Re-organizing the service-delivery machine in a “post-NPM” era: a shopping-basket approach?

Figures & data

Table 1. Big models-big claims: the basics and its application for service-delivery.

Model	Core claim	Most common coordination mechanism	Examples of coordination mechanisms for service-delivery
NPM	To make government more efficient and ‘consumer-responsive’.	Market-type mechanisms (MTms); performance indicators, targets, competitive contracts, quasi-markets.	Privatization; corporatization; decentralization
NWS	To modernize the traditional state apparatus so that it becomes more professional, efficient, and responsive. The state remains a distinctive actor with its own rules, methods, and culture.	Authority exercised through a disciplined hierarchy of impartial and professional officials.	Vertical integration: Coordination mechanisms based on rules, methods, and tools, such as centralized regulation, hierarchical monitoring, centrally defined standards, procedures, and clauses.
NPG	To make government more effective and legitimate by including a wider range of social actors in both policymaking and implementation.	Networks of and partnerships between stakeholders. These bring different skills and resources to address complex problems.	Horizontal integration: inter-local and inter-organizational cooperation and coordination; network and partnerships

Source: Adapted from (Pollitt and Bouckaert 2017) (p. 22).

Table 2. Databases and surveys sources and main characteristics.

		Service	Year	Institutional Source	Type of database	Respondents
Country-wide	Global	Multi service Remunicipalization	2000–2023	Transnational Institute & U. Glasgow	Public Futures Database	NGOs & other associations
	Italy	Multi-service	1990–2023	Department for Internal and Territorial Affairs. Ministry of Interior*	Public registry	Local governments
	Italy	Corporations	2000–2023	Fondazione ANCI-IFEL*	Public registry	Local governments
	Italy	Water	2010–2020	Utilities*	Public registry	Local governments
	Italy	Privatisations & Corporations	2010–2022	Italian National Institute of Statistics*	Public registry	Local governments
	Italy	Privatisations & Corporations	2010–2022	Court of Accounts*	Survey	Local officials
	Spain	Corporations	Since 2002	Inventory of local public sector entities. Ministry of Finance	Public registry	Local governments
	Spain	Waste & Water	2003	U. Barcelona	Survey	Local officials
	Spain	Water	2000–2022	U. Granada, U. València & U. Barcelona	Official Gazettes Provinces	Surveyed by scholars
	Spain	Multi service	2014–2020	Registry of local public services costs. Ministry of Finance	Public registry	Local governments
Regional	Catalonia	Waste & Water	2000	U. Barcelona	Survey	Local officials
	Aragon	Waste & Water	2003	U. Zaragoza & U. Barcelona	Survey	Local officials
	Galicia	Waste	2005	U. Aut. de Madrid	Survey	Local officials
	Andalusia	Water	1984–2009	U. Granada & U. València	Official Gazettes Provinces	Surveyed by scholars
	Catalonia	Waste	2006	U. Barcelona	Survey	Local officials
	Aragon	Waste	2008	U. Zaragoza & U. Barcelona	Survey	Local officials
	Catalonia	Water	2019	ACCO	Public registry	Local governments
	Catalonia	Waste	2019	U. Barcelona & U. Oxford	Survey	Local officials

U.= University; ACCO: Catalan Regional Competition Authority; * For Italian sources, data are available both at country-wide and at regional and local level.

Supra-local public registries are fed by data provided by local governments. Surveys from universities were addressed to municipalities and answered by local officials. Typical response rates were between 25% (Spain, 2003, > 2000 inhabitants) and 80% (Aragon, 2008, > 1000 inhabitants).

Authors.

Table 3. Institutions, governance, and main results of local reforms in Italy and Spain.

	Italy	Spain
Legal & administrative traditions	Civil Law – French Legal Origin. Napoleonic-type of Administration	Civil Law – French Legal Origin. Napoleonic-type of Administration
Institutional context	Regionalist State	Unitarian State with Administrative Decentralization at Regional level (also Financial Decentralization in the Basque Country and Navarre)
Local government structure	Two tiers generally: .1. Municipalities: basic level. Taxing power and responsibility for many public services. .2. Provinces: second degree election	Two tiers generally: .1. Municipalities: basic level. Relevant taxing power and responsibility for many public services. 2. Provinces (second degree election; Supporting purposes; no tax powers) In several regions other intermediate layers exist (e.g. counties in Aragon and Catalonia; island councils in Balearic and Canary Islands)
Urban structure	7,901 municipalities, of which 5,534 with less than 5,000 inhabitants. Median population is little above 2,500.	8,131 municipalities. Average population is 5,911. Median is little above 500
Privatisation	While in the early 1990s Italy was characterized by a large wave of privatization, privatization processes only happened to a limited extent in Italy with limited privatization at the local level in the different policy sectors.	Privatization of local public services was historically important in Spain, and intensified in the last two decades of the 20th century, causing an expansion of private management, market mechanisms for awarding contracts, emphasis on efficiency financial, etc. The privatization wave decreased in the first decade of the 21st century, and in the last decade there is more balance in the choice between private and public.
Reforms in service provision	Amalgamation ➔ As result of the defragmentation policy launched in Italy in the last decade, mergers had significantly increased. A total of 135 merger processes had been registered. Cooperation ➔ Remarkable increase in inter-municipal cooperation in the last decade, as result of the massive use of policy tools by national and regional governments	Amalgamation ➔ It has never been a policy in Spain. Only very few voluntary mergers have taken place in the last two decades, and the total number of municipalities has increased. Cooperation ➔ Remarkable increase in inter-municipal cooperation in the last two decades. Cooperation can use both public and private production.
Reforms in service production	Corporatization ➔ Very high number of municipal companies considering the total number of Italian municipalities, even if mainly concentrated in Northern regions. Local public holdings are also common. Re-municipalization ➔ Very few cases (6)	Corporatization ➔ Increase in corporatization in the first decade of the current century. Municipalities that want to use private-type management mechanisms without going private create ‘public companies’ or ‘public agencies’ (different degree of autonomy and subjection to the law: administrative for agencies; commercial for companies). TPA adopts NPM features without ownership change. Remunicipalization ➔ Relatively intense in Spain -comparative terms- in the last decade. Bringing back service delivery under government responsibility is often done by means of a corporation (rather than traditional in-house).

Authors.

Pollitt, Christopher, and Geert. Bouckaert. 2017. “Comparative Public Management Reform: An Introduction to the Key Debates.” In Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis -Into the Age of Austerity, edited by C. Pollitt and G. Bouckaert, 1–30. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

 Google Scholar