Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (180) (remove)
Language
- English (180) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (180)
Keywords
- Good Administration (4)
- Pan-European Principles (3)
- Deutschland (2)
- EU (2)
- EuGH (2)
- Europäische Union (2)
- Verwaltungsrecht (2)
- delegated acts (2)
- differentiation (2)
- implementing acts (2)
Institute
- Lehrstuhl für Öffentliches Recht, insbesondere Europarecht und Völkerrecht (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Weiß) (28)
- Lehrstuhl für Hochschul- und Wissenschaftsmanagement (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Michael Hölscher) (22)
- Lehrstuhl für vergleichende Verwaltungswissenschaft und Policy-Analyse (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Michael Bauer) (21)
- Lehrstuhl für Öffentliches Recht, Staatslehre und Rechtsvergleichung (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Karl-Peter Sommermann) (20)
- Lehrstuhl für Öffentliches Recht, insbesondere deutsches und europäisches Verwaltungsrecht (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Ulrich Stelkens) (15)
- Seniorprofessur für Verwaltungswissenschaft, Politik und Recht im Bereich von Umwelt und Energie (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Eberhard Bohne) (7)
- Lehrstuhl für Politikwissenschaft (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Stephan Grohs) (6)
- Lehrstuhl für Volkswirtschaftslehre, insbesondere Wirtschafts- und Verkehrspolitik (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Andreas Knorr) (6)
- Lehrstuhl für Wirtschaftliche Staatswissenschaften, insbesondere Allgemeine Volkswirtschaftslehre und Finanzwissenschaft (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Gisela Färber) (5)
- Lehrstuhl für öffentliches Recht, insbesondere allgemeines und besonderes Verwaltungsrecht (Univ.-Prof. Dr. Jan Ziekow) (4)
The purpose of this chapter is to delineate and analyse current adjustments of Public Private Partnerships (PPP) in Germany in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Based on current data and official material, road infrastructure PPP was analysed, as demand for transporta-tion services is highly sensitive to fluctuations of overall economic activity. Accordingly, they do not only offer a good illustration of the challenges encountered by PPP operators in gene-ral but also – as road infrastructure PPP in Germany exist in different designs – important lessons may be learned with respect to their respective resilience in extraordinarily adverse economic conditions. One finding from the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany is that the case for public–private partnerships (PPP) become more compelling, also as an integral element of a large-scale reform package to massively improve the resilience of public service delivery to citizens and companies alike. Another important insight from the pandemic and the politico-administrative countermeasures is that massive pressure – both financial and in terms of the workload on the human resources employed – has been placed upon existing PPP, especially in critical infrastructures. The principal reasons are unforeseen or unexpected changes in user behaviour, affecting demand, and more difficult access to funding. These new insights demonstrate the relevance of anticipation of such events in the PPP contract, and the role of preparation for practitioners on both the private as well as the public side. Moreover, the findings provide leeway for further research on how the public administration, in particular in a federal multilevel system, can strengthen knowledge management and information exchange between single entities and stakeholders, and the role of PPP units as potential gatekeeper within this system.
This chapter analyses the impact of the Internet and the shift in communication processes on the States’ obligations emerging from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). It claims that the environment created by the Internet is different from the traditional one; that is, it substantially empowers a range of private actors such as social media and other Internet platforms. That is why in the light of the actual development of the ECHR’s standards, both the strict distinction between positive and negative State’s obligations, and an overall prefe-rence for the latter are anachronistic. This chapter claims that it is crucial to keep developing European minimal safeguards in horizontal online relations when human rights violation is a result of a State’s non-compliance with the positive duty. Against this backdrop, this chapter centers around the influence of the Internet on the exercise and protection of selected human rights and the changing nature of communication processes, as well as the game-changing shift caused by the growing power of private actors. It also includes a detailed analysis of the scope and content of positive State’s obligations emerging from the use of the Internet, focusing on substantive obligations (i.e., the legal framework and the allocation of responsibilities), as well as on the issue of the public guarantees for online pluralism and procedural obligations (the duty to provide responses to allegations concerning online ill-treatment inflicted by private individuals).
This chapter focuses on the impact of specific “administrative styles,” understood as the everyday routines of the organization, on the reform patterns in international organizations. Consolidators are hence primarily driven by positional rather than policy interests. Entre-preneurs combine the latter two types; they develop administrative routines that entail intensive bureaucratic advocacy in policy-making and a strong orientation toward institu-tional consolidation to strengthen the administration’s position. In contrast, the picture should be completely different for consolidators. Given consolidators’ dominant motivation to secure their institutional status and legitimacy, organizational reforms will to a far greater degree reveal patterns of emulation of dominant reform paradigms and reform ideas in their organizational environment. Public sector organizations adopted these reports from the private sector as a form of communication with external and internal stakeholders. Most reforms have been identified within the area of organizational reforms, for example, institutional adjustments of the directorates.
Administrative justice and the rule of law have often been in tension. However, they have converged over time as the scope of administrative justice and the conceptions of the rule of law have shifted. This chapter starts with the historical connections between administrative justice and the rule of law. It then maps ways in which the rule of law is expressed when ad-ministrative justice is embedded within administrative organization and when it is organized as a system external to the administration. This approach highlights the diversity of technical solutions to recurring questions across three major administrative systems (namely England, France, and the United States). This analysis also leads to highlighting two new challenges for the rule of law: first, how the rule of law responds to various forms of increasing administra-tive repression, and second, how the rule of law responds to globalization at a time when no coherent global administrative justice system exists.
The constitutions of the Lander contain similar provisions for the issue of Rechtsverordnun-gen based on Land legal acts. There are only a few rules on the procedure of the adoption of Rechtsverordnungen in the Grundgesetz and the land constitutions. The aim is to enable social groups to settle, under their own responsibility, the matters that concern them. The power to enact Satzungen is, thus, directly linked to the idea of self-government, which ex-plains the importance of Satzungen at local level. The principle of subsidiarity of the constitu-tional complaint as a criterion which may lead to the inadmissibility of a constitutional com-plaint directly challenging a legislative act also has an impact on the interpretation of proce-dural law applicable to regular courts. It has already been said that the BVerfG gives a clear priority to constitutional complaints challenging a judicial decision which leads to an indirect constitutional review of a legal act on which the decision is based via Article 100(1) GG.
Democratization of good global governance: The EU's role in the Parliamentarization of trade policy
(2022)
The quest for good governance in trade relations occurs against the backdrop of an increa-sing politicization of trade policy. In the new reality of global value chains and servitisation, regulating trade goes far beyond technical issues of reducing entrance barriers, border measures and tariffs, but becomes a comprehensive endeavour of scrutinizing and policing behind-the-border political issues. Therefore, a call for raising the legitimacy of trade policy formulation and implementation rises. Hence, parliamentarisation of trade policy is ever more necessary. The EU's constitutional development and its practice in trade policy is a good example for more parliamentary involvement, which strengthens trade policy's legi-timacy, transparency, and public awareness. Thus, the EU indeed is, despite all weaknesses,
a pacemaker and hence good global actor to the benefit of democratisation of global trade governance, being an essential factor of good governance.
Wolfgang Weiss’ contribution on “Constitutional Challenges to EU Administrative Soft Law During the Covid-19 Pandemic and Some Proposed Remedies” Studies how during the Covid-19 pandemic, as EU member states struggled to deal with the pandemic, EU officials increasingly resorted to so-called “soft law” to provide guidance to member states. He concludes that, while there are benefits to using EU soft law for crisis management and domestic implementation of EU, he raises concerns regarding their challenges for democratic legitimacy and the rule of law. He contends that these challenges should be addressed by a legislative enactment that sets forth a general framework for the adoption of EU soft law, core elements of which should be stipulations of subsidiarity vis-a-vis executive rulemaking and minimum procedural, transparency and justification requirements for the adoption of Commission soft law. Their domestic effects and reviewability should be clarified as well.
Universities in Germany and other countries have recently undergone comprehensive reforms: they are expected to contribute to social development through exchange with external actors. These exchanges are commonly termed “third mission”. In this context knowledge and technology transfer can prove to be particularly critical to academic freedom, because market logic and economically rational behaviour may lead to goals in conflict with the institutional logic of scientific communities.
Academic freedom is currently under pressure. The most obvious cases in Europe are those of Hungary and Poland, where the state interferes directly in core academic issues by chan-ging the laws. More generally, research and teaching are at risk in European democracies. Except in Hungary and Poland, this is not only due to political constraints: society itself seems to have lost its trust in science. Scientific results are declared “fake news” and students and lecturers are not allowed to discuss social, gender or integration issues (keyword: “trigger warning”). Such threats to research and teaching curb scientific autonomy directly and indirectly.
Education plays a key role in knowledge society, since, from a meritocratic perspective, it opens up fair opportunities for well-paid jobs, thereby increasing social mobility and well-being more generally. In order to foster their economic competitiveness, cities are therefore encouraged to engage in knowledge-based urban development by trying to provide good schools and world-class universities to attract the “creative class.” However, meritocracy is a “myth,” as access to educational opportunities is itself socially biased. With the example of Heidelberg, a so-called “knowledge pearl,” we show how knowledge-institutions, such as the university, may shape socioenvironmental contexts in ways conducive to spatially selective access to—and use of—educational opportunities. Instead of reducing social polarization, knowledge-institutions may instead (re-)produce inequalities.
The article introduces a research project carried out at the German Research Institute of Public Administration and the German University of Administrative Sciences Speyer. It examines the development, content and effectiveness of the written and unwritten standards of good administration drawn up within the framework of the Council of Europe (CoE).
Public Finance
(2021)
Article 9 (Social Aims)
(2021)
The landmark judgment in the case of Bivolaru and Moldovan v. France, which concerned the execution of a European arrest warrant, provides a good illustration of the effects of the Con-vention liability of EU Member States for their implementation of EU law. These effects touch on such notions as cooperation, trust, complementarity, autonomy and responsibility. The two European courts have been cooperating towards some convergence of the standards applicable to the handling of EAWs. The Bosphorus presumption and its application in Bivo-laru and Moldovan show the amount of trust placed by the Strasbourg Court in the EU pro-tection of fundamental rights in this area. To the extent that their standards of protection coincide, the Luxembourg and Strasbourg jurisdictions are complementary. However, the two protection systems remain autonomous, notably as regards the methodology applied to fundamental rights. Ultimately, the EU Member States engage their Convention responsibility for the execution by their domestic courts of any EAWs.
The present contribution analyses the Opinion 1/17 of the CJEU on CETA, which, in a surprisingly uncritical view of conceivable conflicts between the competences of the CETA Investment Tribunal on the one hand and those of the CJEU on the other hand, did not raise any objections. In first reactions, this opinion was welcomed as an extension of the EU's room for manoeuvre in investment protection. The investment court system under CETA, however, is only compatible with EU law to a certain extent, which the Court made clear in the text of the opinion, and the restrictions are likely to confine the leeway for EU external contractual relations. Due to their fundamental importance, these restrictions, derived by the CJEU from the autonomy of the Union legal order form the core subject of this contribution. In what follows, the new emphasis in the CETA opinion on the external autonomy of Union law will be analyzed first (II). Subsequently, the considerations of the CJEU on the delimitation of its competences from those of the CETA Tribunal will be critically examined. The rather superficial analysis of the CJEU in the CETA opinion is in contrast to its approach in earlier decisions as it misjudges problems and therefore only superficially leads to a clear delimitation of competences (III.). An exploration of the last part of the CJEU's autonomy analysis will follow, in which the CJEU tries to respond to the criticism of regulatory chill (IV). Here, by referring to the unhindered operation of the EU institutions in accordance with their constitutional framework, the CJEU identifies the new restrictions for investment protection mechanisms just mentioned, which takes back the previous comprehensive affirmation of jurisdiction of the CETA Tribunal in one point and which raises many questions about its concrete significance, consequence, and scope of application.
Severe fiscal pressure experienced by some German municipalities has led to a shift in the way municipalities are controlled by the responsible state governments. Instead of purely relying on a system of approving budgets and borrowing, some states have established debt relief programmes which combine grants and sanctions, or even sent austerity commis-sioners who take over responsibilities of councils and mayors. Whether these are deemed proportionate and legitimate interventions into the constitutionally guaranteed administra-tive autonomy of the local level depends heavily on their success in limiting local government debt. Based on an innovative synthetic control approach, this paper undertakes an empirical assessment of a recent debt relief programme in North Rhine-Westphalia and the deploy-ment of an austerity commissioner, revealing that both instruments to some degree positive-ly impacted upon local government debt, as compared to non-intervention. Nevertheless, it finds the effect is limited in substantial terms.
The article focuses on the legal aspects of intergenerational solidarity in the German statutory pension system. Organised on a pay-as-you-go basis, it relies on a balance of those obliged to pay contributions vs. those who receive benefits. The footing of this system, however, becomes fragile in times of rising life expectancy and declining birth rates: fewer employees will have to finance the pension rights of a growing number of pensioners. These developments do not only lead to lower acceptance of the “intergenerational contract” by the economically active who have to invest a large share of their income in the financing of current pensions while facing the risk of receiving low payments in the future. It also raises questions of intergenerational justice.
The market for voluntary carbon offsets, i.e. those outside the strictly regulated Kyoto framework for tradable carbon emission permits, is growing with a vengeance. With only six such organisations in the business in 2000, their number has virtually skyrocketed to more than 232 commercial as well as not-for-profit outfits today – the vast majority of which entered the trade only after 2005. This trend has not eluded the world of commercial aviation. By contrast, starting in the early millennium years, voluntary carbon-offsetting schemes were appeared to have become a serious concern for the top management of some of the world’s leading airlines. Carriers as diverse as Air Canada, British Airways, Ethiopian Airways, Qantas (incl. its subsidiaries QantasLink and Jetstar), Continental, Cathay Pacific, Japan Air Lines, Air France/KLM, the SAS Group, EasyJet and Virgin Blue, to name just a few, then began to actively encourage their passengers to pay for the ‘neutralising’ services of select carbon offset providers on top of the ticket price whenever they book a flight. Finally, also some large online travel agencies such as Expedia and Travelocity as well as leading car rental companies (AVIS) opted to invite their customers to purchase carbon offsets. However, as this chapter will demonstrate, both the economic efficiency and ecological effectives of voluntary carbon offsetting as a tool to address the challenge of climate change appear very limited.
The Covid-19 pandemic constitutes a veritable capacity test for local administrations in Germany and Austria. Based on a survey among systematically sampled Austrian (n=130) and German (n=517) employees of local public administrations, the article taps into the perceptions of how the bureaucracies in the two federal states coped with the challenges emerging at the early stage of the crisis. As it turns out, in the administratively well-equipped and—in comparison to disastrous situations elsewhere—mildly hit countries, local administrations did fine—even growing beyond themselves. Key to a higher probability of coping well with Covid-19 appears to be an intelligent administrative networking strategy. Five tentative lessons are drawn on what—at this early stage—can only constitute an incomplete picture taken from a fluid context.
Each crisis is dreadful in its own special way, and so is the COVID-19 pandemic. Beyond its lethal nature and truly global spread, one of its characteristics lies within the detachment of cause and effect. The cause, i.e. SARS-CoV-2, can clearly be attributed to health issues, though the COVID-19 pandemic challenges entire public administration (PA) systems well beyond the health sector. Both the lockdown as executed and the first careful exit-steps in their entire complexity increase scope and scale of PA’s tasks and responsibilities, challenging not only health authorities, but all parts of the administrative system, from security administration to public service delivery, with the entire world remaining in very turbulent water. Thus, the question arises how the PA should react to ensure high performance in times of crisis. Our findings underpin the relevance of trust in public administration (or “the government” in general), notably in times of crisis: the higher trust levels are, the more likely compliance of citizens and successful networking with non-state actors is. Even in the absence of many trust generating factors, trust levels are increasing in the current COVID-19 pandemic.
This contribution examines how checks and balances can be organised so that individual freedoms of users in the digital space are protected from encroachment by platforms. Indeed, platforms are quasi-states which enjoy legislative, judiciary and executive powers. This merging of functions in the hands of one single entity illustrates the failure of the liberal attempt at setting up a cyberspace free of sovereign power: platforms are the new sovereign. Modern thinkers like Foucault and Habermas have examined how sovereigns in the past have seen their powers curtailed and the role that the birth of two distinct spheres, one public and one private, has played in this process. Traditional public economic law builds on this public-private dichotomy, leaving little room to conceptualize hybrids. Yet this paper shows that platforms are such hybrids. Building on an analysis of the activities taking places on platforms, as well as the rights at stake in platform governance, it finds that platforms’ immaterial locus is both political and economic, bundling public and private powers. Hence, this paper puts forward the idea that public economic law should seek to develop mirroring hybrid counter-powers: civil society especially should be conceptualized in the digital space, with its rights, duties and responsibilities, to foster balanced relationships between the various actors on platforms.
Mixed agreements have been a preferred form of entering into international treaties chosen by the EU and its Member States, despite the complexities their usage implies. Recent attempts of the EU institutions to prefer the conclusion of EU only agreements to mixed agreements, as a consequence of the broad interpretation of EU exclusive trade competences by the CJEU in Opinion 2/15 are motivated by the hope for increased efficiency in EU treaty making. They, however, provoke criticism with regard to democratic legitimacy and the EU principle of conferral, which constrain the EU to adopt only those legal acts for which it is competent. As this criticism is particularly strong in Germany and led to constitutional challenges of EU only acts, the present contribution will explain the treatment of mixed agreements in the constitutional order of Germany and explore the constitutional challenges that EU only agreements pose to the German constitutional order. This discussion will thus show the German legal order’s continued preference for mixed agreements, in view of the jurisprudence of the German Federal Constitutional Court (FCC). Those constitutional challenges are particularly topical in view of the most recent case law of the CJEU that stressed the political leeway of the EU Council to choose, when it comes to the negotiation and conclusion of EU agreements based on shard competences, between either an EU only agreement or a mixed agreement. This political leeway turns mixity into a facultative endeavour in the hands of the Council. Under the constitutional perceptions of the FCC, such type of facultative mixity meets with considerable constitutional concerns because it replaces what was formerly held obligatory mixity.
The introduction will describe the constant evolving global political context correlated to the events occurring, specifically, in the trade environment and the unprecedented challenges they pose for the EU Trade Policy. These identified and introduced challenges will be addressed in detail in the following book chapters. It will also introduce the reader to the individual contributions of the book and briefly present and anticipate the results attained.
This chapter identifies the most pressing challenges for the EU multilaterally oriented trade policy due to the changing global context for international trade and investment, caused by the shift of the US towards unilateralism and protectionism and by the re-orientation of China´s exceptionalism towards becoming a more influential actor. It explores and assesses how EU trade policy copes with the new polarities and finally formulates proposals for the way forward for the EU multilateral trade policy. It will be shown that the current challenges are more fundamental in character and may last longer than currently anticipated. It will also highlight that maintaining unity in the EU determination of trade policy is of pivotal importance for addressing the challenges, which however might become more difficult.
After the invocation of security exceptions became more common, the first panel report ever on how to apply them has recently been issued in the Russia – Measures Concerning Traffic in Transit case. While this panel addressed the application of the security exception in a situation of threat to international peace and security, the question must be raised whether its approach also applies to the invocation of security exceptions for economic reasons. In this context, the present chapter focuses on the methodical preliminaries to applying security exceptions: Its application in WTO dispute settlement does not only prompt the question of the jurisdiction of WTO panels and the Appellate Body, but also pertains to the issues of standard of proof and standard of review. A related methodical issue concerns the feasibility of the expansive interpretive approach applied to the general exceptions to the security exception. Reading it in the same tune runs the risk of nullifying the concept of multilateral trade regulation altogether, even more so as the security exceptions miss the usual safeguard against abuse, i.e. the requirements of the general exceptions´ chapeau. The lack of such safety valve confirms that security exceptions are of a different character compared to other exceptions. This difference, however, may be difficult to maintain if security exceptions are also used to defend economic security interests. Finally, the application of security exceptions may - as debated with regard to other WTO exceptions - be subject to an inherent limitation against exterritorial application, which would restrain its scope of application in cases in which security measures against a third country intend to affect also the trade of WTO members, and could become relevant in assessing US sanctions against Iran.
Algorithms have a profound and growing influence on our lives, but partially remain a black box to us. Keeping the risks that arise from rule-based and learning systems in check is a challenging task for both: society and the legal system. The essay undertakes the challenge to examine existing and adaptable legal solutions and to complement them with further proposals. It designs a regulatory model in four steps along the time axis: preventive regulation instruments, accompanying risk management, ex post facto protection and the vision of an algorithmic responsibility code. Together, they form a legislative blueprint to further regulate applications of artificial intelligence.
Introduction
(2018)
EU administrative law scholarship and practice remain confused about the reach and interrelation of arts 290 and 291 TFEU, which created the categories of delegated and implementing Commission acts. The introduction of these two different instruments of executive rule-making by the Lisbon Treaty has prompted attempts in delineating them, based on constitutional theories of separation of powers or functional differentiation. These attempts have failed to a large extent, all the more since the CJEU’s relevant case law has not been helpful in constructing a proper distinction. Today, recourse to arts 290 and 291 TFEU by the legislator takes place in the tension created between the fact that the Treaties, informed by an abstract constitutional distinction between legislation and execution, appear to have created categorically different acts, and the fact that delegated and implementing rule-making procedures in practice have become increasingly similar to each other. In simplified terms, the problem is that delegated and implementing acts appear – in terms of their foundation in primary law – as fundamentally different acts that are, however, adopted in practice through similar procedures, at the same time as their content and legal effects are indistinguishable in many or even in most cases. Yet, if we accept that the creation of two forms of Commission acts was prompted by some form of legal necessity or legitimate political will, then understanding the difference between delegating and implementing acts remains paramount.
Arts. 290 and 291 TFEU are notoriously hard to differentiate. However, there is some evidence that a separation on the basis of substantive regulation through delegated acts and procedural specifications by implementing acts is forthcoming. The substantive – procedural differentiation is not very clear cut, but it affords the institutions flexibility in answering new challenges while at the same time exerting some guiding force. This Conclusion describes the separation of delegated and implementing acts along the substantive – procedural differentiation but also points to problems ahead. Thus, constitutional ambiguity, an inappropriate reliance on pre-Lisbon doctrine and the lack of a common vision continue to plague the law on EU administrative rule-making. To find a way to fulfil the promise of simplification that is part of the Lisbon reform, the EU institutions will all need to take the procedural safeguards around delegated and implementing acts more seriously.
The insight that politics and administration should be treated as separated spheres is not new, as already Wilson portrayed administration as the apolitical execution of law. Consequently, even if the spheres are distinct, there is no politics thinkable without administration to execute. However, as argued by Peters (2018: 164), “this presumed separation of administration and politics allows them [bureaucrats] to engage in politics.”
While the consequences and causes of revolutions for political systems and the economy are at the forefront of debates in the respective disciplines, scholars have paid scant attention to the role of bureaucracies in revolutions. Against this background, this entry maps the efforts of public administration theory to come to grips with what is understood as revolution. As public administration is of utmost relevance in the context of revolutions, and the scope of the role of administrations in revolutions can be manifold: they may be the passive recipient of change, may influence developments actively, or be more or less unaffected by a change of the political system.
This entry conceptualizes which potential positions in revolutions can be taken by the public administration and which consequences revolutions have for the bureaucracy from a theoretical viewpoint, and provides humble empirical evidence of administrative behavior in revolutions worldwide.
The analysis of forms and effects of what is usually conceived of as globalization or internationalization has become a major topic of political speeches and academic research, especially in the social sciences. While the consequences of globalization for Western economies and societies are often at the forefront of debates, their effects on public administrations are focused on relatively sparsely yet.
This entry aims at identifying the different manifestations and effects of internationalization in the context of bureaucracies. The subsequent sections provide an introduction and delineate the main mechanisms of internationalization. The next section identifies the topics discussed in the context of globalization, internationalization and transnationalization, and distils the main characteristics of international public administrations, as well as the effects and ramifications of internationalization on domestic public administration.
Local Finance in Germany
(2016)
While traditionally the provision of public services was monopolized by the gov-ernment, lately service delivery has been challenged, resulting in more coopera-tions between private enterprises and the public sector. We discuss theoretically and based on empirical evidence the role of trust in these arrangements and under which conditions information can help to overcome a “trust gap”, contributing to the success of these cooperation. Additionally, we develop and test an experimental design that allows us to show which factors influence the public opinion in favor of these service arrangements and public-private cooperations. Therewith our paper does not only contribute to the investigation of information and trust in PA, but provides some implication for policy makers and the public administration.