Suchergebnisse

The original institutional design of Dutch administration and intergovernmental relations is commonly referred to as the 'decentralized unitary state'. However, the views of traditional administrative theorists have been misrepresented. Hierarchy, uniformity and the separation and delimitation of layers of government are not, as often alleged, the theoretical underpinnings of the Dutch unitary state. Rather, classical theory emphasized interdependence, diversity and the dynamic interaction of relatively independent layers of government. This image suggests that Dutch administration does not need a greater separation of layers of government but better means for regulating conflict. It also suggests that the unitary state comes in several guises and cannot be equated with a monocentric system of government.

Despite variety, plurality and complexity, analysis of (inter) organisational arrangements in the mixed economy of unitary states is still dominated by the centralistic frame of reference suggested by the formal-legal characteristics of these systems. Despite a growing sense of discomfort with this situation, and a growing critique of the unwarrantability of assumptions of uniformity and centralised control, an alternative theoretical approach does not yet seem to have been developed. This article explores the field of public administration in order to see what perspectives can be offered to the analysis of plural public structures. It distinguishes between a policy-instrumental and a political perspective. Differences are outlined in confronting these perspectives with respect to some analytical and normative issues to be resolved.