DIGITALIZATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION MECHANISMS IN THE CONTEXT OF THE THEORY OF BUREAUCRACY AND THE NEO-WEBERIAN STATE

Authors

  • Olha Antonova University of Customs and Finance
  • Sergiy Kvitka National Technical University «Dnipro Polytechnic»

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.34132/pard2025.30.14

Keywords:

Neo-Weberian state, New public management, public administration, bureaucracy, digital transformation, management mechanisms, institutional resilience, European integration.

Abstract

The article, based on the principles of historical neo-institutionalism, provides a comprehensive analysis of the structural transformation of public administration in the context of existential security threats. The authors argue that the global crisis of the New Public Management paradigm, with its emphasis on decentralization and market approaches, has revealed the critical vulnerability of the state system during the war. As a strategic response to these challenges, the need to implement the Neo-Weberian state model in the public administration system of Ukraine is justified. The central element of the study is the rethinking of the functional role of bureaucracy. It is proven that the return to the Weberian principles of hierarchy and professionalism, reinforced by the end-to-end digitalization of processes, gives rise to the phenomenon of «dynamic legalism». This allows overcoming departmental fragmentation and implementing adaptive management mechanisms aimed at rapid consolidation of resources. Using the example of the analysis of the digital ecosystem of Ukraine, it is demonstrated how modern platforms ensure the institutional resilience of the system, transforming the status of a citizen from a passive «client» to an active «co-owner of the state». The conclusions emphasize that such a model not only guarantees a balance between democratic accountability and mobilization capacity, but also serves as a key reference point for the post-war reconstruction and further European integration of Ukraine in the new security landscape.

References

Hrafska, O.I., Pavlenchyk, N.F., & Boiechko, L.A. (2025). Ekonomika danykh u strukturi tsyfrovoho rynku yak novyi format kapitalizatsii informatsiinykh potokiv [Data economics in the structure of the digital market as a new format for capitalization of information flows]. Akademichni vizii – Academic Visions, 46. Retrieved from: https://surl.lu/smuaoe [in Ukrainian].

Boin, A., & Hart, P. (2022). From crisis to reform? Exploring three post-COVID pathways. Policy and society, (Vol. 41), 1, (pp. 13-24). Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1093/polsoc/puab007 [in English].

Bouckaert, G. (2022). The neo-Weberian state: from ideal type model to reality? www.ucl.ac.uk. Retrieved from: https://surl.li/qkcfdd [in English].

Drechsler, W., & Fuchs, L. (2022). Max Weber and the neo-weberian state: a workshop and a Max Weber studies theme issue. Perspectives on public management and governance, (Vol. 5), 2, (pp. 197-198). Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1093/ppmgov/gvac015 [in English].

Drechsler, W. (2005). The rise and demise of the new public management. Post-Autistic economics review, (Vol. 33), 14, (pp. 17-28) [in English].

Dunn, W.N., & Miller, D.Y. (2007). A critique of the new public management and the neo-weberian state: advancing a critical theory of administrative reform. Public organization review, (Vol. 7), (pp. 345-358). Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-007-0042-3 [in English].

Hanna, N. (2018). A role for the state in the digital age. Journal of innovation and entrepreneurship, (Vol. 7), 5. Retrieved from: https://surl.li/ztsosh [in English].

Korvat, O. (2023). Formation of state policy in the sphere of digital platforms and ecosystems. Law and innovations, 3 (43), (pp. 83-88). Retrieved from: https://surl.li/qdceud [in English].

March, J.G., & Olsen, J.P. (2004). The logic of appropriateness. www.sv.uio.no. Retrieved from: https://surl.lt/odxetc [in English].

Dunleavy, P. (et al.). (2005). New public management is dead-long live digital-era governance. Journal of public administration research and theory, (Vol. 16), 3, (pp. 467-494). Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mui057 [in English].

Novikov, Y. (2024). Technological sovereignty of the state: practical experience of ukraine and the european union. Philosophy, economics and law review, (Vol. 4), 2, (pp. 16-35). Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.63341/2786-491X-2024-2-16 [in English].

Olsen, J.P. (2006). Maybe it is time to rediscover bureaucracy. Journal of public administration research and theory, (Vol. 16), 1, (pp. 1-24). Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mui027 [in English].

Ongaro, E. (2009). Public management reform and modernization. trajectories of administrative change in italy, france, greece, portugal and spain. Ελληνική επιθεώρηση πολιτικής επιστήμης, (Vol. 36), (pp. 161-165). Retrieved from: https://surl.lt/wepfed [in English].

Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2017). Public management reform: a comparative analysis – into the age of austerity. Oxford: Oxford University Press [in English].

Randma-Liiv, T. (2009). New public management versus the neo-weberian state in central and eastern europe. NISPAcee journal of public administration and policy, (Vol. 1), 2, (pp. 69-82) [in English].

X-Road – interoperability services. (n.d.). e-estonia.com. Retrieved from: https://e-estonia.com/solutions/interoperability-services/x-road/ [in English].

Downloads


Abstract views: 969

Published

2025-12-31

How to Cite

Antonova, O., & Kvitka, S. (2025). DIGITALIZATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION MECHANISMS IN THE CONTEXT OF THE THEORY OF BUREAUCRACY AND THE NEO-WEBERIAN STATE. Public Administration and Regional Development, (30), 1404–1425. https://doi.org/10.34132/pard2025.30.14