DSpace - Tor Vergata >
Facoltà di Economia >
Tesi di dottorato in economia >

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/2108/1291

Full metadata record

DC FieldValueLanguage
contributor.advisorRanalli, Francesco-
contributor.advisorHuse, Morten-
contributor.authorCalabrò, Andrea-
coverage.spatialItalyen
coverage.spatialNorwayen
coverage.spatialEuropeen
date.accessioned2010-06-16T10:16:02Z-
date.available2010-06-16T10:16:02Z-
date.issued2010-06-16T10:16:02Z-
identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2108/1291-
description22. cicloen
description.abstractPublic services play a central role in the well-being, sustainability and growth of communities, cities and nations. However, globally, public services have emerged from a period of considerable criticism. This period of challenge to public services was generated by the rise of neo-liberal ideologies in the 1980s and 1990s (Hartely et al., 2008). During this period market solutions were implemented instead of State provisions. Privatizations and disinvestments played a central role in that process (Cafferata, 1993) taken place on the grounds that management is underpinned by certain general principles and practices (New Public Management) which can be applied across a range of businesses, organizations and sectors (Pollit and Bouckaert, 2004). The current situation is characterized by new forms of relationships between State and society. The role of both government and public services are considered fundamental in order to create stable social and economic conditions by actively involving citizens and community organizations. Therefore, the inter-relationships between the public, the private and the voluntary sectors in the design and provision of public services are increased (Ferlie et al., 2005). In recent years, two seem to be the key questions: how are public service organizations governed? And, are we asking the right questions? These questions arise from the fact that nowadays, the public sector has differences among countries and many actors are producing and providing public services through different modes of governance. Actually, it is possible that public private partnerships (hereafter denoted as PPPs) (Klijn, 2008), outsourcing, state owned companies, municipal corporations (Grossi and Mussari, 2009; Grossi e Reichard, 2008), third sector and voluntary organizations, citizens, etc. might coexist. However, many issues may arise, for example, from the use of PPPs, co-production with civil society organizations, and other new governance arrangements. These developments open up questions about the extent to which such new organizational forms deliver benefits of innovation, efficiency and responsiveness, as well as their impact on processes of steering and accountability in a democratic context. Even if this fragmented reality gives more challenges to the provision and production of public services and goods to citizens however it raises many accountability problems due to the overlapping of roles and responsibility (Skelcher, 2010). This is the major concern of a networked public sector (Rhodes, 2007) and therefore analyses of public service organizations’ (hereafter PSOs) governance systems are needed. Managing those complex inter-relationships can be harnessed to improve a range of public services by examining them through different theoretical perspectives (e.g. network theories, agency theory, resource and knowledge based theories, political power theories, innovation and change theories, performance and management theories, governance theories, etc.). By using this approach it will be possible to definitely advance both theory and practice, beyond the traditional model of Public Administration (hereafter denoted as PA) and New Public Management (hereafter denoted as NPM), by considering the existence of networked forms of governance, thus arriving at the acceptance of the New Public Governance (hereafter denoted as NPG) as the steering theoretical framework (Osborne, 2006; 2009). These aspects are in line with the new awareness of the social, economic, and cultural contribution of public services, public organizations and government has resulted in a significant period of reform and experimentation (Hinna et al., 2006). Besides, at the heart of these initiatives is the idea that improvements to the ways in which public services can be governed, managed and delivered will produce improved outcomes for citizens (Brandsen and Pestoff, 2006; Pestoff, 2009). The purpose of this thesis, therefore, is a new understanding of public service organizations’ (hereafter denoted as PSOs) governance and management. This is done by using a multidisciplinary approach to explore governance structures and mechanisms, management, innovation, and performance of PSOs. Moreover, the study fills the gap of quantitative analysis to be tested and explored for their meanings and contextual influences by undertaking case studies, and for case studies to generate propositions to be tested with large datasets. Finally, questions of when, how and why governance structures and mechanisms matter to public service performance and accountability, are addressed. The role of governing bodies and internal governance mechanisms seems to be especially important for understanding the dynamics and the processes that in turn affect the overall value creation capacity of PSOs. In this respect, it is important to underline that PSOs primarily aim to produce not profit or market positioning but “public value” (Moore, 1995; 2005; Bozeman, 2009). Public value means what is added to the public sphere and this may be social or economic, or it may be political, environmental or even more broadly about the quality of life. Indeed, a public value perspective requires examining the impact of public services on “costumers” and “users” but also the impact on them as “citizens”. Only by taking into account all these issues and the inherent complexity of the analyzed phenomenon, through this study it becomes possible to investigate the governance structures and mechanisms of PSOs from different angles and “regimes”, with emphasis on differences among national contexts, theoretical frameworks, and methods of analysis.en
description.sponsorshipNorwegian School of management, Department of innovation and economic organizationen
description.tableofcontentsChapter 1 – GOVERNANCE STRUCTURES AND MECHANISMS IN PUBLIC SERVICE ORGANIZATION: A REVIEW AND RESEARCH AGENDA 1.1 Introduction and motivation 1.2 The theoretical debate on governance structures and mechanisms in PSOs 1.3 Methods 1.3.1 Selection of papers 1.3.2 Content analysis 1.3.3 Type of articles 1.3.4 Use of theories 1.3.5 Research setting 1.3.6 Source of data 1.3.7 Governance structures and mechanisms in PSOs 1.4 Empirical results 1.4.1 The growing attention to the research on governance structures and mechanisms in PSOs 1.4.2 Interactions of theories, settings, and data sources 1.4.3 Time evolution 1.5 Discussion and findings 1.6 Conclusions and future research directions 1.7 References. - Chapter 2, CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND GOVERNANCE MECHANISMS IN ITALIAN LOCAL PUBLIC UTILITIES 2.1 Foreword 2.2 The governance system of LPUs: a principal-agent perspective 2.2.1 The agency relationships between the citizens and the main shareholder 2.2.2 The principal-principal conflict 2.2.3 The role of the board of directors as the main governance mechanism 2.3 Research design 2.4 Results 2.4.1 The accountability to citizens 2.4.2 The ownership structure and the board composition 2.4.3 The board independence 2.5 Discussion and findings 2.6 Conclusions and future research directions 2.7 References. - Appendix: The legislative evolution of local public services in Italy.– Chapter 3, PARTIAL PRIVATIZATION PROCESSES AND ACCOUNTABILITY ISSUES: EVIDENCE FROM ITALY AND NORWAY 3.1 Introduction 3.2 The privatization process in different perspectives: New Public Management, New Public Service, New Public Governance 3.3 Privatization, public service providers, corruption and conflict of interest 3.4 Methods 3.5 Privatization in Italy and in Norway: a historical overview 3.5.1 The Italian case 3.5.2 The case of Norway 3.5.3 Privatization in Italy and in Norway: different drivers but same final status 3.5.4 The ethical structure 3.6 Discussion and Findings 3.7 Conclusion and future research directions 3.8 References. - Chapter 4, DOES THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS CONTRIBUTE TO THE INNOVATION OF STATE-OWNED COMPANIES? 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Why is innovation important for SOCs? 4.2.1 The types of innovation in SOCs 4.2.2 The Norwegian context and the role of SOCs 4.3 Governance mechanisms and innovation in SOCs: the role of the board of directors 4.3.1 Board composition and board working style 4.4 Methods 4.4.1 The sample 4.4.2 Measures 4.4.3 The multiple linear regressions analysis 4.5 Results 4.6 Discussion and Findings 4.7 Conclusions and future research directions 4.8 References. - Conclusionsen
format.extent1147199 bytes-
format.mimetypeapplication/pdf-
language.isoenen
subjectgovernance structuresen
subjectpublic services organizationsen
subjectboards of directorsen
subjectco-productionen
subject.classificationSECS-P/10 Organizzazione aziendaleen
titleGovernance structures and mechanisms in public service organizations: theories, evidence and future directionsen
typeDoctoral thesisen
degree.nameEconomia e gestione delle aziende e delle amministrazioni pubblicheen
degree.levelDottoratoen
degree.disciplineFacoltà di economiaen
degree.grantorUniversità degli studi di Roma Tor Vergataen
date.dateofdefenseA.A. 2009/2010en
Appears in Collections:Tesi di dottorato in economia

Files in This Item:

File Description SizeFormat
FINAL THESIS 17-05-2010.pdf1120KbAdobe PDFView/Open

Show simple item record

All items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.