Originally published in 1988. Leading international researchers in regional economic development have contributed an integrated set of chapters reviewing the whole field and taking stock of current thinking. The book is in honour of Francois Perroux, the father of regional development theory, whose contributions to two important concepts in economics - time and space - have been substantial. The book comprises five parts. Part one covers Perroux's work in general and on growth poles in particular. Part two deals with 'the politics of place', population and regional development, techniques for regional policy analysis and a neoclassical approach to regional economics. In part three the Canadian scene is reviewed at national and regional levels. In part four chapters on urban development, small and medium-size cities, and capital grants deal with the experiences of other countries. Part five concludes the book with a chapter on growth poles, optimal size of cities, and regional disparities and government intervention.

This authoritative new volume contains a selection of the most important articles and papers spanning over 20 years on budgeting and managing public spending. It is divided into five succinct parts, covering the main areas of the field including the political-economic environment, approaches to expenditure budgeting and implementing the budget. Donald Savoie does not limit his examples to just one country - budgeting and spending is discussed in a variety of countries, including the UK, Australia, New Zealand, America, Canada and Spain. He has also written a new introduction to accompany the piece. All those with an interest in government spending, budgeting and how finances are controlled will find this work - which includes articles and papers not immediately accessible - an essential reference tool.

Originally published in 1988. Leading international researchers in regional economic development have contributed an integrated set of chapters reviewing the whole field and taking stock of current thinking. The book is in honour of Francois Perroux, the father of regional development theory, whose contributions to two important concepts in economics - time and space - have been substantial. The book comprises five parts. Part one covers Perroux's work in general and on growth poles in particular. Part two deals with 'the politics of place', population and regional development, techniques for regional policy analysis and a neoclassical approach to regional economics. In part three the Canadian scene is reviewed at national and regional levels. In part four chapters on urban development, small and medium-size cities, and capital grants deal with the experiences of other countries. Part five concludes the book with a chapter on growth poles, optimal size of cities, and regional disparities and government intervention.

Canada’s political structure runs contrary to North America’s economic geography and the north-south economic pull. Canada imported political and administrative institutions designed for a unitary state, and its political leaders have struggled to make them work since the country was founded. Because of this, many Canadians, their communities, and their regions view themselves as victims, to a greater degree than groups in other Western democracies do. Our federal government has shown a greater willingness to apologize for historical wrongs than other Western countries. Canada also outperforms other nations in helping victims make the transition to full participants in the country’s political and economic life. Donald Savoie maintains that Canada continues to thrive despite the many shortcomings in its national political institutions and the tendency of Canadians to see themselves as victims, and that our history and these shortcomings have taught us the art of compromise. Canada’s constitution and its political institutions amplify rather than attenuate victimization; however, they have also enabled Canadians to manage the issue better than other countries. Canadians also recognize that the alternative to Canada is worse, and this more than anything else continues to strengthen national unity. Drawing on his extensive experience in academe and as an advisor to governments, Savoie provides new insights into how Canada works for Canadians.

Citizens have lost trust in their institutions of public governance. In trying to fix the problem, presidents and prime ministers have misdiagnosed the patient, failing to recognize that government bureaucracies are inseparable from political institutions. As a result, career officials have become adroit at managing the blame game but much less so at embracing change. Donald Savoie looks to the United States, Great Britain, France, and Canada to assess two of the most important challenges confronting governments throughout the Western world: the concentration of political power and the changing role of government bureaucracy. The four countries have distinct institutions shaped by distinct histories, but what they have in common is a professional non-partisan civil service. When presidents and prime ministers decide to expand their personal authority, national institutions must adjust while bureaucracies grow to fill the gap, paradoxically further constricting government efficacy. The side effects are universal - political power is increasingly centralized; Parliament, Congress, and the National Assembly have been weakened; Cabinet has lost standing; political parties have been debased; and civil services have been knocked off their moorings. Reduced responsibility and increased transparency make civil servants slow to take risks and politicians quick to point fingers. Government astutely diagnoses the problem of declining trust in government: presidents and prime ministers have failed to see that efficacy in government is tied to well-performing institutions.

Inspired by the realization that, in most countries, the commitment to regional development is determined by national ideological swings rather than the socio-economic conditions in a particular region (here meaning an area smaller than a country). Surveys and evaluates the history of regional polic

Winner: Donner Prize for Excellence and Innovation in Public Policy Writing by Canadians (2016) Winner: New Brunswick Book Award for Non-Fiction (2016) Recent decades have shown the public's support for government plummet alongside political leaders' credibility. This downward spiral calls for an exploration of what has gone wrong. The questions "What is government good at?" and "What is government not good at?" are critical ones - and their answers should be the basis for good public policy and public administration. In What Is Government Good At?, Donald Savoie argues that politicians and public servants are good at generating and avoiding blame, playing to a segment of the population to win the next election, embracing and defending the status quo, adding management layers and staff, keeping ministers out of trouble, responding to demands from the prime minister and his office, and managing a complex, prime minister-centred organization. Conversely, they are not as good at defining the broader public interest, providing and recognizing evidence-based policy advice, managing human and financial resources with efficiency and frugality, innovating and reforming itself, being accountable to Parliament and to citizens, dealing with non-performers, paying sufficient attention to service delivery, and implementing and evaluating the impact of policies and programs. With wide implications for representative democracy, What Is Government Good At? is a persuasive analysis of an approach to government that has opened the door to those with the resources to influence policy and decision-making while leaving average citizens on the outside looking in.

In Governance in the Twenty-first Century Canadian and international experts recognize both the difficulty of making predictions and the need to consider the future in order to prepare the public sector for new challenges. The authors' predictions and recommendations are anchored in a thorough understanding of contemporary public administration. They point out that not only have previous reforms made yet more change necessary and inevitable but that the purpose of these reforms is to attempt to return government to the position of respect and competence it enjoyed in the past. Contributors include Peter Aucoin (Dalhousie), Jonathan Boston (University of Wellington, New Zealand), Jacques Bourgault (Ecole nationale d'administration publique Montreal), David R. Cameron (Toronto), Ralph Heintzman (Treasury Board Canada), Christopher Hood (London School of Economics and Political Science), Patricia W. Ingraham (The Maxwell School, Syracuse University), Donald P. Moynihan (The Maxwell School, Syracuse University), Jon Pierre (Goteborg University), B. Guy Peters, Christopher Pollitt (Erasmus University, The Netherlands), Donald J. Savoie, Richard Simeon (Toronto), Ignace Th.M. Snellen (Erasmus University, The Netherlands), and Vincent Wright (Oxford, England).

Distinguished scholars from six countries investigate the effects of reforms in a number of areas, including budgeting, personnel management, and accountability. While reforms have been beneficial in some of these areas, success has been far from universal. By comparing and contrasting measures in Canada, the United States, Britain, Australia, New Zealand, and Europe, contributors isolate and evaluate factors - such as individual political leaders and the complexity of government - that influence the success or failure of reforms. Contents: Introduction - B. Guy Peters (Pittsburgh) and Donald J. Savoie (Moncton) The Changing Role of the State - Bert A. Rockman (Pittsburgh) Managerialism Revisited - Christopher Pollitt (Brunel) What Works? The Antiphons of Administrative Reform - B. Guy Peters Public Sector Values and Administrative Reforms - Nicole de Montricher (Ecole Normale Superieure, Paris) Public Consultation and Citizen Participation: Dilemmas of Policy Advice - Jon Pierre (Goteborg) Making Public Policy: The Changing Role of the Higher Civil Service - Patricia W. Ingraham (Syracuse) Assessing Past and Current Personnel Reforms: The Pursuit of Flexibility, Pay-for-Performance, and the Management of Reform Initiatives - Hal G. Rainey (Georgia) Innovation in Public Sector Management - Michel Paquin (Ecole nationale d'administration publique) A New Generation of Budget Reform - Naomi Caiden (California State) Central Agencies and Departments: Empowerment and Coordination - John Hart (Australian National) Restructuring Government for the Management and Delivery of Public Services - Peter Aucoin (Dalhousie); The Changing Nature of Accountability - Paul G. Thomas (Manitoba); Fifteen Years of Reform: What Have We Learned? - Donald J. Savoie

Fiscal cutbacks, the public's declining confidence in government, and new ideologies are forcing the public sector in industrialized democracies to undertake major reforms. In these essays contributing authors examine changes to the political and economic envirnoment and the ways in which governments have responded. The essays attempt to explain what is happening in government in the late 20th century and suggest changes that can be expected in the future.

Fiscal cutbacks, the public's declining confidence in government, and new ideologies are forcing the public sector in industrialized democracies to undertake major reforms. In these essays contributing authors examine changes to the political and economic envirnoment and the ways in which governments have responded. The essays attempt to explain what is happening in government in the late 20th century and suggest changes that can be expected in the future.

This work suggests that the 1980s were an especially tumultuous decade for the bureaucracies of Great Britain, the United States and Canada. Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan and Brian Mulroney came to office convinced that the bureaucracies of their countries were massively flawed: in addition to exerting too much influence over policy, they were inefficient, resistant to change and responsible for many economic woes. Savoie, a writer, scholar and a senior administrator in the Canadian government, considers the war of reform waged by the leaders of these major industrialised countries. Reagan declared that he had come to Washington "to drain the swamp" of bureaucracy; he set up the Grace Commission to investigate the operation of the US government. Thatcher and Mulroney were equally committed to reform and initiated wide-ranging changes. By the end of the decade, the changes were dramatic. Many government operations had been privatised in all three countries, and new management techniques had been introduced. In Great Britain, one observer judged that the changes were historically as important as the collapse of Keynesian economics. This book asks: is government now better in these three countries, and was the political leadership right in focusing on management of the bureaucracy as the villain? Professor Savoie suggests that the reforms overlooked problems now urgently requiring attention and, at the same time, attempted to address non-existent problems. His viewpoint combines theory and practice, and should appeal to scholars, students and practitioners. His research is based, in part, on interviews with 62 officials, almost all in the executive branch, of the governments of Great Britain, the United States and Canada.

Canada's representative democracy is confronting important challenges. At the top of the list is the growing inability of the national government to perform its most important roles: namely mapping out collective actions that resonate in all regions as well as enforcing these measures. Others include Parliament's failure to carry out important responsibilities, an activist judiciary, incessant calls for greater transparency, the media's rapidly changing role, and a federal government bureaucracy that has lost both its way and its standing. Arguing that Canadians must reconsider the origins of their country in order to understand why change is difficult and why they continue to embrace regional identities, Democracy in Canada explains how Canada's national institutions were shaped by British historical experiences, and why there was little effort to bring Canadian realities into the mix. As a result, the scope and size of government and Canadian federalism have taken on new forms largely outside the Constitution. Parliament and now even Cabinet have been pushed aside so that policy makers can design and manage the modern state. This also accounts for the average citizen's belief that national institutions cater to economic elites, to these institutions' own members, and to interest groups at citizens' own expense. A masterwork analysis, Democracy in Canada investigates the forces shaping the workings of Canadian federalism and the country's national political and bureaucratic institutions.

In Governance in the Twenty-first Century Canadian and international experts recognize both the difficulty of making predictions and the need to consider the future in order to prepare the public sector for new challenges. The authors' predictions and recommendations are anchored in a thorough understanding of contemporary public administration. They point out that not only have previous reforms made yet more change necessary and inevitable but that the purpose of these reforms is to attempt to return government to the position of respect and competence it enjoyed in the past. Contributors include Peter Aucoin (Dalhousie), Jonathan Boston (University of Wellington, New Zealand), Jacques Bourgault (Ecole nationale d'administration publique Montreal), David R. Cameron (Toronto), Ralph Heintzman (Treasury Board Canada), Christopher Hood (London School of Economics and Political Science), Patricia W. Ingraham (The Maxwell School, Syracuse University), Donald P. Moynihan (The Maxwell School, Syracuse University), Jon Pierre (Goteborg University), B. Guy Peters, Christopher Pollitt (Erasmus University, The Netherlands), Donald J. Savoie, Richard Simeon (Toronto), Ignace Th.M. Snellen (Erasmus University, The Netherlands), and Vincent Wright (Oxford, England).

What implications does the GDA approach have for federal-provincial relations? How does it relate to the constitutional division of responsibility? What advantages and drawbacks does it hold for Canada's political system? More generally, what can we conclude about the GDA approach?