COMPARISON OF CLASSICAL AND NEW APPROACHES TO PUBLIC VALUE MANAGEMENT THEORY: A THEORETICAL ANALYSIS

Public Value Management (PVM) theory emerged in the mid-1990s as an alternative to Traditional Public Management (classical bureaucracy) and New Public Management (NPM) in public administration. This study compares the PVM theory with the classical bureaucracy and NPM approaches in theory. The differences between these paradigms regarding public value, stakeholder participation, democratic accountability, and social impact are analyzed. The study was conducted using a content analysis based on a literature review. To evaluate the place of PVM in different administrative contexts, examples of practices and traditions from Turkey and selected EU countries (the United Kingdom, Germany, and the Netherlands) were included in the analysis. The analysis findings show that the traditional bureaucracy’s understanding of public interest, which is based on law and hierarchy, and the NPM’s market-oriented efficiency understanding are insufficient in responding to current governance demands. In contrast, the PVM offers a comprehensive framework that addresses these shortcomings by centering on stakeholder participation and social value creation. The tables presented in the study visually illustrate the fundamental principles of the three paradigms and the relationships between them. In conclusion, PVM is emphasized as a unique paradigm bridging the gap between classical and new approaches, strengthening democratic accountability and social impact in public administration.