Central European University, Special Projects OfficeRoma Access Program 2010/2011

Introduction to Public Policy II1

Tutor: Sara Svensson Email: svensson_sara@ceu-budapest.edu

1. Description of the course

Building on the foundation of knowledge developed during semester 1, this course introduces students to a more systematic exploration of the contextual framework in which public policy is being formulated, negotiated and implemented. The course is divided into three parts, each comprising eight seminars.

The first part is devoted to applied public policy, looking at sector and governance-level specific studies. We discuss and problematize the central role of case studies in policy sciences, as well as the inherent strengths and weaknesses of interdisciplinarity. Examples are drawn from the fields of specialization within the CEU Department of Public Policy. This allows us to draw on, and interact, with in-house expertise. Guest lecturers are expected to attend several of these seminars. To accommodate the schedules of the guest lecturers we might occasionally switch the order of the seminars.

The second part deals with the role of institutions and actors in policy analysis. Policy processes are embedded in an institutional framework, which defines “the rules of the game” and determines who has access to decisions and how they are made. Therefore, we will begin by discussing some of the basic concepts and principles of (representative) democracy, as well as questions of legitimacy, accountability and control. We then turn to the opposing perspectives for policy analyses offered by following the logic of consequences versus the logic of appropriateness. The former leads us to explore behaviorism, rational choice and game theory as frameworks, tools and approaches through which policy processes can be understood and made sense of. The latter emphasizes issues such as norms and socialization with equally important consequences for policy-making.

In the third part we look at how the public administration matter in how policy is formulated, decided and implemented. It introduces students to basic theories and approaches in the field, and explores widely debated issues relating to government reform and modernization efforts. We discuss how the boundary between the public and the private domains has been influenced by these processes, and how that can be taken into account in policy analysis. Finally, normative issues connected to the

1 The syllabus is partially based on the courses ‘Introduction to Public Policy II and “Public Administration and Public Sector Management”, developed by Andreea Nastase for the Roma Access Program 2009.

1

study of public administration and management are touched upon: the tensions between bureaucracy and democracy, the imperative – and institutional mechanisms – for ensuring accountability within the bureaucracy, and the ethics of public office.

2. Course objectives

The objectives of the course are: To expose students to the diversity and inherent interdisciplinary nature of

public policy; To further develop students' capacity to engage critically with the theoretical

literature, and present arguments in a structured, concise and accessible way, both orally and in writing;

To help students develop a systematic and critical understanding of the core concepts and theoretical approaches in the field of public policy, including their potential conceptual and empirical limitations.

3. Course structure

Part 1 – Applied public policy: sector and governance-level specific studies First session Second session

Week 1January 10th-14th

Introduction Cohesion or fragmentation? The use of cases and sector perspectives

Week 2 January 17th-21st

Cultural policy Higher Education Policy

Week 3January 24th-28th

Media, information and communications policy

Decentralized government

Week 4January 31st-February 4th

European Public Policy : International public policy

Part 2 – The Role of Institutions and Actors in Policy AnalysisFirst session Second session

Week 5February 7th-11th

Introduction: preliminaries of democracy

Friends and foes of democracy: the role of interest groups in the policy process

Week 6 February 14th-18th

The logic of consequences versus the logic of appropriateness:

Logic of consequences: the basics of the rational choice approach

Week 7February 21st-25th

Logic of consequences: the basics of game theory

The logic and dilemmas of collective action

Week 8 Logic of appropriateness: new institutionalism in

Review session

2

February 28th-March 4th

social science research

Part 3 – Understanding Public Administration and Public Sector Management

First session Second sessionWeek 9 March 7th-11th

Introduction: review of the traditional model of public administration versus new public management

Public administration reform – the view from post-communist states

Week 10March 14th-18th

The shifting boundaries between the public and private domains

The fundamentals of organizational management

Week 11March 21st-25th

Dealing with people: the civil service system

Organizational culture and leadership

Week 12March 28th-April 1st

Bureaucratic accountability and ethics

Review Session

4. Course requirements

A reader has been compiled for this course. It includes key contributions in the field, selected chapters from classic textbooks of public policy, as well as examples of recent relevant research in academic journals. The readings are divided in two categories: “required readings” (which are mandatory) and “further readings” (which students may consult in addition to the required readings, to get a deeper understanding on the topic of the day). A list of “general readings” has also been prepared – the titles included here can be considered as an optional complement to this reader.

Assessment of students' performance will be based on the following:

Participation 15% Seminar presentation 15% 6 short position papers 30% Final paper outline 10% Final paper 30%

Participation compasses being present as well as taking active part in discussions. Late arrivals should be avoided. If students are not able to attend a class, they should let the tutor know in advance as well as notifying the Program Manager in accordance with the Student Guidelines. Students whose performance in respect to participation has not been satisfactory (below C+) should receive a warning in writing no later than February 21.

3

Once during the semester student are expected to give an oral presentation2 of the topic of the session, plus some critical points and/or application to a real-world case. The topics for presentation will be distributed during the first week of the course. Students are advised to send an outline of the presentation at least three working days before it is taking place in order to enable critical feedback and suggestions.

At least six times during the semester students are expected to write short position papers of 450-650 words. The position paper should be on the topic of a seminar and contain a concise summary of the main argument in a required or recommended reading, followed by own observations, questions, or critical points. Students may themselves select for which seminars to write position papers, but are advised to have done at least 4 by the start of the third part of the course. The position papers should be sent by email to both the tutor and fellow students no later than 24 hours prior to the start of the seminar. Students should be prepared to discuss their conclusions in class.

A one-page outline of the final paper should be submitted by February 26. Students may choose topics and questions for their final papers freely, as long as they are feasible to carry out within the time-frame, and related to the content of the course. Students can also ask the tutor for topic suggestions. The outline should contain the question to be addressed in the paper, a description of sources to be consulted and/or method to be used to answer the question, and a brief background to the topic.

The final paper is due April 4, and should not exceed 2,500 words.

Note that students must achieve a ‘C+’ grade for each specific assignment in order to be allowed to continue to the third semester

5. List of general readings

Anderson, James E. 1994. Public Policymaking: An Introduction. 2nd ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

2 Guidelines for presentations: You should assume that your colleagues have read the “required reading” in advance, therefore it is very important to provide some added value, and not simply summarize the points made by the author. In order to achieve this, you may present your own critical assessment of the text, use interesting examples, relate the text to other contributions or approaches, link theoretical and empirical aspects. In order to deliver a successful presentation, you may need to selectively go through the recommended further reading. The success of a presentation also depends on your public speaking abilities and the capacity to keep the audience interested and involved. Logistical aids such as PowerPoint and handouts can help you achieve this but are not mandatory. If you have little experience talking in public, rehearsing the presentation (by yourself or with some friends) can also help, especially for keeping the time limit. Some useful advice on how to produce and deliver presentations can be found here: http://www.canberra.edu.au/studyskills/learning/oral

4

Bardach, Eugene. 2000. A practical guide for policy analysis : the eightfold path to more effective problem solving. New York: Chatham House Publishers.

Birkland, Thomas A. 2001. An Introduction to the Policy Process: Theories, Concepts and Models of Public Policy Making. Armonk & London: M.E. Sharpe.

Colebatch, H.K. 2002. Policy. 2nd ed. Buckingham ; Philadelphia: Open University Press.

Farazmand ,Ali (ed.). 1994. Handbook of Bureaucracy, New York: Marcel Dekker.

Hill, Michael, ed. 1993. The Policy Process: a reader. New York: Harvester-Wheatsheaf.

Hill, Michael, and Peter Hupe. 2002. Implementing public policy : governance in theory and practice. London: Sage.

Hood, Christopher. 1998. The Art of the State: Culture, Rhetoric, and Public Management. Oxford: Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press.

Howlett, Michael, and M. Ramesh. 2003. Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles and Policy Subsystems. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hughes, Owen E. 2003. Public Management and Administration: An Introduction. Third Edition. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Kingdon, John W. 2002. Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies. New York. Lane, Jan-Erik. 1993. The public sector : concepts, models and approaches.

London: Sage Publications. Le Grand, Julian. 2003. Motivation, Agency and Public Policy: Of Knights and

Knaves, Pawns and Queens. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Moran, Michael, Martin Rein, and Robert E. Goodin, eds. 2006. The Oxford

Handbook of Public Policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Parsons, Wayne. 1995. Public policy: an introduction to the theory and

practice of policy analysis. Aldershot and Brookfield: Edward Elgar Pub. Peters, B. Guy. 1989. The Politics of Bureaucracy. 3rd ed. New York:

Longman Peters, B. Guy and Jon Pierre (eds.). 2003. Handbook of Public

Administration. London, Thousand Oaks, New Dehli: SAGE Publications. Rainey, Hal G. 2003. Understanding and managing public organizations.

Third Edition. San Francisco: 4 Jossey-Bass. Rosenbloom, David H., Deborah D. Goldman, and Patricia W. Ingraham.

(eds.). 1994. Contemporary Public Administration. New York: McGraw-Hill. Sabatier, Paul A. 1999. Theories of the policy process. Boulder, Colorado:

Westview Press. Shepsle, Kenneth A., and Mark S. Bonchek. 1997. Analyzing politics :

rationality, behavior, and institutions. New York: Norton. Theodoulou, Stella Z., and Matthew A. Cahn, eds. 1995. Public policy : the

essential readings.Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall. Wright, Glen, and Juraj Nemec, eds. 2002. Public Management in the Central

and Eastern European Transition: Concepts and Cases. Bratislava: NISPAcee.

Young, Eoin, and Lisa Quinn. 2002. Writing Effective Public Policy Papers: A Guide for Policy Advisers in Central and Eastern Europe. 2nd ed. Budapest:

5

Local Government and Public Service Reform Initiative, Open Society Institute.

Useful websites: The Local Government and Public Service Reform Initiative, Open Society

Institute, Budapest:http://lgi.osi.hu/

The Center for Policy Studies, CEU - The Policy Documentation Center:http://pdc.ceu.hu/

The OECD Public Governance and Management section:http://www.oecd.org/topic/0,3373,en_2649_37405_1_1_1_1_37405,00.html

The SIGMA Program (Support for Improvement in Governance and Management Program):http://www.sigmaweb.org/pages/0,3417,en_33638100_33638151_1_1_1_1_1,00.html

The European Institute of Public Administration:http://www.eipa.nl/en/home/

The World Bank Institute:www.worldbank.org/wbi

6. The course program in detail

PART I

Week 1 (January 10th – 14th ):

Session 1: Introduction

What will you have learned after having taken this course?

Why is the course structured as it is?

How can you get the best out of this course, while also keeping up with your other requirements?

In the introductory reading we also discuss feedback and final papers from the previous semester.

No required readings.

Session 2: Cohesion or fragmentation? The use of cases and sector perspectives

6

Why do sector-specific studies play such a major role in policy studies?

Is there a ‘silo’ effect in the discipline?

What is the use of case studies in policy research?

Required reading:

Etzioni, Amitai. 2006. The Unique Methodology of Policy Research. In Moran, Rein and Goodin, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Public Policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, p 833-843.

Further readings:

Yin, Robert K. 2003. Case Study Research. Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Chapter 1, page 1-18.

Week 2 ( January 17th – 21st)

Session 3: Cultural Policy

Introduction to the DPP MA Stream “Cultural Policy”

Case study discussion.

Required readings:

UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions. 2005. Available at < http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=31038&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html>

Article 167, Lisbon Treaty. 2009.

Further readings:

Klaic, Dragan. 2007. Mobility of Imagination. Budapest: CAC publications, in conjunction with Euclid, UK and the Budapest Observatory.

Miller, Toby and George Yudice. 2002. Cultural policy. London; Thousand Oaks, Calif.:Sage.

Session 4: Higher Education Policy

Introduction to the DPP MA Stream “Higher Education Policy:”

Case study discussion.

7

Required readings:

Leisyte, Liudvika and Danguole Kizniene. 2006. New Public Management in Lithuania’s Higher Education. Higher Education Policy, 29: 377-396.

Sporn, Barbara. 2009. Convergence or Divergence in International Higher Education Policy. Lessons from Europe. Available at < http://firgoa.usc.es/drupal/files/ffpfp0305.pdf>.

Further readings:

Altbach, Philip G, Liz Reisberg,and Laura E. Rumbley, eds. 2009. Trends in Global Higher Education: Tracking an Academic Revolution. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College Center for International Higher Education, 2009)

Week 3 (January 24th-28th):

Session 5: Media, information and communications policy

Introduction to the DPP MA Stream “Higher Education Policy:”

Case study discussion. “What is role of independent regulatory agencies (IRA:s) in the formation and implementation of media policies?” “Do IRA:s differ in this sector from other sectors?”

Required readings:

INDIREG Preliminary Final Report. Indicators for independence and efficient functioning of audiovisual media services regulatory bodies for the purpose of enforcing the rules in the AVMS Directive” (SMART 2009/0001). Executive Summary and Chapter 4.3, p 7-10, p 356-364.

Recommended readings:

Van Cuilenburg, Jan, and McQuail, Denis (2003). "Media Policy Paradigm Shifts: Towards a New Communications Policy Paradigm". European Journal of Communication, June 2003 vol. 18 no. 2, 181-207.

Session 6: Decentralized government

Introduction to the DPP MA Stream “Decentralized government”

Case study discussion.

Required reading:

tbc

Further readings:

8

Tbc

Week 4 (January 31st – February 4th)

Session 7: European Public Policy

Introduction to the DPP MA Stream “European Public Policy”

Class discussion: “How and to whom does the European Union deliver public policies?” “How are citizens and non-government actors represented in the EU policy-making process?”

Required reading:

Warleigh-Lack, A./ Drachenberg, R.: Policy Making in the European Union, in: Cini, M./ Pérez-Solórzano Borragán, N. (eds.): European Union Politics, 3rd edition, Oxford: OUP 2010.

Further readings:

Montpetit, E. 2009. Governance and policy learning in the European Union: a comparison with North America. Journal of European Public Policy, 16:8, 1185-1203.

Session 8: International Public Policy

Introduction to the DPP MA Stream “International Public Policy”

Class discussion: “What does globalization mean? What are the effects of globalization on the demand for public policy?”

Required reading:

Murphy, Craig N. 2005. “Global Governance: Poorly Done and Poorly Understood”, In Rorden Wilkinson, The global governance reader. New York: Routledge. Pp 90-102.

Wilkinson, Rorden. 2002. “The contours of courtship. The WTO and civil society”, in Rorden Wilkinson and Steve Hughes, eds, Global Governance: critical perspectives. London: Routledge. Pp. 193-211.

Further readings:

9

McGrew, Anthony. 2005. Globalization and global politics. In J. Baylis, J., and S. Smith, eds. 2005. The globalization of world politics, Oxford: Oxford University Press. P 19-38.

PART II

Week 5 (February 7th-11th)

Session 9: Introduction: preliminaries of democracy

What are the key principles of democracy?

What are the fundamental differences between policymaking in democracies versus authoritarian states?

What does it mean to provide ‘open and accountable’ government?

Required readings:

Beetham, David, and Kevin Boyle. 1995. Introducing Democracy: 80 Questions and Answers. Cambridge, UK: UNIUB, Chapter 3: “Open and Accountable Government”, pp. 62-88.

Further readings:

Beetham, David, and Kevin Boyle. 1995. Introducing Democracy: 80 Questions and Answers. Cambridge, UK: UNIUB., Chapter 1: “Basic Concepts and Principles”, pp. 1-33.

Mulgan, Richard. 2000. “'Accountability': An Ever-Expanding Concept.” Public Administration 78(3):555-573.

Peters, B. Guy. 1989. The Politics of Bureaucracy. 3rd ed. New York: Longman (Chapter 8: “The Politics of Administrative Accountability”).

Session 10: Friends and foes of democracy

What is the role of interest groups in the policy process?

What is the ideal relationship between the state and societal interest? (The examples of pluralism and corporatism)

10

Required readings:

Lindblom, Charles E., and Edward J. Woodhouse. 1993. The Policy-Making Process. 3rd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, Chapter 7: “Interest Groups in Policy making”, pp.73-88.

Further readings:

Ainsworth, Scott H. 2002. Analyzing Interest Groups: Group Influence on People and Policies. New York: Norton.

Avner, Marcia. 2001. The Lobbying and Advocacy Handbook for Nonprofit Organizations: Shaping Public Policy at the State and Local Level. Saint Paul, Minneapolis: Amherst H. Wilder Foundation.

Birkland, Thomas A. 2001. An Introduction to the Policy Process: Theories, Concepts and Models of Public Policy Making. Armonk & London: M.E. Sharpe (Chapter 5: “Agenda setting, power and interest groups”).

Richardson, Jeremy J., ed. 1993. Pressure Groups. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Week 6 (February 14th – 18th)

Session 11: The logic of consequences versus the logic of appropriateness:

What is the difference between the logic of consequence and the logic of appropriateness?

How can this analytical distinction be useful in policy analysis?

Required readings:

J. March & G. Olsen, The Logic of Appropriateness, M. Rein & R. E. Goodin (eds). Oxford Handbook of Public Policy. Oxford University Press, 2006.

Further readings:

Scharpf, Fritz W., Policy Research in the Face of Complexity, in: Fritz W. Scharp (eds), Games Real Actors Play, Westview Press, 1997

Neiman, Max, and Stephen J. Stambough, “Rational Choice Theory and the Evaluation of Public Policy”, Policy Studies Journal, 26:3 (2005), 449 – 465.

11

Session 12: Logic of consequences: the basics of the rational choice approach

What is ‘rational’ with rational choice?

How can rational choice be used in policy analysis?

Required readings:

Shepsle, Kenneth A. 2010. Analyzing politics : rationality, behavior, and institutions. New York: Norton, Chapter 2: “Rationality: the model of choice”, pp. 13-35.

Further readings

Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper.

Peter, John. 1998. Analyzing Public Policy. London and New York: Continuum (Chapter 6: “Rational Choice Theory”, pp. 116-143).

Week 7 (February 21st- 25th):

Session 13: Logic of consequences: the basics of game theory

How can the strategic interaction between actors be formalized?

Required readings:

Dixit, Avinash, and Susan Skeath. 1999. Games of Strategy. New York: Norton. , Chapter 1: “Basic Ideas and Examples”, pp. 1-15, and Chapter 2: “How to think about strategic games”, pp. 15-39.

Further readings:

Dixit, Avinash, and Barry J. Nalebuff. Thinking strategically: the competitive edge in business, politics and everyday life. New York: W.W.Norton.

Hay, Colin, “Theory, Stylized Heuristic, or Self-Fulfilling Prophecy: The Status of Rational Choice” Public Administration. 82: 1 (2004), 39–62.

12

Scharpf, Fritz W. 1997. Games real actors play: actor-centered institutionalism in policy research. Boulder, Col.: Westview Press.

Session 14: The logic and dilemmas of collective action

Is ‘having an interest’ enough to make people contribute to the achievement of joint goals?

Does acting in one’s best interest always lead to the optimal outcome?

Required reading:

Shepsle, Kenneth A. 2010. Analyzing politics: rationality, behavior, and institutions. New York: Norton, Chapter 9: “Collective action”, pp. 262-305.

Further readings:

Mancur, Olson. 1971. The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

Bickers, Kenneth E., and John T. Williams. 2001. Public Policy Analysis: a Political Economy Approach. Boston, New York: Houghton Mifflin, chapter 4.

Ostrom, Elinor. 1991. Governing the commons: the evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Shepsle, Kenneth A., and Mark S. Bonchek. 1997. Analyzing politics: rationality, behavior, and institutions. New York: Norton, Chapter 10: “Public Goods, Externalities and the Commons”.

Week 8 (February 28th – March 4th)

Session 15: Logic of appropriateness: new institutionalism in social science research

How is new institutionalism different from ‘old’ institutionalism?

How does institutionalist policy analysis differ from rationalist policy analysis?

Required reading:

Andersen, Vibeke. 2007. Transparency and Openness: A Reform or Education Policy? Scandinavian Political Studies, 30:1, 38-60.      

Further readings:

13

J. March and J. Olsen, Rediscovering Institutions. The Organizational Basis of Politics, Chapter 1 (New York: Free Press, 1989)

Hall, Peter and Rosemary Taylor. 1996. “Political Science and the Three New Institutionalisms”, Political Studies, Political Studies 44 (1996), pp. 936-957.

LeGrand, J. 2003. Motivation, Agency and Public Policy (Oxford University Press 2003).

Session 16: Review session

No required readings.

PART III

Week 9 (March 7th – March 11thh)

Session 17: Introduction: review of the traditional model of public administration versus new public management

What were the key characteristics of Weberian bureaucracy?

What was the critique against Weber, and how have reforms in response to that critique looked like?

Required reading:

Caiden, Gerald E. 1994. “Excessive Bureaucratization: The J-Curve Theory of Bureaucracy and Max Weber Through the Looking Glass.” In Handbook of Bureaucracy, ed. Ali Farazmand. New York: Marcel Dekker, p. 29-40.

Further readings:

Hughes, Owen E. 2003. Public Management and Administration: An Introduction. Third Edition. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, Chapter 2-3.

Osborne, David, and Ted Gaebler. 1999. “Reinventing Government.” In Current Issues in Public Administration, ed. Frederick S. Lane. Boston, New York: Bedford/St.Martin's , p. 350-360.

14

Weber, Max. 1994. “The Essentials of Bureaucratic Organization: An Ideal-Type Construction.” In Contemporary Public Administration, eds. David H. Rosenbloom, Deborah D. Goldman, and Patricia W. Ingraham. New York: McGraw-Hill, p. 15-22.

Session 18: Public administration reform – the view from post-communist states

What has driven the public administration reforms undertaken in Central and Eastern Europe in the past 2 decades?

How can we characterize public administration in Central and Eastern Europe today?

Required reading:

Staroňová, Katarína. 2006. “The Characteristics of Public Administration Reform in Transition ountries vis a vis Implementation Capacity .” In Implementation: The Missing Link in Public Administration Reform in Central and Eastern Europe , eds. William N. Dunn, Katarína Staroňová, and Sergei Pushkarev. Bratislava: NISPAcee, p. 29-42.

Further readings:

Meyer-Sahling, Jan-Hinrik. 2004. “Civil service reform in post-communist Europe: the bumpy road o depolitization.” Western European Politics 27(1):71-103.

Shaldeva, Magdalena. 2006. “The Effects of Policy Impact Assessment in the Decision Making Process in the Government of the Republic of Macedonia.” In Implementation: The Missing Link in Public Administration Reform in Central and Eastern Europe , eds. William N. Dunn, atarína Staroňová, and Pushkarev. Bratislava: NISPAcee, p. 125-144.

Week 10 (March 14th – March 18th)

Session 19: The shifting boundaries between the public and private domains

Can and should there be a clear distinction between the private and the public sector?

What are the effects of blurring the boundaries?

15

Required reading:

Larason Schneider, Anne. 2000. “Public-Private Partnerships in the US Prison System.” In Public- Private Policy Partnerships, ed. Pauline Vaillancourt Rosenau. Cambridge & London: The MIT Press, p. 199-215.

Further readings:

Brinkerhoff, Derick W., and Benjamin L. Crosby. 2002. Managing policy reform : concepts and tools for decision-makers in developing and transitioning countries. Bloomfield, CT: Kumarian Press, Chapter 4: “Policy Partnerships”, p. 85-115. The MIT Press.

Brinkerhoff, Jennifer M. 2002. Partnership for international development : rhetoric or results? Boulder, Col.: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

The World Bank Institute/ Global Public-Private Partnerships in Infrastructure Web-portal: <http://info.worldbank.org/etools/PPPI-Portal/index.htm>

Session 20: The fundamentals of organizational management

Continuing and building on the discussion from the previous session, how does public management differ from management in private firms?

Required reading:

Allison, Graham T. 1994. “Public and Private Management: Are They Fundamentally Alike in All Unimportant Respects?.” In Contemporary Public Administration, eds. David H. Rosenbloom, Deborah D. Goldman, and Patricia W. Ingraham. New York: McGraw-Hill, p. 151-171.

Further readings:

Bovaird, Tony, and Elke Loffler, eds. 2003. Public Management and Governance. Second Edition. London and New York: Routledge, especially Part II: “Public Management”.

Rainey, Hal G. 2003. Understanding and managing public organizations. Third Edition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, especially Part 2: “Key dimensions of organizing and Managing”.

Šević, Želko, ed. 2003. Gauging success : performance measurement in South Eastern Europe. Budapest: Local Government and Public Service Reform Initiative, Open Society Institute.

The Free Management Library: http://www.managementhelp.org/

16

Week 11 (March 21st – March 25st)

Session 21: Dealing with people: the civil service system

Are people employed in the public sector motivated by different incentives than employees in the private sector?

Do better employees deserve better pay?

Required reading:

Hughes, Owen E. 2003. Public Management and Administration: An Introduction. Third Edition. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, Chapter 8: “Personnel and Performance Management”, p. 149-164.

Further readings:

Raadschelders, Jos C.N., Theo A.J. Toonen, and Frits M. Van der Meer, eds. 2007. The Civil Service of the 21st Century: Comparative Perspectives. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Katula, Michael, and James L. Perry. 2003. “Comparative Performance Pay.” In Handbook of Public Administration, eds. B. Guy Peters and Jon Pierre. London, Thousand Oaks, New Dehli: SAGE Publications, p. 53--61.

Session 22: Organizational culture and leadership

What is organizational culture?

How can leaders change organizational culture?

Required reading:

Schein, Edgar H. 2004. Organizational Culture and Leadership. Third Edition. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass., Chapter 1: “The Concept of Organizational Culture: Why Bother?”, pp.3-23.

Shore, Cris. 2005. “Culture and Corruption in the EU: Reflections of Fraud, Nepotism and Cronyism in the European Commission.” In Corruption: Anthropological Perspectives, eds. Dieter Haller and Cris Shore. London: Pluto Press, p. 131-155.

Further readings:

17

Baker, Kathryn A. “Organizational Culture” (available online at: http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/ awcgate/doe/benchmark/ch11.pdf)

Van Wart, Montgomery. 2003. “Public-Sector Leadership Theory: An Assessment.” Public Administration Review 63(2):214-228.

Week 12 (March 28th – April 1st)

Session 23: Bureaucratic accountability and ethics

To whom and how is the bureaucracy accountable?

Can civil servants be socialized into behaving ‘ethically’?

What does ethics mean in a public administration context?

Required reading:

Mulgan, Richard. 2000. “'Accountability': An Ever-Expanding Concept.” Public Administration 78(3):555-573.

Whitton, Howard. 2009. “Developing the ‘Ethical Competence’ of Public Officials’, in Raymond W Cox III, ed. Ethics and Integrity in Public Administration. Concepts and Cases. Armonk, New York/London, England: M.E. Sharpe. P. 236-255.

Further readings:

Gruber, Judith E. 1987. Controlling Bureaucracies: Dilemmas in Democratic Governance. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press.

Geuras, Dean, and Charles Garofalo. 2005. Practical ethics in public administration. Vienna/ Virginia: Management Concepts, Chapter 3: “What is ethics anyway?”.

Cooper, Terry L., ed. 1994. Handbook of Administrative Ethics. New York: Marcel Dekker.

Peters, B. Guy. 1989. The Politics of Bureaucracy. 3rd ed. New York: Longman, Chapter 8: “ThePolitics of Administrative Accountability”, pp.250-288.

Session 24: Review session

No required readings.

18