Administrative Reforms: How Essential Recently? (A Comparative Review)

Ni Wayan Widhiasthini (Program Studi Administrasi Publik, Universitas Pendidikan Nasional, Denpasar)
Made Srinitha Millinia Utami (Murdoch University, 90 South St, Murdoch WA 6150, Australia)
Nyoman Sri Subawa (Program Studi Administrasi Publik, Universitas Pendidikan Nasional)
Nyoman Sridiva Dian Prabarini (Universitas Diponegoro)

Jurnal Agregasi
Vol 14 No 1 (2026)

This study aims to examine how administrative reform manifests as a responsive, efficient, and adaptive governance system by comparing three regions—Europe, China, and Indonesia—and to identify the dominant reform typologies within each governmental context. This study employs a qualitative approach through a comparative literature review. Data were collected through a review of the literature. Data analysis was conducted using thematic comparative analysis to identify patterns of reform, institutional characteristics, as well as factors that support and hinder administrative reform in these three regions. The results show that Europe prioritizes democracy, the rule of law, accountability, and citizen participation. China is more centralized and pragmatic, with an emphasis on bureaucratic modernization and administrative efficiency. Meanwhile, Indonesia combines structural, normative, and digital reforms. However, implementation gaps, the politicization of the bureaucracy, and institutional capacity issues remain significant. This study identifies four main dimensions of administrative reform structural, procedural, normative, and technological to support sustainable governance.