Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory Advance Access originally published online on September 8, 2005
Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 2006 16(3):467-494; doi:10.1093/jopart/mui057
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
New Public Management Is Dead—Long Live Digital-Era Governance
London School of Economics and Political Science
Oxford Internet Institute, Oxford University
London School of Economics and Political Science
Address correspondence to Patrick Dunleavy at p.dunleavy{at}lse.ac.uk.
The "new public management" (NPM) wave in public sector organizational change was founded on themes of disaggregation, competition, and incentivization. Although its effects are still working through in countries new to NPM, this wave has now largely stalled or been reversed in some key "leading-edge" countries. This ebbing chiefly reflects the cumulation of adverse indirect effects on citizens' capacities for solving social problems because NPM has radically increased institutional and policy complexity. The character of the post-NPM regime is currently being formed. We set out the case that a range of connected and information technology–centered changes will be critical for the current and next wave of change, and we focus on themes of reintegration, needs-based holism, and digitization changes. The overall movement incorporating these new shifts is toward "digital-era governance" (DEG), which involves reintegrating functions into the governmental sphere, adopting holistic and needs-oriented structures, and progressing digitalization of administrative processes. DEG offers a perhaps unique opportunity to create self-sustaining change, in a broad range of closely connected technological, organizational, cultural, and social effects. But there are alternative scenarios as to how far DEG will be recognized as a coherent phenomenon and implemented successfully.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  P. Davis and K. West What Do Public Values Mean for Public Action?: Putting Public Values in Their Plural Place The American Review of Public Administration, December 1, 2009; 39(6): 602 - 618. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. C. Demchak and K. D. Fenstermacher Institutionalizing Behavior-Based Privacy Administration Society, November 1, 2009; 41(7): 783 - 814. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 G. Green, C. Price, A. Lipp, and R. Priestley Partnership structures in the WHO European Healthy Cities project Health Promot. Int., November 1, 2009; 24(suppl_1): i37 - i44. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. Melian-Gonzalez and J. Bulchand-Gidumal Good moves, mistakes and unexpected events in an initiative to improve public management in the ICT service provision at a university International Review of Administrative Sciences, June 1, 2009; 75(2): 271 - 291. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Morgan and S. Fraser Looked After Young People and their Social Work Managers: A Study of Contrasting Experiences of Using Computer-Assisted-Self-Interviewing (A-CASI) Br. J. Soc. Work, February 12, 2009; (2009) bcp009v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Ramesh Autonomy and Control in Public Hospital Reforms in Singapore The American Review of Public Administration, March 1, 2008; 38(1): 62 - 79. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. Laking and R. Norman Imitation and inspiration in public sector reform: lessons from Commonwealth experiences International Review of Administrative Sciences, December 1, 2007; 73(4): 517 - 530. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|