Comparative Analysis of Public Management Reforms: The Netherlands and France - Essay Example

Comparative Analysis of Public Management Reforms: The Netherlands and France The article deals with the public management reforms that The Netherlands and France have implemented in their respective countries. Reforms have been undertaken in lieu of the conditions and situations that demands public administration reforms. Different factors influences and affects countries decision for new public management, what is of paramount importance is the ideal that public service primarily is to and for the people. INTRODUCTION As the quest for a more humane and good kind of life continues in the modern period, many nations have come up with a vision of improving public administration in their own respective countries. This step shows to us, in a way, the recognition of the players in public administration of the ineptitude of “ancient paradigms” as it is utilised in public management as governments of respective countries address current trends and developments in global trade, economics and politics. Public management reforms are apparently means in achieving multiple ends, which includes “savings in economic expenditures, improving the quality of public services, making the operations of government more efficient and increasing the chances that the policies which are chosen and implemented will be effective” (Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2000, p. 6). COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS: THE NETHERLANDS AND FRANCE A. SOCIO –ECONOMIC FORCES Netherlands is a country with a total population of 16,491,461 and a population growth of .49% as of 2006 .The average life expectancy is 78.6. Birth rate is 10.9/1000 of population while the death rate is 8.68 deaths/1000 of population. On the other hand, infant mortality rate is 4.96%. Literacy rate is 99% with literacy defined as person at the age of 15 with the ability to read and write. (http://stats.oecd.org. & www.cia.gov.) France on the other hand is a country with a total population of 60.2 million as of 2004. Its life expectancy rate is 79.4 %. Its birth rate is 11.99/1000 population while its death rate is 9.14deaths/1000 population. 99% of its population is literate with literacy defined as people at the age of 15 who can read and write. (http://stats.oecd.org. & www.cia.gov.) B.GLOBAL ECONOMY The Netherlands’ exports commodities are machineries and equipments, chemicals, fuels and foodstuffs. Its main export partner is Germany. Its external debt is $1.6 trillion as of 2005. (http://stats.oecd.org. & www.cia.gov.) While France’s exports are mainly machinery and transportation equipments, aircraft, plastics, chemicals, pharmaceutical products, iron and steel and beverages. It main partner in export industry is Germany. Its external debt amounts to 2.8 trillion as of 2005. (www.oecd.org. & www.cia.gov.) C. SOCIO- DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGES The Netherlands gross domestic product (GDP) as of 2006 is $581.3 billion with GDP growth of 1.5%. The total labour force is 7.53 million and the unemployment rate during 2006 is 6.6%. The population living below poverty line is 10%. Public debt is 52.7% of the GDP. ( www.oecd.org. & www.cia.gov.) Telecommunications sector is highly developed and advanced, 7.6 million telephone lines at work, 15,834 million mobile cellular telephones in used. Its Internet hosts of 8,363,158 and internet users reaching to 10,806,308. Statistics also shows a strong economic action in global trade. Its export economy with trade balance reaches 32.847% in 2004. This shows that Netherlands is a strong player in the global market. France on the one hand, its gross domestic product is $2.055 trillion with a growth rate of 1.2%. Its labour force is 27.72 million while its unemployment rate is a staggering 10 %. 6.5 % of the population lives under poverty line while public debt is 66.2% of the GDP. (www.oecd.org. &www.cia.gov.) It has an advanced telecommunications system with 35.7 million telephone lines in use, 48.058 million mobile cellular phone users, Internet hosts of 3,148,789 and internet users of 29.521 million. Just like the Netherlands, it has the ideation of broad based internet access, which in turn can be utilised in accessing information in the ICT highway. D. NATIONAL SOCIO-ECONOMIC POLICIES With the advent of globalisation, France is virtually strained to open its doors to global trading. Its history of state controlled economy has given way to a more open and globally competitive economy. By 1999, its membership in EU has adopted euro currency and as of 2005 the exchange between $1 to 1 euro is .8041 (www.oecd.org.). On the one hand, The Netherlands’economy has picked and is now enjoying a more stable economy both in the local scene as well as in international trade. E. POLITICAL SYSTEM The Netherlands is a constitutional monarchy with Amsterdam as its capital and it is divided into 12 provinces. The government is divided into three branches namely the executive with the Queen as the chief of state, the legislature with the States General with 75 seats and the judicial branch with the Supreme Court as its lead. France is a republic, divided into 22 regions and is further subdivided into 96 departments. The government is divided into three branches namely the executive with the president, legislative with bicameral parliament with 321 seats and the judicial branch with the Supreme Court of Appeals at the helm. Since France is a multi-party system, it is best for the President’s party to have control over the Parliament. F. NEW MANAGEMENT IDEAS Currently, Netherlands employed NPM when it was hit by economic and political problems and turbulence. Its economy suffered much from the oil crisis that started in 1973 due to boycotts from Arab-oil, which hit Dutch economy. It has a tremendous effect; the unemployment rate was high, the public deficit was high, the economy stagnated and government planning and attempts to resolve the economic problems were not enough. Added to the crisis is the worst political scenario wherein, the three weak and unstable political parties held the office. This pushes the Dutch government to undergo a radical reforms that to surmount the economic troubles that they experienced in the 70s. By 1980s, the government faces economic problems via reduction of public deficit, downsizing the welfare sector and revitalising the economy, as a solution the government was decentralised, since local governments were highly dependent on the national government for financial resources. In fact, “90 percent of municipal funds came from the national government” (Hendriks & Tops, 1999, p 136). In addition, a reform such as retrenchment was implemented. The effect was huge affecting the municipal level in terms of financial resources. It also served as a stimulus for government reorientation. In effect, local governments were force to face structural financial changes. “Cheese cutter method in which cutbacks were applied equally over various sectors” (Hendriks & Tops, 1999, p 137) were applied. Due to decentralisation, municipal governments of The Netherlands had to come up with new governmental, administrative and financial instruments that would helped them coped up with the decentralisation process they had come up with four structures that enabled them to address the situation. “First, a new organizational model was developed in which the municipality was reconceptualized as a sort of holding with a number of product divisions under it Second, a new set of management and steering instruments intended to guide and control the bureaucratic apparatus was developed. Notions such as contract management, product budgets, management reports, measurable policy objectives, indicators and benchmarking infiltrated the municipalities. Third, a transformation of the bureaucratic culture, viewed as a highly procedural and risk reducing culture, was pursued. The emphasis was placed on entrepreneurship and on a product and client orientation. Fourth, the core tasks of government were reconsidered: which tasks are essential and which can be cast off?” (Hendriks & Tops, 1999, p 136). Through these municipal governments progressed and growth was achieved after the implementation of decentralisation, in fact the municipality of Tilburg served as the model for development not only for The Netherlands but for other countries like Germany and France as well.. The national government as well has started to embraced neo-liberalism as method in addressing the countries economic problems of which in 1981 they started to implement the concepts of privatization, deregulation and decentralization. In effect, the presence of personalities who were known to be staunch supporter of neo-liberalism had contributed to the ease of acceptance of the ideology for example, Onno Ruding, the Minister of Finance, a private banker. The “financial specialists (for example, Mr Korthals) and two of the ministers, Mrs Neelie Smit-Kroes (Transport and Public Works) and Mr Pieter Winsemius (Environment)” (Yesilkagit & De Vries, 2004, p 966) and Ruud Lubbers himself was an entrepreneur. It was of no not surprise that neo-liberalism was certainly adopted by the government. The “Accord of Wassennar” which, Lubber signed after his installation in office supports all the reforms. It was an agreement among private unions, employers’ organizations and the government concerning “voluntary wage moderation” (Yesilkagit & De Vries, 2004, p 955). It helps the government in implementing the principles of neo-liberalisation e.g. decentralization, deregulation and privatisation. The supports provided by academe world also strengthen the implementation of neo-liberalism. In France, “All modernization measures taken since 1988 share four goals – increasing the speed, effectiveness and efficiency of service provision, giving to individual units defined objectives and responsibilities for achieving those targets, providing both civil servants civil servants and citizens with clear definitions of standards expected in public services and mobilizing civil servants by better training, career management and job involvement” (Guyomarch, 1999, p176). Prime Minister Michel Rocard undertook the initiative for reform on February 1989 with the idea that public administration or management just like any private management be geared towards the ideal of civil servants being motivated in performing their jobs, it entails major breaks from the traditional structure of ‘corps’ in the government. The Rocard’s reforms technically deconstruct the government in such a way that all civil servants are engaged in competition for excellence of service. This paradigm virtually opens the door of efficiency and innovativeness in the public service and encourages civil servants to take the initiative in the performance of their functions. Likewise, performance indicators will now act as the parameters for movement and development in civil service. Deconcentration is the “devolution of competency and managerial authority to the local administrative units of the central government” (www.oecd.org/document). Through it modernization is attained for it moves away from ancient tradition of the rule of the ‘grand corps’ and in turn encourages civil servants’ growth like the ’two decrees on broader promotion opportunities of 1988’, ’Deconcentration Charter of 1993’, ‘deconcentration of interministerial training of prefects in 1991’and other similar undertakings that pushes new public management. On the one hand, decentralisation is the transfer of authority from the central government to the local and regional authorities. A strategy that has been appreciated as less bureaucratic. The top-to-bottom reform is no longer capable of responding to the demand of quality public service, which is now ready to shift to bottom-to –top, that is, from local administration to regional and finally the central state. Deconcentration and decentralization becomes the basic themes that sustain modernization. G. PARTY POLITICAL IDEAS As Netherlands economy gained momentum and started to perform better, the political scenario started to become stable. The political different parties have created a political system that is unitary but “consociational, consensual, multi-party and corporatist” (Lihjpart 1984 cited in Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2000, p 244). However, in France, politicians are not unanimous in their stance. There is a constant strain among the parties as to what is the proper alternative that will be carried out. The different political parties are in constant tension vis-à-vis the more effective programmes that the government should implement. Coupled by the suspicion that the President may closed the Parliament, which happened under Miterrand in 1981 and 1988 and under Chirac on 1997 (Guyomarch 1998), which creates the image of political division. Though the instability in the political scene seems shrouded, it is quite amazing to see that they were able to present a new management style that France has technically contributed to NPM, that is: consultation, cooperation.. This manifest the true nature of consensus built on the foundation of putting forward the interests of the people. H. PRESSURE FROM CITIZENS In The Netherlands, seemingly, its citizenry are not amenable to open display of anti-state sentiments. They prefer low-keyed politicians and are generally happy with the way the government is handling all the public management reforms. While, in France, even if PM Michel Rocard envisioned an administrative reform that will technically emancipate the civil servants from the limitations set by the presence of elite corps, the “respect for public management reform, the pressures from the citizenry in general appears to have been limited. [in effect] there has been a decline in public confidence in the French system, and some popular critiques of the rigidity of some public services and of the corruption and remoteness of the state elite” (Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2000, p 228). I. ELITE PERCEPTION OF WHAT MANAGEMENT REFORMS ARE DESIRABLE In Netherlands, it appears that the elite perceptions on management reforms undertaken are positive. They’ve seen that the wisdom of integrating structural reforms that will enhance development of performance indicators as integral in public service. They have seen the desirability on the concept of contractualisation and output budgeting, in fact, they “were more enthusiastic about the possibilities of management reforms” (Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2000, p 246.). In France, However, it seems that the elites are themselves not in unison vis-à-vis to what may be desirable and feasible management reforms. “For a government to try to reform the administration as a governing project while building its own leadership can jeopardize the resources it will get from that same bureaucratic administrative system.” (Bezes, 2001, p 126). As such, administrative reforms are more often than not hidden from the people and made as an agenda that is only secondary in importance (Bezes, 2001, p 126). Administrative reforms, though undertaken and utilised as an effort to provide a more efficient and speedy service to the people is hidden under the guised of political agendas. J. ELITE PERCEPTION OF WHAT MANAGEMENT REFORMS ARE FEASIBLE It is not surprising that all the management reforms that have been introduced like performance indicators are accepted and seen as viable alternatives in gaining cutbacks and has been positively affirmed by the Dutch people. However, in France, there is a “division of opinion” (Poullitt & Bouckaert, 2000, p228). Some believed that reforms might be achieved, other hold-on intrinsic problems with the reforms since it counters the very structure of “modern individualist democracies’ (Howard, 1998 cited in Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2000, p 229) K. CHANCE EVENTS In the Netherlands, bribery is catching the attention of some international organizations, “bribery of foreign public officials in international business transactions” (www.oecd.org/document). OECD Working Group on Bribery has raised this issue due to numerous international Dutch businesses, sectors, markets that are high risk in corruption. The government has started to take a more pro-active stance pertinent to the issue, unfortunately, to date, “nobody has yet convicted” (www.oecd.org/document). In France, graft and corruption hounds the reform program. The OECD has already made some agreements with the French government regarding the applicable laws that will be use as they deal with bribery of foreign public officials (www.oecd.com/document), still, it has not been properly addressed. In fact, “corruption and cronyism had become endemic” ( Pollitt & Bouckaert 2001). L. ADMINISTRATIVE SYSTEM The Dutch’s new public management style is consensual amidst diversity of culture; the tradition of consensus, of open consultation has always been at the heart of Dutch political and economic system. It is pragmatic and logical for they uphold policies that are supportive of Dutch interests. Although Dutch culture is multifaceted, they have come up with a more pragmatic solution in resolving their differences - consensus, tolerance. Moreover, the Dutch government is acclaimed of being corporatists on the supposition that the government is seen as a venue wherein employers, employees, workers, organizations, businesses and other entities co-operate with one another in a formal structure. It presents to us the notion that the Dutch system is anchored on consensus building since consultation is primary. In “France, the importance of administrative law, the successful experience of nationalized, monopoly, public-service providers in the post-war period, the political weight and established rights of civil servants, and the idea of the general interest, represented at the local level by the prefect, explain many of the distinctive features of the hybrid modernization reforms.” (Guyomarch, 1999, p 171). However, there is a prevalent sentiment among scholars vis-à-vis France’s recognition of the crisis in public management is relatively late since they have failed to see the connection of the institutional relation of the crisis for the reason that the republican institutions long entrenched in the French system has been almost sacrosanct. It is technically basking on a long political tradition dating as far back as Napoleon. Given this scenario, we can vividly observed the four distinctive traits of the French governance. First, the “Dirigisme is associated with a normative framework (.referentiel) which has enabled the administrative elite, through the construction of an ideology of the general interest, to defend an impartial, scientific conception of public action based on a monopoly of technical expertise” (Jobert 1989 cited in Clark, 1998, p 99). The second trait is the presence of “elite groups” in public administration. The primary elite group is an administrative corps made up of financial and legal experts. While the secondary elite group is made up of, “top technical corps recruit from speciahst grandes ecoles following initial training at the Ecoie Polytechnique. Members of the grands corpsare highly mobile, both within the civil service and outside it” (Jobert 1989 cited in Clark, 1998, p 99). The third trait is administrative centralisation with prefect coordination of network of deconcentrated services until 1982. The fourth and final trait is the presence of numerous civil servants working under the system that recognizes hierarchical rankings with the elite corps at the top not relinquishing their position since their stature assures prestigious postings and remunerations that is highly competitive. Since administrative concerns and policies upholds the Napoleonic code of “equal level of services in all parts of France by a central state apparatus” (Guyomarch, 1999, p 184), the number of public servants have ballooned to 2,400,000. The question to be asked is the possibility and feasibility of undertaking public management reform taken into consideration the bulk of government workers that will be greatly affected by it. M. CONTENTS OF REFORM PACKAGE New Public Management as applied in The Netherlands is a possible prime motivation for reform to free the country from economic and political debacle that was brought about by 1973 oil crisis. The Dutch government employed a combination of differing factors and ideology. There is neo-liberalism that becomes the primary agenda of the government as it curbed public deficit and pushed the stagnating economy into action. There is consensus building among all government players. Nevertheless, the effort for reformation is geared for and to the people is of paramount importance. Thus, the “Dutch tradition of consultation, compromise and consensus and substantial consideration of citizens’ desires’ (Hendriks & Tops, 1999, p 139) have been the pillar that supports the continued growth and development of Dutch economy, society. The French public management as clearly defined in the last distinctive trait gives us the idea that neo-liberalism has been seen as a political force that counters corporatists tendencies of government service. It is quite astonishing that neo-liberalism has taken center stage in global economy, but in France, it is just as “managerial rather than ideological or doctrinaire form” (Clark, 199, p 103). Thus, modernization of public administration made possible by moving away from corporatism. N. IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS One thing essential to The Netherlands execution of NPM is its success in implementing decentralization. The role of municipal governments as the nation-embraced neo-liberalism is a primordial factor that helped The Netherlands in regaining economic stability. As we have noted earlier the municipality of Tilburg has become the model of decentralization in the European block. The success with which Tilburg and other municipal governments in The Netherlands have gained points to the feasibility of decentralisation in NPM. (Hendriks & Tops, 2000) France, though it appears to be a strong state there is still the sentiments among the scholars that technically the system has not been altered or changed, in fact “French administrative organization is far more fragmented and nebulous” (Bezes, 2001, p 124). Moreover, current researches undertaken in order to understand French government have shown the possibility and viability of “ administrative bodies…becoming the defender of the milieu for which it is responsible, each of these bodies appearing to be not just society’s messenger to the political powers but equally the instruments for political actions affecting society” ( Chevallier, 1996, p 73). O. REFORMS ACTUALLY ACHIEVED In The Netherlands, policies and actual implementation of programmes have been observed and applied but NPM has been incorporated as secondary to other programmes. Thus, rising concerns regarding the availability of actual data that may be used to assess and analyse the success of NPM. In France, laws and decrees have been passed in order to backed the reform, the 1989 circular that spins modernisastion in public administration, the 1995 ‘responsibility centres’, the 1996 Cour de Comptes. However, “much of the machinery of the centralised civil service remains fundamentally unaltered” (Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2000, p 231) CONCLUSION France and Netherlands both presented us the viability of undertaking public management reforms that brings some benefits to the public. As we try to understand its dynamic of management, we noticed that there are different factors that operates as impetus for public management reforms. Both countries have taken NPM on different reason and both have envisioned and in some degree achieved a public service that is dynamic, responsive to the real needs of the people, innovative, efficient, and speedy. Furthermore, it has been noticed that the two countries differs in forms of government, still, what is of paramount importance is the rendering of true public service. However, at the end, we can claim that the Netherlands has gained real momentum in new public management, the efforts made by the French government as it tackles age-old institutions and systems is a feat worth emulating . REFERENCES: Bezes, P. (2001) ‘Defensive versus offensive approaches to administrative reforms in France (1988-1997): The leadership dilemmas of French prime ministers’, Governance .An International Journal of Policy and Administration, Vol 14, No 1, P 99 – 132. Chevallier, J. (1996) ‘Public administration in statis France’, Public Administration Review, Vol 56, No 1, p 67 – 73. Clark, D. ( 1998) ‘Comparative and international administration The modernization of French civil service: Crisis, change and continuity’, Public Administration, Vol 76, p 97 – 115. Guyomarch, A. (1999) ‘Public service’, ‘public management’ and the ‘modernisation’ of French public administration’, Public Administration, Vol 77, No 1, p 171 – 193. Hendriks, F., & Tops, P. (1999) ‘Between democracy and efficiency: Trends in the local government reform in the Netherlands and Germany’, Public Administration, Vol 77, p 133 – 153. Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. ( 2000) Public management reform: A comparative analysis, London: Oxford University Press. Yesilkagit, K., & De Vries, J. (2004) ‘Reform styles of political and administrative elites in majoritarian and consensus democracies: Public management reforms in New Zealand and The Netherlands’, Public Administration, Vol 82, No 4, p 951 – 974. Electronic sources: ‘In search of results: Performance Management Practises’. Retrieved January 11, 2007 from www.oecd.org/document. ‘Foreign bribery: The Dutch should take a more pro-active stance’, Retrieved January 10, 2007 from www.oecd.org/document. ‘France: Review of implementation of the convention and 1997 recommendation’, Retrieved January 10, 2007 from www.oecd.org/document. ‘Steps taken by France to implement and enforce the convention combating bribery of foreign public officials in international business transactions’. Retrieved January 10, 2007 from www.oecd.org/document. ‘Public modernisation Sector’. Retrieved January 11, 2007 from www.oecd.org/document. www.oecd.org/statisticsdata. www.cia.gov. Read More