Essays on Main Features of New Public Governance Assignment

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing

The paper "Main Features of New Public Governance" is a perfect example of an assignment on management. There are six major features of new public governance with the first one being the dispersion of power and this means that in addition to the market and the government other organizations that exist in the society also tend to possess the same rights in participating in the management of public affairs and also play an essential role on solving issues being faced by the public. Another other feature stresses on the coordination of the government (Bovaird 2009).

In this regard, the new public governance aims at turning the government from being paternalism into a coordinator. The other feature is that the new public governance forms a multifaceted network in that it integrates individuals and social organizations so as to come up with a complex network with contained concentration as well as the restriction of power from all facets. The other major element is that the governance network is mainly concerned with exchange resources. In this respect, the network formed by the public services and products offers the members with great social resources so as to exchange.

The other feature is the network relies on the stability and trust of the contract. The last feature is the new public governance values the role of social public organizations in that it pays great attention to the results and output made y the public sectors. 4.2 Why public value governance is different from other modelsPublic value governance is different from the other models such as the traditional public administration and the new public management. This difference is that the new movement acts as a response to the various challenges of a multi-sector, networked, no-one wholly in charge of the world, and at the same time deal with the shortcomings of the other models (Bryson, Crosby and Bloomberg 2014).

In this regard, the new approach tends to highlight a number of stances that acts as a response to the old challenges and shortcomings. This includes a great emphasis on public values and public value, a recognition that the government has a role to play as the guarantor of the public values, a belief in the benefits of the public management broadly conceived as well as service or and to the public, and a great emphasis on democratic, citizenship and collaborative governance.

Another difference is that the new approach tends to value effectiveness and efficiency and most especially the democratic values.


Alford, J 2009, Chapter 1 in Engaging public sector clients. From Service Delivery to Co-production, Palgrave Macmillan, NY.

APS n.d, APS Values and Code of Conduct in practice, viewed 11 July 2016,

Bhatnagar, D, Rathore, A, Torres, M & Kanungo, P 2003, Participatory budgeting in Brazil. Empowerment Case Studies, World Bank, Washington, DC.

Boston, J & Halligan, J 2012, Political management and the new political governance: Reconciling political responsiveness and neutral competence, From New Public Management to the New Political Governance.

Bovaird, T 2009, ‘Chapter 1 Understanding public governance’, in Public Management and Governance Bovaird T and Loffler E (eds), Taylor & Francis, United Kingdom.

Briggs, L 2011, ‘Co-design: toward a new service vision for Australia?’, Public Administration Today, no. 25, pp 35-47.

Bryson, J, Crosby, B & Bloomberg, L 2014, ‘Public value governance: Moving beyond traditional public administration and the new public management’, Public Administration Review, vol. 74, no. 4, pp.445-456.

Deloitte Access Economics 2015, Digital government transformation, viewed 11 July 2016,

Dudley, E, Lin, D-Y, Mancini, M & Ng, J 2015, Implementing a citizen-centric approach, McKinsey and Company, New York.

Edwards, M., Halligan, J. Horrigan, B. and Nicolls, G. Public Sector Governance in Australia, 2012, Chapter 7 Participatory Governance, viewed 11 July 2016,

Evans, M 2013, Social participation: lessons from Europe, Ministry of Planning, Brazilia/European Union, ANZSIG, Canberra.

Halligan, J 2007, ‘Accountability in Australia: control, paradox, and complexity’, Public Administration Quarterly, pp.453-479.

Hodge, G 2004, ‘The risky business of public–private partnerships’, Australian Journal of Public Administration, vol. 63, no. 4), pp. 37–49.

Kelly, G, Mulgan, G & Muers, S 2002, Creating Public Value: An Analytical Framework for Public Service Reform, discussion paper prepared by the Cabinet Office Strategy Unit, Cabinet Office Strategy Unit, United Kingdom.

Kim, P 2009, Enhancing public accountability for developing countries: Major constraints and strategies’, Australian Journal of Public Administration, vol. 68, iss. 1, pp.S89-S100.

Lawton, A. 1998, Chapter 2 Ethical Issues, in Ethical Management for the Public Services, McGraw-Hill Education, UK.

MacDermott, K 2008, Chapter 1 in Whatever Happened to Frank and Fearless? The impact of new public management on the Australian Public Service, ANU Press, Canberra.

Margetts, H & Dunleavy, P 2013, The second wave of digital-era governance: a quasi-paradigm for government on the Web. Phil Trans R Soc A 371: 20120382.

Pallesen, T 2011, ‘Chapter 17 – Privatization’, in Christensen, T. and Lægreid, P. eds., 2011. The Ashgate Research Companion to New Public Management, Ashgate Publishing, Ltd, Farnham.

World Bank n.d, Accountability in Governance, World Bank, viewed 11 July 2016,

Yong, H 2010, Chapter 3 - Background to PPPs in Public-private partnerships policy and practice: a reference guide, Commonwealth Secretariat, London.

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Contact Us