Search results

Is public administration neutral? Scholarship does not interpret public administration as neutral, even though, on moral–ethical grounds, it frequently advises neutrality for practitioners. Five main schools of thought are surveyed. Neutrality and alternative expressions of it, such as nonpartisanship, expertise, impartiality or facilitation, are role prescriptions for practicing public administrators, and are typically offered as appropriate comportments in interacting with citizens and groups. At the same time, public administration is undeniably a political institution having political purposes and constitutive impacts. Indeed, the very existence of the administrative state is politically contestable. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

Critical reflection, political philosophy, political theory.

Scholars across the various schools of thought in public administration do not presuppose the presence of a neutral public administrator. However, there is sometimes an admonition to practitioners to behave as if they were politically neutral.

Advising practitioners that their practices are neutral masks the fact that public administration is an inherently political institution.

Neutral public administration is revealed as empty cant.

Public administration as an aspect of governmental activity has existed as long as political systems have been functioning and trying to achieve program objectives set by the political decision-makers. Public administration as a field of systematic study is much more recent. Advisers to rulers and commentators on the workings of government have recorded their observations from time to time in sources as varied as Kautilya's Arthasastra in ancient India, the Bible, Aristotle's Politics, and Machiavelli's The Prince, but it was not until the eighteenth century that cameralism, concerned with the systematic management of governmental affairs, became a specialty of German scholars in Western Europe. In the United States, such a development did not take place until the latter part of the nineteenth century, with the publication in 1887 of Woodrow Wilson's famous essay, “The Study of Administration,” generally considered the starting point. Since that time, public administration has become a well-recognized area of specialized interest, either as a subfield of political science or as an academic discipline in its own right.

Smart governance ultimately relates to the ability of political administrations to elicit trust and public confidence. Political administrations normally generate rational policies that arise from their context-sensitive goals. The capability of an administration to develop and implement policies is measured as efficacy, which can influence the value and stability of an administration. However, policy development and implementation is not only an attribute of a political administration but also of its bureaucracy. The purpose of this paper is to explore the nature of bureaucracies, representing them as complex and dynamic.

A traditional blueprint model of a bureaucracy comes from Weber, seen to be a servicing body for the implementation of political policy decisions resulting from a process of governance. An alternative model arises from the fictional works of Kafka, which is underpinned by a firm conceptual basis of a bureaucracy that confronts that of Weber. Agency theory will be used to model bureaucracies, and comparisons will be made between the Weber and Kafka conceptualisation.

There are broad models of a bureaucracy that arise from different propositions such as a Weber and a Kafka model, the latter being more representative of administrations. Any attempts to measure comparative efficacy across political systems or administrations may well lead to failure due to the distinctions in the nature of the bureaucracies that they maintain. The paper argues that the Weber model is an unattainable boundary representation of a bureaucracy. In contrast, Kafka’s more pragmatic conceptualisation can be modelled as a pathological autonomous system that is both complex and adaptive. Such pathologies can be harmful to the implementation of socially improving policies.

The paper shows that even where a political administration has policy initiatives that can improve society, these can be corrupted and misdirected by its bureaucracy, mistakenly believed (by the administration) to be dedicated to the service of the administration, rather than the bureaucracy’s own self-interests.

No other approach has been able to graphically represent the relative natures of different bureaucracies, or their pathologies.

This chapter examines one of the most contested issues in Public Administration, namely political–administrative relationships. The first part of the chapter begins with a brief overview of the features of an ideal-type bureaucracy. Next is a literature review of political–administrative relationships. This is followed by an analysis of typologies of political–administrative relationships, with particular reference to developing countries. The second part of the chapter analyses the evolution of political–administrative relationships since the dawn of South African democracy in 1994. It examines the growing politicisation of the public service, the weakening of the powers of public officials vis-a-vis Ministers and the emasculation of the PSC. Data indicate that the government is unable to fill posts at the Senior Management Service (SMS) level and that there are a high number of acting HoDs, an indicator of instability. Finally, it uses Dasandi and Esteve’s typology of political–administrative relationships in developing countries to interpret the South African case.

The complex interaction of politics and the economy is a critical factor for the sustainable growth and development of the construction sector (CNS). This study aims to investigate the effects of type of political administration including democracy and military on the performance of CNS using the Nigerian Construction Sector (NCS) as a case study.

A 48 year (1970–2017) time series data (TSD) on the NCS and the gross domestic product (GDP) based on 2010 constant USD were extracted from the United Nations Statistical Department database. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) models were used to analyze the TSD. The ANCOVA model includes the GDP as correlational variable or covariate.

The estimates of the ANOVA model indicate that democratic administration is significantly better than military administration in construction performance. However, the ANCOVA model indicates that the GDP is more important than political administration in the performance of the CNS. The study recommends for a new national construction policy, favourable fiscal and monetary policy, local content development policy and construction credit guaranty scheme for the rapid growth and development of the NCS.

Hitherto, little is known about the influence of political administration on the performance of the CNS. This study provides empirical evidence from a developing economy perspective. It presents the relationships and highlights recommendations for driving growth in the construction industry.

It is a point of continuing debate whether the study of public administration can in any circumstances be graced by a disciplinary label. Rhodes (1996), for example, has argued that the study of British public administration was traditionally insular, dominated for a long period by an institutionalist tradition characterized by an interest in administrative engineering, but a distaste for theory. As Rhodes also observes, this position emphasized, albeit in a traditional sense, the political and ethical context of administration public administration existed within a wider framework of accountability relationships and political and moral responsibilities. We might add to this the way government and public administration was seen as linked within a framework of administrative law, which, while not formalized in the sense of continental Europe, was important.

While Norway, Sweden, and Denmark share many historic, political, and cultural features, their state systems and public administration exhibit important differences. Likewise, Nordic administrative sciences reflect a significant degree of ethnocentric diversity. Although as a whole, since the 1960s, Scandinavian academic public administration has witnessed rapid growth, an emphasis on local–regional government, and highly sophisticated scientific-empirical research, as opposed to professional training or narrow application of technical–legal methodologies.

Progressive era debates about politics and economics featured a concern for the effects of political and economic institutions on the civic vitality of democratic regimes. Similarly, over the course of his scholarly work on public administration and management, Woodrow Wilson developed a civic or “constitutive” conception of administration in a constitutional democracy. An examination of Wilson’s most well‐known works, as well as his lectures on administration and public law, reveals the development of Wilson’s thinking on this score. Taking Wilson’s ideas into consideration can enrich current debates about public management and its impact on the quality of democratic governance.

Looks at the reasons for the collapse of both regimes and considers the importance of repression with these developments. Contrasts the methods of Imperial Russia with the Bolsheviks looking at Court proceedings, prison conditions, education and propaganda in prison, exile and the secret police. Concludes that whilst social support is usually seen as essential for survival of a system, repression is not regarded as a positive element but can become the method for a system’s survival and stability.