by the fiscal crisis to a different degree. The large-scale comparison of 14 European countries presented in this issue allows us to conclude that more substantial reforms were carried out in countries most severely hit by the crisis and/or where administrative reforms were conditioned by the international financial assistance. That is why the articles in this issue look at the countries which were hit the hardest by the crisis, including Estonia, Italy, Ireland and Latvia. At the same time, fiscal crisis and changes in public administration do not necessarily go hand in hand. Although the popular saying calls for not wasting "a good crisis" and using it for carrying out long-awaited changes and structural reforms, several academics have noted that because of the time pressure involved in curbing budget deficits, policy makers' attention has been diverted from comprehensive and time-consuming preparation and implementation of structural reforms. The argumentation for and against the reforms during the era of fiscal crisis presents a central puzzle that this special issue addresses. The main claims around this puzzle are outlined below.

show abstract

“…Classifying coping of street-level bureaucrats Based onTummers, Bekkers, Vink and Musheno (2015) Post and Ray 2017;Liu, Tang, Lo and Zhan 2016;Møller 2016;Savi and Cepilovs 2016;Schillemans and van Twist 2016;Sowa and Lu 2016;Tummers 2017; Tummers and Rocco 2015; van Loon and Jakobsen 2017; Yang and Ortega 2016; Zang 2016). Here, we discuss this work.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Discretion and Bureaucracy

Pedersen¹

2019

Discretion and the Quest for Controlled Freedom

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

show abstract

Central Decisions, Decentralized Solutions: Comparing the Implications of Central Cutback Policy for the Agency Level in Estonia and Latvia

Cited by 8 publications

References 23 publications

Behavioral Public Administration

Behavioral Public Administration

The Impact of Fiscal Crisis on Public Administration Reforms in Europe

Discretion and Bureaucracy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About