Constituting 'the public' in public participation

The emphasis on public participation in contemporary policy discourse has prompted the development of a wide range of forums within which dialogue takes place between citizens and officials. Often such initiatives are intended to contribute to objectives relating to social exclusion and democratic renewal. The question of ‘who takes part’ within such forums is, then, critical to an understanding of how far new types of forums can contribute to the delivery of such objectives. This article draws on early findings of research conducted as part of the ESRC Democracy and Participation Programme. It addresses three questions: ‘How do public bodies define or constitute the public that they wish to engage in dialogue?’; ‘What notions of representation or representativeness do participants and public officials bring to the idea of legitimate membership of such forums?’; and ‘How do deliberative forums contribute to, or help ameliorate, processes of social inclusion and exclusion?’     

Preventive veto and obstructive veto: the imposition of public policy by organizations on the margins of government

This article argues that powerful organizations at the margins of government (i. e,, contractors, franchisers, quangos, state-owned corporations, etc.) which provide vital public services are able to impose public policy on the electorate and elected officials in democratic countries. These organizations' enormous resources, including not only their tangible assets, but also freedom from accountability and dependent clientele, constitute both a source of power and vital vested interests. Illustrating with the example of the Kupat Holim Sick Fund of Israel, it shows how when these interests are significantly jeopardized, the organizations impose veto power: a preventive veto at the policy making stage or an obstructive veto at the policy implementation stage. Both types of veto enable them to appropriate the major instruments of policy making - allocation, regulation, and restructuring - from elected government. This ability undermines the traditional relationship between the electorate and elected and raises questions about the risks to democracy inherent in the proliferation of such bodies on the margins of government.     

POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION: ONE MORE TIME IN THE FRYING PAN

As an academic discipline, public administration has reached yet another fork in its evolutionary road. Earlier milestones have posed choices during the discipline's unfolding. In this century emphases have shifted in turn from civil service reform to scientific management, then to human relations and decision making. As the century closes, the discipline acknowledges some intellectual debt to each of these foci. The traditional debate about what kinds of ties suffuse policy/politics and administration now reflects a new uncertainty—the meaning of administration itself. Is there anything analogous among the public, private, and not-for-profit contexts in which administration transpires? Are there substantive or procedural considerations within these various contexts of policy making that influence, and in turn are influenced by, administrative participation in the policy process? If so, what is the nature of such influence, and what are its consequences?     

Citizen Participation in Local Policy Making: Design and Democracy

Embedding democratic innovations that increase and deepen citizen participation in decision making has become a common policy of local governments in many countries. This article focuses on the role of the design of these innovations and seeks to establish the effects of their design on democracy. The article evaluates 20 cases of participatory governance and 19 deliberative forums. The findings show that different designs produce different democratic effects, but also that the suitability of a particular design depends on the type of policy issue. Tensions between representative and direct democracy are more likely to exist for participatory governance than for deliberative forums.     

ELITE ETHNOGRAPHIES: POTENTIAL,PITFALLS AND PROSPECTS FOR GETTING ‘UP CLOSE AND PERSONAL’

This article celebrates Rod Rhodes' use of ethnography to study political elites ‘up close and personal’. Initially Rhodes' work is contextualized within the development of political ethnography more generally, before his ethnographies of ‘Everyday life in a Ministry’ are reviewed, illustrating the potential of ethnography to research policy‐making elites. This review highlights epistemological and ontological questions which link to criticism of Rhodes' work as taking an anti‐foundational stance. In looking at future prospects for ethnography in governance settings, this article argues that researchers building on Rhodes' scholarship can choose whether to use ethnography as a ‘method’ or an ‘interpretive methodology’. In concluding, the case is made for a ‘constructivist modern empiricism’ which utilizes the ethnographic method alongside other research methods as being most useful for public policy and administration scholarship aiming to be practically useful for understanding either the processes of public policy‐making or its impact.     

IMPROVING UK PUBLIC SERVICES: A REVIEW OF THE EVIDENCE

Over a number of years in the UK, public service improvement has been at the centre of both Conservative and Labour policy. Keen to make improvements in public services, the current Labour government is pursuing this issue more strongly than any other. This paper examines the concept of improvement and reviews the academic literature which has empirically assessed improvements in a range of public services. Drawn from over 50 studies of improvement, the evidence highlights seven determinants or improvement ‘triggers’ which have been put in place and which have had a positive effect on a public service. These include quality frameworks and public participation forums. The paper reviews the evidence and evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of the studies themselves. The findings of the paper indicate that, despite a political drive to improve public services, there is insufficient evidence available on ‘what works’ in bringing about improvement. The need for sustained research in this area is emphasized and conclusions are drawn on a way forward.     

Friends or Foes? Nonstate Public Goods Providers and Local State Authorities in Nondemocratic and Transitional Systems

Ordinary citizens often welcome nonstate provision of public goods and social welfare, but government officials, particularly in nondemocratic and transitional systems, may view nonstate actors as political competitors. Drawing on a combination of qualitative and quantitative data from rural China, this paper finds that some kinds of nonstate participation in public goods and social welfare provision can actually make local officials more optimistic about their ability to implement state policies and elicit citizen compliance. Local officials often believe that coproduction of public goods and services with community groups in particular, often with community actors taking the lead, can build trust and social capital that can spill over into increased citizen compliance with state demands, a central element of state capacity. Simply increasing levels of public goods provision, however, is not associated positively with optimistic perceptions of local state authority and capacity. Moreover, other forms of nonstate participation such as coproduction between private businesses and local officials or substitutive provision by nonstate actors have less potential for building trust between officials and citizens and are not seen by officials as beneficial for increasing citizen compliance.     

Book reviews

Improving the quality of public participation in council decision making continues to be a key goal of local government 'modernisation'. Different rationales for this have been advanced, including consumerist aims of service improvement, participation as an important value in itself, and participation as a survival strategy for local government. Based on surveys of, and interviews with, councillors and senior officers in Scottish local government, this article explores the ways in which concepts of 'consumerism' and 'citizenship' inform councils' approaches to public participation.     

Exorcising the ghost of the politics-administration dichotomy: an institutional theory of administration policy making

This article takes implementation theory one critical step further. It argues that administrative policy making is a separate, distinguishable process, not a stage in or component of the legislative policy-making process. In addition, it argues that the institutional setting for policy making has a major influence on policy ideas, choices, and actions. Administrative agencies form a distinct institutional setting for policy politics, and setting influences policy outcomes. The implications of the institutional perspective for understanding policy making, policy analysis, and the legitimacy of public organizations are examined.

The ghost of the politics-administration dichotomy haunts implementation theory. Although numerous scholars have declared the dichotomy dead,⁽¹⁾ administrative policy making is still seen as a component or step in the policy process that is dominated by elected officials. For example, Kelman recently examined the different institutional settings of policy making.⁽²⁾ Elected officials, in his view, are and should remain the primary source of policy ideas and choices while administrators remain responsible for translating these ideas and choices into practice. Other scholars underscore the lack of effective control by legislators and elected executives. But even those who acknowledge administrative initiative and autonomy see administrators as servants, however weak their masters.

This article takes implementation theory one critical step farther. It argues that administrative policy making is a separate, distinguishable process—not merely a stage in or component of legislative policy making. Policies can and do originate in administrative agencies. These innovations gather supporters and critics, are tested and refined, and can become part of the routine with little, if any, involvement by elected officials or political appointees. Legislation and executive orders commonly ratify existing administrative policies rather than initiate administrative involvement.

In addition, the institutional setting for policy making has a major influence on policy ideas, choices, and actions. Administrative agencies form a distinct institutional setting for policy politics. The institutional setting, it is argued, influences policy outcomes. Administrative policy making is not, however, an entirely discrete process. It intersects with legislative policy making at important and predictable points. The two policy processes, legislative and administrative, are loosely and variably coupled.⁽³⁾ The central distinction is that administrative policy making is dominated by the ideas, norms, routines, and choices of nonelected public employees, whereas legislative policy making is dominated by the perspectives of elected officials. Administrative policy making can occur in the bureaucracies of the President or of Congress.

The argument that these two processes—legislative and administrative—are distinct does not, however, deny their essential overlap. The overlap between these two fundamentally different policy settings has fostered the delusion that there is only one policy setting with legislative and administrative components. Clearly elected officials influence administrative policy making, and, just as clearly, administrators influence legislative policy making.⁽⁴⁾ Nevertheless, their interaction remains obscure without a clearer perception of the profound differences between the two settings. As stated, the importance of administrative policy making seems obvious and uncontroversial, but its implications are strongly resisted.⁽⁵⁾

Public administration and implementation theories have not adequately recognized the importance of administrative policy making in modem welfare states.⁽⁶⁾ Before more fully developing these ideas, four examples of administrative policy making are briefly reviewed.     

Trends in Public Administration Research: A Content Analysis of Iranian Journal Articles (2004-2017)

This study aims to examine the trends of public administration research in Iran during 2004–2017. A total of 520 articles from three databases have been reviewed and analyzed using content analysis. Results are reported based on research themes, purposes, orientations, methods, and authorship. Comparisons are made across two time spans and by journal type. Findings indicate that the focus of public administration research has been on issues of public administration, Islam and public administration, administrative performance, and organizational behavior in the public sector. Observations reveal that recent Iranian research studies have more explanatory purposes and often apply qualitative methods. The study also concludes that the Iranian public administration research has advanced considerably over the past 14 years, but more efforts are needed to fill in the gap in such important areas as new public service, civic participation, globalization, policy making, sound governance, and policy implementation.     

Administrative reform in global perspectives: a symposium

ABSTRACT

This study examines public officials' preferences for different performance measures. Understanding these preferences is important for public officials to reach consensus on performance measurement. It finds that public officials overwhelmingly favor outcome measures, although output measures are more likely to be used in government. Public officials favor the capacities of outcome measures in addressing organizational goals and achievements. Measurement validity is not a major concern to public officials in their selections of performance measures. Finally, public officials favor the use of outcome measures in performance monitoring rather than in resource allocation.     

The economic perspective on public administration

Public administration as a body of thought and field of study is changing from a paradigm dominated by political science to an eclectic array of theoretical contributions from all of the social sciences, particularly economics. Basic education and training in economics is essential to an effective contemporary public administration. Without a fundamental understanding of economics the “do-it-yourself-economics” which is practiced in policy-making contributes to basic errors in policy.

As the size and significance of the public sector has grown, increased attention has been paid to the discipline of public administration. What began as a structured way of describing the operation and structure of public management and public organizations has evolved into a discipline that has a much broader scope—the analysis of policy making in the public and not-for-profit sectors. In addition, employment in the public administration profession is more likely to be viewed as a vocation rather than as an avocation, in contrast to the past.

Once the repository of generalists in the areas of public management and organizational behavior, public administration has become a hodgepodge of individuals with varied backgrounds and training. This has resulted in a discipline that has notable strengths and weaknesses. A major weakness, and source of criticism from outsiders, is the discipline's lack of a paradigm—there is no easily identifiable intellectual structure. Its strength lies in the diverse theoretical, conceptual, and methodological contributions borrowed from other disciplines.

The most prominent contributor has been political science, where the discipline of public administration had its origins. Political science's influence on public administration still is evident: numerous public administration programs are located in political science departments; a large number of faculty in public administration programs are political scientists by training; and public administration professional societies and publications are dominated by political scientists.

Economics has made forays into public administration and established garrisons in some of the larger and more prominent programs. But, economics has failed to have a distinct impact on everyday public policy making. This is evident in many policy decisions that lack much semblance of basic economic understanding on the part of decision makers. Recent examples include the handling of the federal deficit, solutions to airway and airport congestion, the war on poverty, housing programs, dealings with international trading partners, proposed solutions to the third world debt crisis, resolution of the acid rain problem, and so forth.

Although other explanations can be offered for the absence of good economic reasoning in many policy decisions, a lot of the blame lies with public administration's failure to adequately integrate economics. Economics does not wield substantial influence in either the discipline's curricular matter or administrative structure. This failure partially can be attributed to a lack of understanding of what economics has to offer the discipline and partially can be attributed to the insolent demeanor of many economists.

This paper proposes to discuss what role economics can and should play in public administration. First, the relationship between public administration and economics is discussed. Second, deficiencies within the economics discipline that keep it from becoming an integral component of everyday policy making are discussed. Finally, ways to better blend economics into public policy making are proposed.     

Politicians and Interactive Decision Making: Institutional Spoilsports or Playmakers

In recent years interactive decision making has become quite popular in The Netherlands, especially at the level of local government. It involves new forms of participation of citizens, consumers of public services and interest groups in the process of policy formation. Workshops, panels, internet discussions and a lot of other techniques are used to arrive at innovative and supported solutions for existing problems. The ambitions are high: these new forms of participation should result in better government both in the sense of providing better policies, but also in bridging the democratic gap between local government and citizens. However, these new forms of participation in local government are not without problems. Recent experiences suggest that one of the major problems is the challenge interactive decision making constitutes for the existing practice of representative politics. On the basis of two cases — the decision-making process concerning the expansion of the Rotterdam Harbour and the discussion about a new administrative structure for the Rotterdam region — this article illustrates that one of the barriers that stands in the way of the success of such processes is the ambiguous attitude of elected politicians. Although politicians often initiate interactive decision-making processes, they do not actively support these processes when they are in progress. The outcomes of interactive decision-making progress are often not used in the formal political procedures that follow. Because elected politicians fear that these new forms of participation threaten their political primacy, they find it hard to play a constructive role in these processes.     

Central-Local Relations in an Era of Multi-Level Governance: The Case of Public Participation Policy in England, 1997-2001

The election of a 'New Labour' UK government in 1997 promised a new era of central-local relations facilitated by a programme of local government reform which recognised local government's 'community leadership' role. Other aspects of the agenda supported the development of multi-level governance, for example, the establishment of sub-national institutions such as the Scottish Parliament and the promotion of neighbourhoods as key sites for action. Despite these actions this paper will argue that in England the central state retains considerable influence over the key agents of local governance. Using the example of public participation policy, and drawing on the findings of a recent study in two English cities, the paper will explore how national policy aspirations were reflected locally. It concludes that while local action generally complemented national priorities, there were important points of contrast, and that localities' capacity to act in their own interests is supported by the opportunities presented in a multi-level governance environment.     

Unintended Consequences of Vigilance Activities in Two Project Settings in India

Anti-corruption agencies that are independent and vested with the authority to enforce laws can be a potent force in combating corruption. However, overzealous anti-corruption agencies acting in the absence of an effective institutional environment could paralyse the public sector's decision-making apparatus by instilling a sense of hesitancy into the officials’ minds. Through ethnographic studies of two infrastructure projects in India, I investigate how anti-corruption agencies contributed to project delays. This research supplements the existing discourse on factors contributing to the efficiency of anti-corruption agencies, given the constraints of project settings, and provides insights towards policy making in this domain.     

Citizen participation in solid waste policymaking: a case study of the spokane experience(1)

The focus of this case study was on citizen participation in solid waste policymaking in Spokane, Washington. It was predicated on the idea that there is a need for government to develop more workable and meaningful approaches to facilitating citizen participation in public policymaking. The formulation and implementation of solid waste management policy in Spokane proved to be a technological and democratic trial for the community. The research used three models of citizen participant styles - coopted, prudent, and confrontive - as it examined the views of citizen group leaders, city and county administrative staff, and elected officials involved in this policy dispute with regard to: 1) the purposes of citizen participation, 2) the desirability of citizen participation, 3 ) the impacts of citizen participation, 4) the most effective approaches for citizen participation, and 5) the levels of satisfaction associated with various approaches to citizen participation.     

A difference that is not a difference

This symposium illustrates a serious problem. There has been a great deal of fragmentation in the field of public administration in the last two decades. For three decades, from the 40's through some of the 70's, public administration was able to encompass many diverse approaches within its boundaries. However, dissatisfaction with traditional public administration content, methodology, incrementalism, and administrative management led to divisions in the field of public policy and public management that have separated themselves from public administration. The desire for separateness is seen in changed names of academic programs and degrees, different course content and separate professional associations. The symposium was designed to try to stimulate debate and discussion of the ties rather than differences in the field.

This article discusses the differences from the standpoint of the students, the practitioners of public administration, the faculty and the public. The conclusion is that there is much more which should join these programs than separate them and that the need to produce leaders for the public service requires strong places in the academic world for these programs. The field would be stronger if those who argue for public policy, public management and public affairs separate and unequal from public administration would engage in dialogue to take the best of all these approaches and merge into a stronger whole. The common concern with the public nature of the profession and the need to educate public leaders overrides most of the perceived differences. The weakness in the perception of the field generally and in the academic world caused by these splits will continue until more common efforts are undertaken.

Public policy has contributed a great deal to improving methodological rigor in the field. Public management has been important in making the leap from policy to implementation. These differences have changed public administration considerably. But the parts of the field are not sufficiently aware of each other. Analysis of all the programs finds more in common than is acknowledged and finds that these differences do not make a real difference.

It is time to begin discussion of how to make all parts of this field stronger, to improve the academic training, to increase the link between theory and practice, and to work together to improve the public image of public service. To do this, these divisions must be acknowledged and brought together into a stronger professional program for the public service.     

Citizen participation matters. Bureaucratic discretion matters more

New Public Governance theory increases citizen participation and expands bureaucrats' roles in the work of government. Citizen participation creates new mechanisms for citizens to influence the policy process. Bureaucrats' expanded roles allow for broader bureaucratic discretion over policy implementation. When citizens' and bureaucrats' views on public management decisions collide, whose views prevail? Do citizen volunteers or bureaucrats have greater influence over public decisions? We answer this question by studying the U.S. Department of Energy's initiative to engage citizens in environmental clean-up decisions. We assess 10 years of meeting records and administrative decisions using a three-step, mixed-method analysis to identify, weigh, and test the influence of citizen participation and bureaucratic discretion. The results indicate that while citizen participation matters, bureaucratic discretion has a more significant influence over administrative decision-making. The findings expose holes in New Public Governance theory, which has implications for democracy and demands deeper thought into structuring citizen participation.     

Electronic Local Government and the Modernisation Agenda: Progress and Prospects for Public Service Improvement

The wider use of new information and communications technologies (ICTs) is central to the current drive to promote public service improvement in the UK. This paper describes the policy context within which 'e-government' is being developed by local authorities in the UK and evaluates the strategies developed by a sample of local councils against the key components of an ideal model of the electronic local government organisation. It suggests that many authorities have made significant progress in providing information 'on-line'. However, additional funding and staff development, combined with more fundamental changes to internal business processes and inter-organisational working, are needed if councils are to harness the full potential of new ICTs to transform their transactions with service users and citizens.