While not limited to public administration, the two words could be seen as meaning the same thing.
"Modernization" could also mean using the same processes, but instead of filling out paper work, using a computerized system that has the same information, which makes the process/workflow more efficient.
Reform means "to change". there may be many reasons to change - modernization being just one. You may need to reform because the current process is inefficient and involves too many signoffs - the reform being to stream line decision making. Another reason for reform is that there is an appearance of not treating all equally - introducing a new process to replace the one that is "in question".
This book might be helpful, and it uses re-engineering - rather than reform/modernize. Geared towards Corporations, I assume some would be applicable to public administration http://www.amazon.com/Reengineering-Corporation-Manifesto-Revolution-Essentials/dp/0060559535
Usually, modernisation refers to be harmonious with the "modern period", which is 1789-1989!
As for "reforms" lately means to be compatible with "neoliberalism"! States have a single purpose: To facilitate international firms to make profit as easy as possible. Their motto is: Profits are ours, damages are payed by the people!
It rather depends on who is using the description.
When used by government it tends to be a method used to mislead the public.
In the UK welfare 'reforms' have been used by government to intimidate chronically sick and disabled people, to suggest that the majority are malingering on welfare benefit and to dramatically reduce the welfare budget as the UK is covertly changed to the use of private healthcare insurance without the mandate of the British people. The influence of a notorious corporate insurance giant with successive UK governments will not be exposed by the national press.
The term 'modernization' tends to be used when routine paperwork is changed to another form, questionnaire or reply document compared to those previously used for general administration purposes.
According to Pollitt and Bouckaert, reforms are deliberate changes to the structures and processes of public sector organizations with the objective of getting them (in some sense) to run better. Although modernization is often perceived as a synonym of reforms, this term often means the objective or outcome of transition into a more advanced state/situation.
This is an interesting question. The two words are, at times, used as synonyms hence the confusion. Indeed, in a recent article, I have used the word 'reform' when I could perhaps have made a distinction between reform and modernisation.
However, one can strictly make a distinction in the following manner: one could say that public service reform of the last four decades has taken the form of what is known as modernisation. So, reform has a wider and more abstract connotation than modernisation and refers to the need to change per se. Both reform and modernisation can be used rhetorically to pejoratively imply the 'antiquated' and ’inefficient' nature of public service and public administration pre-1979.
Modernisation however has a narrower and more concrete connotation than reform and denotes a set of policies that embody the principles of New Public Management.. NPM roughly equates to making the public sector more like the private sector. It hopes to do this through a set of techniques and practices such as performance management, the use of indirect labour through outsourcing, the replacement of bureaucratic/professional approaches with managerial ones. The idea is to make public administration and public service more ‘efficient’ through injecting market-like mechanisms into it. For example, decentralising pay determination and service delivery in order to link them to local labour markets. However, this decentralisation goes hand-in-hand with an increased centralisation in that targets are centrally set whether it be for student intake into universities or NHS hospital waiting times.