Guy Peters – författare

This book i sone of two volumes in which leading scholars examine the way in which EU member states co-ordinate their European policies. Eschewing the 'Europeanisation' problematic within which the issue is usually adressed, this book adopts a broader, more inclusive approach. It examines domestic processes and investigates co-ordination in ten member states - Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain and the United Kingdom - looking at co-ordinating ambitions, the actors involved in EU policy making, and the structures and processes by which policy is made.From a comparative perspective, the book identifies and assesses the impact of the influiences that have shaped systems of national co-ordination - the demands exerted by Union membership, the instituional structure of the national polity, the pre-existing balance between domestic institutions, administrative norms and values, and attitudes, both popular and elite, the European integration. It assesses the extent to which there has been a convergent response to the administrative challenges posed by membership on the part of the member states or whether a pattern of divergence emerges. The effectiveness of member states in influencing policy outcomes at the European level is also addressed. The companion volume answers similar questions about national administrations in Brussels. Looking at twelve member states, it is the first systematic examination of the role played by Permanent Representations in national EU policy making.

Adminstrative reform in most western democracies over the past couple of decades has been characterized by bringing in market-based concepts of public-service delivery. This book looks critically at administrative reform in a comparative perspective. The contributors - experts on administrative reform - assess its scope and objectives, and also the ways in which these reforms have impacted on the traditional roles of elective office and civil servants. This book will be an invaluable resource for students and academics in Politics and Public Administration, as well as for civil servants and experts on administrative reform.

Adminstrative reform in most western democracies over the past couple of decades has been characterized by bringing in market-based concepts of public-service delivery. This book looks critically at administrative reform in a comparative perspective. The contributors - experts on administrative reform - assess its scope and objectives, and also the ways in which these reforms have impacted on the traditional roles of elective office and civil servants. This book will be an invaluable resource for students and academics in Politics and Public Administration, as well as for civil servants and experts on administrative reform.

Institutionalism has become one of the dominant strands of theory within contemporary political science. Beginning with the challenge to behavioural and rational choice theory issued by March and Olsen, institutional analysis has developed into an important alternative to more individualistic approaches to theory and analysis. This body of theory has developed in a number of ways, and perhaps the most commonly applied version in political science is historical institutionalism that stresses the importance of path dependency in shaping institutional behaviour. The fundamental question addressed in this book is whether institutionalism is useful for the various sub-disciplines within political science to which it has been applied, and to what extent the assumptions inherent to institutional analysis can be useful for understanding the range of behaviour of individuals and structures in the public sector. The volume will also examine the relative utility of different forms of institutionalism within the various sub-disciplines. The book consists of a set of strong essays by noted international scholars from a range of sub-disciplines within the field of political science, each analysing their area of research from an institutionalist perspective and assessing what contributions this form of theorising has made, and can make, to that research. The result is a balanced and nuanced account of the role of institutions in contemporary political science, and a set of suggestions for the further development of institutional theory.