Problem Statement and Purpose
Problem Statement: The realm of public governance is undergoing profound transformations in response to evolving societal needs, technological advancements, and global challenges. However, amidst these shifts, a significant problem persists: the lack of a comprehensive understanding of the various public governance models and their effectiveness in addressing contemporary issues. This problem arises due to the absence of systematic bibliometric analyses that synthesize and evaluate the existing literature on public governance models. Consequently, researchers, policymakers, and practitioners face challenges in identifying the most suitable governance frameworks for specific contexts and objectives. Addressing this gap is critical for enhancing the efficiency, transparency, and accountability of public institutions worldwide.
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to conduct a rigorous bibliometric analysis of public governance models to provide insights into their evolution, trends, and effectiveness. By systematically reviewing and synthesizing the literature, this study aims to elucidate the key characteristics, strengths, and limitations of different governance models, ranging from traditional hierarchical structures to more contemporary collaborative and network-based approaches. Ultimately, the paper seeks to inform researchers, policymakers, and practitioners about the current state of knowledge in the field of public governance and offer recommendations for advancing theoretical understanding and practical implementation.
Methodology
We conducted a bibliometric analysis using a dataset comprising 11,288 documents. Our study focused on three main governance models: Weberian, New Public Management (NPM), and hybrid. Utilizing bibliometric techniques, we identified the most frequent occurrences of these models, with NPM being the most prevalent, followed by hybrid. We examined the significant overlap among the models, with 663 documents (5.87%) describing all models. Analysis encompassed main document sources, countries of corresponding authors, and keyword analysis, specifically targeting keywords related to reforms. Additionally, we investigated the associations between particular models and significant sources, countries, and reform-related keywords.
Findings
Countries of corresponding authors significantly associated with hybrid models include China, South Korea, and Spain, while NPM is linked to Portugal and Australia, and Weberian to Norway and Germany. Characteristic sources for Hybrid models are Electronic Government, Information Polity, and Government Information Quarterly; for Weberian models are Public Administration and Administration & Society; and for NPM are International Review of Administrative Sciences and International Journal of Public Sector Management. Dominant reform-related keywords include education, anti-corruption, and NPM reform, with distinct associations to each governance model: anti-corruption for hybrid, health and public finance management for NPM, and institutional for Weberian.
Proposals
Based on the results, some proposals to address the problem can be suggested. First, international collaboration and exchange programs between countries with different governance models, like the Hybrid models of China, South Korea, and Spain, and Weberian models in Norway and Germany, could promote the adoption of best practices. Second, sector-specific reforms in areas like education and health can leverage model-specific strengths such as anti-corruption or institutional reforms. Finally, enhancing regulatory and legal frameworks to improve transparency, efficiency, and responsiveness, either by revising existing laws or introducing new regulations, could further support each governance model's unique needs.
References
Pollitt, Christopher, and Geert Bouckaert. 2011. Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis-New Public Management, Governance, and the Neo-Weberian State, 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hammerschmid, Gerhard, Steven Van de Walle, Rhys Andrews, and Ahmed Mohammed Sayed Mostafa. 2019. New public management reforms in Europe and their effects: Findings from a 20-country top executive survey. International Review of Administrative Sciences 85: 399–418.
Ropret, Marko, and Aleksander Aristovnik. 2019. Public sector reform from the Post-New Public Management perspective: Review and bibliometric analysis. Central European Public Administration Review 17: 89.
