首页> 外文期刊>International journal of public sector management >Reforming fire and rescue services: a comparative study of Estonia and Georgia
【24h】

Reforming fire and rescue services: a comparative study of Estonia and Georgia

机译:改革消防和救援服务:爱沙尼亚和乔治亚州的比较研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to compare the systems of fire and rescue services (FRS) in Estonia and Georgia with respect to recent centralization reforms, especially with performance measurement and management in mind, and analyse their prospects for successful implementations. Design/methodology/approach - A desk study, covering all the main publicly available strategic plans of both countries relevant to FRS was conducted by the author. In addition, a meeting with the Georgian officials from the Emergency Management Agency was held in May 2016 and follow-up inquiries to specify certain aspects were made in the following two months. Findings - This study demonstrates that Estonia is using performance indicators widely to set the target levels and manage the fire and rescue system, whereas Georgia is still under the process of introducing performance indicators. Therefore, since the systems of both countries are under centralized management in contrast to the typical European system, it would be suitable to learn from the reforms of each country to further understand the best practices. Research limitations/implications - Since Georgia was in the process of reform in 2016, it does not have many performance indicators or impact evaluations of the reform readily available, which makes the possibilities of comparison limited. Practical implications - The last reform of the FRS in Estonia and Georgia was similar: the centralization of services to increase the potential of cooperation and standardize the level of service provision. Estonia's FRS system is eager to implement the reforms based on a data-driven analysis, whereas Georgia, still in the process of reform, does not have many performance indicators. As a result, Georgia and other countries aiming to centralize their FRS system in the near future would have the perfect opportunity to learn from Estonia's reforms as well as predict and adapt to the possible bottlenecks of the reforms. For a wider audience, an analysis of the possible challenges of centralizing public agencies in transitional countries are of interest. Originality/value - The public service provision is not widely analysed in the context of transition countries. As the reforms are to some extent the result of the accession process of joining the EU, it is crucial to understand whether the reforms have the planned impact on public services. The current paper analysed the reforms and implementations of public management techniques in the FRS, based on two transitional countries: Estonia and Georgia. FRS has seen relatively few studies analysing and comparing the reforms of different countries.
机译:目的-本文的目的是比较爱沙尼亚和佐治亚州的消防和救援系统(FRS)与最近的集中化改革,尤其是考虑到绩效评估和管理,并分析其成功实施的前景。设计/方法/方法-作者进行了案头研究,涵盖了两国与FRS相关的所有主要的公共可用战略计划。此外,2016年5月与紧急管理局的格鲁吉亚官员举行了会议,并在接下来的两个月中进行了后续调查以指明某些方面。调查结果-这项研究表明,爱沙尼亚广泛使用绩效指标来设定目标水平并管理消防和救援系统,而格鲁吉亚仍处于引入绩效指标的过程中。因此,与典型的欧洲体系相比,由于两国的体系都处于集中管理之下,因此从每个国家的改革中吸取教训,以进一步了解最佳实践是合适的。研究的局限性/意义-自从格鲁吉亚在2016年进行改革以来,它没有很多绩效指标或对改革的影响评估,因此比较的可能性受到限制。实际影响-爱沙尼亚和格鲁吉亚的FRS上一次改革是类似的:集中服务以增加合作潜力并标准化服务水平。爱沙尼亚的FRS系统渴望基于数据驱动的分析来实施改革,而仍处于改革过程中的格鲁吉亚没有许多绩效指标。结果,格鲁吉亚和其他打算在不久的将来集中其FRS系统的国家将有绝佳的机会学习爱沙尼亚的改革,并预测和适应改革的可能瓶颈。对于更广泛的受众而言,对转型国家集中公共机构的可能挑战进行分析很有意义。原创性/价值-在转型国家中,公共服务的提供没有得到广泛的分析。由于改革在某种程度上是加入欧盟的结果,因此了解改革是否对公共服务产生计划性影响至关重要。本文基于两个过渡国家:爱沙尼亚和格鲁吉亚,分析了FRS中公共管理技术的改革和实施。 FRS很少有研究分析和比较不同国家的改革。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号