公共行政

PA — 2026-05-25 Original Cultural Competence in Community‐Level Initiatives to Advance Racial Equity in Homeless Services

PMR — pp. 1-29 2026-05-25 Original Cocreating service innovations in European public libraries Anthony Arundel, Nordine Es-Sadki, Paul Windrum, Luis Rubalcaba Abstract This study uses survey data for 543 European libraries to investigate the effect of co-creation and other factors on the usefulness of knowledge for innovation obtained from four groups: library users, non-management staff, non-profits and businesses. The study finds that 24.3% of libraries develop a 'high priority' innovation through co-creation with library users. Co-creation has a substantial positive effect on the usefulness of knowledge obtained from all four groups. The knowledge of non-managerial library staff on user needs can partly substitute for user engagement. The results support the importance of drawing on multiple knowledge sources within a library innovation ecosystem.

PMR — pp. 1-27 2026-05-23 Original Hybrid professionalism in regulatory governance: the reconfiguration of professionalism in the procurement of social services Avishai Benish, Avner Gassner, Noa Katz

PMR — pp. 1-31 2026-05-23 Original Exploring how individual and shared accountability shape risk management approaches in public service delivery Emily Rose Tangsgaard Abstract This article explores how frontline managers (FMs) approach risk management in politically salient public service contexts under individualized versus shared accountability structures, integrating theories of accountability, blame avoidance, and leadership. Drawing on individual and group interviews with 62 FMs in Danish healthcare (individualized accountability) and social services (shared accountability), the analysis shows that anticipatory blame avoidance and perceptions of formal accountability structures shape risk management approaches: FMs engage more closely in decision-making processes when accountability is shared, whereas they focus on structuring decision-making procedures when accountability is individualized. The findings illustrate that FMs actively calibrate their leadership in anticipation of blame, revealing greater individual agency than typically acknowledged in studies emphasizing informal accountability structures such as professional norms or organizational culture. By highlighting how formal accountability shapes leadership in practice, the study offers a novel, empirically grounded perspective on public leadership.

PMR — pp. 1-29 2026-05-23 Original An empirical analysis of digital strategies and behaviours in Korea’s public sector think tanks: an institutional organizational theory perspective

PAR — 2026-05-22 Original Exploring the Role of Gene, Traumatic Experiences, and Religious Participation in Public Service Employment: A Gene–Environment Interaction Perspective

PAR — 2026-05-21 Original Functional Politicization in Practice. From Responsive Competence to Reflexive Functional Politicization Amalie Trangbæk Abstract ABSTRACT This study addresses how senior civil servants navigate the tension between responsiveness and competence through functional politicization. Based on rich observational data (300 h) and interview material (42 interviews), the article theorizes how senior civil servants navigate this tension by providing advice that integrates political considerations with professional technical knowledge to challenge the minister, provide alternative solutions, and clarify consequences. I call this practice reflexive functional politicization and hereby contribute to the literature on politicization by conceptualizing how politicization is practiced by civil servants in action. Their practice is motivated by the conviction that true neutrality is rare or nonexistent and thus that they must instead strike a balance between political responsiveness and technical competence.

PAR 86/5 pp. 1225-1234 2026-05-19 Original How Was Democracy Under the Administrative Presidency Supposed to Work? Ben Merriman Abstract ABSTRACT Aggressive use of the administrative power of the presidency is a major source of public administrative concern about the health of American democracy. Many of these powers stem from executive branch reorganization in the late 1930s, which was conceived and implemented by founding figures in the modern field. Fear for democracy defined reorganization. Reorganizers elaborated a working theory about the conditions under which strong presidential administration could preserve and strengthen democracy: structured internal friction in the executive branch to recreate traditional checks on administrative conduct; identification and promotion of a corps of socially and politically astute administrators; and a watchful Congress. This design relied on a political approach to administration that created few managerial or legal safeguards. As subsequent polarization has altered the political order under which executive reorganization was conceived, the institutional powers of the presidency have emerged as a threat to democratic arrangements, rather than a bulwark.

PAR 86/5 pp. 1462-1477 2026-05-18 Original Walking the Regulatory Line: The Effects of a Disbursement Quota on Foundations Nathan J. Grasse, Elizabeth A. M. Searing, Susan D. Phillips

PMR — pp. 1-25 2026-05-18 Original Outpaced by platforms: how employment services for immigrants struggle to keep pace Atieh Razavi Yekta, Suzanne Huot Abstract Immigrants are overrepresented in Canada’s platform economy, yet platform work is not characterized as legitimate and sustainable within employment services shaped by New Public Management (NPM) and austerity policies. This focused ethnography interrogates limitations of NPM and uses a sociotechnical approach to analyse key informant interviews. Three themes are addressed: (1) Out of scope: the limits of current policy, (2) Systemic lags and the unknowns of platform work and (3) Reproducing racial and cultural inequalities in platform work. Findings show that narrow performance metrics, competitive funding and depoliticized environments marginalize platform workers, constrain innovation and suppress culturally responsive advocacy.