Language
Country/Area
No result found
The origins of new public management: how did government reforms in the 1980s transform public services?
New Public Management (NPM) is a management method for public service organizations that is widely used in governments and public service agencies, covering local and national levels. The term was first proposed by academics in the UK and Australia to describe the various reforms carried out during the 1980s to make public services more "commercial", which aimed to improve efficiency by borrowing management models from the private sector. .
The core of new public management is to emphasize the positioning of "citizens as customers" and to emphasize the service quality and efficiency of public institutions.
Against this backdrop, many reformers have attempted to adopt decentralized service delivery models that would give local agencies more freedom in how they deliver projects or services. In some cases, governments have also adopted quasi-market structures that enable the public sector to compete with the private sector—particularly in health care in the UK. Key themes of NPM include "financial control, cost performance, improving efficiency, setting goals and continuously monitoring performance".
"Public managers, under the reforms of New Public Management, can provide customers with a variety of choices, including the right to completely opt out of the service delivery system."
In the 1980s, the first practice of New Public Management appeared in the United Kingdom, when Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher promoted changes in public management policies. Next, John Major continued to promote projects such as the Next Step Initiative and the Citizens' Charter Initiative, all of which centered on improving the quality and competition of public services. As public management becomes active in many countries, especially in New Zealand, Australia and Sweden, the OECD has also established a Public Management Committee to elevate public management issues to a higher policy priority.
As many scholars have pointed out, the concepts and practices used in the public sector reform in the 1980s gradually expanded to the world, forming a global new public management trend. However, when countries adopt similar reform measures, they still adjust according to their unique socio-economic background and challenges. For example, the reforms in Germany stemmed mainly from internal dissatisfaction with the traditional bureaucracy, while the reforms in the Netherlands took place in the context of fiscal austerity. These diverse reforms demonstrate the adaptability and flexibility of the New Public Management concept in different countries.
"New Public Management was accepted as the "gold standard of administrative reform" in the 1990s."
With the changes in global governance needs, NPM has not only shown strong vitality in Western countries, but has also gradually gained attention and implementation in developing countries. For example, many countries in Africa have begun to carry out NPM reforms to improve the efficiency and accountability of the public sector due to bureaucratic corruption and imperfect governance systems.
However, NPM has also faced criticism, especially in its comparison with traditional public management models. On the one hand, NPM emphasizes commercialization and customer-centeredness, but it has limitations in the moral responsibility of public interests. With the advent of the digital age, many scholars believe that NPM may be losing its relevance, especially in the context of the rise of digital governance (DEG).
"Governance in the digital age offers a unique self-sustainable opportunity to improve public services through the effective application of information and technology."
With the clear reshaping of the roles of political parties and enterprises, NPM needs to face the challenges brought about by technological progress, which not only requires rethinking the model of public management, but also requires in-depth thinking about future policy directions. Whether NPM reform can face increasingly complex real-world challenges and still maintain its effectiveness and relevance? Is this an important question worthy of every policymaker's consideration?
