In an innovative approach, applied to a region of the world on which research remains in its infancy, this article identifies the dominant administrative reform traditions embedded within the administrative elites responsible for administrative reform in Eurasia. Our contribution is twofold. Firstly, we establish a mechanism for measuring bureaucrat perceptions of administrative reform that may be replicated in other regions, by identifying the extent to which the three dominant Western traditions of public service (traditional public administration, new public management and new public governance) have been embedded in Eurasian societies. The article thereby demonstrates the effectiveness of these turns in public administration to be ‘learned’ and become embedded within the psyche of elite-level bureaucrats in these Eurasian post-Soviet regimes. The article posits that, while members of these elites hold several common governance perceptions, understanding of administrative reform differs markedly between bureaucrats and is broadly aligned with various aspects of the three dominant turns in public administration. Therefore, it is recommended that some rebalancing needs to take place between international/regional public policy interventions and public administration interventions. While public policy interventions are of course required, the administrative foundations upon which they are built (or learned), require greater attention to the needs, skills and attitudes of practitioners.

中文翻译：

---

欧亚大陆的公共行政工艺

本文以一种创新方法应用于世界上一个研究仍处于起步阶段的地区，确定了嵌入在负责欧亚大陆行政改革的行政精英中的主要行政改革传统。我们的贡献是双重的。首先，我们通过确定西方三种主导公共服务传统（传统公共行政、新公共管理和新公共治理）在多大程度上被其他地区复制，建立了一个衡量官僚对行政改革的看法的机制，该机制可能会在其他地区复制。融入欧亚社会。因此，本文证明了公共行政中这些转变的有效性，这些转变被“学习”并嵌入到这些欧亚后苏联政权中的精英级官僚的心理中。文章假设，虽然这些精英的成员持有几种共同的治理观念，但官僚对行政改革的理解存在显着差异，并且与公共行政的三个主要转向的各个方面大体一致。因此，建议在国际/区域公共政策干预和公共行政干预之间进行一些重新平衡。虽然公共政策干预当然是必需的，但其建立（或学习）的行政基础需要更多地关注从业者的需求、技能和态度。官僚对行政改革的理解存在显着差异，并且与公共行政的三个主要转向的各个方面大体一致。因此，建议在国际/区域公共政策干预和公共行政干预之间进行一些重新平衡。虽然公共政策干预当然是必需的，但其建立（或学习）的行政基础需要更多地关注从业者的需求、技能和态度。官僚对行政改革的理解存在显着差异，并且与公共行政的三个主要转向的各个方面大体一致。因此，建议在国际/区域公共政策干预和公共行政干预之间进行一些重新平衡。虽然公共政策干预当然是必需的，但其建立（或学习）的行政基础需要更多地关注从业者的需求、技能和态度。