Suchergebnisse

Turkey first applied for EU membership in 1987 and started negotiations for full membership in October 2005 after lengthy and challenging negotiations between EU member states. This master's thesis attempts to examine the relationship between the negotiations for EU membership that are going on between Turkey and the EU Commission and the public discussion on the subject. The research material consists of selected posts on the Financial Times discussion forum and the Acquis communautaire and Copenhagen criteria. By comparing the research material this thesis attempts to investigate if the public deliberation and official negotiations focus on the same issues and requirements for membership. The theoretical background for this analysis is deliberative democracy, according to which public debate should be a prerequisite for agenda setting and decision making. The findings of the thesis reveal that the public discussion does touch on the acquis communautaire and Copenhagen criteria to some degree, but the public is also concerned with non-acquis issues such as the culture and history. A unique feature of the accession negotiations is also the amount of commentary from heads of state regarding the negotiations, which was also noted in the research material. In the light of deliberative democratic theory it can be noted that the public may take part in the discussion over Turkey's membership, but it has little or no chances of setting the agenda for the negotiations.

Väitöstutkimus analysoi julkisia poliittisia performansseja poliittisena viestintänä. Poliittiset performanssit voidaan ymmärtää julkisissa tiloissa toimeen pantuina 'näytöksinä', joiden tavoitteena on luoda arkisiin rutiineihin yllättäviä katkoksia ja synnyttää uutta toimintatilaa jonkin yhteiskunnallisen ongelman esiin nostamiseksi. Performanssit synnyttävät katkoksia monin tavoin, mutta erityisen leimallista niille on näkyvän, vallalla olevan visuaalisen järjestyksen murtaminen tuomalla siihen erilaisia 'häiritseviä' (disruptive) elementtejä: resistoivia kehoja, valtaa parodioivia kuvia, karnevalistista protestointia, katuteatteria jne. Poliittisten performanssien viestintä perustuu puheen sijaan tai ohella toimijoiden oman kehon ja sen kantamien erilaisten visuaalisten merkkien julkiseen esittämiseen, joskus hyvin äärimmäisellä tavalla, kuten esimerkiksi nälkälakoissa ja polttoitsemurhissa. Väitöskirjassa tällaista viestintätyyliä kutsutaan visuaaliseksi ja esteettiseksi politikoinniksi. Tutkimuksessa analysoidaan useita esimerkkejä performatiivisesta poliittisesta viestinnästä ja kehitetään teoreettisia ideoita sen ominaispiirteiden tulkitsemiseksi. ; In this doctoral thesis I study a phenomenon which I have titled as public political performance. By public political performance I refer to a public event (a 'show', display, demonstration) the purpose of which is to expose in public and challenge those social-political norms, practices, and relations of power which usually remain invisible in the sway of routine political life. I am interested especially in how performance works as a form of non-linguistic, or wider than linguistic, political communication. I theorize and analyze, through several illustrative examples, performances from three perspectives: as corporeal (bodily), visual, and aesthetic communication. In construction of theory I use and partly rework ideas from thinkers such as Jürgen Habermas, Michel Foucault, Hannah Arendt, Maurice Merleau-Ponty, and Jacques Ranciere. The study shows that public political performance is a sensitive, even volatile phenomenon because it often manifestly exposes the fundamentally violent power structure of society – as when, for example, street demonstrations induce strong counter reactions from the police and political authorities – and puts this order under critical public scrutiny. Political authorities do not take such challenges lightly, which is why public performances sometimes instigate serious political controversies. The key theoretical ideas of the study relate to performance as something done and en/acted. On the one hand, performance discloses the nature of politics as a 'doing.' This means in simple terms that, in order to subsist, the political world needs to be done, performed, and 'iterated,' every time anew. The term performative describes this social-constructivist side of politics. That the constitution of the social and political power is based not on any 'natural' ground but on continuous re/iteration of certain ways and routines is often revealed only when it is visibly and noticeably disrupted. This is what political performance typically does. On the other hand, performance signifies a particular kind of public show which resembles but does not equal theatrical shows. Performance is theatrical in being an 'art-like' communicative act, yet it is more surprising and unpredictable compared to regular theatre and, because of this, usually more difficult to approach and interpret. Political performance as a contingent and sometimes oddly appearing public event with a surprise effect brings forth the importance of disruption for politics. It alerts us to situations where the normalized political performatives are being visibly questioned by bringing into public space – 'in your face' – diverse disrupting elements like resisting bodies, parodying images, and carnevalism. The relationship between these two, performatives and performances, creates an edgy and 'chiasmatic' political space from which much of political life gains its driving force. This basic idea and relationship constitute the key starting point for this study's theoretical reflections. Political performance is an important subject for political studies for several reasons. The purely knowledge-based reason is that that in directing attention to the corporeal and visual aspects of politics and political communication, performance brings into view phenomena and conceptual possibilities which are too often ignored by political researchers and theorists. The relevance of performance for the field can also be justified from another perspective, through reference to its political and democratic significance. The discussions and analyses carried out in the study show that there are political circumstances where citizens see public performance as the only available means of participation in political communication, with other channels of communication forbidden or marginalized. There are also situations where citizens create, through setting up a performance, space for public communication and action where it has not existed before. Political performance as a way of contesting existing political realities can therefore have special value for political freedom. Political and democratic theory needs to understand, I shall argue, also that category of political action which performs political freedom rather than asks for it.

This article investigates what happens when governmental actors foster the participation of non-state actors (NSAs) in treaty ratification and implementation decisions. NSAs, being non-governmental organisations, business groups, citizens, or research institutions among others represent interests that will be ultimately impacted by policy choices. While governments have long consulted them on an ad hoc basis, a "deliberative turn" happened in the 2000s to encourage their involvement, for greater legitimacy and transparency, through among others, the use of public consultations. This proactive turn raises questions about public consultations: are such instruments effective? Do they encourage new thinking? Do they matter for final decisions? This article answers these questions by investigating, using among others lexicometry tools, the public consultation organised by the European Commission in 2011 prior to the ratification of the Nagoya Protocol on access and benefit sharing (ABS) by the European Union in 2014. The results are mixed. While the studied public consultation favoured the expression of small national NSAs the process is still poorly inclusive. NSAs did not propose any fresh ideas on the ABS issue and their final influence on European decision-makers is blurred by the diversity of interests expressed.

Kunnat ovat suuren muutoksen keskellä. Kuntarakenneuudistus sekä sosiaali- ja terveydenhuollon palvelurakenneuudistus tulevat muuttamaan kuntien hallintoa merkittävästi. Kari Hakarin tutkimus tarkastelee yhden suuren kaupungin hallinnonuudistusta uuden julkisen hallinnan teorian näkökulmasta. Uusi julkinen hallinta on kunnallishallinnon uudistamisen kolmas vaihe, joka on kehittynyt perinteisestä julkishallinnosta ja tätä seuranneesta uudesta julkisjohtamisesta. Tutkimuksen tavoitteena on arvioida, onko uudesta julkisesta hallinnasta kuntien hallinnonuudistusten uudeksi suunnaksi. Tutkimuksella tuetaan myös kuntien käytännön kehittämistoimintaa. Tutkimuskohteena on Tampereen kaupungin toteuttama kokonaisvaltainen toimintamallin uudistus. Uudistus muodostuu kolmesta osasta: pormestarijärjestelmästä, tilaaja–tuottaja-mallista sekä asiakaslähtöisestä prosessiajattelusta. Tutkimustulokset osoittavat, että Tampereen muutosprosessi toteuttaa varsin hyvin uuden julkisen hallinnan mukaista ajattelua. Se ei kuitenkaan edusta tätä moderneimmillaan, vaan perustuu vahvasti sekä byrokraattisen organisaation rakenteisiin että uuden julkisjohtamisen mukaiseen markkinoistumisen tavoitteeseen. Näyttää siltä, että Tampereenkin toimintamalli kaipaa päivittämistä, jotta se pystyy vastaamaan paremmin tulevaisuuden haasteisiin. Moderni uuden julkisen hallinnan kokonaisuus kuntien hallinnon kehittämisen näkökulmasta muodostuu 1) avoimesta kumppanuudesta asukkaiden, palvelutuottajien ja muiden sidosryhmien kanssa, 2) paikallisuuden ja yhteisöllisyyden korostamisesta, 3) monimuotoisesta suorasta ja edustuksellisesta demokratiasta, 4) asiakaslähtöisestä palvelujen kehittämisestä, 5) tulosperusteisesta palveluiden hankinnasta sekä 6) monimuotoisesta palvelutuotannosta. Muutos vallankäytössä on yksi uuden julkisen hallinnan ominaispiirre. Kunnan johtaminen edellyttää monimutkaistuvassa yhteiskunnassa uusia välineitä ja toimintatapoja. Tutkimuksen mukaan moderni kunnan johtaminen perustuu onnistuneelle yhdistelmälle pehmeää ja kovaa valtaa. Tutkimuksen mukaan uusi julkinen hallinta voi kehittyä kuntien hallinnonuudistusten perustaksi. Tätä tukee se, että uudessa julkisessa hallinnassa kehittämisperiaatteet muodostavat loogisen kokonaisuuden, jota voidaan käytännössä toteuttaa monin välinein erilaisissa tilanteissa. Lisäksi on olemassa ilmeinen tarve yhteiselle visiolle, jotta välttämättä edessä oleva kuntien hallinnonuudistus pystytään toteuttamaan. Uudet, isot reformit tarvitsevat aina mallin, johon muutos voidaan perustaa. Uuden julkisen hallinnan kehittymistä tukee myös se, että hallinnon kehittämisen käytännön toteutukset sekä kansainvälisesti että Suomessa toteuttavat jo monella tavoin uuden julkisen hallinnan mukaisia hallinnonuudistuksen kehityssuuntia. Tutkimus tuo uutta tietoa uuden julkisen hallinnan käytännön toteutuksesta suuressa suomalaisessa kaupungissa. Se näyttää myös suuntaa kuntien kehittämistyölle yhdistäen käytäntöä ja teoriaa ja tuo näin tietoa sekä käytännön kuntien kehittämistehtävissä toimiville että tutkijoille. Tampereen toimintamallin päivittämiselle se tarjoaa päämäärän, jota kohti edetä. ; The subject of this dissertation is the new public governance from the perspective of the local government management reforms. The research question is: how is the new public governance reflected in local government reforms? The research ques-tion will be examined from the perspectives of theory, practice and power relations. The empirical object of the study is the management reform of the City of Tampere, Finland. The reform includes three parts: the mayoral system, the purchaser-provider model and the customer-oriented process organization. The study also aims at the development of municipal operations, and presents new public governance as a comprehensive "theory of practice", which combines theory and practice and allows municipalities to find perspectives, tools and a theoretical framework for their management reforms. The study consists of four separate published sub-studies and this summary. The first sub-study deals with the theory of new public governance within the framework of the management reform of the City of Tampere. The second and third sub-studies are concerned with a variety of practical implementations of new public governance in the City of Tampere management reform. The fourth sub-project addresses power relations. In this summary the results are presented from the perspective of a management model, networked service development and the change in the exercise of power. Questionnaires were the empirical basis of the first two sub-studies, the third examined written documents and used interviews with experts and fourth sub-study relied on theme interviews with directors. New public governance (NPG) represents the third wave of the management re-forms evolving from a traditional public administration, and that following the new public management. An essential feature of the new public governance is that it does not completely reject earlier administrative reforms, but rather complements them with new solutions. NPG is based on the view that the public administration is no longer able alone to control society, but the success of governance is based on the partnership with the private and third sectors as well as with the citizens. Within the framework of new public governance one can, at least to some extent, identify three distinct trends. The differences between the trends are mainly in emphasis placed on various matters. Discussion of the new public governance started in network governance. Next, the new public governance was discussed from the perspective of democratic decision-making and public participation. The third emphasis seems to be on the new public governance as a development of customer-focused services and co-production. The results show that the process of change of the City of Tampere can be imple-mented quite well within the new public governance paradigm. At the beginning of the process the new public management was a decided basis of the reform. In the phases of preparation and implementation constraints and international experiences of weaknesses were perceived in the new public management model. On the basis of this, the management model has been developed further so that issues of new public governance such as local democracy, participation, networks and transparency of government have become stronger. The management model of Tampere does not, however, represent the new public governance in its modern form. The Tampere model is built on a basis of democracy and regulation of traditional public administration as well as the quasi-markets of the new public management. The modern new public governance reform seems to be moving especially towards a customer-oriented service development. According to this study the change in the use of power seems to be one of the characteristics of society's growing complexity and new public governance. There is a need for new instruments for leadership and in the exercise of power in an in-creasingly complex society. The modern municipal leadership is based on a suc-cessful combination of soft and hard power. The growth of new public governance as the next paradigm of management re-forms can be justified from three different perspectives. First, the new public gov-ernance is a logical entity. It brings together coherent principles of management reform, which can be implemented in practice by a variety of techniques in different situations. Second, there is an obvious need for a common vision for local gov-ernment reforms. New, large-scale reforms always need a new paradigm in which a change can be set up. There is a need for a common vision for the municipalities and their functions in order to implement local government reform. The new public governance could be the entirety that can show the way for the necessary man-agement reform of municipalities in Finland. Third, the practical implementations of management reforms both internationally and in Finland are already realizing the trends of management reform of new public governance in a number of ways.

Pro gradu ­tutkielma koostuu seuraavista osista: Rouvinen, Kaisa. Lisääntymisterveydenhuollon haasteet ja naisten hyvinvointi vähiten kehittyneissä maissa. Tampereen yliopisto. Terveystieteen laitos. Kirjallisuuskatsaus. Osasuoritus Pro gradu ­tutkielmaan. 26 s. 2003 Rouvinen, Kaisa. Quality of care in reproductive health services at health posts in Nepal. International EuroQuan Conference on Quality and Nursing Practice. Proceedings. Norsk sykepleieforbund. 1997; 224-231. Rouvinen, Kaisa. Quality of care in reproductive health services at five government health posts in Siraha District, Eastern Nepal. A dissertation submitted to the University of Liverpool (School of Tropical Medicine) in partial fulfilment of the degree of Master in Community Health. 95 pages. 1996 ; 1. JOHDANTO 6 2. LISÄÄNTYMISTERVEYS KEHITYKSEN INDIKAATTORINA 7 3. NAISEN ELÄMÄN TÄRKEÄT JA KRIITTISET VAIHEET 10 3.1. RASKAUS JA SYNNYTYS - TURVALLISEN ÄITIYDEN TAVOITE 10 3.2. PERHESUUNNITTELU JA ABORTTI 15 3.3. HIV JA MUUT SUKUPUOLITAUDIT 17 3.4. LAPSETTOMUUS JA LAPSEN SUKUPUOLI 19 3.5. SUKUPUOLIELINTEN TRADITIONAALINEN SILPOMINEN 20 3.6. KÖYHYYDEN, TRADITIOIDEN JA OLOSUHTEIDEN MERKITYS 22 4. HAASTEET JA MAHDOLLISUUDET 23 LÄHTEET 26 QUALITY OF CARE IN REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH SERVICES AT FIVE GOVERNMENT HEALTH POSTS IN SIRAHA DISTRICT, EASTERN NEPAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS III LIST OF TABLES VI LIST OF FIGURES VII LIST OF ABBREVATIONS AND ACRONYMS VIII GLOSSARY IX EXECUTIVE SUMMARY X CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1. THE CLIENT AND THE CONCERN 1 1.1.1. Save the Children US in Nepal 1 1.1.2. Save the Children Siraha project 1 1.1.3. Problem statement 2 1.2. THE STUDY 2 1.2.1. Study question 2 1.2.2. Aim and objectives of the study 2 1.2.1. Action plan and accomplishment of the study 3 1.3. STUDY LOCATION 4 1.3.1. Nepal 4 1.3.2. Siraha District 4 CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW 6 2.1. GLOBAL VIEWS OF WOMEN'S HEALTH 6 2.2. PRIMARY HEALTH CARE IN NEPAL 8 2.2.1. Safe Motherhood and Family Planning 8 2.3. QUALITY IN HEALTH CARE 10 2.3.1. What is quality? 10 2.3.2. Approaches to assessment of quality in health care 10 2.4. SELECTED ISSUES IN QUALITY OF HEALTH CARE 14 2.4.1. The structure of the health care and its relevance in quality assessment 14 2.4.2. Health care providers' job motivation and its impact on quality of health care 15 2.4.3. User satisfaction 16 2.5. CONCLUSION 17 CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY 19 3.1. EVALUATION OF HEALTH POST FACILITIES AND SERVICE ARRANGEMENTS 20 3.1.1. Study location 20 3.1.2. Selection of health posts 20 3.1.3. Issues and variables used to explore the objective 20 3.1.4. Tools and strategies of data collection 20 3.2. EXPLORING HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS' PERCEPTIONS ABOUT THE QUALITY OF CARE 21 3.2.1. Study population 21 3.2.2. Selection of informants 21 3.2.3. Issues and variables used to explore the objective 21 3.2.4. Tools and strategies of data collection 21 3.3. DESCRIBING THE LEVEL OF USERS' SATISFACTION 22 3.3.1. Study population 22 3.3.2. Selection of informants 22 3.3.3. Issues and variables used to explore the objective 22 3.3.4. Tools and strategies of data collection 23 3.4 ADDITIONAL DATA COLLECTION METHODS 24 3.5. PRE-TESTING AND TRANSLATION 24 3.6. DATA HANDLING AND STORAGE 25 3.7. DATA ANALYSIS 25 3.8. QUALITY ASSURANCE AND ENCOUNTERED CONSTRAINTS IN DATA COLLECTION 25 CHAPTER 4. RESULTS 27 4.1. EVALUATION OF HEALTH POST FACILITIES AND SERVICE ARRANGEMENTS 27 4.1.1. Location and accessibility 27 4.1.2. Target population and service statistics 27 4.1.3. Sub-health posts, outreach clinics and staffing 28 4.2.4. Waiting facilities at health posts 28 4.1.5. Rooms for counselling and MCH and FP services 28 4.1.6. Infection prevention 29 4.1.7. Equipment and instruments for use in MCH and FP 29 4.1.8. Availability of contraceptives and essential medicines 29 4.1.9. IEC material and activities 29 4.1.10. Record keeping and reporting 30 4.1.11. Health post management and supervision 30 4.1.12. Conclusion 30 4.2. HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS' PERCEPTION ABOUT THE QUALITY OF CARE 31 4.2.1. Job satisfaction and experience as a health care provider 31 4.2.2. Health workers' perception of what is good quality in health care 32 4.2.3. Health workers' perception about users' expectations 33 4.2.4. Health workers' suggestions for improvement of health care 33 4.2.5. What are the specific reasons for low utilisation of FP and AN services 34 4.2.6. Conclusion 35 4.3. QUALITY OF CARE FROM THE USERS' POINT OF VIEW 35 4.3.1. The sample 35 4.3.2. Perceptions of the quality of care 37 4.3.3. Suggestions for improvement for the quality of care at a health post 40 4.3.4. Conclusion 40 4.4. SUMMARY OF RESULTS 41 CHAPTER 5. DISCUSSION 43 5.1. IMPACTS OF STRUCTURE OF HEALTH CARE ON QUALITY OF THE SERVICE 43 5.1.1. Accessibility 43 5.1.2. Clinical settings and procedures 44 5.1.3. Service arrangements 44 5.2. HEALTH WORKERS' ROLE 47 5.2.1. Users' expectations contradicting providers' perceptions 47 5.2.2. Implications of health workers' perceptions for improvement of quality 48 5.2.3. Job motivation 48 5.2.4. Quality assurance cycle 50 5.3. CONCLUSIONS 50 5.4. COMMENTS ON METHODS USED IN THE STUDY 51 CHAPTER 6. RECOMMENDATIONS 53 REFERENCES 54 APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 PHOTPGRAPHS: WALL PAINTINGS AND TBA TRAINING 58 APPENDIX 2 MAPS OF NEPAL AND SIRAHA DISTRICT 59 APPENDIX 3 INVENTORY FORM FOR HEALTH POST FACILITIES 60 APPENDIX 4. BACKGROUND VARIABLES 70 APPENDIX 5.A STRUCTURED QUESTIONNAIRE FOR USER EXIT INTERVIEW 71 APPENDIX 5.B MAITHALI TRANSLATION OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE 75 APPENDIX 6 EVALUATION OF HEALTH POST FACILITIES AND SERVICE ARRANGEMENTS 79 APPENDIX 7. FINDINGS FROM HEALTH PERSONNEL IN-DEPTH INTERVIEWS 84 APPENDIX 8. USERS' EXPRESSIONS OF THE QUALITY OF CARE. QUOTATIONS. 85

Tutkimuksessa selvitetään, missä määrin työpaikkojen työsuojeluvalvontaa toteutetaan alueellisesti eri tavalla eli toteutuuko valvonta työpaikoilla yhtenäisesti eri puolilla Suomea. Tutkimuksen ennakko-oletuksena on, että merkittävä syy työsuojeluvalvonnan alueelliseen erilaisuuteen on valvonnan organisointi viiden itsenäisen aluehallintoviraston työsuojelun vastuualueen tehtäväksi. Työsuojeluhallintoa ja työsuojeluvalvonnan toteutumisen yhtenäisyyttä työpaikoilla ei ole tutkittu tieteellisesti 2000-luvulla. Tämä tutkimus arvioi työsuojeluhallinnon rakennetta ja valvonnan toteutumista sekä hallinnon että työpaikkojen näkökulmasta. Tutkimus antaa sekä tieteellisesti perusteltuja teoreettisia että hallinnon asiakkaiden näkökulmia työsuojeluhallinnossa käynnissä olevaan valvonnan yhtenäistämiskehitykseen. Tutkimuksen teoreettisena viitekehyksenä on hallinnon evaluaatiotutkimus, joka tarkoittaa hallinnon toimivuuden arviointia käyttäjä- ja asiakasnäkökulmasta. Työsuojeluhallinto toteuttaa työpaikoille kohdistuvaa työsuojeluvalvontaa työsuojelutarkastuksina, jolloin hallinnon asiakkaita ovat työpaikat ja niiden työnantajat ja työntekijät. Pääasiallisena tutkimusaineistona ovat valvontatietojärjestelmä Veran raportit ja niistä tehdyt 27 valvonnan alueellista vertailua sekä henkilöhaastattelut, jotka kohdistuvat 52:een työsuojeluhallinnon, työmarkkinajärjestöjen ja työpaikkojen työsuojeluhenkilöön. Tutkimuksessa on kolme päälukua: työsuojeluhallituksen aika 1973-1993, itsenäisten alueellisten työsuojeluviranomaisten aika vuodesta 1993 lähtien sisältäen työmarkkinajärjestöjen roolin työsuojeluvalvonnassa ja valvonnan alueellinen vertailu. Tutkimusmatkani kohti yhtenäistä työpaikkojen työsuojeluvalvontaa alkoi työsuojeluhallituksesta, joka perustettiin vuonna 1973 osana hyvinvointivaltion rakentamista ja valtiojohtoista suunnitteluoptimismia. Valtiollinen työsuojelu koottiin yhden ministeriön alaisuuteen. Työsuojeluhallituksen aikana oli keskusjohtoinen, ainakin osittain yhtenäinen työsuojeluvalvonta, mutta keskusviraston toiminta ei onnistunut, koska työnantajat vastustivat sitä koko ajan pitäen sen toimintaa konspiratiivisena, vehkeilevänä. Työsuojeluhallitus lakkautettiin vuonna 1993 osana keskusvirastojärjestelmän purkamista 1990-luvun alun taloudellisen laman seurauksena. Valtion harjoittamaa sääntelyä purettiin hallinnon kaikilla sektoreilla, ja hallintoa madallettiin lähemmäksi asiakasta. Valtion merkitystä vähennettiin koko yhteiskunnassa ja hyvinvointivaltiosta tehtiin kilpailuvaltio, jolloin markkinaliberalismi ja New Public Management voimistuivat. Työsuojeluhallituksen lakkautuksessa tehtiin ehkä muutakin politiikkaa; pirstaloimalla valvovaa hallintoa heikennettiin samalla työpaikoille kohdistuvaa keskitettyä valvonnan voimaa. Itsenäisten alueellisten työsuojeluviranomaisten aikana vuodesta 1993 lähtien entisten työsuojelupiirien ja nykyisten aluehallintoviraston työsuojelun vastuualueiden toiminnallinen itsenäisyys korostui. Hallinnon toiminnassa näkyy, ettei työsuojeluvalvonnalla ole yhteistä keskusjohtoa. Sosiaali- ja terveysministeriön työ- ja tasa-arvo-osasto, jonka alaisuuteen työsuojelu keskushallinnossa kuuluu, toteuttaa Kansainvälisen työjärjestön ILO:n (International Labour Organization) sopimusten tulkintaa, että työsuojeluhallinto on riippumaton valvontatehtävää suorittaessaan eikä ministeriö siten puutu valvonnan alueellisiin menettelytapoihin. Tutkimus käsittelee myös työsuojeluhallinnon laajaa yhteistyötä työmarkkinajärjestöjen kanssa. Järjestöt osallistuvat kaikkeen päätöksentekoon, jossa käsitellään hallinnon tavoitteita, painopisteitä, valvontaohjeita ja resursseja. Tutkimuksessa arvioidaan edustuksellisen demokratian näkökulmasta korporatiivisen etujärjestövaikutuksen ja hallinnon suhdetta riippumattoman työsuojeluvalvonnan päätöksenteossa ja toimeenpanossa. Tarkastuskertomuksiin perustuva alueellisen valvonnan vertailu osoittaa, että työsuojeluvalvonta on eriytynyt vastuualueittain. Työpaikkojen kunnossaolo määritellään usein eri tavalla, joten tarkastajien valvoma työturvallisuuden minimitaso ei toteudu yhdenmukaisesti koko maassa. Siten velvoitteita korjata tai poistaa työturvallisuusepäkohtia annetaan eri tavalla ja lopputuloksena on se, ettei työnantajia kohdella tasapuolisesti. Tutkimuksen johtopäätöksenä on, että työsuojeluvalvonta on osa kansallista hallintotoimintaa ja laillisuusvalvontaa, ei alueellista tai paikallista hallintoa. Työsuojelu ei eroa toimialoittain maantieteellisesti, koska eri ammattialojen työ on pääpiirteissään samanlaista koko maassa ja niiden työturvallisuus ei juurikaan eroa maantieteellisesti. Tämän vuoksi myös työsuojeluvalvonnan pitäisi olla yhdenmukaista koko maassa. Suomeen pitäisi perustaa Pohjoismaiden mallin mukainen työsuojelun keskusorganisaatio, joka koordinoisi yhtenäistä laillisuusvalvontaa samalla tavalla kuin Poliisihallitus, Syyttäjälaitos ja uusi Tuomioistuinvirasto koordinoivat toimialojensa laillisuusvalvontaa ja toiminnan menettelytapoja. ; This study examines the extent to which workplace occupational safety and health (OSH) enforcing is carried out differently across the Finnish regions, in other words whether workplace enforcing is uniform across Finland. The presupposition of the study is that an important reason for the regional disparity in labour inspection is the decentralized organization of the inspection to by the five independent divisions of occupational health and safety of the regional state administrative agency. The OSH administration and the uniformity of the implementation of OSH in the workplace have not been scientifically studied in the 21st century. This study assesses the structure and implementation of the OSH administration from the perspective of both the administration and the workplace. The study provides a scientifically justified analysis covering both theoretical and customers' perspectives on OSH management and the ongoing integration of health and safety enforcement. The chosen theoretical approach of the study is the administrative evaluation framework, which means assessing the functionality of administration from the user and customer perspective. The Labour Inspectorate carries out workplace safety inspections in the form of occupational safety inspections, whereby the customers of the administration are the workplaces and their employers and employees. The main research material are OSH inspection database Vera reports and personal interviews carried out with 52 persons in the job protection administration, labour organizations and employment OSH personnel. The study consists of three main empirical chapters: the Labour Protection Board, the Central Office 1973-1993, the independent Regional Labour Inspectorate since 1993, including the role of labour organizations in labour inspection and the regional comparison of labour inspection. Shift towards an integrated job labour inspection started with the Labour Protection Board which was established in 1973 as part of the construction of the welfare state during the era of optimism in state-directed planning State labour protection was brought together under one ministry. The Labour Protection Board the system was center-led, at least regarding uniform occupational health and safety enforcing, but the Board's operations were not successful, mainly because the employers were opposed to it throughout its existence. The Labour Protection Board was abolished in 1993 as part of the dismantling of the central office system that followed the economic recession in the early 1990s. State regulation in all sectors of government was decentralized and administration was brought closer to the customers. The role of the state was diminished in society as a whole and the welfare state became a competitive state, with neoliberalism and New Public Management becoming stronger. Other objectives were also part of the decision to abolish the Labour Protection Board; at the same time, the fragmentation of supervisory authorities weakened the efficiency of workplace control. The era of the independent regional labour inspectorates since 1993 underlines the functional independence of the former OSH Inspectorate and the current division of occupational health and safety of the regional state administrative agency. The operation shows that there is no common central management for labour enforcement. The Department for Work and Gender Equality of the Social and Health Ministry, which is responsible for occupational safety in central administration, interprets International Labour Organization (ILO) conventions as meaning that the labour administration is independent in carrying out its supervisory function. Thus, the Ministry does not interfere with regional control procedures. The study also deals with the extensive co-operation between the labour protection administration and the labour market organizations. Trade unions are involved in all decision-making concerning management objectives, priorities, control guidelines and resources. The study examines the influence of corporatist interest groups and the governance of occupational health and safety enforcing decision-making and implementation from the perspective of representative democracy. A comparison of regional control based on inspection reports shows that OSH control of occupational health and safety has varied between the regional divisions. The condition of workplaces is often defined differently, so the minimum level of occupational safety supervised by inspectors is not uniformly applied throughout the country. Thus, obligations to remedy or eliminate occupational safety deficiencies in workplaces are given different treatment and the result is that employees are not treated equally. The conclusion of the study is that health and safety control should be in the competence of national administration and judicial review, not regional or local administration. Occupational safety and health does not differ geographically by industry, as the work of the various occupations is broadly similar throughout the country and there is little geographical variation in occupational safety. For this reason, labour inspection should also be uniform throughout the country. Finland should set up the Nordic model of a more centralized OSH system, which would coordinate an integrated review of legality in the same way as the National Police Board, the Prosecutor's Office and the Court of Justice co- ordinate the law enforcement and operational procedures of their respective sectors.

In Belgium, the idea of 'openness' is a well spread notion in electoral political discourses and the 2012 local election in Wallonia is no exception to this trend. Despite a clear victory, it is indeed very common for local political leaders in Belgium to announce that they will open their majority to other lists. The idea of 'openness' is also part of the local electoral campaign in terms of recruitment: non-partisan candidates – who clearly want to distinguish themselves from the party – are recruited to figure on the lists as 'independent candidates'. They are called 'candidates d'ouverture' as a sign of openness towards the civil society, the opposition, or dissidents from other political parties. Actually, these candidates are recruited for various reasons: there are sometimes used to demonstrate the citizen character of the list, to enhance the fact that the list 'makes politics differently from established political parties', to underline the local roots of the list, and sometimes the 'candidates d'ouverture' are simply used to complete vacancies on a list.

The name of a party is an important dimension of its political position. Often, the label used by a political party in its name tells much about its ideology. But, since in most cases, only a few parties compete for each election it is difficult to undertake large qualitative and quantitative analyses of party names. Local elections can provide an interesting option, however. Indeed, in several cases, we find lots of different names, and not only the usual national party labels. In the last local elections in Wallonia, one of the three Belgian Regions, 1012 lists were in competition. Such data provide a fertile ground for analysis. To study the name of the lists, we proceed in two steps. First, we build a typology of the names. We classify the lists in different categories: lists with national party name, lists with a clear reference to a national party, lists with an ideological label, lists with a clear reference to the commune's name, lists with a reference to the communal level but also lists with a reference to democracy, to a union or alliance, to change and an alternative way of doing politics, to the future, with puns, and with a reference to a person. In the second step, using multinomial regressions, we show where the different types of lists can be found and above all we look at their electoral performances and thus test the hypothesis whether the party name matters or not.

Demokratia ja tehokkuus muodostavat kunnallishallinnon keskeisimmän arvopohjan. Näiden välillä vallitsee tietynlainen jännite. Kauko Heurun väitöskirjassa tutkitaan oikeushistoriallisessa valossa kunnanvaltuuston asemaa tämän jännitteen sisällä. Siinä selvitetään kunnanvaltuuston vallan syntyhistoria sekä sen kehittyminen yhteiskunnallisen muutoksen osana. Kunnallishallinnossa on perinteisesti korostettu demokraattisia arvoja. 1990 -luvulla tässä tapahtui ratkaiseva muutos. Tällöin tehokkuusvaatimukset voimistuivat, ja niihin myös vastattiin. Maamme kunnallishallinto siirtyi erilaisten kokeilujen ja hallinnonuudistusten kautta uudenlaiseen kunnallishallintoon, jonka johtavana aatteena on tulosjohtamisen idea. Mitä pitemmälle tulosjohtamista on kunnallishallinnossa toteutettu, sitä enemmän valtuusto on menettänyt asemaansa kunnan päätösvallan käyttäjänä. Valtuuston valtaa on siirretty täytäntöönpanijoille tietoisesti, mutta sitä on siirtynyt myös salaisesti. Jokainen pelkän tavoitteen asettava valtuuston päätös, jota ei sidota keinovalikoimaan, siirtää valtuuston valtaa. Samoin tekee määrärahapäätös, jota ei sidota yhteen määrätarkoitukseen. Yleistymässä oleva käsitys valtuuston aseman heikkenemisestä saa tutkimuksellista vahvistusta. Kauko Heuru selvittelee yli 400 -sivuisessa väitöskirjassaan laajasti tämän kehityksen syitä. Tällöin hän osoittaa kunnallishallinnon kiinteän yhteyden yhtäältä valtioon ja toisaalta ajan yleisiin virtauksiin. Hän näkee, että 1980 -luvulla alkanut kunnallishallinnon uudistaminen ei ollut ilmiönä itsenäinen, vaan se liittyi kiinteästi uusliberalismin nousuun ja valtionhallinnon uudistamiseen. Kunnallishallinnon vahvistamisen nimissä tehdyt lainsäädännölliset uudistukset kuten normien purku, vapaakuntakokeilu ja kuntien valtionosuusjärjestelmän uudistaminen olivat tarkoitukseltaan ensisijassaq valtionhallinnon uudistamista. Valtion edustajat eivät kuitenkaan ajaneet kuntia muuttamaan hallintoaan, vaan tämän tehtävän hoitivat kuntien keskusjärjestöt. Ne aloittivat jo 1970 -luvulla määrätietoisen koulutus- ja muun ohjaustoiminnan mangeristisen kunnallishallinnon aikaansaamiseksi. Kaiken perustana oli uusliberalismi sekä amerikkalainen liiketaloustieteellinen tutkimus ja sen osakseen saama huomio OECD-maiden julkisessa hallinnossa. Kauko Heuru pohtii myös valtuuston aseman vahvistamista. Hän tulee siihen tulokseen, että nykyajan tehokkuuden ihannointi antaa vain vähän mahdollisuuksia siihen. Näistä merkittävämpänä on vallan ja vastuun jaon normatiivinen täsmentäminen. Tämä merkitsee nykyistä selkeämmän poliittisen johtajuuden luomista suomalaiseenkin kunnallishallintoon. Tutkija, jolla itsellään on pitkä kaupunginjohtajan virkaura, puoltaa pormestarityyppistä johtamisjärjestelmää. Tämän hän tekee nimenomaan valtuuston vallan kannalta. ; The study was designed to investigate the origins of the competency to use municipal decision-making power and its development in the light of the central development of municipal law, including causal relationships and systematization of municipal law. The frame of reference consisted of the democratic values and efficiency values of local government. Up to the end of the 1980s local government in Finland can be regarded as a legal-administrative practice. In a closer analysis, we can distinguish three pha-ses: liberalism, rule-of-law and social state. In the beginning of the 1990s the Finnish state administration was refor-med in line with the managerial theory. The idea of management by results played a key role in this development. Local government was remodelled on the same con-cept. From the 1990s on we can speak of managerial local government. The entire legal-administrative period was characterized by the priority of democratic values in local government. While demands for efficiency grew, they we-re mainly responded to by detailed norm setting and direction by the state. The launch of management by results meant that efficiency values took precedence over democratic ones. If municipal decision-making power is understood as competency to form local intent, and if we assume as municipal laws have assumed that the exercise of this power resides in the local council, the introduction of managerial local go-vernment and management by results has not been possible without transferring aut-hority from the local council to the executive organization. The main reason was that local government activities had become increasingly target-oriented. This involved a demand to separate strategic and operational activities. According to the idea of ma-nagement by results, strategic activities cover the setting of general objectives, whe-reas concrete (case-specific) decisions should be made at the operational level. The level of strategic activities is formed by the work of the local council, and the level of operational activities by the work of the executive organization. The local council's (the local government's) decision-making power can be transferred legally to the executive organization within the limits of the law by a by-law. This is called delegation, whereas in the management-by-results system local decision-making power is factually transferred in other forms too. This happens either in a permissible manner or secretly, and the more the more generally the coun-cil has set the objectives and the more systematically strategic and operational acti-vities are separated. The most important tool for transferring the council's power is the municipal budget, even if the law does not recognize it as such. The introduction of the management-by-results system to local govern-ment broke the mechanisms that had protected the council's authority in the legal-administrative practice. Such mechanisms included general budget principles (no-tably the detail principle) and the inner logic of the dual principle of local govern-ment. The detail principle required that the municipal budget be detailed to the extent that none of the council's power could be transferred to the executive or-ganization through this way. For the purpose, the budget was to be divided in ap-propriations up to one designation. The inner logic of the dual principle corresponded to the perceptions of the rule of law and legal positivism about formal rational legal order; implementation was based on subsumptional logic rather than independent consideration. Expedien-cy, which thus was not conveyed from the decision to be implemented, did not reside with the executive organization. During the legal-administrataive local government, the number of muni-cipal officials increased steadily. However, we cannot speak of bureaucracy in the true sense of the word, because municipal offices existed mainly for executive func-tions only. During managerial local government, municipal officials became also executors of the self-government of local residents. Generally, it can be said that the further the idea of management by re-sults is taken in local government, the more the status of the council shifts from a decision maker to a legalizer of municipal activities. Along with the change the conceptual contents of municipal democracy have changed. The decision-making moment is no longer the sole basis of evaluati-on, rather, it is the moment when the consequences are seen. Newer research has anticipated a shift from representational democracy towards direct democracy, but it seems unlikely. Representational democracy still appears to have its chances. This requires increasing attention to the political functi-on of municipalities, including stricter normative definition of municipal authority and responsibility. In the end, the key issue is whether the Finnish local government will have a distinct political leader or not.

What are the outputs and effects of deliberative mini-publics? This is probably one of the most critical questions for any deliberative endeavor. In the realm of large-scale deliberative experiments, the G1000 in Belgium holds a special place: it happened in the wake of the longest government formation ever, it sought to gather 1000 randomly selected citizens in Brussels to discuss key social and political issues, and, above all, it was a fully citizen-led initiative. Its organizers explicitly sought to avoid any political and institutional ties and their focus was much more on guaranteeing a high representativeness and a qualitative process, rather than generating strong political outcomes. While the G1000 did well in terms of representativeness and open agenda setting, the political uptake was very limited in the short term. In the longer term, however, it seems that the effects of the G1000 were larger than initially expected. A rich set of empirical data is used to analyze the interaction between the G1000 with the entire political system by looking at the relation with the media, public opinion, political parties and MPs, and other experiments in deliberative democracy. Such endeavor sheds light on the "so what" question which is key to the development of real-world deliberative democracy.

What are the outputs and effects of deliberative mini-publics? This is probably one of the most critical questions for any deliberative endeavor. In the realm of large-scale deliberative experiments, the G1000 in Belgium holds a special place: it happened in the wake of the longest government formation ever, it sought to gather 1000 randomly selected citizens in Brussels to discuss key social and political issues, and, above all, it was a fully citizen-led initiative. Its organizers explicitly sought to avoid any political and institutional ties and their focus was much more on guaranteeing a high representativeness and a qualitative process, rather than generating strong political outcomes. While the G1000 did well in terms of representativeness and open agenda setting, the political uptake was very limited in the short term. In the longer term, however, it seems that the effects of the G1000 were larger than initially expected. A rich set of empirical data is used to analyze the interaction between the G1000 with the entire political system by looking at the relation with the media, public opinion, political parties and MPs, and other experiments in deliberative democracy. Such endeavor sheds light on the "so what" question which is key to the development of real-world deliberative democracy.

From the beginning of the 1990's onwards, political analysts in all Western European countries discovered the contours of what they thought to be a widespread crisis of democracy. The alleged decline of political trust and public participation, and the rise of electoral volatility pointed out that the gap between politicians and citizens had never been wider. This political climate characterized by a deep-rooted crisis of democratic legitimacy offered an excellent breeding ground for critical reflection on the role, shape and function of democracy in modern societies. It gave rise to a fruitful quest for new and innovative ways of governing a democracy. It is in this turbulent period that the ideal of a deliberative democracy was coined (Dryzek 2000). A community of international scholars and philosophers, inspired by the work of Jürgen Habermas, became more and more convinced that a vibrant democracy is more than the aggregate of its individual citizens, and that democratic politics should be about more than merely voting. The quality of a democracy and the quality of democratic decisions, according to them, did not depend on the correct aggregation of individual preferences, but rather on the quality of the public debate that preceded the voting stage. Democratic decisions were thus no longer considered a function of mere compliance with aggregation rules. Instead, they were determined by extensive argumentation about political choices before voting on them. Because of its strong focus of public involvement in politics, this deliberative model of democracy started out in life as a theory of legitimacy (Benhabib 1996; Cohen 1997; Dryzek 2001; Parkinson 2006). By including everyone who is affected by a decision in the process leading to that decision, deliberation has important political merits: it is capable of generating political decisions that receive broad public support, even when there is strong disagreement on the aims and values a polity should promote (Geenens & Tinnevelt 2007, p. 47). After all, talking about political issues allows citizens to hear other perspectives to a problem and to see their own perspectives represented in the final decision. However, deliberation's beneficial effects do not come about easily. If deliberative democracy wants to contribute to increasing the legitimacy of the political system as a whole, it has to be legitimate in itself. In other words, deliberative events have to reflect the principles of legitimacy in their own functioning before their outcomes can generate legitimate political decisions. It is therefore crucial to assess the internal legitimacy of deliberative mini-publics before making claims about their contribution to the legitimacy of the political system as a whole. Our research question is therefore: to what extent can deliberative mini-publics live up to the criteria of democratic and political legitimacy? In this paper, we set out to assess the internal legitimacy of one specific deliberative event, namely the G1000 project in Belgium (Caluwaerts & Reuchamps, 2012). The G1000 project takes a particular place in the world of deliberative practice because it was not only grassroots in its process and its results, but also in its organization. Most deliberative events are introduced and funded by either public administrations or scientific institutions. The G1000 was rather considered a genuine citizens' initiative from its very inception. All of the organizers of the event were volunteers, and all of the funds were gathered using crowd funding. So instead of a scientific experiment, the G1000 was more of a democratic experiment by, through, and for citizens. This grass-root structure makes it a very interesting case for students of legitimacy, because as we will see later on it situated at the heart of the democratic trade-off between input and output legitimacy.

From the beginning of the 1990's onwards, political analysts in all Western European countries discovered the contours of what they thought to be a widespread crisis of democracy. The alleged decline of political trust and public participation, and the rise of electoral volatility pointed out that the gap between politicians and citizens had never been wider. This political climate characterized by a deep-rooted crisis of democratic legitimacy offered an excellent breeding ground for critical reflection on the role, shape and function of democracy in modern societies. It gave rise to a fruitful quest for new and innovative ways of governing a democracy. It is in this turbulent period that the ideal of a deliberative democracy was coined (Dryzek 2000). A community of international scholars and philosophers, inspired by the work of Jürgen Habermas, became more and more convinced that a vibrant democracy is more than the aggregate of its individual citizens, and that democratic politics should be about more than merely voting. The quality of a democracy and the quality of democratic decisions, according to them, did not depend on the correct aggregation of individual preferences, but rather on the quality of the public debate that preceded the voting stage. Democratic decisions were thus no longer considered a function of mere compliance with aggregation rules. Instead, they are determined by extensive argumentation about political choices before voting on them. Because of its strong focus of public involvement in politics, this deliberative model of democracy started out in life as a theory of legitimacy (Benhabib 1996; Cohen 2002; Dryzek 2001; Parkinson 2006). By including everyone who is affected by a decision in the process leading to that decision, deliberation has important political merits: it is capable of generating political decisions that receive broad public support, even when there is strong disagreement on the aims and values a polity should promote (Geenens & Tinnevelt 2007, p. 47). After all, talking about political issues allows citizens to hear other perspectives to a problem and to see their own perspectives represented in the final decision. As such, deliberative democracy seeks to score high on input, throughput and output legitimacy. However, deliberation's beneficial effects do not come about easily. If deliberative democracy wants to contribute to increasing the legitimacy of the political system as a whole, it has to be legitimate in itself. In other words, deliberative events have to reflect the principles of legitimacy in their own functioning before their outcomes can generate legitimate political decisions. It is therefore crucial to assess the internal legitimacy of deliberative mini-publics before making claims about their contribution to the legitimacy of the political system as a whole. In this paper, we set out to assess the internal legitimacy of one specific deliberative event, namely the G1000 project in Belgium (Caluwaerts & Reuchamps, 2012a). Our research question is therefore: to what extent does the G1000 live up to the criteria of input, throughput and output legitimacy? The G1000 project takes a particular place in the world of deliberative practice because it was not only grass roots in its process and its results, but also in its organization. Most deliberative events are introduced and funded by either public administrations or scientific institutions. The G1000 was rather considered a citizens' initiative from its very inception. All of the organizers of the event were volunteers, and all of the funds were gathered using crowd funding. So instead of a scientific experiment, the G1000 was more of a democratic experiment by, through, and for citizens. This grass-root structure makes it a very interesting case for students of legitimacy, because as we will see later on it situated at the heart of the democratic trade-off between input and output legitimacy.

In recent years, public authorities and civil-society organisations, driven by increasing public disengagement and a growing sense of distrust between the public and their representatives, have been instituting exercises in public deliberation, often using 'mini-publics', that is relatively small groups of citizens, selected according to various criteria and representing different viewpoints, brought together to deliberate on a particular issue. From small-scale experiments, mini- publics have recently taken a constitutional turn, at least in Europe. Iceland and Ireland have turned to deliberative democracy to reform their constitutions. Estonia, Luxembourg and Romania have also experienced constitutional processes in a deliberative mode. In Belgium, the G1000, a citizen-led initiative of deliberative democracy, has fostered a wider public debate about the place and role of citizens in the country's democracy. At the same time, the European Union institutions have introduced different forms of deliberative democracy as a way to reconnect with citizens. These empirical cases are indicative of a possible 'constitutional turn' in deliberative democracy in Europe. These examples of constitution-making happened in a particular time and place but they may also serve as models for other events.

Tutkimuksessa tarkastellaan palvelun laadun arviointia moniportaisessa julkisessa organisaatiossa. Laatutyöhön kuuluu keskeisenä osana laadun arviointi. Ongelmallista julkisten organisaatioiden tuottamien palvelujen arvioinnissa on se, että lainsäädäntö jättää usein viranomaisten harkinnan varaan sen, millaisina palvelut tosiasiallisesti tuotetaan eivätkä kunnalliset päätöksentekijätkään välttämättä aseta palvelujen laadulle kovin tarkkoja tavoitteita. Jos em. tahot asettavat palvelun laatua koskevia tavoitteita, ne asetetaan yleensä palvelun lopputulokselle eikä palvelun tuotantoprosessin välivaiheille. Moniportaisissa organisaatioissa ja organisaatiohierarkian eri tasoilla ylempien organisaatiotasojen osuus palvelujen tuottamisessa jää usein arvioinnissa mm. tavoitteiden puutteellisuuden vuoksi vähemmälle huomiolle kuin asiakasrajapinnassa toimivien organisaatiotasojen. Asiaan vaikuttaa myös tulosjohtamiseen liittyvä käytäntö, jossa ylempi organisaatiotaso arvioi alempaansa eikä päinvastoin. Tulosjohtaminen on ankkuroitunut Suomen julkiseen hallintoon aiemmin ja vahvemmalla otteella kuin laatujohtaminen. Selkeiden laatua koskevien tavoitteiden puute hankaloittaa arvioimista, erityisesti tavoiteperusteista arviointia, jossa toimintaa verrataan asetettuihin tavoitteisiin. Tavoitteiden puutteellisuus asettaa paineita arvioida toimintaa eri intressitahojen näkemykset huomioon ottavan monitahoarvioinnin avulla. Palvelun laadun intressitahoja julkisessa hallinnossa ovat palvelujen käyttäjien lisäksi mm. poliittiset päätöksentekijät ja kansalaiset, palvelua tuottavan organisaation johto sekä palvelua tuottava henkilöstö ja moniportaisissa organisaatioissa vielä organisaation eri tasot. Eri intressitahojen näkökulmat ja vaateet palvelun laadulle määräytyvät niiden suhteesta palveluun samoin kuin niiden asema ja tehtävät arvioinnissa ja arviointitiedon hyväksikäytössä. Moniportaisissa organisaatioissa keskeisin intressitaho ylemmän organisaatiotason tuottamalle palvelulle on alempi organisaatiotaso. Alemman organisaatiotason näkökulmasta katsottuna ei ole riittävää arvioida moniportaisissa organisaatioissa ylemmän organisaatiotason toimintaa esim. laatupalkintokriteereiden avulla, vaan ylemmän organisaatiotason toimintaa on tarpeen arvioida palvelukohtaisesti. Tämä puolestaan edellyttää sitä, että palvelukohtaisesti määritellään ylemmän ja alemman organisaatiotason työosuus (osapalvelu) moniportaisen organisaation palveluketjussa. Tutkimuksessa päädyttiin myös näkemykseen, jonka mukaan palvelut on varsinkin ylemmän organisaatiotason toiminnan suhteen syytä suunnitella moniportaisissa organisaatioissa etukäteen eri intressitahojen vaateita yhteen sovittaen. Tutkimuksen tuloksena syntyi arviointikehikko moniportaisten julkisten organisaatioiden tuottamien palvelujen laadun arviointiin. Arviointikehikossa otetaan kantaa siihen, miten arvioinnin eri vaiheissa olisi tarkoituksenmukaista edetä ja millaisia näkökohtia eri vaiheissa on tarpeen ottaa huomioon. ; EVALUATION OF THE QUALITY OF SERVICES IN A PUBLIC MULTI-LEVEL ORGANIZATION The task of the study was crystallized in the following questions: 1. In what way is it justifiable in public organizations to evaluate the activi-ties of upper organizational levels in producing high quality services? 2. Accordingly, in what way is it justifiable to evaluate the guidance and support directed to the school assistants work and carried out by the ad-ministrative level in the Education Department of the City of Helsinki.? The study showed that the way in which it is justifiable to evaluate the qual-ity of services in public organizations is determined by the special features of public administration. These features have an effect on the definitions of the ser-vice and quality in public administration. The definition is especially influenced by the community orientation of public organizations, the lack and the vagueness of the goals which guide the quality of services, and many interest groups of services. In this study the quality of the service produced by a public organization has the following definition: the quality of the service and the process with help of which the users of the service receive the service must satisfy the integrated de-mands of the users of the service and its various interest groups in all the features of quality. In public administration, interest groups for the quality of services include not only the users of the services but also political decision makers, the leaders and the personnel of the organization producing the services ­ and in a multilevel organization, the different levels of the organization. The quality demands made by these groups, their opportunities to evaluate the service and their interests in utilizing the evaluation data at least partly differ from each other. In a multi-level organization the lower level, often the so called performing level of the organization, is one of the interest groups in relation to how the up-per level takes care of its own tasks in the service chain. The culture of manage-ment by results has rooted in the public organizations earlier than quality culture. Management by results assumes that the upper organizational levels evaluate the lower levels and not the other way around. Quality culture, however, places the direction of the evaluation upside down, bottom-up and not top-down. In service chain thinking there is a need for the lower level to give feedback to the upper organizational level about how it has for its own part supported the work of the lower level in producing value added to the ultimate users of the services. From the point of view of the lower organizational level the emphasis in evaluation should be on the quality of those parts of the services that are pro-duced by the upper organizational level. Evaluation should take place by evaluat-ing one service at a time. The main interest of the lower level is in evaluating whether or not the upper level supports the lower level well enough in producing individual services. In order to be able to define what is good enough in each case it is necessary to specify the responsibilities of both the upper and lower organizational levels service by service in the service chain. Multiple constituency evaluation or stakeholder-based evaluation is an approach to evaluation in which activities are evaluated from the points of views of many different interest groups. The choice of the approach is determined by the purpose of the evaluation. Purposes of evaluation can be for instance evaluation for development work or evaluation for accountability. Multiple constituency evaluation is suitable for situations where there is a lack of goals for the quality of public services or the goals are vague. The case example of the study showed the lack and vagueness of goals in the guidance and support directed to the school assistants work and carried out by the administrative level of the Hel-sinki City Education Department. Multiple constituency evaluation is suitable for evaluations for both accountability and for development. However, if there were clear goals defined for the quality of the services the natural choice of the ap-proach in the purpose of evaluation for accountability would be the goal-attainment evaluation.