Public Sector Reform in Central Asia and the Caucasus

References

• Andrews, C. W. (2008). Legitimacy and context: Implications for public sector reform in developing countries. Public Administration and Development, 28(3), 171–180.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrews, M. (2013). The limits of institutional reform in development: Changing rules for realistic solutions. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Andrews, M., & Manning, N. (2016). A guide to peer-to-peer learning: How to make peer-to-peer support and learning effective in the public sector. Paris: Effective Institutions Platform. Retrieved from www.effectiveinstitutions.org.
   Google Scholar
• Baimenov, A., & Everest-Phillips, M. (2016). A shared perspective on public administration and international development. Public Administration Review, 76(3), 389–390.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Batley, R., McCourt, W., & McLoughlin, C. (2012). The politics and governance of public services in developing countries. Public Management Review, 14(2), 131–144.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhuiyan, S., & Amagoh, F. (2011). Public sector reform in Kazakhstan: Issues and perspectives. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 24(3), 227–249.
   Google Scholar
• Boarini, R., Kolev, A., & McGregor, A. University of Sussex (2014) Measuring well-being and progress in countries at different stages of development: Towards a more universal conceptual framework. OECD Development Centre Working Paper 325: Paris, France.
   Google Scholar
• Bouckaert, G., & Van Dooren, W. (2016). Performance measurement and management in public sector organizations. In: T. Bovaird, & E. Loeffler (eds), Public management and governance (3rd ed., pp. 148–161). London, UK: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Brinkerhoff, D. W., & Brinkerhoff, J. M. (2015). Public sector management reform in developing countries: Perspectives beyond NPM orthodoxy. Public Administration and Development, 35, 222–237.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brinkerhoff, D. W., & Crosby, B. L. (2002). Managing policy reform: Concepts and tools for decision-makers in developing and transitioning countries. Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press.
   Google Scholar
• Carnegie Trust and OECD. (2016). Sharpening our focus: Guidance on well-being frameworks for cities and regions. Dunfermline, Scotland: The Carnegie UK Trust.
   Google Scholar
• Dass, M., & Abbott, K. (2008). Modelling new public management in an Asian context: Public sector reform in Malaysia. Asian Journal of Public Administration, 30(1), 59–82.
   Google Scholar
• Dunleavy, P. (1991). Democracy, bureaucracy and public choice. Hemel Hempstead, New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
   Google Scholar
• Effective Institutions Platform (2016) Effective institutions platform concept note: Peer-to-peer learning alliance: Retrieved from https://www.effectiveinstitutions.org/en/
   Google Scholar
• European Union (2016) Quality of life indicators: Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Quality_of_life_indicators_-_measuring_quality_of_life
   Google Scholar
• Friedman, M. (2005). Trying hard is not good enough: How to produce measurable improvements for customers and communities. Great Britain, Marston Gate: FPSI Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Grindle, M. (2007). Good enough governance revisited. Development Policy Review, 25(5), 553–574.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grindle, M. (2012). Jobs for the boys: Patronage and the state in comparative perspective. Cambridge Massachusetts, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., & Mastruzzi, M. (2010). The worldwide governance indicators: Methodology and analytical issues. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 5430. Washington, DC: World Bank.
   Google Scholar
• Knox, C. (2008). Kazakhstan: Modernising government in the context of political inertia. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 74(3), 477–496.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knox, C., & Carmichael, P. (2015). Local government reform: Community planning and the quality of life in Northern Ireland. Administration, 63(2), 31–57.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhlmann, S., & Wollmann, H. (2014). Introduction to comparative public administration: Administrative systems and reforms in Europe. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Levy, B. (2014). Working with the grain: Integrating governance and growth in development strategies. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Manning, N. (2001). The legacy of new public management in developing countries. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 67(2), 297–312.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Massey, A. (ed.). (2013). Public sector reform. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Mayne, J. (2007). Best practice in results-based management. New York, NY: United Nations Secretariat.
   Google Scholar
• McCourt, W. (2002). New public management in developing countries. In: K. McLaughlin, S. Osborne, & E. Ferlie (eds), New public management: Current trends and future prospects (pp. 227–242). London, UK: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Nunberg, B., & Taliercio, R. R. (2012). Sabotaging civil service reform in aid-dependent countries: Are donors to blame? World Development:, 40(10), 970–1981.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Official development assistance: List of developing countries. Retrieved from : http://www.oecd.org/dac/stats/documentupload/DAC%20List%20of%20ODA%20Recipients%202014%20final.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD]. (2014). Public governance review Kazakhstan: Review of the central administration. Paris, France: OECD Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD]. (2015). Multi-dimensional review of Kazakhstan: Volume 1 – initial assessment. Paris, France: OECD Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Polidano, C. (2001). Why civil service reforms fail. Public Management Review, 3(3), 345–361.
   Google Scholar
• Polidano, C., & Hulme, D. (1999). Public management reform in developing countries. Public Management: An International Journal of Research and Theory, 1(1), 121–132.
   Google Scholar
• Pollitt, C. (2013). Back in the OECD … an oblique comment on the World Bank’s better results from public sector institutions. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 79(3), 406–412.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pritchett, L. (2013). The World Bank and public sector management: What next? International Review of Administrative Sciences, 79(3), 413–420.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pugh, G. (2010). Outcomes Based Accountability: A brief summary. In: T. Chamberlain, S. Golden, & F. Walker (eds), Implementing outcomes-based accountability in children’s services: An overview of the process and impact. Local government group research report (pp. 17–22). Slough, UK: NFER.
   Google Scholar
• Regional Hub of Civil Service in Astana. (2014). Partnership for civil service excellence. Astana, Kazakhstan: ACSH and UNDP. See also: http://www.regionalhub.org
   Google Scholar
• Schedler, K., & Proeller, I. (2010). Outcomes-oriented public management: A responsibility based approach to new public management. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Schneider, B. R., & Heredia, B. (2003). Reinventing Leviathan: The politics of administrative reform in developing countries. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers and North-South Center Press.
   Google Scholar
• Siegel, J. P. (2006). Probleme und Defizite bei der Reform der US-Bundesverwaltung: Erste Ergebnisse einer mat-analytischen Untersuchung. In: K. Birkholz, C. Maass, P. Von Maravic, & P. Siebart ( Hrsg.), Public management – Eine neue generation in Wissenschaft and Praxis (S.201 220). Potsdam, Germany: Universitätsverlag.
   Google Scholar
• UK Audit Commission (2015). Local quality of life indicators: Retrieved from http://www.audit-commission.gov.uk.
   Google Scholar
• Wimbush, E. (2011). Implementing an outcomes approach to public management and accountability in the UK – Are we learning the lessons? Public Money and Management, 31(3), 211–218.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Bank. (1999). Civil service reform: A review of World Bank assistance: Report No. 19211. Washington, DC: World Bank.
   Google Scholar
• World Bank. (2012). World Bank approach to public sector management, 2011–2020. Washington, DC: World Bank.
   Google Scholar
• World Bank Institute. (2017). Worldwide Governance Indicators. Retrieved from: info.worldbank.org/governance/
   Google Scholar
• Xavier, J. A. (2013). The World Bank approach to public sector management 2011-2020: Lessons from the Malaysian experience. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 79(3), 426–432.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar