QUALITY, INNOVATION, AND KNOWLEDGE – FOUNDATIONAL PILLARS OF SUSTAINABLE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

 XXI međunarodna konvencija o kvalitetu JUSK ICQ – 29 – 31. maj 2025, Beograd, (122-131 str.)

 

АУТОР(И) / AUTHOR(S):  Nemanja Lekić , Ivana Ljubičić , Svetlana Marković   

 

Download Full Pdf   

DOI:  10.46793/XXIJUSK-ICQ.122L

САЖЕТАК / ABSTRACT:

Modern public administration faces increasing demands to simultaneously enhance service quality, drive innovation, and ensure fiscal sustainability. This paper explores how the integration of intellectual capital, strategic management, and digital technologies can improve public administration efficiency and strengthen its long-term stability. The analysis focuses on the role of knowledge, innovation, and quality management in optimizing administrative processes, streamlining expenditures, and fostering budgetary transparency. Special emphasis is placed on digitalization as a catalyst for responsible public resource management and the enhancement of service delivery. The empirical section presents successful examples of public sector reforms and analyzes key initiatives aimed at improving administrative procedures and resource management. By comparing global and local practices, the study highlights critical factors that contribute to greater efficiency, stability, and sustainability in public administration. The findings underscore the necessity of a systemic approach in which quality, innovation, and knowledge serve as the foundation for long-term competitiveness and fiscal stability in the public sector.

КЉУЧНЕ РЕЧИ / KEYWORDS:

intellectual capital, public sector management, fiscal sustainability, digital transformation, administrative efficiency

ПРОЈЕКАТ / ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:

ЛИТЕРАТУРА / REFERENCES:

  • Mergel, I., Edelmann, N., Haug, N., Defining digital transformation: Results from expert interviews, Government Information Quarterly, Vol. 36, No. 4, pp. 101–119, 2019.
  • OECD, Digital Government Index: 2019 results, OECD Public Governance Policy Papers, No. 3, OECD Publishing, Paris, 2020.
  • Pollitt, C., Bouckaert, G., Public management reform: A comparative analysis – Into the age of austerity (4th ed.), Oxford University Press, 2017.
  • Bovaird, T., Löffler, E., Public management and governance (3rd ed.). Routledge, 2016.
  • Dobrolyubova, E., Measuring outcomes of digital transformation in public administration: Literature review and possible steps forward, NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 61–86, 2021.
  • Wirtz, B.W., Weyerer, J.C., Geyer, C., Artificial intelligence and the public sector—Applications and challenges. International Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 42, No. 7, pp. 596–615. 2019.
  • Program razvoja elektronske uprave u Republici Srbiji za period od 2020. do 2022. godine sa Akcionim planom za njegovo sprovođenje, „Službeni glasnik RS“, br. 85/2020.
  • Strategija reforme javne uprave u Republici Srbiji za period od 2021. do 2030. godine, „Sl. glasnik RS”, br. 42/2021 i 9/2022.
  • Pareek, U., Sole, N.A., Quality of Public Services in the Era of Guaranteed Public Service Delivery, Indian Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 68, No. 2, pp. 160–173, 2022.
  • Nethercott, K., Assessment or referral tool: The unintended consequences of a dual purpose common assessment framework form, Journal of Interprofessional Care, Vol. 35, No. 1, pp. 1–9. 2020.
  • Norgate, R., Traill, M., Osborne, C., Common Assessment Framework (CAF) – early views and issues, Educational Psychology in Practice, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 139–150, 2009.
  • Rocha, J., Zavale, G., Innovation and Change in Public Administration. Open Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 9, No. 6, pp. 285–297, 2021.
  • Salman, M., Total Quality Management in Private and Public Sectors in Bahrain: An Exploratory Study, Journal of Service Science and Management, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 452–475, 2022.
  • Sharma, R., Mishra, R. Investigating the role of intermediaries in adoption of public access outlets for delivery of e-Government services in developing countries: An empirical study, Government Information Quarterly, Vol. 34, No. 4, pp. 658–679, 2017.
  • Adnan, M., Ghazali, M., Othman, N.Z.S. E-participation within the context of e-government initiatives: A comprehensive systematic review, Telematics and Information Reports, Vol. 8, No. 1, 100015, 2022.
  • Bizimana, S.C., E-government Readiness Assessment for Government Institutions in Burundi, International Journal of European Studies, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 1–8, 2020.
  • Terrance, M.T., E-Government and Public Administration: Navigating through the Public Administration Paradigm of Governance to make sense, of E-Governance, International Journal of Social Science Research and Review, Vol. 6, No. 8, pp. 340–351.
  • Bontis, N. Intellectual capital: An exploratory study that develops measures and models, Management Decision, Vol. 36, No. 2, pp. 63–76, 1998.
  • Edvinsson, L., Malone, M.S., Intellectual Capital: Realizing your Company’s True Value by Finding its Hidden Brainpower, Harper Business, New York, 1997.
  • González, I. B., Flores, A.J., Maritza, Á.H., Impact of intellectual capital on the performance of public administration, International Journal of Learning and Intellectual Capital, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 334–350, 2023.
  • Rodchenko, S., Bielska, T., Brus, T., Naplyokov, Y., & Trevoho, O. (2021). Human capital management in the system of public administration in the context of COVID-19 pandemic. Postmodern Openings, Vol. 12, No. 1Sup1, pp. 346–355.
  • Kamaruddin, K., Abeysekera, I., Intellectual capital and sustainable economic performance in the public sector: The context of the New Public Management in Malaysia, Sustainability, Vol. 13, No. 14, 7885. 2021.
  • Busenan, E.F.M., Ramli, A., Bakar, M.S, Intellectual capital and its importance to the public sector, Journal of Global Business and Social Entrepreneurship (GBSE), Vol. 4, No. 10, pp. 131–138, 2018.
  • Wilson, R., French, M., Hesselgreaves, H., Lowe, T., Smith, M.. New development: Relational public services—reform and research agenda, Public Money & Management, Vol. 44, No. 6, pp. 553–558, 2024.
  • Dumay, J., A critical reflection on the future of intellectual capital: From reporting to disclosure, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 168–184, 2016.
  • Corsetti, G., Kuester, K., Meier, A., Müller, G. J. Sovereign risk, fiscal policy, and macroeconomic stability, The Economic Journal, Vol. 123, No. 566, pp. F99–F132, 2013.
  • Alesina, A., Favero, C., Giavazzi, F., The output effect of fiscal consolidation plans, Journal of International Economics, Vol. 96, pp. S19–S42, 2015.
  • Ardagna, S., Fiscal stabilizations: When do they work and why, European Economic Review, Vol. 48, No. 5, pp. 1047–1074, 2004.
  • Ciaffi, G., Deleidi, M., Di Domenico, L., Fiscal policy and public debt: Government investment is most effective to promote sustainability, Journal of Policy Modeling, Vol. 46, No. 6, pp. 1186–1209, 2024.
  • Valle-Cruz, D., Fernandez-Cortez, V., Gil-Garcia, R. J., From E-budgeting to smart budgeting: Exploring the potential of artificial intelligence in government decision-making for resource allocation, Government Information Quarterly, Vol. 39, No. 2, 101644, 2022.
  • Global Innovation Index Database: Unlocking the Promise of Social Entrepreneurship, WIPO, Geneva, Switzerland, 2024.
  • Kattel, R., Mergel, I., Estonia’s Digital Transformation, in M.E. Compton, ‘t Hart, P. (Eds.), Great Policy Successes (pp 143–160), Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2019.
  • Scupola, A., Digital Transformation of Public Administration Services in Denmark: A Process Tracing Case Study, Nordic and Baltic Journal of Information and Communications Technologies, No. 1, pp. 261–284, 2019.
  • Chooi, A., Mobilizing revenue: Digital transformation of revenue administration in Singapor, Governance Briefs, Asian Development Bank, 2024.
  • Stefanović, M., Đorđević, I., Milosavljević, N., Đonović, A., Analiza analiza stanja inovacija procesa digitalne transformacije transformacije u Republici Srbiji, NALED, Beograd, 2021.