Futures for the Public Sector. By G.Bouckaert, A.Hondeghem, T.Steen, and S.Van de Walle (eds), Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2025. ISBN: 978‐9‐46‐270450‐3

There is a rising and extensive debate about the future of Public Administration research, due to the contemporary turbulence that public administration faces in many countries, reflected in an increasing number of journals running special issues on the theme (Christensen and Lægreid 2025a, 2025b). This book is a very interesting and timely contribution to this debate. It raises big questions about the futures for the public sector and the possibility of democratic and effective public administration, as well as issues related to government organizations, cooperation and civilized coexistence. It adds to our understanding of the challenges faced in the contemporary situations, in which political leaders in democratic institutions in several countries, elected through largely fair processes and working through largely legal processes, are trying to dismantle long-term institutional principles and established institutions. The book is edited by scholars from the KU Leuven Public Governance Institute in Belgium, which is a stronghold of PA research in Europe. It is written in honor of Professor Geert Bouckaert on his formal retirement, and is well deserved given his very strong record of institution building and academic leadership. It is divided into 6 parts and contains 24 chapters on the different topics written by a wide variety of renowned scholars in the field. The six parts are on the futures of the politico-administrative system, containing crises and disruptions, futures of citizen-state interactions, administrating the state, managing the civil service, and studying public administrations. The first part on the future of the politico-administrative system, has a clear US leaning. The issue of democratic backsliding in the US is addressed by Donald Moynihan and Norma M. Riccucci in discussing the undermining of the administrative state and the rolling back of diversity, equity and inclusion. Alistair Roberts examines the trend towards fragility in the twenty-first century. Michael W. Bauer discusses strategies for democratic public administration in an era of populism. The part on futures of containing crises and disruption is primarily dealing with digital governance and the advantages and disadvantages of new technology. Greta Nasi deals with cybersecurity, Moon et al. with the AI–human relationship and Albert Meijer with digital transformation. Both Brian W. Head and Tiina Randma-Liiv/Steven Nommik are discussing “the new normal,” related to poly-crises and the rise of hybridity, respectively. Part three on futures of citizen-state interaction discusses the rise of citizens being skeptical about public administration (Maria Jose Canel) and politicization and populism as the future frontline of public services (Gabriela Lotto). Part four on the future of administrating the state, focuses on the transformation of the regulatory state (Martin Lodge), public value (Sandra Van Thiel) and ecosystems (Adina Dudau). Part five, on futures of managing civil service, addresses the shifting dynamics of advice from non-state experts and private sector consultancies in public policy (Rosie Collington), the flexibilization of work and the future of public sector employment (Adrian Ritz, Gulliem Ripoll, and Lorenza Micacchi), the future of bureaucratic merit (Martina Nistotskaya), the functional politicization of merit civil service—from responsive to subservient bureaucracy (Tobias Bach) and the disappearance of lower-grade bureaucrats (Steven Van de Walle). Part six on futures of studying public administration covers the use of Public Administration research to strengthen “future thinking” in the public sector (Jeroen Maesschalk), the future of a scattered field: challenges and opportunities (Asmund Leth Olsen), and the rise of open science and public access and implications for Public Administration research (Mary K. Feeny). In the conclusion chapter Geert Bouckaert discusses the dynamics of the imbalances between the legislative, the executive, and the judicial branch. There are tensions between on the one hand “public value” and “mission driven” programs based on harmony and a shared understanding of the common good, and on the other hand, crises, turbulence and unsettled situations informed by societal and political conflicts more than by consensus. According to Bouckaert, such tensions are resulting in dilemmas leading to contradictions for the administrative state, such as between merit versus representative administrations, and “neutral” responses versus “engaged” communication to citizens. His argument is that governance in practice is hybrids between hierarchy, markets and networks and that the dominant model is the hierarchy-based Neo-Weberian State model founded on the rule of law and constitutional democracy regulating markets and networks. Bouckaert ends the book by formulating 10 tentative and hypothetical conclusions regarding futures for the public sector. The book is overall better on diagnosing challenges and problems, than pointing to solutions and showing their relevance to the development of PA as a field of study. One could also miss some more reflections on the central role of Political Science in collaboration with PA, which is reflected institutionally in many university systems around the world. There is a tendency in international PA research to forget the central politics-administration axis in all the fragmentation of PA (Christensen and Lægreid 2025a, 2025b). This is clearly represented in literature on the reassertion of the center, post-NPM and the Neo-Weberian State, which could have been more represented in the book (Bouckaert 2023; Halligan and Evans 2024). Governments around the world have in fact tried to cope with crises and turbulence through both increased horizontal coordination and strengthening the vertical control of public administration. On another note, one could have asked for a stronger theoretical foundation of the book, such as a more explicit institutional approach addressing governing through institution building assuming that the effectiveness of political systems depends largely on the quality of administrative institutions that prepare decision-making and translate debates and formal decisions into specific results (March and Olsen 1989; Olsen 2010). Combining insights from governance capacity and legitimacy could be useful in this respect (Christensen et al. 2016). The book is also relatively much leaning towards US and European experiences, both regarding authors and content, while other parts of the world are not much represented. There is a lot of worry about populism and democratic backsliding in the West, which is important, but there is, for example, no analysis from authoritarian countries, like China, which has a very strong expanding field of PA research. However, Asmuth Leth Olsen asks for the need for a more diverse set of non-Western case studies and Alastair Roberts argues that PA ought to show more concern for governance in fragile states, both timely claims. We are no doubt, as well documented in the book, living in turbulent times, affected by pandemics, wars, terrorism and global crises, which have severe consequences on the function of public administration around the world. But, one can also ask whether it has become a “fashion” for PA researchers to say that everything is in flux. Is there a tendency to forget all the political-administrative systems where the politician-civil servant interaction is functioning well, where meritocracy is doing its stable and good job, where people are supporting paying taxes and enjoying good public services, where both the diffuse and specific support and legitimacy are high, etc. (Easton 1965). Are these tendencies only islands in a turbulent world sea or is there a need to be reminded of robust public governance in turbulent times (Ansell et al. 2025)? Further, is there a tendency to exaggerate that changing preconditions for public sectors will change the scholarly communities, that is the community of PA scholars? An alternative observation, which of course is open to debate, is that PA is not only changing over time, for various reasons, but also displays a lot of continuity inside rather narrow sub-disciplinary fields. Over a long period of time, it has been said that the cross-disciplinary trends will take over, which does not seem to be true. And it is not obvious that predictions on collaborations inside the PA field, between sub-fields, have come true. Summing up, this is a very rich volume addressing the fundamental normative question within Public Administration on how governance can be organized with or without democracy, and with or without a rule-of-law-based constitutional framework. We agree on the need for rediscovering bureaucracy and the role of public administration in protecting the values of liberal democracy and the rule-of-law and merit-based bureaucracy. This happens in a period characterized by democratic backsliding. The book gives new knowledge about how “living” public administration organizations work in practice in unsettled and turbulent situations and their relations to other institutional settings. The authors declare no conflicts of interest. Tom Christensen is Professor Emeritus at Department of Political Science, University of Oslo. His main theoretical basis is organization theory and he has empirically focused on studies of central administrative structures and public sector reforms, including studies of sectors like crisis management, police, welfare administration, universities, health (COVID-19), but also studies of trust, accountability, reputation management, etc. Christensen has spent 30 years of teaching in China and has extensively published with Chinese colleagues. Per Lægreid is Professor Emeritus at Department of Government, University of Bergen, Norway. Theoretically his scholarly work is informed by an institutional perspective combining political science and organizational studies. Empirical his works have revolved around studies of institutional changes of central government organizations, democratic governance, administrative reform, welfare state reforms, societal security and crisis management, and administrative policy in a domestic and comparative perspective.