Practitioners evaluating complex social phenomena such as the youth mental health crisis, segregation, or childhood poverty can benefit from taking a complexity-informed, participatory approach. This approach contributes to moving beyond linear and reductionist thinking by emphasizing the interconnected and systemic nature of public policy, program and project evaluation. This article provides practitioners with a better understanding of participatory systems mapping (PSM) as a tool for evaluation and enhances their informed use of it. When designing processes and using complexity-informed evaluation tools, it is important to stay aware of the situation and pay attention to relations, conflicts, and power imbalances in participatory settings. Participatory evaluation methods like PSM are valuable because they support inclusive, informed, and data-driven evaluations that highlight the relational aspects of complex social issues. This article addresses participatory systems mapping (PSM) as a relational method for evaluating complex social phenomena by utilizing an illustrative case example related to young people's wellbeing in schools and at work. Theoretically grounded in complexity thinking and analysing the data produced in participatory workshops through the public service ecosystem (PSE) framework, the article contributes by foregrounding the systemic and relational understanding of the phenomena studied as a basis for public policy evaluation. Through participatory processes and the chosen analytical framework, the PSM method identifies and visualizes key leverage points, clusters of leverage points, and their relationships across the individual, organizational, and institutional spheres of the system. Targeting actions to these leverage points can improve young people's wellbeing. In practice, relational aspects such as situational awareness and flexibility, particularly concerning power dynamics and participant diversity, become important when using the PSM method.
Public sector organizations invest heavily in digital transformation but often struggle to move beyond immediate financial goals. In the National Health Service (NHS) in England and similar contexts, benefits realization management (BRM) is common but frequently fails to deliver real value. This study shows that BRM is not a neutral tool but a relational process shaped by power, governance, and material artefacts such as business cases, project templates and information systems. Early decisions, especially benefit definitions, can confine value to narrow financial metrics, marginalizing broader outcomes such as patient care, staff wellbeing and service learning. For senior managers, digital leaders, and policy-makers, the key is active governance of BRM. Practitioners should co-create benefit definitions with frontline staff, revisit assumptions during delivery, and critically assess how project management tools, suppliers, and governance shape 'value'. Without this, BRM may reinforce existing priorities rather than support meaningful transformation. This article critically examines benefits realization management (BRM) as a strategic tool for public sector transformation. Widely promoted as a response to the challenges of digital adoption and organizational change, research shows that its practical use often diverges from its theoretical intent, particularly in complex and politically charged environments. Applied to the context of healthcare in England, this ethnographic case study brings together observational, interview and documentary data gathered across multiple National Health Service (NHS) sites. Using the sociology of translation as the analytical lens, the study explores how governance arrangements, accountability frameworks and organizational cultures shape the enactment and outcomes of BRM. The findings reconceptualize BRM as a relational and contested process co-constructed through the interplay of human and non-human actors, showing how power dynamics and institutional tensions can redirect or marginalize its influence. The discussion considers the implications for public sector transformation more broadly and offers insights that may assist decision-makers seeking to strengthen BRM implementation approaches that recognize the centrality of power, politics and relationships.
This article will be of value to senior and middle-level public sector accountants, auditors, standard setters, asset managers, and to managers in museums and cultural institutions who are involved in heritage asset reporting. Its contribution is to consolidate and systematize the fragmented academic literature on heritage accounting, showing how the debate has evolved over three decades and where significant issues remain. By mapping dominant themes, methods, geographical patterns, and contrasting views on recognition, definition, and measurement, the article helps practitioners understand the arguments for and against balance sheet recognition, the limits of monetary valuation, and the role of disclosure in conservation, maintenance, use, and cultural significance. The authors' findings support informed reporting policies, stronger dialogue between accountants and heritage professionals, and balanced decisions on financial valuation, narrative disclosure, or combined approaches that better reflect public value. DICHIARAZIONE DI IMPATTOQuesto articolo si rivolge a professionisti contabili del settore pubblico di livello senior e intermedio, revisori, standard setter, responsabili della gestione degli asset e direttori di musei e di istituzioni culturali coinvolti nella rendicontazione dei beni culturali. Il contributo dello studio consiste nel consolidare e sistematizzare la letteratura accademica, finora frammentata, in materia di contabilit & agrave; dei beni culturali, mostrando come il dibattito si sia evoluto nell'arco di tre decenni e quali questioni restino ancora oggetto di discussione significativa. Attraverso la mappatura dei temi dominanti, dei metodi utilizzati, dei modelli geografici e delle diverse posizioni in merito alla rilevazione, alla definizione e alla misurazione, il paper aiuta i professionisti a comprendere le argomentazioni a favore e contro l'iscrizione dei beni culturali nello stato patrimoniale, i limiti della valutazione monetaria e il ruolo dell'informativa nella conservazione, manutenzione, fruizione e valorizzazione del significato culturale. Sul piano pratico, i risultati possono supportare politiche di rendicontazione pi & ugrave; consapevoli, un dialogo pi & ugrave; efficace tra professionisti contabili ed esperti del patrimonio culturale, nonch & eacute; decisioni equilibrate tra valutazione finanziaria, informativa narrativa o approcci combinati, in grado di riflettere meglio il valore pubblico dei beni culturali. IMPACTVERKLARINGDit artikel is gericht aan hoger en middel level public sector accountants, auditors, standaardzetters, vermogensbeheerders en managers van musea en culturele instellingen, die betrokken zijn bij de rappertering van erfgoederen. De bijdrage van dit artikel is het consolideren en systematiseren van de gefragmenteerde wetenschappelijke literatuur over erfgoed accounting, waarbij wordt getoond hoe het debat zich in de afgelopen drie decennia heeft ontwikkeld en waar nog steeds belangrijke discussies bestaan. Door dominante thema's, methoden, geografische patronen en argumenten pro en contra erkenning, definitie en waardering in kaart te brengen, helpt het professionals de argumenten voor en tegen balansopname, de grenzen van monetaire waardering en de rol van openbaarmaking met betrekking tot behoud, onderhoud, gebruik en culturele betekenis te begrijpen. In de praktijk kunnen de bevindingen bijdragen aan een beter onderbouwde rapportering, een sterkere dialoog tussen accountants en erfgoed professionals en evenwichtige beslissingen over financi & euml;le waardering, beschrijvende openbaarmaking of gecombineerde benaderingen die de publieke waarde beter weerspiegelen. This article improves our understanding of how research has progressed since 1991 on accounting for cultural, heritage, and scientific collections of public, not-for-profit museums, galleries, and other repositories. The accounting standard setters propose assigning monetary values to these collections for financial reporting. The authors identify alternative approaches or dimensions that may require further exploration. A rigorous structured literature review (SLR) was conducted, following the steps outlined in earlier prominent SLR studies. The results suggest that the organized accounting profession, through the activities and proposals of public sector accounting standard-setting agencies, remains largely unaffected by the depth and breadth of the opposition to these proposals to assign monetary values on 'priceless collections'.
This study critically examines the functionality of accrual-based financial reporting (ACC-FR) under IPSAS and IPSAS-like standards in supporting decision-making and management accountability within the museum sector. The findings reveal the limited functionality of some ACC-FR information items, including the financial valuation of heritage assets (HAs), for decision-making and accountability purposes, highlighting the need for more relevant and user-driven reporting mechanisms. Supported by practice-based evidence, the findings align with scholarly arguments, noting that HA valuation costs are not commensurate with its benefits and that ACC-FR items like impairment and depreciation offer less practical data compared to asset registries and collection databases. Aimed at policy-makers and standard setters, this article provides valuable insights into the implications of adopting IPSAS 45, which became effective in 2025. Furthermore, the study contributes to the debate on accounting for HAs by advocating for more practical and context-specific ACC-FR mechanisms that address the complexities of HA management, providing insights to enhance ACC-FR functionality for heritage institutions. Museums are acknowledged for safeguarding heritage assets and promoting public access to knowledge, a mission that necessitates informed decision-making and effective accountability systems. Accrual-based financial reporting (ACC-FR) has gained prominence as a strategic tool in this context; however, the adoption of IPSAS and similar ACC-FR standards presents challenges within museums' complex environments. Using documentary analysis, content analysis, and in-depth interviews, this study assesses the functionality of ACC-FR in supporting decision-making and accountability in museums. The findings highlight the factors driving partial compliance with ACC-FR standards within museums, emphasizing the functionality of some ACC-FR items for decision-making and accountability purposes, while others fall short. The study provides critical insights into the potential implementation of IPSAS 45 in museums, emphasizing the need to adapt financial reporting standards to user needs and the unique attributes of heritage management, ensuring a balance between theoretical objectives and practical implementation.
This article offers important practical insights for policy-makers, cultural managers, and urban governance practitioners. It moves beyond theoretical critique to highlight how non-convergent relationships between powerful organizations, public authorities, and civic actors can transform potential goods into contested and rival resources. For professionals working in fragile urban contexts, the study provides a roadmap to understanding the governance pitfalls of large-scale institutions. Most importantly, the authors identify the regulatory design of concessions as a primary site of institutional friction. By demonstrating how standard concession models can block grassroots participation, the findings call for a shift toward context-sensitive regulatory frameworks that transcend New Public Management constraints. This research serves as a catalyst for reforming concessionary models and institutional arrangements, advocating for governance structures that are inherently dialogic and capable of supporting the 'urban commons' rather than merely managing cultural assets. This article investigates the enactment of relationality within the governance of global cultural and heritage contexts, using the Venice Biennale as a critical lens. While the relational public management literature emphasizes participation as a normative ideal, empirical evidence on its implementation within large-scale cultural events remains scarce. This study addresses this gap by analysing the Austrian Pavilion at the 2023 Architecture Biennale. Through a qualitative reconstruction of its conception, negotiation, and implementation, the research explores how participatory ambitions are mediated, and often curtailed, by institutional dynamics. The findings identify a state of 'problematic relationality', where genuine engagement is stifled by power asymmetries and systemic rigidity. By bridging relationality, participation, and the commons, the article demonstrates how entrenched New Public Management logics actively hinder collaborative governance. It contributes by providing a critique of how relational ambitions clash with traditional governance structures, calling for a radical rethinking of institutional frameworks in cultural production.
This article is relevant to local government practitioners, especially general managers, finance directors and policy advisers. It shows that larger councils can achieve lower per capita administrative costs, but only up to a point. Beyond that, additional scale can be associated with higher administrative intensity, suggesting that bigger councils are not necessarily more efficient. For practitioners, the findings highlight the need to look beyond population size or staffing levels when assessing administrative performance. Internal systems, governance arrangements, managerial capacity and local service context are likely to matter as much as scale. The results suggest that local government reforms should focus on improving organizational capability and using shared services where appropriate, rather than relying solely on structural mergers to achieve efficiency gains. This article examines the relationship between scale and administrative intensity in New South Wales (NSW) local government using a six-year panel (2018-19 to 2023-24). The authors assessed whether larger councils achieve governance and administrative efficiencies by analysing per capita administrative expenditure, with scale proxied by population and full-time equivalent staff (FTEs). Using pooled OLS, random, and fixed-effects (FE) models, we find a U-shaped relationship: administrative intensity initially falls with scale but rises at higher levels. This result persists in FE models, suggesting robustness to time-invariant council characteristics. However, when disaggregated by council type (metropolitan, regional, rural), evidence of scale effects is limited and inconsistent. These findings imply that while scale may influence administrative costs, local context and institutional factors remain critical. The results contribute to current debates on council mergers, shared services, and strategies to improve efficiency in local government administration.
Although digital innovation is widely considered a cure for demographic decline, it will only succeed if governments confront how demographic decline itself undermines the capacity to innovate. This article shows that depopulation and workforce aging erode local governments' organizational capacity by shrinking fiscal bases, depleting human capital, and weakening administrative infrastructure, ultimately making it harder to develop the very solutions that demographic pressures demand. The findings provide insights for policy-makers designing national and local digital innovation strategies, especially in aging societies, where investment in technology will not succeed without parallel investment in the people and institutions adapting to demographic shifts. A demography-smart approach, which combines family support, migration policy, and digital capacity-building, can help governments avoid a 'vicious circle' in which demographic decline weakens innovation, which in turn accelerates the decline in institutional quality and public service capabilities. Providing support to smaller and depopulating municipalities is essential to ensure that digital innovation does not become a privilege of major urban centres. While digital innovation offers governments powerful tools to address grand challenges, the demographic shifts driving demand for such solutions often undermine the very capacities needed to develop them. This article examines this paradox: how demographic decline constrains local governments' ability to design and implement digital innovations. Quantitative results from 110 municipalities in Italy and qualitative evidence from two neighbouring cities (Biella and Vercelli) suggest that depopulation and aging significantly erode the organizational capacity for innovation by constraining human capital, shrinking fiscal bases, and weakening administrative infrastructure. These findings extend public sector innovation research by integrating demographic variables into models of organizational capacity, and challenge the prevailing assumption in the digital governance literature that technology investment alone can compensate for demographic decline. The study offers a framework for future cross-national research on how population change shapes governments' capacity for technological transformation.
Controllers have an increasingly important role in advising on strategic issues beyond traditional accounting activities. However, research on controllers involved in such issues in public sector organizations is scarce. By using survey data, this article examines the role perception of controllers in Dutch ministries, distinguishing between financial, business and policy controllers. The results suggest that controllers have a broad range of tasks, with financial accounting issues being an important part of their responsibilities. In addition, topics such as the creation of public value, policy development and whether planned policies could be monitored are considered more important than topics such as cost efficiency and effectiveness. Moreover, the research findings suggest that 'policy technical activities'-activities that contribute to the substantive underpinning of policy plans-are an important part of the work package and thus the role of controllers.
Nonprofit resilience is increasingly treated as a practical imperative and a legitimate target of public policy support. This article revisits resilience by arguing that resilience-building may carry political-organizational consequences that nonprofit scholarship has often examined in adjacent terms, including co-optation (i.e. the accommodation of external expectations that narrows independent claims-making), managerialism, and mission drift. The article conceptualizes this consequence as resilience-to-neutrality drift, whereby nonprofits may be nudged toward a risk-averse, legitimacy-preserving 'do not create controversy' operating programme and away from equity-oriented responsiveness to differential vulnerability and structural injustice. It develops three propositions specifying how such drift may occur through selection pressures linked to risk and measurability, observational filtering via universalistic categories that obscure distributional harms, and institutional lock-in through funding and accountability architectures that reward depoliticized delivery. To operationalize the argument, the article introduces a 2 & times; 2 diagnostic matrix linking defensive/offensive resilience with upward/downward accountability. It concludes by specifying how policy-makers, funders, regulators, and nonprofit leaders can pursue equity-capable resilience without
This article provides valuable insights for international and national public sector accounting standard setters, auditors, public sector financial managers and technical advisors involved in implementing or adapting IPSAS-based frameworks. Focusing on the transition from IPSAS 17 to IPSAS 45 (through ED 78), the authors demonstrate how stakeholder backgrounds shape both their participation in due process activities and their viewpoints on heritage asset (HA) reporting. By unpacking tensions between the different objectives of financial reporting (decision-usefulness and stewardship), the study helps practitioners anticipate interpretative challenges in recognition, measurement, and disclosure. It also clarifies to what extent IPSAS 45 reflects stakeholder concerns, and where practical or conceptual ambiguities remain. For senior policy-makers and technical specialists, the article offers evidence-based insights to strengthen consultation strategies, enhance implementation planning of accrual-based reforms, and design more inclusive engagement mechanisms. Ultimately, it supports more legitimate, transparent, and operationally feasible HA reporting in the current public sector context. Questo studio fornisce interessanti spunti di riflessione per gli organismi internazionali e nazionali preposti alla definizione dei principi contabili per il settore pubblico, ai manager pubblici, ai revisori dei conti e ai consulenti tecnici coinvolti nell'attuazione o nell'adeguamento di sistemi contabili basati sugli IPSAS. Focalizzandosi sulla transizione dall'IPSAS 17 all'IPSAS 45 (attraverso l'ED 78), questo studio dimostra come il background degli stakeholder influenzi la loro partecipazione al processo decisionale e le loro opinioni in relazione al trattamento contabile delle attivit & agrave; del patrimonio culturale. Analizzando le tensioni tra le diverse finalit & agrave; dell'informativa economico-finanziaria (utilit & agrave; decisionale vs gestione responsabile), la presente analisi aiuta i professionisti ad anticipare le sfide interpretative in materia di rilevazione, misurazione e disclosure delle attivit & agrave; del patrimonio culturale. Chiarisce, inoltre, in che misura l'IPSAS 45 rifletta le preoccupazioni degli stakeholder e dove, invece, permangono ambiguit & agrave; applicativo/concettuali. Per i responsabili politici e gli specialisti tecnici, l'articolo offre approfondimenti basati su dati concreti per rafforzare le strategie di consultazione pubblica, migliorare la pianificazione dell'attuazione di riforme accrual e progettare meccanismi di coinvolgimento pi & ugrave; inclusivi dei diversi portatori d'interesse. Da ultimo, sostiene una rendicontazione contabile dei beni culturali pi & ugrave; legittima, trasparente e operativamente fattibile nel contesto del settore pubblico. Financial reporting of heritage assets (HA) is a central challenge in the harmonization of public sector accounting. The International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board (IPSASB) launched its 'Heritage' project in the early 2000s, culminating in Exposure Draft (ED) 78 in 2021. This draft proposed including HA within IPSAS 17, 'Property, Plant, and Equipment', and ultimately led to the issuance of IPSAS 45, effective in 2025. This article examines stakeholders' participation in the IPSASB's due process on HA, focusing on responses to ED 78 and their influence on the development of IPSAS 45. Through content analysis of comment letters, the study investigates whether institutional background shapes engagement and viewpoints, and assesses the extent to which these perspectives were incorporated into the final standard. The analysis highlights persistent tensions between decision-usefulness and stewardship in public sector reporting, and demonstrates how principles-based standard setting mediates diverse stakeholder expectations, with implications for input and throughput legitimacy.
The alignment of public sector accounting practice with the International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS) represents a significant and far-reaching public management reform on a global scale. Although earlier research has identified concerns and hindrances to the adoption and diffusion of IPSAS, and has acknowledged the relevance of national institutional contexts, there is a lack of systematic knowledge about which institutional factors condition the reception of IPSAS-inspired reform ideas. Empirically, this study analyses the European Commission's consultation on the suitability of the IPSAS for EU member states. Through the application of discourse network analysis and exponential random graph models, the author finds statistically significant non-random structures in national public administrations and authorities' consultation responses that are explained by administrative traditions, organizational mandates and accountability structures.
Networked public service delivery requires trust and flexibility, yet public managers remain constrained by legal contracts designed for hierarchical control. This article advances public management theory by examining how courts in the UK and the US address this governance dilemma through their interpretation of good faith in relational contracts. Using a mixed case selection strategy, combining diverse and pathway logic, the authors trace doctrinal evolution across both jurisdictions. UK courts are shown to be developing a pragmatic, context-sensitive framework that aligns legal doctrine with collaborative practice. In contrast, courts in the US are constrained by sovereign immunity and a high bar for proving bad faith, creating a legal environment that prioritizes government discretion over partnership. From this divergence, four judicial models of good faith enforcement are theorized: presumptive, high bar, contextual, and reasonable expectations. The article makes three contributions: it positions judicial reasoning as an active institutional force shaping relational governance; it offers a framework linking legal interpretations of good faith to accountability, risk, and collaboration; and it bridges public management and contract law to support future empirical research on contracting behaviour and governance outcomes.
This article develops the three main conflicts of interest that credit rating agencies face when performing sovereign ratings: economic, regulatory and epistemic. Through a four-layered analytical framework (informational, interpretative, institutional, and analytical), the author shows that these conflicts still influence how data are selected, interpreted, and legitimized. By examining recent empirical evidence and theoretical contributions, the author argues that opacity in data use, internalized interpretive routines, and weak accountability are key features of the current rating process. Employing the four analytical layers, reforms are proposed that could strengthen public oversight and could be conducive to generating more 'public value' in sovereign ratings. The findings also contribute to rethinking public financial governance and the regulation of expert judgment in the public sphere.
Co-creation refers to the involvement of societal actors in generating public value. But who defines that value? Starting from an ideal definition of co-creation-emphasising that it is a response to shared problems and the needs of participants-this article argues that, in practice, the value intended for co-creation is often pre-defined by professionals and elected leaders. Such a gap between the ideal and reality should not come as a surprise, given that similar conflicts, tensions, and discrepancies have long been observed. However, this does not imply that the concept of co-creation should be dismissed altogether. Rather, we need to ask how the public sector can be improved by negotiating between competing ideas of governance, including co-creation. In recent years, co-creation has become a widely known and popular recipe for the creation of public value. This article reports on a study of co-creation initiatives, focusing on how municipal leaders engage in defining and realizing value within these initiatives. The study investigates how public leaders identify public value, how they select suitable partners for value creation, and how they design or organize the value creation process. Competing clusters of ideas about public governance offer different answers to these three questions, and the article compares co-creation with what is conceptualized as professionalism and managerialism. The findings indicate that value is often defined externally to the co-creation process, meaning that citizens and stakeholders are invited to contribute but play a limited role in setting the overall aim.
The authors provide lessons for public service practitioners internationally by highlighting how elected officials can actively strengthen relational approaches to service delivery. This article shows that councillors are not just decision-makers but key connectors who build trust with communities, gather local intelligence, and facilitate collaboration across organizations. For practitioners working in different governance contexts, the findings emphasise the importance of engaging elected representatives as partners in relational practice rather than treating them as peripheral or obstructive. The article also provides insight into how changing conditions-such as financial constraints, remote working, and rising public hostility-affect relationship-building on the ground. Importantly, it draws attention to the risks and emotional labour involved in relational work, including exposure to abuse, and the need for better support systems. Practitioners are urged to recognize, support, and work with the relational capacities of elected officials to improve outcomes for communities. This article makes a significant contribution to the academic literature on relational public services by foregrounding the often-overlooked role of elected councillors. While existing scholarship largely centres on relationships between professionals and citizens, this study addresses a critical gap by conceptualizing councillors as key relational actors. Drawing on qualitative interviews with councillors in English local government, the article demonstrates that relational work-such as building trust, facilitating problem-solving, and interpreting community needs-is central to councillor practice. The article contributes to theory by reframing relationality as not only embedded in frontline service delivery but also in local political representation and governance. Additionally, the article extends the literature by examining how austerity, digitalization, and rising public hostility reshape relational dynamics, highlighting both the productive and "dark" sides of relationality. In doing so, it challenges overly optimistic accounts and calls for a more inclusive and realistic understanding of relational public services that incorporates political actors and contested social conditions.
Public managers have a critical role in advancing sustainable development. Managing sustainability in public administration requires fostering shared visions, building coalitions, and adapting strategies to evolving challenges. Public managers balance global and local objectives to ensure that localized actions reinforce broader sustainability goals. This literature review underscores the importance of multi-stakeholder governance networks that enable co-design, trust-building, and dialogue across sectors. Also, institutional frameworks and ethical safeguards are important to harness sustainability data responsibly, ensuring inclusivity, transparency, and alignment with democratic values. Furthermore, integrated sustainability accounting and reporting systems should extend beyond financial metrics to ecological and social indicators, embedding accountability mechanisms that uphold ecological and social priorities. Collectively, these insights call for adaptive, collaborative, and data-informed approaches that strengthen legitimacy, trust, and impact in sustainability governance. By reinforcing co-operation, openness, and continuous learning, sustainability can become an integral part of everyday management and decision-making in the public sector. Julkisjohtajilla on keskeinen rooli kest & auml;v & auml;n kehityksen edist & auml;misess & auml;. Kest & auml;vyyden johtaminen julkishallinnossa edellytt & auml;& auml; yhteisi & auml; visioita, yhteisty & ouml;verkostoja ja muuttuviin kest & auml;vyyshaasteisiin mukautuvia strategioita. Julkisjohtajat tasapainottavat globaaleja ja paikallisia tavoitteita varmistaakseen, ett & auml; paikallinen toiminta tukee laajempia kest & auml;vyystavoitteita. Kest & auml;vyyden johtamisessa tarvitaan monitoimijaisia hallintaverkostoja, jotka mahdollistavat yhteissuunnittelun, luottamuksen rakentamisen ja vuoropuhelun eri sektoreiden toimijoiden v & auml;lill & auml;. Lis & auml;ksi tarvitaan institutionaalisia puitteita ja eettisi & auml; varmentamismekanismeja, jotta kest & auml;vyysdataa hy & ouml;dynnet & auml;& auml;n vastuullisesti, osallistavasti, l & auml;pin & auml;kyv & auml;sti ja demokraattisten arvojen mukaisesti. Integroitujen kest & auml;vyyden laskenta- ja raportointij & auml;rjestelmien tulisi kattaa taloudellisten mittareiden ohella ekologiset ja sosiaaliset indikaattorit sek & auml; sis & auml;lt & auml;& auml; tilivelvollisuusmekanismeja, jotka tukevat ekologisia ja sosiaalisia tavoitteita. Kest & auml;vyyden johtaminen edellytt & auml;& auml; mukautuvia, yhteisty & ouml;h & ouml;n perustuvia ja tietoon pohjautuvia l & auml;hestymistapoja, jotka vahvistavat legitimiteetti & auml;, luottamusta ja vaikuttavuutta. Vahvistamalla yhteisty & ouml;t & auml;, avoimuutta ja jatkuvaa oppimista kest & auml;vyydest & auml; voi tulla olennainen osa julkisen sektorin jokap & auml;iv & auml;ist & auml; johtamista ja p & auml;& auml;t & ouml;ksentekoa. This study systematically reviews how sustainability is integrated into six core areas of public management: strategic management, financial management, operational management, public procurement and contract management, human resource and capacity management, and performance management and public sector accounting. Addressing the fragmented nature of existing research, this review offers a novel contribution by identifying five interrelated development trajectories: localization, datafication, strategization, hybridization, and accountingization-that reflect institutional responses to growing sustainability challenges and the limitations of siloed governance structures. These trajectories illustrate how public management practices are evolving to accommodate complexity and interdependence. This study concludes by examining how these developments are reshaping public management and suggests critical directions for future research.
This study explores how public employees address the complex interplay between bureaucratization and de-bureaucratization through relational dynamics, including joint projecting (where managers, human resource management [HRM] professionals, and employees collaboratively shape goals, roles, or organizational change by aligning expectations, knowledge, and future plans), the integration of diverse competencies, and responsive stakeholder engagement. The findings highlight that managing this tension requires deliberate and collaborative effort, offering essential insights for those shaping or delivering public sector HRM and governance reforms globally. Policy-makers are encouraged to design legislative frameworks that foster inter-organizational networks and relational capacity through flexible, enabling instruments. Practitioners, including public managers and employees, can apply these insights to enhance recruitment effectiveness while balancing legal safeguards with adaptive practices. Furthermore, this study calls on public administration (PA) educators to embed relational competencies within training curricula, equipping practitioners with the skills to navigate complex governance landscapes in which procedural safeguards and innovative responsiveness must coexist. Questo studio analizza come i dipendenti pubblici affrontano l'interazione tra burocratizzazione e de-burocratizzazione attraverso dinamiche relazionali. I risultati mostrano che la gestione di questa tensione richiede uno sforzo intenzionale e collaborativo, fondamentale per chi & egrave; impegnato nella progettazione e attuazione di riforme nella gestione delle risorse umane pubbliche e nella governance. In questa prospettiva, i decisori politici sono chiamati a sviluppare una legislazione che favorisca reti inter-organizzative e rafforzi le capacit & agrave; relazionali attraverso strumenti flessibili e abilitanti. Allo stesso tempo, i professionisti del settore pubblico possono utilizzare queste indicazioni per migliorare l'efficacia dei processi di reclutamento, trovando un equilibrio tra il rispetto delle garanzie legali e l'adozione di pratiche adattive. Infine, lo studio sottolinea l'importanza di integrare le competenze relazionali nei programmi formativi della pubblica amministrazione, al fine di preparare i professionisti ad operare in contesti di governance complessi, nei quali devono coesistere salvaguardie procedurali e capacit & agrave; di risposta innovativa. The bureaucratic ethos and de-bureaucratization efforts coexist within the public sector, while global challenges call for a 'relational turn'. However, how bureaucratization and de-bureaucratization interact, especially in connection with relational dynamics and co-ordination, remains underexplored. This article investigates how public employees navigate these tensions, focusing on hiring processes in Italian municipalities. Drawing on 40 interviews and grounded in the relational bureaucracy framework, the study reveals how public employees actively balance the protective functions of bureaucracy with demands for de-bureaucratization. This balance is not straightforward; rather, it is mediated by relational dynamics such as joint projecting, integration of diverse competencies, and responsiveness to internal and external stakeholders. These dynamics shape administrative behaviour and enable more adaptive public action. The study contributes to the PA literature by showing that de-bureaucratization requires not only procedural simplification but also mature, stable relational systems that support the contextual and constructive interpretation of rules.
The authors draw on secondary analyses of central-local relations in England over recent decades to suggest that conflicting perspectives on what local government should be for-its role in the UK state-have resulted in an unstable and incoherent governance landscape, hampered strategic thinking, and made it more difficult for public bodies to address pressing challenges. Specifically, ministerial efforts to use local authorities primarily as a mechanism for achieving national policy priorities have created a context of local dependence and central control, which undermines local desires for greater independence and autonomy to shape places. These opposing views lead to mutual distrust and hinder attempts at greater vertical interdependence, despite broader recognition that more joined-up approaches can increase the capacity of the state to achieve its objectives. We suggest that recent reforms outlined in the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill (published in July 2025) will leave these tensions unresolved. Previous policy agendas around localism and autonomy, coupled with financial austerity, have highlighted conflicting perspectives on the role of English councils in the UK governance system and weakened their overall capacity. The UK state needs to be more vertically integrated, underpinned by a more interdependent, rather than dependent or independent relationship between the UK government and English local authorities. Coupled with more equitable and longer-term local government funding arrangements based on need, greater vertical integration would help improve policy coherence, enable councils to plan ahead and allocate resources appropriately, and increase the state's ability to achieve common objectives.
A combination of government accounting and fiscal information with digital activism can be a powerful tool for public oversight. It enables citizens to identify systemic governance failures, expose & eacute;lite misconduct, and reveal entrenched inequalities, nepotism, corruption, and patronage within government and parliament. In Indonesia, for example, the dissemination of parliamentary salaries or revenue disparities between officials and the public-drawn from government reports and reframed by social activists-has played a central role during periods of social unrest, demonstrating how transparency, coupled with activist engagement, can challenge & eacute;lite power structures. This illustrates a compelling dynamic: patterns of patronage and corruption within government, along with their consequences, have increasingly been counterbalanced by digital activism, as social media platforms empower citizens to contest government policies and highlight poor governmental performance. Similar dynamics have also emerged in other developing and emerging democracies, highlighting the broader relevance of this pattern. This article examines how social activists and anti-corruption advocates in Indonesia strategically mobilize accounting information via social media to limit the government's ability to obscure poor performance and manipulate financial data. Drawing on local and international media reports, the authors show how these practices transform accounting from a technocratic tool into a powerful instrument of civic empowerment, expanding public scrutiny, reinforcing accountability, and challenging entrenched & eacute;lite secrecy. The article contributes to the literature by highlighting how digital activism via social media counters the unintended effects of developmentalism by enabling civic engagement.
The growing presence of agentic AI in public governance is transforming the once familiar, human-bound principal-agent relationship into a multi-directional socio-technical challenge. This article provides a structured analysis of these challenges by dissecting how AI-related agency problems manifest across three critical delegation interfaces: trust delegation between human users (principals) and AI agent systems; hierarchical delegation between senior officials (principals) and lower-level officials (agents) augmented by AI agents; and contractual delegation where government officials (principals) outsource AI development to private firms (agents). At each interface, the authors clarify how delegation drift may arise due to the intensified information asymmetry and goal misalignment, while creating new accountability gaps. Building on this analysis, the article concludes with a discussion on governing AI agents and proposes a forward-looking research agenda for public administration scholars. As public agencies adopt autonomous 'agentic AI', traditional principal-agent relationships in public administration are fundamentally transforming. This article offers a roadmap for senior administrators, digital transformation chiefs, and procurement officers modernizing government services. The authors demystify algorithmic governance risks by mapping how AI complicates three critical principal-agent delegation interfaces: direct delegation to AI systems, hierarchical delegation to AI-augmented staff, and contractual delegation to private tech vendors. By identifying where goal misalignment, information asymmetries, and 'delegation drift' emerge, this article provides practitioners with a practical diagnostic framework. Ultimately, this equips public sector leaders to anticipate agency problems before they manifest, design robust oversight mechanisms, align vendor incentives, and confidently harness AI innovation while maintaining effective control over public service delivery. (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)'(sic)(sic)(sic)AI', (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)-(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic),(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)AI(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic):(sic)AI(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic),(sic)AI(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic),(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)'(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)'(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic).(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic),(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic), (sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)(sic)AI(sic)(sic).
