Market fundamentalism, delusions and epistemic failures in policy and administration

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to overview and critique the over‐reach of highly ideological assumptions of neo‐classical economics into policy and governance terrains. The ontology and epistemology of neo‐classical economics know no bounds in their imperial extension to non‐market applications. The colonization of Public Administration in Australia, and elsewhere, is a vexing epistemological issue, demanding some reckoning.

Design/methodology/approach

This deconstructive, critical essay seeks to provide a set of “check‐lists” of issues for those teaching, or proselytizing, governance within highly reduced public domains.

Findings

This paper moves an epistemological “audit” of “public choice theory” some steps forward, especially in the face of significant ideological and policy convergence, among putative social‐democratic governance regimes, regarding out‐sourcing, no‐bid contracting, agency “capture”, risk and a renewed urgency for necessary re‐regulation. The paper identifies policy imperatives for a new age of regulation after 35 years of prevailing “market fundamentalism”.

Originality/value

There has been much hubris associated with so‐called policy convergence in a globalized context. Deconstructing such hubris within a divergent world is long overdue for the next generation of scholars/policy apologists/rating agencies/and economists prone to some reflexivity in plying their “dismal” trade.

Citation

Kouzmin, A. (2009), "Market fundamentalism, delusions and epistemic failures in policy and administration", Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 23-39. https://doi.org/10.1108/17574320910942150