Security, Capacity and Post-Market Reforms: Public Management Change in 2003

Public sector change in 2003 was a product of external demands and internal pressures for improvement. The specific areas addressed are responses to security threats in the international environment; strengthening internal capacity, particularly through whole-of-government approaches; and fine-tuning the public management model in part through readjustments to the centre-agency relationship and greater emphasis on horizontal structures and processes.
This is the ninth year an administrative essay has been published in the journal since 1996. Earlier chronicles include: J. Stewart 55(1) 1996; S. Prasser 56(1) 1997; J. Homeshaw 57(3) 1998; J. Moon 58(2) 1999; J. Curtin 59(1) 2000; C. Broughton and J. Chalmers 60(1) 2001; N. Miragliotta 61(1) 2002; and J. Nettercote 62(1) 2003.
In this issue two chronicles are published — the first, by John Halligan and Jill Adams, focuses on external security and internal capacity building. The second assessment by Scott Prasser takes a different view of compliant management, poor decisions and reactive change.     

Similar Ends, Differing Means: Contractualism and Civil Service Reform in Denmark and New Zealand

State sector reform was an integral component of the radical economic and social policy changes enacted by New Zealand governments between 1984 and 1991. This reform replaced the traditional tenured public service with a contractual regime. Through a comparison with Denmark, it is shown that New Zealand's reforms were not unique. Similar reforms were enacted in Denmark. But contrary to what occurred in New Zealand, the Danish reforms had already begun in the 1960s, and have since been gradually expanded. The parallel contractual regimes introduced in the two countries are accounted for by an increasing demand among politicians to secure a civil service that is responsive to political executive demands. However, because of institutional differences and diverging regulatory regimes, the strategic approaches in the two countries have been different. Whereas the New Zealand approach was dominated by an appeal to a coherent and sophisticated body of theoretical knowledge, combined with strict formalization, the Danish strategy has been based on political bargaining with the civil service unions. In both cases the reforms rest on critical assumptions regarding their positive and negative implications.