APA 6th Edition Perko-Šeparović, I. (2002). Globalisation and Democracy: the Paradoxes of New Public Management. Politička misao, 39 (5), 97-106. Preuzeto s https://hrcak.srce.hr/23389
MLA 8th Edition Perko-Šeparović, Inge. "Globalisation and Democracy: the Paradoxes of New Public Management." Politička misao, vol. 39, br. 5, 2002, str. 97-106. https://hrcak.srce.hr/23389. Citirano 08.12.2019.
Chicago 17th Edition Perko-Šeparović, Inge. "Globalisation and Democracy: the Paradoxes of New Public Management." Politička misao 39, br. 5 (2002): 97-106. https://hrcak.srce.hr/23389
Harvard Perko-Šeparović, I. (2002). 'Globalisation and Democracy: the Paradoxes of New Public Management', Politička misao, 39(5), str. 97-106. Preuzeto s: https://hrcak.srce.hr/23389 (Datum pristupa: 08.12.2019.)
Vancouver Perko-Šeparović I. Globalisation and Democracy: the Paradoxes of New Public Management. Politička misao [Internet]. 2002 [pristupljeno 08.12.2019.];39(5):97-106. Dostupno na: https://hrcak.srce.hr/23389
IEEE I. Perko-Šeparović, "Globalisation and Democracy: the Paradoxes of New Public Management", Politička misao, vol.39, br. 5, str. 97-106, 2002. [Online]. Dostupno na: https://hrcak.srce.hr/23389. [Citirano: 08.12.2019.]
Sažetak In this paper, New Public Management is interpreted as a dimension of globalisation with certain implications on democracy. The analysis uses McCourt’s classification which differentiates among 3 public administration models: the classic model, the Washington model and the New Public Management model. The Washington model is the most significant from the point of view of globalisation, since it is used by the IMF and the World Bank to conduct globalisation of the public sector by imposing homogenisation, i.e. “the one best way” towards the reform of the public sector, on all countries applying for loans (developing countries, transition countries, etc.). According to reports drawn up by the donors themselves, the Washington model is more or less doomed to failure. There are numerous reasons for this, but it seems that the most important one lies in its limited, primarily financial approach. Consequently, the British model seems more interesting. This model is identical to the Washington model only in its first stage, and is subsequently enhanced with a greater number of dimensions. However, this model is replete with paradoxes and has negative effects on the fundamental principles of democracy. The Swedish model is briefly presented as an alternative. This model points to the possibility of opposing the dominant aspect of globalisation and hierarchically imposed homogenisation with a different aspect of globalisation through the networking of self-organising and self-regulatory elements.