The article emphasizes that decentralization is aimed at significantly improving the quality of services in territorial communities through the use of new management methods. It is substantiated that the following areas require additional support and initiatives: medicine (secondary and higher levels), education (support for basic educational institutions), economy (creation of industrial parks, scientific and technical laboratories, support for startups), housing and communal services (waste management system). The article substantiates the relevance of the work on the development of united territorial communities, based on the implementation of effective anti-corruption measures and modern principles of good governance in the daily practice of management, as these are the priorities set today for local governments. Special attention is paid to the system of "good governance" as the newest form of communication between the public and the authorities. The aspects of improving the governance system are identified. The main management approaches used by successful local governments are described. In order for territorial communities to achieve the results of their activities not only today, but also in the future, modern approaches and practices for the development of dynamic organizations based on trust in government, effective communication, continuous learning and openness to change are proposed. It is proved that in order to bring the system of organization and functioning of public sector institutions closer to business approaches, it is advisable to apply a more business-oriented paradigm of the New Public Management and the principles of good governance. The essence of "good governance" as the newest form of interaction between public authorities and civil society is revealed. Recommendations in the field of management of territorial communities in the light of the concept of good governance are proposed. The aim of the work is to study the role of the newest concept of public administration in the management of territorial communities through a comparative analysis of the postulates related to the process orientation of local government and recommendations for the functioning of public administration in the light of the concept of good governance. The article proposes the use of the good governance cycle and the creation of Project Offices, which can become the basis for formulating recommendations in the field of process orientation in the functioning of the local government apparatus.
How to Cite
management of territorial communities, good governance, process management, decentralization, cycle of good governance
Bezverhnyuk, T., Sakhanenko, S., & Topalova, E. (2008). Yevropeiski standarty vriaduvannia na rehionalnomu rivni [European governance standards at the regional level]. Odesa: ORIDU NADU. (in Ukrainan)
Christensen, T. (2001). Administrative reform: changing leadership roles. Governance, 14/4: 457–480.
Christensen, T. & Lægreid, P. (eds.) (2001). New public management: the transformation of ideas and practice, Aldershot, Ashgate.
Christensen, T., Lægreid, P., & Stiger, I. M. (2006). Performance management and public sector reform: the Norwegian hospital reform, International Public Management Journal, 9(2): 113–139.
Clarke, J. (2005). Performing for the public: doubt, desire and the evaluation of public services. Oxford University Press: 211–232.
Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S. & Tinkler, J. (2006). Digital-era governance: IT corporations, the state and e-government. Oxford University Press.
Europeane Charter of local self-government (2017). Available at: https://rm.coe.int›european-charter-for-local-self
Gow, J. & Dufour, C. (2000). Is the New Public Management a paradigm? Does it matter? International Review of Administrative Sciences, 66(4): 573–593.
Gulledge Jr., T. R., & Sommer, R. A. (2002). Business Process Management Public Sector Implications. Business Process Management Journal, 8:364–376.
Hood, C., & Peters, G. (2004). The middle aging of New Public Management: into the age of paradox? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 14(3): 267–282.
Jessop B. Promoting good governance, disguising governance failure ... Available at: https://www.academia.edu›
Kuhlmann, S., Bogumil, J. & Grohs, S. (2008). Evaluating administrative modernization in German local governments: success or failure of the “New Steering Model”? Public Administration Review, September/October: 851-863.
Lynn, L. (2006). Public management: old and new – London and New York, Routledge/Taylor and Francis.
Macinati, M. (2006). Il ricorso all’ outsourcing nel Ssn: i risultati di un’indagine empirica. Mecosan, 57, 121–144.
Painter, M., & Peters, G. B. (eds.) (2010). Traditions and public administration, Basingstoke, Palgrave/Macmillan.
Pawson, R. (2002). Evidence-based policy: the promise of realist synthesis. Evaluation, 8(3): 340–358.
Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine No. 695 of August 5, 2020, "On Approval of the State Strategy for Regional Development for the period of 2021–2027". Available at: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/695-2020-п#Text
Roberts, P., Sykes, H., & Granger, R. (Eds.) (2017). Urban regeneration. 2nd ed. Sage Publications Ltd. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781473921788
Rothstein, B., & Teorell, J. (2008). What Is Quality of Government? A Theory of Impartial Government Institutions. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net
Sustainable Development Goal 11, which provides for the provision of openness, security, livelihoods, and ecological stability of cities and other populated areas of Ukraine. We believe that the strategy of "good governance" will play an important role in this.
Torres, L., Pina, V., & Royo, S. (2005). E-government and the transformation of public administrations in EU countries: beyond NPM or just a second wave? Online Information Review, 29(5): 531–553.
Uddin, M., Haque, C., & Khan, M. (2021). Good governance and local level policy implementation for disaster-risk-reduction: actual, perceptual and contested perspectives in coastal communities in Bangladesh. Disaster Prevention and Management, vol. 30 no. 2, pp. 94–111. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/DPM-03-2020-0069
Verhoest, K. (2005). Effects of autonomy, performance, contracting and competition on the performance of a public agency: a case study. Policy Studies Journal, 33:2: 235–258.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.