Public administrators and policy legitimization: Policy analysis,politics and power

This article discusses the factors public administration faculty should incorporate into the curriculum in order to equip students to engage in the policy legitimization process. In order to produce leaders, public administration programs should emphasize the nature of the political system, an understanding of the legitimacy of subgovernments, the importance of coalition building and the psychological factors associated with policy choices.

Integration of policy analysis into the public administration curriculum requires that students be equipped with an in-depth understanding of both the political environment and the political process. This is true because public administrators are deeply involved in the stages of policy development, adoption, and implementation; activities which reach beyond the narrow confines of program management and into the realm of politics. Consequently, public administrators serve in a variety of capacities: as policy advocates, program champions, or as defenders of client interests. It is in these roles that public administrators move into the political arena. Policy analysis activities provide the discipline with the opportunity to move beyond an emphasis on a narrow concern with simply “managing” government and into the realm of policy choice, policy advocacy, political power and the exercise of leadership.

Public administration as a discipline, and teaching faculty in particular, face the challenge of increasing the relevance of the master's degree to policy leadership. Astrid Merget, past president of the National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration, expressed this need for increased emphasis on policy leadership training quite eloquently in 1991:

“Our vision of the holder of a master's degree in our field is that of a leader, not merely a manager or an analyst. But we have not been marketing that vision.”⁽¹⁾

Merget attributes partial responsibility for the low public esteem of government service to the attitudes, teaching, and research activities of public administration faculty who have failed to link the “lofty” activities of government (environmental protection, health care, the promotion of citizen equality) with public administration. Accordingly, the academic standard of “neutrality” governing teaching and research acts as an obstacle to teaching the fundamentals of the goals of public policy. This professional commitment to neutrality places an emphasis on administrative efficiency at the expense of policy advocacy. The need, according to Merget, is to reestablish the linkage between policy formulation and policy management. Such a teaching strategy will enhance the purposefulness of public administration as a career. Failure to do so will relegate public administration programs to the continued production of governmental managers, not administrative leaders.

The integration of policy analysis into the public administration curriculum affords the discipline with the opportunity to focus on policy leadership and escape the limitation associated with an emphasis on program management. Teaching policy analysis skills cannot, and should not, be divorced from the study of politics and the exercise of political power. This is true because politics involves the struggle over the allocation of resources, and public policy is a manifestation of the outcome of that political struggle. Public policy choices reflect, to some degree, the political power of the “winners” and the relative lack of power by “losers.” The study of public policy involves the study of conflict and the exercise of power.

Teaching public administration students about the exercise of power cannot be limited to a discussion of partisan political activities. Public administrators serve in an environment steeped in the exercise of partisan and bureaucratic power.⁽²⁾ It is practitioners of public administration who formulate, modify and implement public policy choices. Such bureaucratic activity is appropriate, provided that it is legitimated by the political system. Legitimacy can be provided to public administrators only by political institutions through the political process.

Teaching public administration students about policy analysis and policy advocacy necessitates an understanding of the complexities associated with the concepts of policy legitimacy and policy legitimization.     

Professionalism,Responsiveness, and Representation: What do They Mean for City Managers?

The literature in public administration advances three important values for public administrators. In their roles as technical experts, public administrators are professionals whose decisions are guided by the norms and principles of the public administration profession. In their roles as appointed officials, public administrators are expected to be responsive to their elected superiors. As representatives of the community, they are expected to voice the concerns and demands of citizens. Professionalism, responsiveness, and representation all are considered fundamental values that must be reflected in administrative decisions and actions. Despite the importance of these three values for public administration, insufficient empirical research has been done to examine what these values mean for public administrators. That is, the critical question that remains unanswered is: “What activities of public administrators are associated with these three values?” Based on a nationwide survey of city managers, this article identifies critical activities in which public administrators get involved, then reduces these activities into factors (dimensions), and finally examines the correlation of these factors with attitudes of city managers towards professionalism, responsiveness, and representation. The findings of this research help make these three values more concrete by associating them with major policy and political activities of city managers.     

From Discourses to Policy: Analyzing the Creation of an Accountability Discourse in Colombia

This article analyses the construction of a public discourse about accountability in Colombia. The article maps the different interpretations that actors make of political ideas related to accountability and their change over a period of 13 years (1991–2014). The article has an interpretive framework and uses content and discourse analysis techniques to identify meanings different actors give to the concept of “accountability” and changes in these meanings. It identifies an academic discourse on accountability, as well as external actors’ discourses that influenced the construction of a public and official discourse in Colombia. It concludes by identifying the effect of this process of building consensus about meaning on the resulting public policy.     

Public administration and policymaking: The political/career executive environment

Federal government policymaking is improved by the partici-pation of career executives. As a minimum, contributions based on their professional expertise and institutional experience can serve as an early warning system for helping political executives to avoid mistakes in new policy ventures. However, a number of political, structural, and attitudinal factors cause the political/career executive relationship environment to be characteristically stressful, tense, and frequently not conducive to joint involvement in policymaking. Historic factors producing this environment include basic constitutional and democratic values regarding the exercise of unitary power, the ambiguous roles of political and career executives, the controversial executive workforce structure, and the differing orientations of career and non-career executives. More recent obstacles to developing a cooperative state of political/career relations consist of the rise of the administrative presidency accompanied by bureaucrat-bashing, an increased politicization of management, and the trend toward ideological administration. What has been termed the “quiet crisis” in public service has led to calls for change in presidential rhetoric, development of orientation and communication opportunities in the political/career relationship, and proposals of structural alternatives to the present executive workforce system established in 1978. The Bush administration has implemented several measures leading to a renewed recognition of the benefits to policymaking output of career executive involvement.     

Searching for the best structure for American local government

Citizens, practitioners and academicians involved in local government have for decades debated the best structure for local public organizations; at the polar ends of this debate are those advocating rational administration and those advocating political responsiveness. The conventional wisdom equates rational administration with reformed structures like the council-manager plan and political responsiveness with structures which have an elected chief executive officer. The debate is unresolvable within this value-driven framework, and these ideological positions do not seem to be helping in the design of governmental structures which “work” in a practical and meaningful way. The paper argues for a “functional” model of local government structure based on how much citizens and administrators can know and oversee with competence. The analysis leads to a significant rethinking of the role of governing bodies, administrators, and the general management position in American local government.     

Queer Coalitions: An Examination of Political Resistance to the Russian Migration Law

Abstract

Migration policy in Russia is implemented by a variety of actors, such as state officials, market actors, and social activists. In the implementation of migration policy, they inevitably interact with one another. Having examined the categories used by the people involved in the implementation of migration policy, I explore the potential of coalition-building in this process. In order to scrutinise these fluid political forms, I make use of the concept of ‘queer coalitions’. This concept draws on literature in queer theory, which I argue is also productive for the analysis of current political actions in the migration domain.     

The fiscal risk of all-hazards emergency management or the political hazards in rational policy

The professionalization of emergency management and the adoption of all-hazards policies mean fundamental changes in agency constituencies and budgetary politics. Professionalization can increase the distance between emergency managers and the public they serve, expand the need for scientific and technical knowledge among generalist administrators, and fragment the disaster community. The more “rational” approach to disaster policy may well alienate the supporters of disaster-specific programs. Fiscal risk may result, particularly at the state and local levels where there are fewer opportunities to secure funding and to cultivate political support.     

Institutional and management building in sub-saharan africa: the role of training

In this essay, I intend to argue that in Mexico public administration as a discipline has not achieved the necessary theoretical cohesion, because rather than understanding and explaining the state, the government and the administrative structure, it has devoted itself to justifying the proposals made from the heights of power. The challenge facing public administration in countries such as Mexico is that of seeking a more specific space for study and creation. I believe this space should result from a deep analysis of the institutional capabilities that must be generated, and from the design and implementation of public, non-governmental policies, with the participation of different, so to make real the transit to democracy. From a brief review of some decisions derived from the political project of the Salinas Administration, I argue that public administration's concerns are absorbed by the issues that are set over them from the summit of power, thereby impeding the necessary distance that scientific proposals should take. This paper includes, therefore, a brief analysis of the issues that, since the governmental relay in December of 1988, have hold the attention of Mexican scholars in this field. The aim is to show that public administration's theoretic-methodological development cannot be solid and long-term as long as public administration studies are forced to justify or do justify the governmental proposals. Finding in public administration a true social science, with the complete theoretic structure social sciences must have, is a concern shared in many academic fields around the world. However, the problem facing the discipline in Mexico might be set forth as that of the “object” of public administration, which makes the concern for the requirement of a scientific character secondary. This does not hide public administration's limitations and conditioning factors, even as a not “heavily” scientific discipline.     

Policy Relations and Policy Subsystems: Financial Policy in Hong Kong and Singapore

Existing studies of Hong Kong’s and Singapore’s success as leading Asian international financial centers (IFCs) have largely focused on economic structural factors at the neglect of political economic contextual variables. Taking a policy subsystems approach and based on extensive field research, this article attempts to address this shortcoming by conceptualizing the “policy relations” that exist between state, industry, and other non-state actors in the two IFCs and delineating the “division of policy roles” among these actors. In the process, this article contributes toward the existing IFC literature and conceptualizes the sociopolitical relations that exist among financial sector actors.     

Leadership and innovation in the administrative state

The field of public administration, as well as the social science upon which it is based, has given little serious attention to the importance of vigorous leadership by career as well as non-career public administrators. The field tends to focus on the rigidities of political behavior and the obstacles to change. To reclaim an understanding of the importance of individual leadership the author suggests the use of biography and life history. The behavior and personality of the entrepreneur is an especially helpful perspective on the connection between leadership and organizational or institutional innovation. The case of Julius Henry Cohen, who played a pivotal role in the development of the New York Port Authority, is used to illustrate the connection between the entrepreneurial personality or perspective and innovation.

In the social sciences—and especially in the study of American political institutions—primary attention is given to the role of interest groups and to bureaucratic routines and other institutional processes that shape the behavior of executive agencies and legislative bodies. In view of the powerful and sustained pressures from these forces, the opportunities for leadership—to create new programs, to redirect individual agencies and broad policies, and to make a measurable impact in meeting social problems—are very limited. At least this is the message, implicit and often explicit, in the literature that shapes the common understanding of the professional scholar and the educated layperson in public affairs.⁽¹⁾ For administrative officials, captured (or cocooned) in the middle—or even at the top—of large bureaucratic agencies, the prospects for “making a difference” seem particularly unpromising. In his recent study of federal bureau chiefs, Herbert Kaufman expresses this view with clarity:… The chiefs did not pour out important decisions in a steady stream. Days sometimes went by without any choice of this kind emerging from their offices … If you need assurance that you labors will work enduring changes on policy of administrative behavior, you would do well to look elsewhere. ⁽²⁾

There are, of course, exceptions to these dominant patterns in the literature. In particular, political scientists and other scholars who study the American presidency or the behavior of other national leaders often treat these executives and their aides as highly significant actors in creating and reshaping public programs and social priorities. ⁽³⁾ However, based on a review of the literature and discussions with more than a dozen colleagues who teach in political science and related fields, the themes sketched out above represent with reasonable accuracy the dominant view in the social sciences.

The scholarly field of public administration is part of the social sciences, and the generalizations set forth above apply to writings in that field as well.⁽⁴⁾ (Indeed, Kaufman's book on federal bureau chiefs won the Brownlow Award, as the most significant volume in public administration in the year it was published.) Similarly, the argument regarding scholarly writing in the social sciences can be extended to the texts and books of reading used in courses in political science and public administration; what is in the scholarly works and the textbooks influences how we design our courses and what messages we convey in class. The provisional conclusion here, then, is that in courses as well as in writings the public administration field gives little attention to the importance of vigorous leadership—by career as well as noncareer administrators. Neither does it give much attention to the strategies of leadership that are available to overcome intellectual and political obstacles which impede the development and maintenance of coalitions which support innovative policies and programs.⁽⁵⁾

The further implication is that students learn from what we teach, directly and indirectly. Students who might otherwise respond enthusiastically to the opportunities and challenges of working on important social programs learn mainly from educators that there are many obstacles to change and that innovations tend to go awry.⁽⁶⁾ And there the education often stops, and the students go elsewhere, to the challenges of business or of law. Those students who remain to listen seem to be those more attracted to the stability of a career in budgeting or personnel management. Public administration needs these people, but not them alone. If career officials should have an active role in governance and if the general quality of the public service is to be raised, does it not require a wider range of young people entering the service—including those who are risk-takers, those who seek in working with others the exercise of “large powers”?

Taken as a class, or at least in small and middle-sized groups, scholars in the fields of public administration and political science tend to be optimistic in their outlook on the world. Informally, in talking with their colleagues, they tend to convey a sense that public agencies can do things better than the private sector, and they sometimes serve (even without pay) on task forces and advisory bodies that attempt to improve the “output” of specific programs and agencies and that at times make some modest steps in that direction. Why, then, do public administration writings and courses tend to dwell so heavily on the rigidities of political behavior and the obstacles to change?

One reason may be our interest, as social scientists, in being “scientific.” We look for recurring patterns in the complex data of political and administrative life, and these regularities are more readily found in the behavior of interest groups and in the structures of bureaucratic cultures and routines. The role of specific leaders, and perhaps the role of leadership generally, do not as easily lend themselves to generalization and prediction.

Perhaps at some deeper level we are attracted to pathology, inclined to dwell on the negative messages of political life and to emphasize weakness and failures when the messages are mixed. Here, perhaps more than elsewhere, the evidence is impressionistic. ⁽⁷⁾

Some of the concerns noted above—about the messages conveyed to students and to others—have been expressed by James March in a recent essay on the role of leadership. He doubts that the talents of specific individual managers are the controlling influences in the way organizations behave. He, however, questions whether we should embrace an alternative view—a perspective that describes administrative action in terms of “loose coupling, organized anarchy, and garbage-can decision processes.” That theory, March argues, “appears to be uncomfortably pessimistic about the significance of administrators. Indeed, it seems potentially pernicious even if correct.” Pernicious, because the administrator who accepts that theory would be less inclined to try to “make a difference” and would thereby lose some actual opportunities to take constructive action.⁽⁸⁾

March does not, however, conclude that the “organized anarchy” theory is correct. He is now inclined to believe that a third theory is closer to the truth. Administrators do affect the ways in which organizations function. The key variable in an organization that functions well is having a “density of administrative competence” rather than “having an unusually gifted individual at the top.” How does an organization come to have a cluster of very able administrators—a density of competence—so that the team can reach out vigorously and break free from the web of loose coupling and organized anarchy? Here March provides only hints at the answer. It happens, he suggests, by selection procedures that bring in able people and by a structure of motivation “that leads all managers to push themselves to the limit. “⁽⁹⁾     

Does EU Policymaking Allow for Skilful Networkers But Limited Knowledge Managers? The Think Tanks’ Tale

This article aims to depict how the EU policymaking process affects the knowledge-broker role of EU think tanks. To this end, I examine the organisational and output strategies of 22 EU think tanks—think tanks sharing a EU-transnational origin, an interest in EU subjects, and the intention to contribute to EU policymaking. I argue that certain aspects of EU policymaking, (a) the emphasis on participative processes that foster linkage and exchange activities, (b) concern with stakeholder representatives, (c) development frameworks for knowledge management for particular policy actors, and (d) lack of an overarching European public sphere, affect the knowledge-broker role of EU think tanks. As a result, EU think tanks concentrate on customised knowledge management and platform development and dissemination among target publics in order to appeal to partners, members and sponsors and thereby secure funding and reputation.     

Strategic Interaction Between Rebels and the State: A Study of the Maoist Conflict in Nepal

The “people's war” in Nepal during 1996–2006, led to two significant outcomes—the elimination of monarchy and political victory for the Maoists. These political outcomes raise important questions about the process of Maoist conflict in Nepal. While several studies on political conflict are concerned about “why” such conflicts happen, I focus on “how” the strategy of conflict unfolded in Nepal. In this article, I argue that strategic interaction between rebels and the state explain why the conflict led to negotiated settlement in Nepal. To discuss the sequence of rebel–state interaction, I introduce a game theoretic model. In addition, I show how territorial control, target selection, and levels of violence used by the rebels in comparison to the state are crucial in understanding the conflict process. The case study in this article analyzes the relevance of rebel–state interaction to reveal micro processes of political conflict and further suggests that negotiation can become an important tactical choice in resolving conflict.     

Who is Governing What? Governing Local Technical Systems–an Issue of Accountability

The article discusses accountability in governance of local energy and IT systems. The aim is to focus on accountability of local policy making regarding technical systems by comparing consequences when new forms of governance are developed. Governance steering demands and ensures a clear division of responsibility regarding what a network is responsible for, but not regarding who is accountable for the decision making and implementation. On the other hand, in a steering context characterized by government, it is clear who is responsible and accountable for decisions, but the specific issues for which different actors can be accountable are unclear. We argue that demands for clarifications of accountability emerges from the complex modern governance.     

Neutralized,enhanced, tokenistic: The influence of formal employment of service-users on processes of co-production

Can formally employing service-users in co-production roles redress the problematic power imbalances inhibiting co-production in the public sector? In this paper, we analyze service-users formally employed in co-production roles. Through semi-structured interviews, we illustrate how actors use their voice, experience, and identity to respond to different power imbalances. First, through the process of “inverting professionalism” structural limitations resulted in neutralized co-production. Second, through the process of “embedding expertise” formally employed service-users challenged collective expectations of their role and meditated power imbalances, resulting in enhanced co-production. Finally, through the process of “perpetuating rejection” a new exacerbated power imbalance emerged when their employment became a negative resource, resulting in tokenistic co-production. We extend understandings of how formally employing service-users has potential to redress power imbalances. However, we caution against policy taking this for granted and argue that more consideration of the influence of different forms of power is needed.     

Managing Public Accountability: How Public Managers Manage Public Accountability

Accountability is of growing importance in contemporary governance. The academic literature on public accountability is fraught with concerned analyses, suggesting that accountability is a problematic issue for public managers. This article investigates how public managers experience accountability and how they cope with accountability. The analysis highlights a number of ways in which public managers do indeed “suffer” from accountability, although, conversely, most of the respondents were able to identify strategic coping mechanisms with which apparently problematic accountability requirements can be converted into practically useful procedures.     

Teaching public management: the case for (and against) cases

This article calls for an increased and more rigorous use of the case method in public administration education. Cases yield generalizations, cases help students take ownership of knowledge, and cases can further repetition of behavioral characteristics important to students such as empathy and self-confidence.

The gradual expansion of public policy training into the area of public management has brought with it a marked increase in the use of cases and case teaching. Executive training programs, an ever more common feature of publicpolicy schools, rely even more heavily on case. Despite their prevalence and popularity, cases and case teaching have come in for considerable criticism. Social scientists in particular fault them for being atheoretical and, hence, lacking in intellectual rigor. Contemporary cases are also faulted for implicitly endorsing an “activist” or “heroic” view of public management. Whereas cases from the 1940s and 1950s portrayed a functional view of public managers, recent cases portray managers as people who actively shape their legal mandates and use administrative systems to promote political objectives--a questionable image to convey to students training for public service.⁽¹⁾

The first half of the paper describes in some detail a seminar, “Ethics and Public Management,” conducted at the Kennedy School by Mark Moore, Mark Lilla, and the author.     

The development and evolution of city-county management in Ireland: An illustration of central-local administrative relationships

Ireland was the first European nation to model its local governments after the American council-manager plan. Although the diffusion of the manager plan in the U.S. was slow, and at local initiative, the Irish experience was very different. The central government in Ireland imposed the manager plan on all urban districts, boroughs and counties within a short period of time. This “imposition” was designed with both political and administrative values in sight. Politically, the period immediately after independence from Great Britain was unstable and violent. A method was needed to bring order, stability and uniformity to the emerging nation. One approach was to exert central control over the activities of the one hundred elected councils in small towns, villages, boroughs and major cities. The institution of city-county manager was designed to facilitate the control by national political leaders over local authorities. Managers were appointed by the central Ministry of Local Government, were given significant administrative autonomy from local councils and were protected in their positions by national-level structures. The political values of stability, order, uniformity in the nation: building process created an environment for the emergence of new administrative values. Values of professionalism, efficiency, accountability, modernization replaced out-dated practices. An understanding of modern Ireland's experiences in local government administration may give additional insights into the active, essential role of administration in developing nations. Particularly, the role of administrators as stabilizers in conditions of political and social instability deserve our increased attention.     

Problems in evaluating economic development politics : an urban perspective

The central concern in this paper is with the way we think about economic development at the local level. I turn first to a look at the local context of economic development policymaking, then to the strategy derived from this context and the resultant “politics of growth”. Finally, I focus on the need for a theoretically grounded model to evalate the economic development efforts of local public officials. Mayors and scholars alike must begin the task of building such a model by first recognizing the importance of conducting their work within a theoretical framework which places the city within the larger political, social, and economic context which defines it. The central reality of that wider context, I argue, is that the business community dominates economic development politics: businessmen Issue commands (as a condition of investing in the local economy) and politicians offer inducements (in competition with other politicians for that investment).