Abstract
Purpose This paper examines the applicability of new public governance (NPG) in authoritarian states, using Central Asia as an empirical case. It tests and refines the theoretical scope conditions of NPG by evaluating its relevance in the five consolidated authoritarian regimes of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. Design/methodology/approach The study employs a nested comparative design combining a “critical case” logic, a most similar systems design across the five states and Estonia as a post-Soviet democratic benchmark. Secondary quantitative data from the Varieties of Democracy index, Worldwide Governance Indicators, World Values Survey and World Bank Open Data triangulate three analytical themes: civil society capacity, citizen engagement and public trust. Findings NPG's three core prerequisites – civil society capacity, citizen engagement and public trust – are systematically absent or suppressed across Central Asia. NPG-type instruments such as e-government platforms and public councils represent superficial isomorphic mimicry rather than substantive adoption, deployed by regimes for legitimacy and control. NPG rests on unarticulated liberal democratic foundations, yet an emerging “authoritarian-compatible NPG” is discernible, whereby managers pragmatically employ network tools to improve service delivery without challenging regime authority. Originality/value This paper provides an original systematic empirical examination of NPG within Central Asian authoritarian regimes. It challenges the implicit universalism of NPG scholarship, exposes its unarticulated liberal democratic assumptions and advances theoretical understanding of public governance in non-Western contexts, reducing Western bias in comparative public administration.