Muutke küpsiste eelistusi

Role of the Public Bureaucracy in Policy Implementation in Five ASEAN Countries [Pehme köide]

Edited by (National University of Singapore)
Teised raamatud teemal:
Role of the Public Bureaucracy in Policy Implementation in Five ASEAN CountriesSuurem pilt
Teised raamatud teemal:
Püsilink: https://www.kriso.ee/db/9781107545175.html
Märksõnad:
"This pioneering book addresses an important gap in the literature by comparing the role of the public bureaucracies in policy implementation in Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Vietnam. It highlights the importance of the policy context, especially the commitment of the government in allocating the necessary resources and the support of the implementers, as well as the public bureaucracy's effectiveness, as the critical factors responsible for effective policy implementation. The comparative analysis shows that the public bureaucracies in Singapore and Malaysia are more effective in policy implementation than their counterparts in Indonesia, the Philippines and Vietnam because of their favourable policy contexts and higher level of organizational effectiveness. The focus on policy context and the public bureaucracy's role in the policy-making process and its implementation of two ASEAN policies will be of interest to policymakers, civil servants, scholars and students concerned with enhancing policy implementation in the ASEAN countries"--

Arvustused

'In sum, the book backs the universal need for a science of delivery that provides realistic advice to anyone trying to run a contemporary government (Barber, 2015).' Gerald E. Caiden, Governance

Muu info

Comparative analysis of the public bureaucracy's implementation of two ASEAN policies in Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Vietnam.
List of tables
xi
List of contributors
xiv
General editors' preface xix
Preface xxv
1 The role of the public bureaucracy in policy implementation in five ASEAN countries: a comparative overview
1(97)
Jon S. T. Quah
1.1 Introduction
1(2)
1.2 Review of literature
3(5)
1.3 Purpose and approach
8(2)
1.4 Policy context
10(22)
1.5 Profile of the public bureaucracies
32(5)
1.6 Policy formulation
37(6)
1.7 The public bureaucracy's role in policy implementation
43(15)
1.8 Two case studies of policy implementation
58(14)
1.9 Conclusion
72(26)
2 Weak central authority and fragmented bureaucracy: a study of policy implementation in Indonesia
98(73)
Agus Pramusinto
2.1 Introduction
98(2)
2.2 Indonesia's policy context
100(13)
2.3 Profile of the civil service
113(8)
2.4 Policy formulation
121(6)
2.5 The civil service's role in policy implementation
127(12)
2.6 Implementing the ASEAN Cosmetic Directive (ACD)
139(9)
2.7 Implementing the ASEAN Ministerial Meeting on Transnational Crime (AMMTC)/Senior Officials Meeting on Transnational Crime (SOMTC)
148(6)
2.8 Conclusion
154(17)
3 The public bureaucracy's role in policy implementation in Malaysia
171(62)
Nik Rosnah Wan Abdullah
3.1 Introduction
171(1)
3.2 Malaysia's policy context
172(14)
3.3 Profile of the Malaysian public service
186(6)
3.4 The public service's role in policy formulation
192(14)
3.5 Implementing the ASEAN Cosmetic Directive (ACD)
206(10)
3.6 Implementing the ASEAN Ministerial Meeting on Transnational Crime (AMMTC)/Senior Officials Meeting on Transnational Crime (SOMTC)
216(9)
3.7 Conclusion
225(8)
4 Dysfunctional bureaucracy, corruption and weak rule of law: a case study of policy implementation in the Philippines
233(64)
Vicente Chua Reyes, Jr.
4.1 Introduction
233(1)
4.2 Policy context
234(8)
4.3 Profile of the civil service
242(7)
4.4 Policy formulation
249(4)
4.5 The civil service's role in policy implementation
253(11)
4.6 Case studies on implementing the ASEAN Cosmetic Directive (ACD) and the ASEAN Ministerial Meeting on Transnational Crime (AMMTC)/Senior Officials Meeting on Transnational Crime (SOMTC)
264(4)
4.7 Assessing the implementation of the ACD
268(9)
4.8 Assessing the implementation of the AMMTC/SOMTC
277(7)
4.9 Conclusion: implications for current ASEAN processes and outputs
284(13)
5 Governance and meritocracy: a study of policy implementation in Singapore
297(73)
David Seth Jones
5.1 Introduction
297(1)
5.2 Policy context
298(8)
5.3 Profile of the public bureaucracy
306(8)
5.4 Policy formulation
314(5)
5.5 Policy implementation
319(17)
5.6 Singapore's implementation of two ASEAN agreements
336(5)
5.7 Implementing the ASEAN Cosmetic Directive (ACD)
341(6)
5.8 Implementing the ASEAN Ministerial Meeting on Transnational Crime (AMMTC)/Senior Officials Meeting on Transnational Crime (SOMTC)
347(6)
5.9 Conclusion
353(17)
6 Vietnam's public bureaucracy and implementation of two ASEAN policies
370(62)
Jairo Acuna-Alfaro
Anh Tran
6.1 Introduction
370(1)
6.2 Policy context in Vietnam
371(6)
6.3 Profile of Vietnam's public bureaucracy
377(8)
6.4 Policy formulation
385(5)
6.5 Public bureaucracy's role in policy implementation
390(8)
6.6 Implementation of two ASEAN policy initiatives
398(3)
6.7 Implementing the ASEAN Cosmetic Directive (ACD)
401(13)
6.8 Implementing the ASEAN Ministerial Meeting on Transnational Crime (AMMTC)/Senior Officials Meeting on Transnational Crime (SOMTC)
414(9)
6.9 Conclusion
423(9)
7 Policy implementation in ASEAN and the European Union: the problem of asymmetric compliance
432(35)
Giulio Napolitano
7.1 The public bureaucracy's role in implementing international policies
432(4)
7.2 Asymmetric compliance: ASEAN and the European Union compared
436(5)
7.3 Causes of asymmetric compliance across countries
441(7)
7.4 Causes of asymmetric compliance across policies
448(4)
7.5 Remedies for policy implementation failure and asymmetric compliance
452(15)
Executive summary 467(7)
Index 474
Jon S. T. Quah is a retired Professor of Political Science at the National University of Singapore and an Anti-Corruption Consultant based in Singapore. He was Vice-President of the Asian Association for Public Administration (2010-2012) and co-editor of the Asian Journal of Political Science. He has published extensively on corruption and public administration in Asian countries.