Browse by author
Lookup NU author(s): Professor Roderick Rhodes
Full text for this publication is not currently held within this repository. Alternative links are provided below where available.
A governmental tradition is a set of beliefs about the institutions and history of government. In this article I argue the Anglo-Saxon governmental tradition interprets public sector reform differently to the Rechtsstaat, participation tradition of Denmark, leading to different aims, measures and outcomes. In the Introduction, I define NPM arguing that is has become everything and is, therefore a meaningless term. I identify six dimensions to public sector reform: privatization, marketization, corporate management, regulation, decentralization and political control. In section 2, I describe the six dimensions of public sector reform in Britain and Denmark. In section 3, I explain the idea of a governmental tradition and argue the idea is essential to understanding the differences between Britain and Denmark. In section 4, I compare British and Danish governmental traditions, arguing the key differences lie in beliefs about the constitution, bureaucracy and state-civil society relations. Finally, I provide a summary explanation of the differences and argue that traditions not only shape the aims, measures and outcomes of public sector reform but also lead to different interpretations of reform and its dilemmas. In Britain, the key dilemma concerns central steering capacity. In Denmark, the main dilemma is democratic accountability.
Author(s): Rhodes RAW
Publication type: Article
Publication status: Published
Journal: Scandinavian Political Studies
Year: 1999
Volume: 22
Issue: 4
Pages: 341-370
Print publication date: 01/01/1999
ISSN (print): 0080-6757
ISSN (electronic):
Publisher: Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9477.00023
DOI: 10.1111/1467-9477.00023
Altmetrics provided by Altmetric
