ABSTRACT
Colombia's experience is distinctive in several respects. Unlike the situation in the other two countries the Colombian reforms have not been dominated by a group of specialists. Two further characteristics differentiate the Colombian reforms from the other cases. First, they have generally been less ambitious than those proposed in Venezuela and Peru, limited to what the Venezuelans termed "micro-reform" that is, the reorganization of individual entities rather than of the bureaucracy as a whole. Second, they have usually been drawn up by committees of bureaucrats and politicians. The idiosyncracies of the Colombian reforms have not prevented their sharing one major trait with the other two cases a close association with changes of administration. Although the Colombian case suggests that high levels of institutionalization, integration and diffused power will lessen the chances for attempts at comprehensive reform, it also indicates that these same conditions raise the likelihood of incremental, piecemeal change.
