Publicado

2019-01-01

Creación de organizaciones públicas en Colombia: ¿Importan el sector y las funciones?

Establishing public organizations in Colombia: do sector and functions matter?

Criação de organizações públicas na Colômbia: o setor e as funções importam?

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15446/innovar.v29n71.76399

Palabras clave:

creación de organizaciones públicas, funciones, reforma al sector público, sectores de política pública (es)
Establishment of public organizations, functions, public sector reform, public policy sectors (en)
criação de organizações públicas, funções, reforma do setor público, setores de política pública (pt)

Autores/as

En el presente artículo se pone a prueba la relación que existe entre la creación de organizaciones públicas en Colombia, las funciones que estas ejercen y el sector de política pública al que pertenecen. Asimismo, se examina si esta relación está mediada por los diferentes estilos de reforma que, desde 1990, han buscado favorecer a organizaciones públicas que ejercen ciertos tipos de funciones en ciertos sectores de política pública. Para esto, se realizó un mapeo de organizaciones públicas en Colombia desde 1990 hasta el 2015. La información recolectada se analizó por medio de una regresión logística. Los resultados muestran que en Colombia solo las funciones de formulación de políticas públicas y de regulación en sectores económicos explican la creación de organizaciones públicas, y que se ha privilegiado la creación de entidades con poca autonomía legal.
This article test the relationship between the establishment of public organizations in Colombia, the functions they exercise and the public policy sector to which they belong. It also studies whether this relationship is mediated by the different styles of reforms that, since 1990, have sought to favor public organizations with certain types of functions in particular public policy sectors. For this purpose, we carried out a mapping of public organizations in Colombia from 1990 to 2015. The information gathered was analyzed by means of logistic regression. Results allow concluding that, in Colombia, only the functions of formulating public policies and regulating economic sectors explain the creation of public sector organizations. Results also show that the establishment of entities with little legal autonomy has been privileged.
No presente artigo, coloca-se a prova a relação que existe entre a criação de organizações públicas na Colômbia, as funções que elas exercem e o setor da política pública a que pertencem. Assim, examina-se se essa relação é mediada pelos diferentes estilos de reforma que, desse 1990, buscaram favorecer organizações públicas que exercem certos tipos de funções em certos setores da política pública. Para isso, realizou-se um mapeamento de organizações públicas na Colômbia desde 1990 até 2015. A informação coletada foi analisada por meio de uma regressão logística. Os resultados mostram que na Colômbia somente as funções de formulação de políticas públicas e de regulação em setores econômicos explicam a criação de organizações públicas e que a criação de entidades com pouca autonomia legal foi privilegiada.

Referencias

Aubin, D., & Verhoest, K. (2014). Multi-Level Regulation in the Telecommunications Sector: Adaptive Regulatory Arrangements in Belgium, Ireland, The Netherlands and Switzerland. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.

Alonso, J. M., Clifton, J., & Díaz-Fuentes, D. (2015). Did New Public Management Matter? An Empirical Analysis of the Outsourcing and Decentralization Effects on Public Sector Size. Public Management Review, 17(5), 643-660. doi:10.1080/14719037.2013.822 532.

Babb, S. (2013). The Washington Consensus as Transnational Policy Paradigm: Its Origins, Trajectory and Likely Successor (2012). Review of International Political Economy, 20(2), 268-297. doi:10.1080/09692290.2011.640435

Badran, A., & James, O. (2012). Does formal independence matter for regulatory outcomes? Measuring regulatory interdependence in networks: The case of telecoms sector in Egypt. International Journal of Politics and Good Governance, 3(3.2), 1-30.

Baldwin, R., Cave, M., & Lodge, M. (2012). Understanding Regulation: Theory, Strategy, and Practice. New York: Oxford University.

Berr, E., & Combarnous, F. (2007). The false promises of the (second) Washington consensus: Evidence from Latin America and the Caribbean (1990-2003). Revista de Economia Política, 27(4), 525-545.

Byrne, C. (2016). Ready or not? Statutory Registration, Regulation and Continuing Professional Development for Social Care Workers in Ireland. Administration, 64(2), 9-29. doi:10.1515/admin-2016-0014

Boston, J. (2016). Basic NPM Ideas and their Development. En T. Christensen, & P. Lœgreid (Eds.), The Ashgate Research Companion to New Public Management (pp. 33-48). London: Routledge.

Coen, D., & Héritier, A. (2005). Refining Regulatory Regimes: Utilities in Europe. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Córdova-Jaimes, E. (1996). La reforma administrativa en Venezuela y Colombia. Revista Venezolana de Gerencia, 7(2), 227-250

Cuervo-Restrepo, J. I. (2003). La reforma del estado y el ajuste estructural en América Latina. El caso de Colombia. Revista Opera, 3(3), 67-110.

Daland, R. (1981). Exploring Brazilian Bureaucracy: Performance and Pathology. Washington: University Press of America.

Dubash, N. K., & Morgan, B (2012). Understanding the Rise of the Regulatory State of the South. Regulation & Governance, 6(3), 261-281. doi:10.1111/j.1748-5991.2012.01146.x

García, D. V. (2008). La transformación de la administración pública hispanoamericana: de la reforma administrativa a la reforma gerencial (tesis doctoral). Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, México.

Gilardi, F. (2005). The Institutional Foundations of Regulatory Capitalism: The Diffusion of Independent Regulatory Agencies in Western Europe. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 598(1), 84-101. doi:10.1177/0002716204271833

Gilardi, F., Jordana, J., & Levi-Faur, D, (2006). Regulation in the Age of Globalization: the Diffusion of Regulatory Agencies across Europe and Latin America. IBEI Working Paper, 2006/1. doi:10.2139/ssrn.960739

González, J. J. (2008). Las reformas neogerenciales en Hispanoamérica: enseñanzas para incrementar las capacidades de gobierno. Estado, Gobierno y Gestión Pública, 72, 105-123. doi:10.5354/0717-6759.2008.14034

González, C. I., & Verhoest, K. (2016). Recent Evolution of Public Sector Structure in Latin America: Describing and Explaining Shifts in Autonomy Trends in Colombia and Venezuela. Public Administration and Development, 36(1), 35-50. doi:10.1002/pad.1746

Gruening, G. (2001). Origin and theoretical basis of New Public Management. International Public Management Journal, 4(1), 1-25. doi:10.1016/S1096-7494(01)00041-1

Guardiancich, I., & Guidi, M. (2016). Formal Independence of Regulatory Agencies and Varieties of Capitalism: A Case of Institutional Complementarity. Regulation and Governance, 70(3), 211-229. doi:10.1111/rego.12080

Hardiman, N., MacCarthaigh, M., & Scott, C. (2013). The Irish State Administration Database. Recuperada de http://www.isad.ie.

Hanretty, C., & Koop, C. (2017). Political Independence, Accountability, and the Quality of Regulatory Decision-Making. Comparative Political Studies, 57(1), 38-75. doi:10.1177/0010414017695329

Hood, C. (1991). A Public Management for all Seasons. Public Administration, 69(1), 3-19. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9299.1991.tb00779.x

Hood, C., & Dixon, R. (2015). What We Have to Show for 30 Years of New Public Management: Higher Costs, More Complaints. Governance, 28(3), 265-167. doi:10.1111/gove.12150

Ibáñez-Najar, J. (2002). Colombia: un estado en reforma permanente. Revista Opera, 2(2), 5-22.

Israel A. (1987). Institutional Development: Incentives to Performance. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University.

Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behaviour, Agency Costs and Ownership Structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305-360. doi:10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X

Jordana, J., & Levi-Faur, D. (2005). The Diffusion of Regulatory Capitalism in Latin America: Sectoral and National Channels in the Making of a New Order. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 598(1), 102-124. doi:10.1177/0002716204272587

Jordana, J., Levi-Faur, D., & Fernández-Marín, X. F. (2011). The Global Diffusion of Regulatory Agencies: Channels of Transfer and Stages of Diffusion. Comparative Political Studies, 44(10), 1343-1369. doi:10.1177/0010414011407466

Krause, G. A. (2003). Agency Risk Propensities Involving the Demand for Bureaucratic Discretion. En G. A. Krause & K. J. Meier (Eds), Politics, Policy and Organizations: Frontiers in the Scientific Study of Bureaucracy (pp. 41-72). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.

Koop, C. (2011). Explaining the Accountability of Independent Agencies: The Importance of Political Salience. Journal of Public Policy, 37(2), 209-234. doi:10.1017/S0143814X11000080

Koop, C., & Lodge, M. (2017). What is Regulation? An Interdisciplinary Concept Analysis. Regulation & Governance, 77(1), 95-108. doi:10.1111/rego.12094

Lane, J. E. (2002). New Public Management: An Introduction. London: Routledge .

Leonard, D. K. (2010). 'Pockets' of Effective Agencies in Weak Governance States: Where are They Likely and Why does it Matter? Public Administration and Development, 30(2), 91-101. doi:10.1002/pad.565

Laking, R. (2005). Agencies: their benefits and risks. OECD Journal on Budgeting, 4(4), 7-25.doi: 10.1787/budget-v4-art19-en

Lavertu, S. (2015). For fear of Popular Politics? Public Attention and the Delegation of Authority to the United States Executive Branch. Regulation and Governance, 9(2), 160-177. doi:10.1111/rego.12061

Levi-Faur, D. (2005). The Global Diffusion of Regulatory Capitalism. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 598(1), 12-32. doi:10.1177/0002716204272371

Levi-Faur, D., & Jordana, J. (2006). Toward a Latin American Regulatory State? The Diffusion of Autonomous Regulatory Agencies across Countries and Sectors. International Journal of Public Administration, 29(4-6), 335-366. doi:10.1080/01900690500437212

Levi-Faur, D. (Ed.). (2011). Handbook on the Politics of Regulation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar .

Maggetti, M., & Verhoest, K. (2014). Unexplored Aspects of Bureaucratic Autonomy: A State of the Field and Ways Forward. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 80(2), 239-256. doi:10.1177/0020852314524680

Majone, G. (1994). The Rise of the Regulatory State in Europe. West European Politics, 77(3), 77-101. doi:10.1080/01402389408425

Majone, G. (2016). The evolution of the Regulatory State: From the Law and Policy of Antitrust to the Politics of Precaution. En Burgess, A & Alemanno, A (Eds.), Routledge Handbook of Risk Studies (pp. 216-228). Abringdom: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315776835.ch18

Martínez Rangel, R., Garmendia, R., & Soto, E. (2012). El Consenso de Washington: la instauración de las políticas neoliberales en América Latina, Política y Cultura, 37, 35-64.

Mitnick, B. M. (2011). Capturing Capture: Definition and Mechanisms. En D. Levi-Faur (Ed.), Handbook on the Politics of Regulation (pp. 34-49). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar .

Moran, M. (2003). The British Regulatory State: High Modernism and Hyper-Innovation. Oxford: Oxford University.

Morrison, K. M. (2018). Washington Consensus and the New Political Economy of Economic Reform. En C. Lancaster & N. van der Walle (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of the Politics of Development (pp. 73). Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199845156.013.41

Nef, J. (2005). The Culture of Distrust in Latin American Public Administration. En J. G. Jabbra & O. P. Dwivedi (Eds.), Administrative Culture in a Global Context. Whitby: Sitter.

Osborne, D. (1993). Reinventing Government. Public Productivity & Management Review, 76(4), 349-356. doi:10.2307/3381012

Overman, S. (2015). Great Expectations of Public Service Delegation: A Systematic Review. Public Management Review, 78(8), 1-25. doi:10.1080/14719037.2015.1103891

Painter, M., & Peters, B. G. (2010). Tradition and public administration. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Pavón-Mediano, A. (2018). Agencies' Formal Independence and Credible Commitment in the Latin American Regulatory State: A Comparative Analysis of 8 Countries and 13 Sectors. Regulation & Governance [online]. doi:10.1111/rego.12187

Pérez, C. (1996). La modernización industrial en América Latina y la herencia de la sustitución de importaciones. Comercio Exterior, 46(5), 347-363.

Pollitt, C. (2004). Theoretical Overview. En C. Pollitt & C. Talbot (Eds), Unbundled Government. A Critical Analysis of the Global Trend to Agencies (pp. 117-160). Quangos and Contractualisation. London: Routledge .

Pollitt, C., Talbot, C., Caulfield, J., & Smullen, A. (2004). Agencies: How governments do Things Through Semi-Autonomous Organizations. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1057/9780230504868

Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2011). Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis-New Public Management, Governance, and the Neo-Weberian State. Oxford: Oxford University .

Ramírez-Brouchoud, M. F. (2009). Las reformas del Estado y la administración pública en América Latina y los intentos de aplicación del New Public Management. Estudios Políticos, 34, 115-141.

Simmons, B. A., & Elkins, Z. (2004). The Globalization of Liberalization: Policy Diffusion in the International Political Economy. American Political Science Review, 98(1), 171-189. doi:10.1017/S0003055404001078

Svara, J. H. (2006). The Search for Meaning in Political-Administrative Relations in Local Government. International Journal of Public Administration, 29(12), 1065-1090. doi:10.1080/01900690600854704

Thoumi, F. (1999). La relación entre corrupción y narcotráfico: un análisis general y algunas referencias a Colombia. Revista de Economía del Rosario, 2(1), 11 -33.

Ter Bogt, H. J. (1998). Neo-Institutionele Economie, Management Control Verzelfstandiging Van Overheidsorgansiaties: Overwegingen Voor Verzelfstandiging en Effecten Op Efficiëntie En Financieel-Economische Sturing. Groningen: University of Groningen.

Van Thiel, S. (2001). Quangos: Trends, Causes and Consequences. Aldershot: Ashgate.

Van Thiel, S., & Yesilkagit, K. (2014). Does Task Matter? The Effect of Task on the Establishment, Autonomy and Control of Semi-Autonomous Agencies. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 80(2), 318-340. doi:10.1177/0020852313514524

Verhoest, K., Peters, B. G., Bouckaert, G., & Verschuere, B. (2004). The Study of Organisational Autonomy: A Conceptual Review. Public Administration and Development, 24(2), 101-118. doi:10.1002/pad.316

Verhoest, K., Roness, P. G., Verschuere, B., Rubecksen, K., & Mac-Cathaigh, M. (2010). Autonomy and Control of State Agencies. New York: Palgrave.

Verhoest, K., Van Thiel, S., Bouckaert, G., & Laegreid, P. (2012). Government Agencies Practices and Lessons from 30 Countries. New York: Palgrave .

Verhoest, K. (2016). The Relevance of Culture for NPM. En T. Christensen & P. Lœgreid (Eds.), The Ashgate Research Companion to New Public Management (pp. 63-80). London: Routledge .

Williamson, O. E. (1981). The Transaction Cost Approach. American Journal of Sociology, 87 (3), 548-577.

Williamson, O. E. (1985). The Economic Institutions of Capitalism: Firms, Markets, Relational Contracting. New York: Free Press.

Williamson, J. (1990). What Washington Means by Policy Reform. En Autor, Latin American Adjustment: How Much has Happened (pp. 7-20). Washington: Institute for International Economics.

Williamson, J. (2004). The Strange History of the Washington Consensus. Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 27(2), 195-206. doi: 10.1080/01603477.2004.11051438

Williamson, J. (2009). A short history of the Washington Consensus. Law & Business Review of the Americas, 75(1), 7-24.

Wilson, J. Q. (1989). Bureaucracy: What Government Agencies Do and Why They Do It. New York: Free Press.

Yamamoto, K. (2006). Performance of Semi-Autonomous Public Bodies: Linkage between Autonomy and Performance in Japanese Agencies. Public Administration and Development, 26(1), 35-44. doi: 10.1002/pad.369

Younes, D. (2012). Las Reformas del Estado y de La Administración Pública. Bogotá: Instituto de Estudios del Ministerio Público.

Zeckhauser, R. J., & Pratt, J. W. (Eds.). (1985). Principals and Agents: The Structure of Business. Boston: Harvard Business School.

Cómo citar

APA

González, C. I. & Tanco Cruz, L. F. (2019). Creación de organizaciones públicas en Colombia: ¿Importan el sector y las funciones?. Innovar, 29(71), 113–126. https://doi.org/10.15446/innovar.v29n71.76399

ACM

[1]
González, C.I. y Tanco Cruz, L.F. 2019. Creación de organizaciones públicas en Colombia: ¿Importan el sector y las funciones?. Innovar. 29, 71 (ene. 2019), 113–126. DOI:https://doi.org/10.15446/innovar.v29n71.76399.

ACS

(1)
González, C. I.; Tanco Cruz, L. F. Creación de organizaciones públicas en Colombia: ¿Importan el sector y las funciones?. Innovar 2019, 29, 113-126.

ABNT

GONZÁLEZ, C. I.; TANCO CRUZ, L. F. Creación de organizaciones públicas en Colombia: ¿Importan el sector y las funciones?. Innovar, [S. l.], v. 29, n. 71, p. 113–126, 2019. DOI: 10.15446/innovar.v29n71.76399. Disponível em: https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/innovar/article/view/76399. Acesso em: 14 mar. 2026.

Chicago

González, Camilo Ignacio, y Luisa Fernanda Tanco Cruz. 2019. «Creación de organizaciones públicas en Colombia: ¿Importan el sector y las funciones?». Innovar 29 (71):113-26. https://doi.org/10.15446/innovar.v29n71.76399.

Harvard

González, C. I. y Tanco Cruz, L. F. (2019) «Creación de organizaciones públicas en Colombia: ¿Importan el sector y las funciones?», Innovar, 29(71), pp. 113–126. doi: 10.15446/innovar.v29n71.76399.

IEEE

[1]
C. I. González y L. F. Tanco Cruz, «Creación de organizaciones públicas en Colombia: ¿Importan el sector y las funciones?», Innovar, vol. 29, n.º 71, pp. 113–126, ene. 2019.

MLA

González, C. I., y L. F. Tanco Cruz. «Creación de organizaciones públicas en Colombia: ¿Importan el sector y las funciones?». Innovar, vol. 29, n.º 71, enero de 2019, pp. 113-26, doi:10.15446/innovar.v29n71.76399.

Turabian

González, Camilo Ignacio, y Luisa Fernanda Tanco Cruz. «Creación de organizaciones públicas en Colombia: ¿Importan el sector y las funciones?». Innovar 29, no. 71 (enero 1, 2019): 113–126. Accedido marzo 14, 2026. https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/innovar/article/view/76399.

Vancouver

1.
González CI, Tanco Cruz LF. Creación de organizaciones públicas en Colombia: ¿Importan el sector y las funciones?. Innovar [Internet]. 1 de enero de 2019 [citado 14 de marzo de 2026];29(71):113-26. Disponible en: https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/innovar/article/view/76399

Descargar cita

CrossRef Cited-by

CrossRef citations4

1. Camilo Ignacio González, Nathalie Mendez. (2024). Comparative Governance Reforms. Public Administration, Governance and Globalization. 52, p.267. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-70306-5_14.

2. Martín Freigedo, Guillermo Fuentes, Alejandro Milanesi, Conrado Ramos, Matías Ruiz Díaz. (2022). Las agencias de gobierno en Uruguay: características y autonomía de la administración descentralizada. Revista del CLAD Reforma y Democracia, (83), p.167. https://doi.org/10.69733/clad.ryd.n83.a268.

3. Camilo Ignacio González, Pablo Sanabria‐Pulido. (2025). When Politics Shapes Administration: Bureaucratic Autonomy, Policy Role Separation, and Organizational Capacity in an Institutionally Weak Public Administration. Public Administration and Development, https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.70050.

4. Luis Bernardo Mejía Guinand, Isabella Pinzón Caputo. (2022). Exploring Agency Termination in Colombia: Understanding the Impact of Political and Economic Factors on the Survival of Public Organizations. Colombia Internacional, (112), p.3. https://doi.org/10.7440/colombiaint112.2022.01.

Dimensions

PlumX

Visitas a la página del resumen del artículo

1971

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.