<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<record
    xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
    xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim http://www.loc.gov/standards/marcxml/schema/MARC21slim.xsd"
    xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim">

  <leader>01344nam a2200181   4500</leader>
  <datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="c">509500</subfield>
    <subfield code="d">509500</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <controlfield tag="008">190510b           ||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d</controlfield>
  <datafield tag="100" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Simonet, Daniel</subfield>
    <subfield code="9">5394</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="245" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Vertical alignment, elite power, and the democratic recess in the French health care system</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="260" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="c">2018</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">p.1095-1106.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">The article critically examines administrative restructuring of the French health care system. Despite calculated benefits of New Public Management (NPM) reforms, conflicts between values escalated. NPM-endorsed decentralization never took off in France. Instead, a re-concentration of health policy decisions benefited a Ministry-level welfare elite that sought to restore fiscal discipline rather than responsiveness to users. That process triggered a clash of culture with the medical profession and was at the expense of democratic participation. The role of citizens as reform overseers, although initially contained in the NPM doctrinal puzzle, never materialized. Key issues such as greater accountability and responsibility remain unresolved. - Reproduced.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Administrative reforms</subfield>
    <subfield code="9">5395</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Public administration</subfield>
    <subfield code="9">5396</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">New Public Management</subfield>
    <subfield code="9">6130</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="773" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">International Journal of Public Administration</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="906" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Health care - France</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="942" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="2">ddc</subfield>
    <subfield code="c">AR</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="0">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="1">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="2">ddc</subfield>
    <subfield code="4">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="7">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="9">383440</subfield>
    <subfield code="a">IIPA</subfield>
    <subfield code="b">IIPA</subfield>
    <subfield code="d">2019-05-10</subfield>
    <subfield code="h">41(13), Oct, 2018: p.1095-1106.</subfield>
    <subfield code="p">AR119669</subfield>
    <subfield code="r">2019-05-10</subfield>
    <subfield code="y">AR</subfield>
  </datafield>
</record>
