Implications for Governance
These two trends—globalization and devolution—define the agenda for governance in the early twenty-first century.They chart the challenge for government.Not only must government devise new strategies for managing public programs effectively in a globalized and devolved policy world，it must also build the capacity for doing so.Most government bureaucracies remain structured and staffed to manage traditional direct programs through traditionally structured and staffed bureaucracies.As the government's strategies and tactics have changed，its structures and process—especially its personnel systems—have not....This certainly does not mean abandoning the traditional model.That model is the keystone of democratic accountability.It does mean adapting it to deal effectively with the horizontal networks that have been layered on top of the traditional verticals system.Thus，the first governance problem is adaptation:fitting traditional vertical systems to the new challenges of globalization and devolution，and integrating new horizontal systems to the traditional vertical ones.
The second governance problem is capacity:enhancing government's ability to govern and manage effectively in this transformed environment.For a century，hierarchical authority has provided the intellectual foundation of public administration.It has also provided the foundation for delegation of power to the bureaucracy in exchange for a mechanism of accountability.Because both globalization and devolution scramble these foundations，they demand that government create new strategies for effective management and accountability.The federal civil service system，for example，is built on the assumption of direct service delivery.It performs more poorly in developing and rewarding a cadre of skilled contract managers.The federal budget system simply does not track well the number and dollar volume of contracts awarded.The data that are available are rudimentary and require great interpolation.Government's structure is function-based，at a time when more of its problems are area-based.There is sound logic，as Luther Gulick argued in 1937，in organizing by function.The strain between the vertical processes of government(represented in function-based departments)and its horizontal problems，however，has been growing.How can government strengthen its ability to govern and manage while maintaining democratic accountability?
This is also a problem of education.Many，perhaps most，of the nation's schools of public affairs，public administration，and public policy have not adjusted themselves to cope with the challenges well under way in public institutions.Consequently，future public servants，who will pursue the public interest both within and outside the government，might well fail to receive the education they need.Increasingly，the pursuit of public value occurs in the nongovernmental institutions that manage many of government's programs.It is also increasingly the case that the careers of many public affairs program graduates take them，at least for part of their professional life，into nongovernmental organizations.Public affairs education needs to broaden its perspective to the emerging tools of government action—and to the transforming environment in which managers use them.(https://www.daowen.com)
Closely related is a third governance problem，scale:sorting out the functions of different levels of governance and，in particular，redefining the role of the federal government.As Daniel Bell argued in his prescient 1988 forecast，“Previewing Planet Earth in 2013”:
The common problem，I believe，is this:the nation-state is becoming too small for the big problems of life，and too big for the small problems of life．It is too small for the big problems because there are no effective international mechanisms to deal with such things as capital flows，commodity imbalances，the loss of jobs，and the several demographic tidal waves that will be developing in the next twenty years．It is too big for the small problems because the flow of power to a national political center means that the center becomes increasingly unresponsive to the variety and diversity of local needs．In short，there is a mismatch of scale．
Some problems，like welfare reform，are better suited to devolved systems.Other problems，like international capital flows and regional security policy，might best fit globalized systems.The federal government，along with other national governments，risks finding itself in a squeeze for relevance.The rise of global pressures in international(and even domestic)policies，coupled with the increasing importance of state and local governments and nongovernmental partners in implementing domestic programs，raises sharp questions about what role the federal government should play.