Refah Devletinde Kamu Hizmetlerinin Dönüşümü: Kamu-Sivil Toplum Kuruluşu İş Birliğine Kuramsal Bir Bakış

Öz

Bu çalışmada, refah devletinin dönüşüm sürecinde sivil toplum kuruluşlarının (STK) kamu hizmetlerinin sunumundaki artan rolü teorik olarak incelenmektedir. Refah devletinin tarihsel gelişimi boyunca kamu hizmetleri uzun süre merkezi ve hiyerarşik yapılar aracılığıyla sunulmuştur. Ancak bu yapı, ekonomik, demografik ve idari değişimlerle yeniden şekillenmiştir. Bu dönüşüm, kamu hizmetlerinin yalnızca devlet tarafından değil, aynı zamanda çok aktörlü ve çok düzeyli yönetişim yapıları içinde de sunulmasını ön plana çıkarmıştır. Bu çerçevede kamu-STK iş birliği, söz konusu dönüşüm sürecinin temel yapılarından biri olarak ele alınmakta; STK’ların kamu hizmetlerinin tasarımı, uygulanması ve değerlendirilmesindeki rolü değerlendirilmektedir. Literatür, kamu-STK iş birliğinin kamu hizmetlerinde verimlilik, katılım ve hesap verebilirlik açısından önemli fırsatlar sunduğunu, ancak aynı zamanda yapısal sınırlamalar ve yönetsel gerilimler de yarattığını göstermektedir. Bu bağlamda çalışma, kamu-STK iş birliğini çok katmanlı ve dinamik bir yönetişim alanı olarak ele almakta ve bu iş birliklerinin başarısının uygun kurumsal düzenlemelere ve açık hesap verebilirlik mekanizmalarına bağlı olduğunu vurgulamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Refah Devleti
• Kamu Hizmetleri
• Sivil Toplum Kuruluşları
• Kamu-STK İş Birliği

Destekleyen Kurum

Bu çalışma herhangi bir kurum veya kuruluştan mali destek almamıştır.

Etik Beyan

Bu çalışma, bilimsel araştırma ve yayın etiğine uygun olarak hazırlanmıştır.

The Transformation of Public Services in the Welfare State: A Theoretical Perspective on Public–Civil Society Organization Cooperation

Öz

This study theoretically examines the increasing role of civil society organizations (CSOs) in the delivery of public services during the transformation of the welfare state. Historically, public services were managed through centralized and hierarchical structures. However, this structure has been reshaped by economic, demographic, and administrative changes. This transformation has highlighted the need for public services to be delivered not only by the state but also within multi-actor and multi-level governance arrangements. In this context, the study considers cooperation between public institutions and civil society organizations as one of the fundamental structures of this process and evaluates the role of CSOs in the design, implementation, and evaluation of public services. The literature indicates that cooperation between public institutions and CSOs offers important opportunities for efficiency, participation, and accountability in public services, while also generating structural limitations and governance tensions. Within this framework, the study approaches public-CSO cooperation as a multi-layered and dynamic governance field and emphasizes that the success of such arrangements depends on appropriate institutional design and clear accountability mechanisms.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Welfare State
• Public Services
• Civil Society Organizations
• Public-CSO Cooperation

Destekleyen Kurum

This study did not receive any financial support from any institution or organization.

Etik Beyan

This study has been prepared in accordance with scientific research and publication ethics.

Kaynakça

1. Bano, M. (2019). Partnerships and the good-governance agenda: Improving service delivery through state–NGO collaborations. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 30(6), 1270-1283. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-017-9937-y
2. Blekesaune, M., & Quadagno, J. (2003). Public attitudes toward welfare state policies: A comparative analysis of 24 nations. European Sociological Review, 19(5), 415-427. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/19.5.415
3. Bovaird, T. (2016). The ins and outs of outsourcing and insourcing: what have we learnt from the past 30 years? Public Money & Management, 36(1), 67-74. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2015.1093298
4. Christensen, T., & Lægreid, P. (2011). Administrative reforms and the complexification of competencies requested from civil servants: The case of Norway. In J.-M. Eymeri-Douzans & J. Pierre (Eds.), Administrative reforms and democratic governance (pp. 41–54). Routledge.https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203820339
5. Cohen, J. L., & Arato, A. (2020). Civil society and political theory. In M. E. Vogel (Ed.), Crime, inequality and the state (pp. 628–631). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003060581-52
6. Curtis, S., & Edwards, J. (2019). Improving public services by sharing the right information. Public Money & Management, 39(5), 355-358. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2019.1611238
7. Das, S. K. (2005). Economic foundations of welfare state systems. In B. Vivekanandan & N. Kurian (Eds.), Welfare states and the future (pp. 20–40). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230554917_3
8. Del Regil, A. (2021). Keynesian economics and the welfare state. Revista Internacional de Salarios Dignos, 3(01), 86-115.

9. DeWiel, B. (1997). A conceptual history of civil society: From Greek beginnings to the end of Marx. Past Imperfect, 6, 3-42. https://doi.org/10.21971/P7MK5N
10. Eppel, E., & Allen, B. (2023). Social services fragmentation. In K. J. Baehler (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of governance and public management for social policy (pp. 401–414). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190916329.013.5
11. Esguerra III, J., & Villanueva, E. (2009). Pathways out of patronage politics: New roles for communities, new rules for politics in the Philippines. IDS (Institute of Development Studies) Bulletin, 40(6), 13-21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1759-5436.2009.00080.x
12. Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Polity Press.
13. Farnsworth, K. (2021). Business and the (corporate) welfare state. In A. Kellow, T. Porter, & K. Ronit (Eds.), Handbook of business and public policy (pp. 276–294). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788979122.00024.
14. Forma, P. (2012). Welfare state opinions among citizens, MP-candidates and elites: Evidence from Finland. In S. Svallfors & P. Taylor-Gooby (Eds.), The end of the welfare state? Responses to state retrenchment (pp. 87–105). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203022955
15. Galeazzi, A. M., Foucat, V. S. Á., & Perevochtchikova, M. (2025). Collaborative management of hydrological ecosystem services: A multilevel social network analysis of a Mexican watershed. Environmental Management, 75(4), 961-980. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-024-02101-1
16. Garland, D. (2014). The welfare state: A fundamental dimension of modern government. European Journal of Sociology/Archives Européennes de Sociologie, 55(3), 327-364. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003975614000162
17. Gough, I. (1979). The political economy of the welfare state. Macmillan Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-16122-5
18. Greve, B. (2019). Welfare and the welfare state: Central issues now and in the future. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429341199 Gupta, A. K., & Lamsal, B. P. (2023). From traditional to innovative public service: A review of paradigm shifts. Public Administration Issues, (6), 137-156. https://doi.org/10.17323/1999-5431-2023-0-6-137-156
19. Habermas, J. (1991). The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) Press.
20. Hegelich, S., & Meyer, H. (2009). Conflict, negotiation, social peace: The German welfare system. In K. Schubert, S. Hegelich, & U. Bazant (Eds.), The handbook of European welfare systems (pp. 120–136). Routledge.https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203878590
21. Kaelble, H. (2013). A social history of Europe, 1945-2000: Recovery and transformation after two World Wars. Berghahn Books.
22. Kazanchian, L. (2021). Features of interaction between the state and civil society in the context of the philosophy of law. Wisdom, 2(18), 114-119. https://doi.org/10.24234/wisdom.v18i2.532
23. Lin, H. S., Hsieh, C. C., & Chen, D. Y. (2023). The multiplexity of collaborative networks in post-disaster recovery: Testing intra-sector and cross-sector network contexts. Administration & Society, 55(3), 485-514. https://doi.org/10.1177/00953997221147240
24. Lister, M. (2005). 'Marshalling' social and political citizenship: Towards a unified conception of citizenship. Government and Opposition, 40(4), 471-491. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-7053.2005.00161.x
25. Llanos, C., & Lanfranco, M. F. (2011). Problems of the British welfare state in the history of the present: An approximation to the path of reduction of the welfare state. Análisis Político, 24(73), 79–96.
26. Mafunisa, M. J. (2004). The role of civil society in promoting good governance in the Republic of South Africa. International review of administrative sciences, 70(3), 489-496. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852304046203
27. Mead, L. M. (1997). Citizenship and social policy: TH Marshall and poverty. Social Philosophy and Policy, 14(2), 197-230. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265052500001886
28. Muchadenyika, D. (2017). Civil society, social accountability and service delivery in Zimbabwe. Development Policy Review, 35, 178-195. https://doi.org/10.1111/dpr.12242
29. Nwogu, C. E., Mahoney, M., Okoye, I., Ejiogu, K., George, S., Dy, G., & Michalek, A. M. (2016). Role of private enterprise in cancer control in low to middle income countries. Journal of Cancer Epidemiology, 2016(1), 7121527. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/7121527
30. Ohemeng, F. L., & Grant, J. K. (2014). Neither public nor private: The efficacy of mixed model public service delivery in two Canadian municipalities. Canadian Public Administration, 57(4), 548-572. https://doi.org/10.1111/capa.12090
31. Osborne, S. P. (2010). Conclusions: Public governance and public services delivery: A research agenda for the future. In S. P. Osborne (Ed.), The new public governance? Emerging perspectives on the theory and practice of public governance (pp. 413–428). Routledge https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-07074-7
32. Quadagno, J., & Street, D. (2006). Recent trends in US social welfare policy: Minor retrenchment or major transformation? Research on Aging, 28(3), 303-316. https://doi.org/10.1177/0164027505285921
33. Pill, M. (2022). Neighbourhood collaboration in co-production: State-resourced responsiveness or state-retrenched responsibilisation? Policy Studies, 43(5), 984-1000. https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2021.1892052
34. Saunders, P. (2012). Religiosity, citizenship and attitudes to social policy issues. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 47(3), 335-352. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1839-4655.2012.tb00252.x
35. Sekwat, A., & Tacuara, J. W. (2024). Challenges of public service delivery in a global era. In C. G. Reddick & T. Demir (Eds.), Handbook of public service delivery (pp. 359–376). Edward Elgar Publishing.https://doi.org/10.4337/9781035315314.00030
36. Stafford, A., & Stapleton, P. (2017). Examining the use of corporate governance mechanisms in public–private partnerships: Why do they not deliver public accountability?. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 76(3), 378-391. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12237
37. Stefan, G. M. (2015). European welfare state in a historical perspective. A critical review. European Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 7(1), 25-38.
38. Stolleis, M. (2011). Origins of the German welfare state: Social policy in Germany to 1945. In L. Leisering (Ed.), Origins of the German welfare state: Social policy in Germany to 1945 (pp. 23–176). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22522-2_2
39. Streck, C. (2004). New partnerships in global environmental policy: The clean development mechanism. The Journal of Environment & Development, 13(3), 295-322. https://doi.org/10.1177/1070496504268696
40. Titmuss, R. M. (2018). The social division of welfare: Some reflections on the search for equity. In Essays on the welfare state (pp. 17-30). Policy Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv6zdctd
41. Ungsuchaval, T. (2016). Gramsci’s civil society in a Nutshell. Journal of Social Sciences, 46(2), 33-50.
42. van der Ploeg, T. J., van Veen, W. J. M., & Versteegh, C. R. M. (Eds.). (2017). Civil society in Europe: Minimum norms and optimum conditions of its regulation. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316536407
43. Van Dijck, M. F., De Munck, B., & Terpstra, N. (2017). Relocating civil society: Theories and practices of civil society between late medieval and modern society. Social Science History, 41(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1017/ssh.2016.35
44. Vivekanandan, B., & Kurian, N. (2005). Introduction: Welfare states and the future. In B. Vivekanandan & N. Kurian (Eds.), Welfare states and the future (pp. 1–13). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230554917_1
45. Voorberg, W., Bekkers, V., Flemig, S., Timeus, K., Tonurist, P., & Tummers, L. (2017). Does co-creation impact public service delivery? The importance of state and governance traditions. Public Money & Management, 37(5), 365-372. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230554917_1
46. Wilensky, H. L. (1974). The welfare state and equality: Structural and ideological roots of public expenditures. University of California Press.
47. Williams, C. C. (2003). Developing community participation in deprived neighbourhoods: A critical evaluation of the third-sector approach. Space and Polity, 7(1), 65-73. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562570309247
48. Woldring, H. E. (1998). State and civil society in the political philosophy of Alexis de Tocqueville. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 9(4), 363-373. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022197815098
49. Wong, C. K. (2013). The evolving East Asian welfare regimes: The case of China. In L. Zhao (Ed.), China’s social development and policy: Into the next stage? (pp. 207–229). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203496794
50. Yang, Y., Cao, S., & Yi, H. (2025). Network structure and collaborative performance among environmental NGOs in China. Nonprofit Policy Forum. https://doi.org/10.1515/npf-2023-0116