Tamilnadu housing board

Social welfare administration

Microfinance programs

Jayaprakash Narayan

The research investigates the effects of the 1989-92 Public Service Renewal and 1995-1997 Reform of the State administrative reform programme on the ministerial field services. These reforms, through the processes of deconcentration and responsibilisation, delegated increased autonomy to the firld services in their operational management to enable them to improve their delivery of policy objectives. The primary research question was whether operational and institutional factors at field service level impeded or facilitated moves towards a more managerial logic of appropriateness as envisaged by the reform programmes. Through an institutional analysis of the French administrative reform process, a number of institutional and operational factors were identified that would determine the capacity of the field services to engage in the reform process. These factors included the concessions made by the reforms to the field services in budgetary and human resource management, the incentives for field service officials to participate and the extent to which both the field services and their central Ministries were able to adjust to the requirements of the reform. In addition, there were the conservative influences of the trade unions, the effects of budgetary cutbacks and the contextual backgrounds of the respective Ministries that were influences on the receptivity of the field service to change. Burgelman's 'Model of the Interaction of Strategic Behavior, Corporate Context and the Concept of Strategy' was used as the theeoretical framework through which the findings from the fieldwork investigations conducted in the Education, Agriculture and Infrastructure Ministries were interpreted. The theoretical framework was found to be applicable to the French administrative context through its articulation of those over their operations and to show greater initiative. Burgelman's criteria for autonomous strategic behaviour were, therefore, adapted to the French administrative reform context and utilised as a structural framework through which the research findings were presented. The establishment of whether the respective criterial had been met provided a means to identify those institutional and operational variables which influenced the capacity of the field services to exercise greater autonomy in their operational management. The explanatory insights of Burgelman's model show how the resilience of traditional institutional features and the effects of budgetary cutbacks minimised the impact of the Public Service Renewal and the Reform of the State programmes in those field services of the Education, Agriculture and Infrastructure Ministries where fieldwork was carried out. The conditions within the French administration were found to be more constraining on the organisational behaviour of officials than Burgelman's model, based on a large scale private sector organisation envisages. Burgelman's model was able to identify the organisational dynamics that constrain reform, but was not able to trace the source of these constraints into a wider social context. It was found that insights from sociological and rational choise institutionalist perspectives clarified the missing social elements of Burgelman's model. The final chapter examines how the organisational dynamics identified in the study could be used as the basis for a generalised framework.

European integration theory is currently in a stage of evolution in which the validity of the traditional theoretical approaches, neofunctionalism and neorealism is increasingly questioned as a consequence of their inability to explain and predict EU developments successfully. The two theories, longtime rivals derived from International Relations (IR) scholarship, are now challenged by an emergent critique grounded in comparative politics theory. Within the IR camp, attempts to bolster the orthodox theories through their synthesis have been unsuccessful. The neofunctionalist-neorealist rivalry continues unproductively despite the advent of a rival paradigm. John Peterson's framework of European Union (EU) decision making, the focal theory of this thesis, seeks to provide a means of marrying IR and comparative political concepts, but requires (and fails to make) a choice between the two IR theories in order to function. The aim of this thesis therefore, is to shed new light on the neofunctionalist-neorealist debate by applying literature to an analysis of the Committee of the Regions. This new EU body affords actors from subnational government their first formal rights in EU policy making, thereby significantly altering the range of actors involved in that process. In order to meet this objective, an original investigation of the Committee was undertaken. It involved research interviews with a series of key actors as well as analysis of the available literature, and concluded that the Committee is having a limited but identifiable impact on the EU policy. The thesis argues that neither neofunctionalism nor neorealism is able to encompass this due to their respective essential premises. It therefore proceeds to propose amendments to the Peterson framework, drawing on its advocacy of a composite model of EU decision making to advance a new framework. The latter harnesses insights obtained from confederal, multi level governance, policy network and new institutionalist theories, and thereby lends support to the burgeoning paradigm shift in favour of comparative politics.

The aim of this thesis is to explain recent developments in the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) infrastructure policy and their implications for European integration theory. It sets out to test the view that firstly, the ad hoc nature of the TEN-T programme leads to national governments reaffirming their role as key actors within the EU policymaking process. Secondly, the aspiration of the EU's sustainable mobility strategy is not implemented in practice at the national level. The thesis combines theories of European integration with a study of the EU day-to-day transport policy making process to show how the TEN-T programme fits into wider debates on sustainability and European integration generally. To achieve this objective the thesis examines the dichotomous debate that exists between intergovernmental and supranational theorists in their attempts to conceptualise the wider process of European integration. It argues that such approaches drawn from International Relations (IR) are sufficient tools to explain the EU system of governance. In order to characterise the EU transport policy-making process more effectively this thesis highlights the need to adopt a combination of tools from both IR and Comparative Politics (CP) schools of thought. The transport sector is examined within the thesis for the reason that it remains one of the few policy areas that can better illustrate the tension between intergovernmental and supranational approaches to European integration. In addition, the transport sector is of European significance as decades of unrestrained growth have heightened concerns about its ability to achieve sustainable mobility. Indeed, the TEN-T programme is offered as part of the solution to Europe's transport problems and as a means of promoting sustainable mobility within the EU. However, analysis of the TEN-T policy development reveals a set of obstacles to the implentation of a sustainable European transport infrastructure policy. The findings resulting from this research are firstly, contrary to the assumption that European transport policy is dominated by an integrationist strategy of the political centre in Europe: it is the national government that remains the key actor in the European transport infrastructure policy process. Secondly, based on the evidence presented within this thesis, the transport sector does not signify a marked shift towards multi-level governance. Thirdly, the absence of this power sharing framework can be used to explain the unsustainable direction of the current TEN-T policy.

The aim of the thesis is to gain insight into the contemporary system of urban governance through an analysis of multi-sectoral regeneration partnerships. It specifically seeks to contribute to an understanding of urban governance through an investigation of three inter-linked themes. These are firstly, the power relations that governance entails; secondly, the quality of the relationships between those involved, with particular regard to the existence (or otherwise) of trust; and, thirdly, the democratic implications of the system. Three conceptual lenses were developed to investigate those central concerns, the first drawing on insights from regime theory, the second employing the literature on social capital and the third utilising the principles of deliberative democratic theory. These lenses were applied both separately and holistically to concrete examples of three different types of multisectoral regeneration partnerships operating within the geographical location of Brighton and Hove. The purpose was firstly, to ascertain whether when viewing the partnerships holistically the exercise of power, the development of trust and the engendering of democracy were compatible with one another; secondly, to gauge whether success in one of those dimensions was to the detriment of one or more of the others; and thirdly, to examine how different types of partnerships dealt with those issues. From the case study it was found that the exercise of power, the development of trust and the engendering of democracy were difficult goals for all of the partnerships studied. It was also found those goals were incompatible with one another and that success in one was to the detriment of one or more of the others but that the different types of partnership dealt with those issues in different ways. These findings contribute to a fuller understanding of multi-sectoral regeneration partnerships in and of themselves and they also provide insights into the contemporary system of urban governance. For the practice of urban governance they indicate, for example, that policy makers may be faced with incommensurable goals. At a conceptual level the findings suggest the need for a holistic approach to the subject.

Deliberative democratic theory has evolved in response to the perceived limits of liberal democratic theory and practice and offers a challenge to, and a critical perspective from which to judge, contemporary liberal representative institutions. The institution of representation establishes a 'division of labour' between an elite of professional politicians and a passive, privatized citizenry. Deliberative democracy offers the possibility of a different form of that division where increased opportunities for citizen participation are taken to be both feasible and desirable, and citizen engagement forms part of an ongoing critical dialogue upon which more legitimate forms of political authority can be grounded. Underpinning deliberative democratic theory is the idea that our needs and interests may be dialogically interpreted and formed. This takes us away from the notion of the citizen as sole proprieter of private, subjectively formed preferences and provides the imperative for a more public, active conception of citizenship. The work of Jurgen Habarmas is central to deliberative demoratic theory. His distinction between strategic and communicative rationality lies at the heart of the deliberative critique of representative government and in itself provides a useful critical foothold. However, Habermas's procedural conception of discursive legitimacy, though necessary, is not a sufficient condition for a flourishing and vibrant deliberative democracy. This thesis addresses this lacuna in his work, the problem of the mediation of moral pronciples and moral culture, and elaborates a political ethic of philia politike which substantively supplements contemporary deliberative democratic theory. Turning to the question of deliberative democratic institutions, we ask whether deliberative democracy should be seen as an alternative to liberal representative democracy, requiring a complete restructuring lf liberal political institutions, or whether it points to the reform and supplementation of representative structures and practices. We draw learning from the experience of citizens' juries on what may be of value to deliberative democratic theory as well as critically assessing the claim that citizen's juries are viable deliberative institutions.

This PhD thesis examines the E-government implementation in Dubai and examines the critical success factors and barriers to a successful E-government implementation. The study is based on primary research conducted on the subject of E-government in the United Arab Emirates. The thesis critically reviewed extant literature on E-government implementation. The methodology used for this research is a mixed-methodological design comprising of quantitative survey of 450 employees of the Dubai Smart Government Department. A survey questionnaire was designed to assess the impact of various independent and dependent variables on the effectiveness of E-government implementation. To complement the shortcomings of the high level of abstraction often associated with quantitative methodology, a qualitative methodology was used which involved in-depth interviews with 25 middle and high ranking officials in the Dubai Smart Government Department. The results of these questionnaires and interviews helped provide a theoretical framework for the postulation of standard operating procedures, which could ensure the success of E-government implementation, in Dubai. The research analyses and discusses the primary data (questionnaire and interviews) to generate insights regarding the success of E-government implementation in Dubai. The analysis also examines the various factors which limit and hinder successful E-government implementations and offers recommendations for improvement. The study finds that some of the major barriers to E-government in Dubai include: technology, security, legal, monetary and strategic. Employees surveyed also generally expressed fear of complexity, system integration, data security, and job losses. Researchers have repeatedly shown that there is need for empirical based studies to understand contextually relevant aspects of E-government implementation in non-western contexts. This PhD thesis contributes to this debate with fresh empirical data sets from Dubai on E-government implementation including the identification of critical successes factors and barriers of a successful E-government implementation. This study also contributes theoretically by challenging the popular normative stage models with a more robust theoretical framework encompassing both human centeredness and context relevance. In so doing, the study came up with a tripartite approach comprising management support, cultural change, and system design. The study concludes that dynamic interplay between internal and external forces; socio-economic and technological factors (including maturity of ICT capabilities) are all relevant for a successful implementation of E-government in Dubai. This study’s key significance lies in its contribution to improve the implementation of a successful E-government in the UAE context, thereby leading to a development of a road map for facilitating practical implementation of strategies and reversing the declining trend of E-government participation in Dubai. In addition, the study’s emphasis on the public sector, could lead to strengthening of the role of E-government for administrative and institutional reform and inclusion in the public sector. The study could provide a useful guide both for the Dubai Smart Government Department and other E-government agencies in Arab regions and for internal stakeholders in the field who wish to gain insight into the process of E-government globally.