Conclusion

In commenting upon the chapters gathered together in this volume I have had certain guidelines in mind. To the best of my ability, I have tried to consider the significance of the chapters on their own terms. I have tried to do so without reference to such commentary as may have occurred since they were first presented. I have tried to confine my observations to the relationship of the chapters in this volume to the most meaningful issues for the present dialogue and near future of the field. For the purposes of this reflection, the new public administration of Minnowbrook I and the papers gathered in the companion volume to the present one have served as background, but I have tried to restrain the temptation for detailed comparison. I hasten to avow that this approach—and the inescapable frailties of personal and perhaps idiosyncratic intellectual predilections and perceptions—has undoubtedly caused me to neglect some content of this volume which might strike others as more significant than that which I do discuss. I offer only a corollary to “Miles’ Law”:⁽¹⁾ what you see depends on where you stand on the path and what you have seen on other paths.

A quarter of a century ago, in commenting upon Minnow-brook I, I thought the main themes were relevance, antipositivism, ethics, innovation, concern for clients, antibureaucratic philosophy, social equity, and repression.⁽²⁾ With the exception, perhaps, of “repression” (which mainly surfaces in this volume only in the sense of the repressiveness of technicism), this could serve as a reasonable sketch of important themes of the chapters in this volume. The present discussion is organized under not very different headings. After a brief discussion of themes which seem central, I attempt a summary of some general impressions of the Minnowbrook perspective as it has evolved. Throughout, I try to indicate where I believe additional investigation and reflection might well serve the field and its future.     

From reorganizing to reinventing: sixty years and “we still don’t get it”

Sixty years ago the “Brownlow Committee Report” was written by some of the most prominent members of the emerging field of public administration. Its recommendations had serious consequences for the way both our democratic republic and the field of public administration have evolved. In developing principles in which to anchor the recommendations, Luther Gulick, who was both the intellectual and political force behind the committee, contributed to a confusion of the concepts of organizations and the polity and those of management and governance.

Some of the story of how the concepts promoted by Gulick and the Papers on the Science of Administration led to a misconception, which became public administration's living legacy is told in this article. We then discuss the Brownlow Committee Report as something which changed: our very conception of the Constitution; Gulick's rationale for cooperation with Franklin D. Roosevelt; the Report as a misplacement of organizational concepts upon a polity; the dimensions of constitutional change in the report; and the staying power of Gulick's and the Committee's ideas. In conclusion, we contend that if we are to move beyond Gulick's legacy, that the field must learn and act upon the distinctions between organizations and the polity and management and governance.

“The charge that the Brownlow Committee set in train the development of the “imperial presidency” can be advanced only by those who have not read the Committee's report.”

James Fesler, former staff member of the Brownlow Committee Public Administration Review (July/August, 1987)

“How interesting it is historically that we all assumed in the 1930s that all management, especially public management, flowed in a broad, strong stream of value-filled ethical performance. Were we blind or only naive until Nixon came along? Or were we so eager to ‘take politics out of administration’ that we threw the baby out with the bathwater?”

Luther Gulick, member of the Brownlow Committee From Stephen K. Blurnberg, “Seven Decades of Public Administration: A Tribute to Luther Gulick” Public Administration Review (March/April, 1981)

was as old in American politics as it was popular. Yet, before the end of his second term, Roosevelt, with the help of Charles Merriam, Herbert Brownlow, and Luther Gulick, would use such hoary symbolism towards ends that would fundamentally alter our perceptions of the constitutional order, the nature of the presidency, and public administration. How did this come to pass? Barry Karl says that “He (Roosevelt) had continued as President to look at reorganization through the eyes of those who saw in it a means of saving money, balancing the budget, and thereby giving security to the nation's economy.” But Karl adds, “By 1936, this viewpoint had undergone drastic revision.”⁽⁶⁾ The revision in his thinking replaced “saving money” with “managerial control” as the principal aim of reorganization. “Managerial control” by the president would enable him not only to manage New Deal programs but protect them against potential Republican counterattacks, i.e., in short, to strengthen his hand as president.

The impetus for this change apparently came directly from the President's experiences in seeking to administer the government's burgeoning and increasingly chaotic Executive Branch. Roosevelt was a skilled, intuitive, and flexible administrator. But, according to Karl, his experience in seeking to administer the Emergency Relief Appropriation Act with a loose arrangement, quickly dubbed “the five ring circus,” taught the President several lessons. First, “it demonstrated the growing dependence of the President on official staff, other than cabinet members, working exceedingly close to the President's own sphere of daily operation. “⁽⁷⁾ Second, the problems of administering the Act raised questions among the participants themselves as to whether or not the President could “administer and control so complex an operation as federal relief given the inadequate machinery in his possession.”⁽⁸⁾ In other words, the effort was not simply a “five ring circus” because of FDR's famed flexible and informal style, but also because of the inadequacy of the available structures. Karl notes that “despite the problems inherent in the fiscal machinery as it stood, a continued development of governments within governments could only lead to a dangerous chaos over which the President would have no control whatsoever.”⁽⁹⁾ The questions raised suggested to the President that perhaps there was some merit to the position of those urging that emergency agencies be absorbed into the existing framework. This could meet a very practical question by “placing agencies within the purview of budget and accounting procedures already in existence.”⁽¹⁰⁾

According to Gulick, FDR told Brownlow and him at a November 14, 1936, meeting “that, since the election, he had received a great many suggestions that he move for a constitutional convention for the United States” and observed that “with Coughlin and other crackpots about there was no way of keeping such an affair from getting out of hand. But,” he said, “there is more than one way of killing a cat, just as in this job I assigned you.”⁽¹¹⁾ Gulick also quotes FDR as specifically telling the Committee, “We have got to get over the notion that the purpose of reorganization is economy. . . . The reason for reorganization is good management.”⁽¹²⁾ Of course FDR meant management as in “presidential management.”

So it was that President Roosevelt by 1936 was prepared to do something quite beyond “abolishing useless offices” in the words of his 1932 speech--something significantly more constitutional in nature. His other aim was no doubt to strengthen his hand significantly to protect the New Deal programs from Republican counterattack. But whatever his aim, the practical effect was to treat the executive branch as a hierarchical organization headed by a chief executive of corporate or city management conception. In so doing, the delicate constitutional balance among branches was altered. Recommending the reorganization of the executive branch as they did inevitably led to reorganization of the larger whole, the government, which was not an organization, but something qualitatively different.⁽¹³⁾     

CACOPHONIES IN THE CONTEMPORARY CHORUS ABOUT CHANGE AT PUBLIC WORKSITES,AS CONTRASTED WITH SOME STRAIGHT-TALK FROM A PLANNED CHANGE PERSPECTIVE

The New Public Management (henceforth NPM) has coalesced into a movement in a short period of time, virtually worldwide. Thus, inter alia, we hear about the allegedly-new focus on the “customers” of public services, which are to be provided by “public intrapreneurs” as well as by cadres of employees at all levels who are “empowered.” And so on and on—through the conventional organizational litany including cross-training, total quality, performance measurement, and eventuating in strategic planning. These emphases make for a pleasing, even convincing, organizational libretto.

If the “chorus” proclaiming the NPM libretto is both ubiquitous as well as insistent, however, the chanting is often loosely-coupled, curiously directed, and at times even contradictory—at times so much so as to alert one's native cunning about what forces are really at work. Hence, the reference here to the “chorus” and also the “cacophonies” this essay detects in NPM's ardent vocalizing. This reflects our judgment that, in equal measure, NPM combines ubiquity, too much of some useful things, unreconciled diversities, and issues at sixes-and-sevens.

But this essay also urges that NPM can “walk its talk.” In effect, several emphases will at once help explain how NPM was all-but-predestined to experience serious shortfalls, as well as prescribe how NPM can rise about these limitations. Particular attention gets directed at appropriate guidelines interaction and structural arrangements.

Four emphases relate to these critical-cum-constructive ambitions. In preview, NPM 1. seldom even attempted detailing a useful approach to applications;

2. typically neglected systemic or millieu characteristics within which applications occurred;

3. usually did not specify a useful front-load in designs: i.e., training in values, attitudes, and interaction skills that would facilitate developing a “cultural preparedness” for appropriate applications; and

4. seldom specified supportive structural/managerial arrangements.

This essay proposes to do better.

This essay takes a direct if dual approach to describing the New Public Management “chorus” and its “cacophonies.” To begin, introductory attention goes to NPM as a “liberation” of theory and practice beyond the classic conservatisms of Public Administration. Then, four limitations of this NPM “chorus” will be detailed, and this quartet of “cacophonies” also implies ways to enhance NPM applications, as well as urges a stark warning against overselling.     

Organizational development in the third world: values,closeness of fit and culture-boundedness(1)

This paper seeks to counterbalance some common arguments about the role of organization development (OD) in Third World settings. OD is a value-laden technology and this raises the issues of the closeness of fit of specific OD approaches or designs to different cultures, histories and settings. Most organizational theorists recommend a close fit, based upon an overall characterization of OD and estimates of the features of macro-cultures such as nations or regions. This paper urges a more differentiated perspective, based on evidence that OD works, on balance, in a broad range of contexts. Specifically, OD designs/approaches are not homogeneous, and neither are the nation-states or organizations in which OD is applied. The paper suggests a number of ways in which OD practitioners might become more sensitive to different contexts and thereby improve their judgments about the advisability of making OD interventions.

Since its earliest days, OD has been concerned with the issue of degree of fit. OD is a normative, re-educative strategy,⁽²⁾ and, for that reason, practitioners agree that “there” will be different from “here” in pervasive ways. Thus many ODers speak of “a new social order at work”⁽³⁾ and envision a new tomorrow, either in progressive steps, or via some frame-breaking effort. The key issue underlying how to get from “here” to “there” involves choices of designs for learning or change which are sensitive to beginning “here” and also capable of inducing systemic movement toward “there.”

Four emphases will carry this paper beyond these generalizations about why and how OD is concerned with the closeness of fit between its values and different sites of application. An initial section briefly describes OD as value laden, and hence as potentially at cross-purposes with other value laden aspects of sites of application -- national or organizational cultures, managerial climates, small work groups and so on. The second section describes three models of the relationship between OD and existing cultures, climates or styles. In addition, extended consideration is given to four generalizations about OD in Third World settings, in which closeness of fit and culture-boundedness are of special significance. The generalizations relate to success rates, the primacy of process and interaction in OD, the significance of a systems perspective, and an emphasis on specific OD sites and OD interventions. The final section presents my personal views as practitioner about closeness of fit and how to minimize cross-cultural blind spots.

Neither OD designs nor cultures are homogeneous; and change objectives can differ radically from case to case in their urgency and acceptable probabilities of success, with each case requiring judgments to be made about closeness of fit. The available literature tends to oversimplify in posing such questions as:

Is OD exclusively culturally appropriate to North America?

Does nation A have a culture that constitutes a close fit to OD values/interventions?

Are close fits preferable to distal-fits?     

The new paradigm: from development administration to sustainable development administration

In light of changing national and international conditions, the field of public administration is going through an exercise of refounding and reinventing. Globalization, technological advancements, and ecological concerns have diluted the importance of development administration. This study traces the demise of development administration and presents a new paradigm in the form of sustainable development administration. The author argues that the paradigm of sustainable development administration (SDA) is markedly different from the traditional paradigm of development administration (DA) in its emphasis, scope, treatment of politics, view of indigenous cultures, goals, operating mode, decision-making system, use of foreign aid, and performance accountability. The study concludes by declaring that SDA has the potential to emerge as a new field of study in public administration.

The discipline of public administration is at a crossroads: the advent of the “global village” philosophy is challenging its parochial tendencies⁽¹⁾;the “refounding of public administration” is nullifying its separation from politics⁽²⁾; and the “reinvention of government” is questioning the very basic reasons for its existence.⁽³⁾ Faced with new and continuing intellectual challenges, the discipline is in search of a new paradigm.⁽⁴⁾ What will this new paradigm be? What will its emphases and priorities be? The answers are less than clear at this point, however, the questions themselves are receiving attention from scholars. This article attempts to examine one of many alleged elements of the emerging paradigm, and that is the shift from development to sustainable development. The arguments presented here trace the demise of “development” focus in public administration and explore the possibility of sustainable development becoming the new thrust.     

Understanding chester I. Barnard

Chester I. Barnard is an example of a manager-participant-observer whose concepts and theories have a major impact on managerial thought and practice in both the public and private sectors.

I am greatly honored to be here and to participate in the first meeting of the Chester I. Barnard Society (U.S.A.). It seems only fitting that we make every effort to bring Barnard, the man, and Barnard's thinking to public attention. In this modern age where computers and rapidly advancing technology seem to be dominating our world, we need to find focus and balance in dealing with the eternal paradoxes and conflicts of a managerial society. Chester I. Barnard more than any other person in the field of management provides perspective for this challenge.

Accordingly, I wish to discuss my perception of Chester I. Barnard and some of the key concepts found in his philosophy and his theory of management. However, before doing so I wish to summarize comments about Chester I. Barnard by a few outstanding persons. These will serve to give a feel for the breadth of Barnard's activities and the significance of his work.

Barnard's thinking has been praised by outstanding men of science. Many see in the work of Herbert Simon, the Nobel Prize recipient, a significant shadow of Barnard. In Simon's book, Administrative Behavior, a number of ideas are traceable to Barnard: composite decision processes, bounded rationality, opportunism in decision processes, and so forth. Simon himself states that “The Functions of the Executive [Barnard's major publication]⁽¹⁾ was a major influence upon my thinking about administration.⁽²⁾ The eminent economist, Kenneth Boulding, states in his book, The Image, that one of the books which influenced him the most is the “pioneering work of Chester I. Barnard.”⁽³⁾

The famous American philosopher, John Dewey, stated: “In the main I believe the great value of Barnard's discussion is that it is one of those rare cases in which a man of affairs, an experienced executive, also has genuine intellectual curiosity and wisdom.”⁽⁴⁾

Bertrand de Jeuvenel, the distinguished French political scientist, wrote to Barnard: “Your thinking is political philosophy of the highest order...As one speaks of Keynesian revolution in economics, I feel one should speak of a Barnardian revolution in political science.”⁽⁵⁾

Fortune Magazine,one of the renown American business periodicals, states:

Chester I. Barnard possibly possesses the most capacious intellect of any business executive in the U.S.⁽⁶⁾     

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.     

The new business environment of latin america and the caribbean

Latin America and the Caribbean Region experienced dramatic changes in the 1990s. Politically, all but one country, are governed by a democratically elected government. Economically, import substitution industrialization policies (ISI) followed in the past, were replaced by liberalization programs aimed at reducing inflationary pressures and creating a competitive environment.

The significant increase in capital flows to Latin America in one single year, 1990, buried the 1980s as the “lost decade,” and the successful implementation of privatization programs region-wide prompted to affirm that the 1990s might constitute the “Latin America's decade.” Where does the euphoria come from? Is there any implicit promise to be derived from such international capital flows? Will the pattern be sustained? Has Latin America begun a new era? Are unfolding events on defiance of fundamentals?

These and many other questions can be raised regarding the spectacular transformation of Latin America and the Caribbean, particularly when analysts still debate about the Mexican crisis of 1994, investors eagerly pursue the agenda of a second privatization wave, experts around the world get fascinated with the high-tech push found in Latin America, bankers apply Latin American lessons to deal with the currency crisis in Asia, and casual observers recognize the value-creation process added by Latin American entrepreneurs who challenge the most adverse circumstances. Indeed, Latin America and the Caribbean is a land full of promises and contrasts, where there exists a head to head competition between globalization and nationalism, the haves and the have-nots, capitalism and communism, literature and high-technology, markets and governments, East and West, North and South, myth and reality, and … “despair and hope.”

There is no question, however, that Latin America and the Caribbean, being she a detached wide-land, is a region of great opportunity. Since the external debt crisis of 1982 and its aftermath, democracy, open markets, economic reform and privatization have blended to offer great expectations and opportunities for business and investment in the region. The new vision strongly questioned the status quo to render a new business environment to open the doors and light up the roads of the upcoming millennium.

It is the purpose of the International Journal of Public Administration to offer to its readers, for the very first time, a special issue devoted entirely to the discussion of the new business environment of Latin America and the Caribbean. We are, therefore, grateful to all the authors who generously are sharing with us the findings from their scholarly research. Given the far reaching consequences of their contributions, we, as guest editors of this special issue, had no other choice but to incorporate the fruits yielded by this symposium of thirty-seven papers in four issues in one single volume. The papers have been sorted according to the following four focal points: Privatization of State Owned Enterprises; Mexico; Economic, Financial and Foreign Investment Issues; and Economic Integration, Trade and Cultural Issues.

Part I of this special issue on “The New Latin American Business Environment” looks at one element of the broad economic strategy followed by most Latin American countries: Privatization of State Owned Enterprises. The role of governments is to provide the framework that will allow the private sector to create wealth. Notwithstanding, this partnership between the public and private sectors must ensure the inclusion of the poorer sections of the population. In many ways, the long-term sustainability of these economic programs will largely depend on this. The ten papers selected for this part, provide insight on how this phenomenon is affecting different Latin American countries.

The first paper by Shamsul Haque argues that there is a need to analyze the social consequences of privatization programs. Further research is needed to identify the main advocates and beneficiaries of privatization programs. According to the author, “critical economic conditions have not improved significantly after privatization, and in many instances, the conditions have deteriorated.” About fifty percent of Latin America's population of 470 million people live under poverty.

The late Sister Martin Byrne (1) documents in her paper, “Cananea Consolidated Copper Company from Nationalization to Privatization: 1972-1991 ,” the problems of ownership and management faced by La Cananea, a Mexican copper mine. Sister Byrne argues that “The Cananea mines were profitable under entrepreneurial and MNC ownership, but proved to be a financial drain on the government during the paraestatal period.”

The third paper by Garcia and Dyner, examined the reform and regulation of electricity in Columbia. According to the authors, the regulatory framework adopted by the government is going to determine the success of these programs. Furthermore, “the challenge is the change of public intervention in the sector, so that it regulates, supports, and supervises the decentralized activities of the firms, and liberates resources to be invested in other areas.”

Walter and Gonzalez provide interesting philosophical arguments on technology and human resources management derived from the cases of privatized companies in Argentina. The authors consider two variants, “systemic modernization and revamping of existing teams” to invite a reopening of the old debate on technological blending. They argue, however, that “to compete you do not necessarily need to ‘ be on the frontier.’”

Joan B. Anderson examines, the “Privatization, Efficiency and Market Failure: Transforming Ecuador's Public Sector,” privatization in Ecuador through the shift experienced by development theory with respect to the role of the public sector. In this paper the author points out that “while careful privatization can be positive, privatizing monopolies like the electric utility and/or quasi-public goods like highways are likely to be detrimental to long run economic development.”

Doshi identifies the successes and failures of the privatization program in Mexico by analyzing the cases of Mexicana Airlines, Aeromexico and Telmex. The author argues that even though the government was able to sell a number of state owned enterprises, a “successful” privatization program required appropriate macroeconomic policies and defining the role of foreign investment in economic development. One can argue then, that even though the size of the state is shrinking, its role is becoming more important.

The article by Vetter and Zanetta analyze also the case of Argentina. The authors argue that in order to consolidate the economic reforms implemented by the national government, provincial reform has to take place. A number of important lessons were identified.

John M. Kirk and Julia Sagebien present, in “Cuba's Market Rapprochement: Private Sector Reform - Public Sector Style,” the highlights of Cuba's process of transition towards a market economy by analyzing the conditions that lead to a market opening as well as the ends, the means and the actors of the ensuing process of economic reform.

Walter T. Molano contributes a paper, “The Lessons of Privatization,” based on his book The Logic of Privatization: The Case of Telecommunications in the Southern Cone of Latin America by looking at privatization as a process that may end up in varied outcomes as seen from microeconomic-, macroeconomic-, and political perspectives of analysis.

The focal point of Part II is Mexico. It is very clear that since the beginning of the decade, Mexico has made major efforts to transform its economy in order to play a more significant role in the global economy. Different attempts have been undertaken leading to: first, address the aftermath of the debt crisis of 1982; second, modernize and open the economy through a structural change that have included, among other programs, privatization, deregulation, fiscal deficit reduction, and trade liberalization: and third, change the political landscape.

Ephraim Clark models, in his “Agency Conflict and the Signaling Snafu in the Mexican Peso Crisis of 1994,” the conflict as a government held option to default and introduce signaling by assuming that the Mexican government had monopolistic information on the economy's true situation. The author argues that “if steps had been taken in late 1993 and early 1994, the crisis element of the adjustment could probably have been avoided.”

Blaine's article examines the role of foreign capital in economic development. By studying the Mexican case, the author answers a number ofvery important questions: How are once protected markets going to react to a large inflow of foreign capital? How did Mexican authorities deal with these inflows? What are some of the lessons that could be derived from the Mexican experience?

Hazera's paper discusses the history and legal basis of Mexican financial groups. On the basis of various stock market and financial statement data, an examination is also made of the groups’ evolution from 1991 to 1994.

Eugene M. Salorio and Thomas L. Brewer consider, in “Expanding the Levels of Analysis of FDI for Improved Understanding of Policy issues: The Case of Mexico,” both macro-, and micro-level shifts of analysis which mutually complement one another, and yield, for example, a “components profile” of disaggregated national level FDI flows which depends on the type of the project. The authors identify far reaching implications for public policy that may be extrapolated from the case of Mexico to the new business environment faced by the Latin American countries.

Francis A. Lees suggests also, from another angle, that the crisis of December 1994 could have been avoided because the financial disequilibrium was clearly evident by mid-1994 just be looking at Mexico's GDP and balance of payments.

C. Bulent Aybar, Riad A. Ajami, and Marca M. Bear provide a comparative study of the recent experiences of Mexico and Turkey. The authors identify common elements in the development and eruption of the crises to conclude that “under capital mobility strong internal and external shocks may lead to explosive crises … even though overall macroeconomic balances are sound.”

James P. D’Mello shows in “An Analysis of Mergers and Acquisitions in Mexico: 1985-1996,” that the Mexican crisis has led to an escalation of corporate restructuring such as mergers, acquisitions and joint-ventures.

Jiawen Yang joins the current debate on the causes of the recent Mexican financial crisis by arguing that “capital inflows that are not well absorbed by the private sector will cause financial instability under a fixed exchange rate regime.”

Part III of the new business environment of Latin America and the Caribbean includes ten papers on Foreign Investment, Economic and Financial issues which add significantly to the understanding of the overall transformation carried out in recent years by this region of the world.

Christopher Korth and Ajay Samant, and Craig A. Peterson andK. C. O’Shaughnessy recognize, respectively in the following two papers, “American Depositary Receipts (ADRs) from Latin America: An Opportunity for American Investors.” and “Financial Investment Via ADRs in Mexico and South America,” the usefulness of ADRs for operationalizing international diversification.

Juan Espana surveys the literature on models and tools currently used to predict exchange rate movements, and aims to suggest market solutions, economic policy measures and institutional arrangements to currency crises. The author analyzes the origin and evolution of the 1994 Mexican Peso crisis, its contagion effects on other Latin American economies, and the measures taken by the affected countries to manage the crisis.

Prakash L. Dheeriya and Mahendra Raj provide, in “An Investigation in Exchange Rate Behavior of Emerging Countries,” insights on the role that exchange rate risk plays by identifying similarities and differences through international comparisons.

Kumar's paper examines the important role of foreign direct investment in promoting economic development. The emphasis here is on the transfer of technology through foreign direct investment.

Neupert and Montoya study the characteristics of’ Japanese foreign investment in Latin America, with a focus on Brazil and Mexico. The authors looked at the preferred modes of entry and the post-entry performance of these subsidiaries.

Thomas M. Fullerton, Jr. shows, in “Currency Movements and International Border Crossings,” through two ARIMAmodels that “northbound bridge traffic to El Paso is nonrandom and follows fairly well defined patterns each year.”

Trevor Campbell makes, in “A Note on the Current and Capital Accounts Compilation of Barbados under the Fourth and Fifth IMFEditions,” a comparison with respect to the composition and structure of the current and capital accounts of Barbados.

Janet Kelly and Alexeis Perera argue, in “Antitrust Policy in a Hostile Environment: Institutional Building in Venezuela's Procompetencia,” that the theories of bureaucracy in Latin America generally stress institutional weakness, political volatility and the politicized nature of government agencies which motivated, in Venezuela, the creation of the anti-monopoly agency called “Procompetencia.”

G. Scott Erickson and Andrea Nhuch recommend in ‘The Latin American Business Environment: Patent Protection Issues” a general hybrid system to deal with patent rights issues.

Finally, Part IV deals with a blend of Trade, Economic Integration and Cultural issues. Since much of the world still tends to view Latin America and the Caribbean in terms of stereotypes, it seems appropriate to end this special issue on the new business environment of the region with a group of papers that revisits the rich mosaic of Latin America, and permits appreciate her new reality.

Isaac Cohen argues, in “Hispanics and Foreign Policy.” that though the primacy of economics in Hemispheric relations provides an opportunity for Hispanic businesses, yet this community will have to act deliberately to benefit from the opportunities that are emerging.

Eva Kras contributes, in “The Viable Future of Mexico and Latin America: A New Business Paradigm,” with a South looking North approach for doing business that challenges the traditional view of business relations.

Guillermo Duenas argues, in “Cultural Aspects in the Integration of the Americas,” that managing cultural integration successfully requires a process of “intercultural learning.”

Andres A. Thompson, Francisco B. Tancredi and Marcos Kisil introduce, in “New Partnerships for Social Development: Business and the Third Sector,” the novel argument that corporate philanthropy can make the difference in social development because grantmaking is still the least frequent used strategy in Latin America and the Caribbean region.

Chris Robertson, Pol Herrmann and Kevin Duffy measure, in “Exploring Perceptions of Technology Between the United States and Ecuador,” perceptions of technology on the basis of the typology of motivators and inhibitors of technological growth.

Melissa H. Birch argues, in “Mercosur: The Road to Economic Integration in the Southern Cone,” that Mercosur represents, in contrast to the historical record of economic integration in the region, an adaptation to the contemporary political climate.

Wu and Longley discuss the rationale for extending NAFTA to Chile. Their study examines also how NAFTA negotiators may address issues such as trade and investment rules, intellectual property rights, and labor and environmental standards among other things.

Roger Kashlak and Srinath Beldona identify, in “Partner Reciprocity, Telecommunications Flows and Balance of Trade Patterns Between the United States and Latin America,” partner reciprocity as the issue at the core of the international long-distance industry.

Ines Bustillo extends, in “Overview of Economic-wide NAFTA Models” computable general equilibrium models to the case of NAFTA.

We hope that this special issue is informative and interesting to business-decision makers, regulatory policy makers, and students concerned with gaining an understanding of the ongoing transformation of Latin American and the Caribbean.

Finally, we are again most grateful to the contributors of articles for making this special issue possible. We would also like to thank Jack Rabin, editor-in-chief of the International Journal of Public Administration, for trusting us the delicate mission of providing to the readers a fresh view of the new business environment of Latin America and the Caribbean.     

Conclusion: exploring the heart of civic darkness

This article is a synthesis of Volume II of Public Policy and Administration: The Minnowbrook Perspective and an extension of the arguments found herein. And, it is an application of issues of ethics and morality to this volume. The author calls for a return to civility in public discourse and to Plato's conception of virtue, and particularly public virtue. New versions of civic space are important. The American emphasis on individualism must be tempered by a greater concern for the common good and the public interest. To achieve this public administrators must be both examples and representative citizens.

Cyrano: Perhaps I do exaggerate—a little.

Le Bret: You see!

Cyrano: But for the sake of principle.

Also in practice I have often found Exaggeration works extremely well.

—Edmund Rostand

Cyrano de Bergerac

And sin, when it is full grown, brings forth death.

—James 1:15

“Civic darkness” and “sin” are offputting words. “Offputting” is also an offputting word, but we must do what we can to follow Cyrano's advice to the Count de Guiche and color our discourse as but we can. Actually, sin is quite a useful word, meaning, as it does, transgression of a moral principle. Those whose sensibilities are offended when words such as sin are introduced, or react in anger at remembrances of the excesses of evangelical piety, would do well to revisit the idea of separation from the moral good and the consequences such separatilon has for persons and for societies. Such is the case with what I will call the sin of incivility, which I believe leads us into a civic heart of darkness, which is the deathtrap of American democracy. I will exaggerate—a little.

The word “moral” is also an attenuated word. It tends to conjure personal identity material and prejudgments about the authority, associations, and intent of the preacher or philosopher using the term. Fresh in my memory after twelve years is the aftermath of the publication of my article, “The Problem of Moral Reasoning in American Public Administration: The Case for a Code of Ethics,” in the Public Administration Review of January/February 1983. Of the nineteen letters I received about the article, five came from academic public administrationists wondering why a person of my background should now be joining the Moral Majority. I sent each of them a copy of my work exposing Jerry Falwell's problems with the Federal Trade Commission.

We have before us thirteen papers and twelve responses, each dealing with an important aspect of public policy. Are there common threads running through them? Do they highlight recurring themes in American public administration? Since they were written just before the collapse of the Soviet Empire in 1989, was there anything prescient about them, or are they just historical artifacts, interesting enough in themselves but now overtaken by events?

There is a common thread, and that is a continuing commitment to the legacy of Mimowbrook I, understood as a post-positivist concern with social values. The most prophetic and, I believe, relevant statements of Minnowbrook I1 extended that understanding to the societal, organizational, and personal dimensions of communicative ethics, including the problem of the alienation of the self. I will elaborate that interest in my discussion of incivility below.

The old controversies were also there: in Willa Bruce's demand that Cynthia McSwain and Orion White translate their exercise in analytic psychology “into a practical application to real world problems,” for example, and in Gary Wamsley's passionate belief that public administrationists should “unmask the norms economists camouflage as science.” Complementarities were there, too, as when real world public administrator, Ray Pethtel, Virginia Commissioner of Transportation, said hurrah for egghead John J. DeIulio, describing him as “a scholar who recognizes the value of the public manager!” A pernicious theme that continued at Minnowbrook II, despite the efforts of conference organizers to diminish it through representation and structured dialogue, was that those who live more contemplative lives do not live in the real world. The truth is that most academic public administrationists are or have been heavily involved in workaday policy formulation and execution and that most civil servants reflect profoundly on what they do. Why, then, do we continue to use the language of separation?

Although there were arguments at Minnowbrook II, and I well remember the tension in the room after Bruce and Wamsley spoke, as on other occasions, we stayed well within the bounds of civility. That is what democracy does. It roughs and tumbles and postures and threatens and in the end stays within the bounds of civility. It finds a way we can live together. Minnowbrook II did not anticipate the degree to which incivility, manifested as displaced anger, separatist politics, and cultural isolation, would come to characterize public discourse in America in the 1990s and threaten the continued existence of democracy itself. Such a development demands careful analysis.

Plato would not have been surprised at any of this, as Dorothy Robyn pointed out in her paper about using cases for teaching public management. Since cases focus on how a process affected substantive policy questions, it is easy to ignore the inherent merits of the policy. Thus induction from fact replaces deduction from theory and leaves a large potential for casuistry and the justification of moral laxity. When discussion of a case begins with the postulate that at least one of the protagonists was unethical, the opportunities for recognizing moral ambiguity in the situation itself are limited. The temptation to reduce moral reasoning to laws and regulations tends to replace the abstraction of the public manager as a political being deducing his or her strategies from whatever ideal is being served. Deontological ethics become the analytical norm.⁽¹⁾

Plato's impatience with deontological ethics means that he is not a popular theorist among democrats today. Yet his critique of democracy remains the most powerful in philosophic literature, and I believe his analysis is particularly relevant for an American political environment of electronic sound bites and bored ignorance about the processes of government. There is a paradoxical way in which Plato's explication can deliver those of us who care too much.

The rhetoricians have their way in a democracy, Plato says. As they pursue their enthusiasms, trying to persuade the inattentive public here and there, misleading the people when necessary, they devise temporary solutions to fundamental problems. They consume as they encourage others to consume, leaving nothing in store. They live transient lives in mortal bodies. The worst thing about rhetoricians such as Gorgias, Plato believes, is that they misuse words. They often invert their meaning. Words are the vehicle of the dialectic that can lead us to transcendent truth, but in the hands of Gorgias, they produce only chaos and discord. In Plato's terms, the rhetoricians

once they have emptied and purged [the good] from the soul of the man whom they are seizing … they proceed to return insolence, anarchy, wastefulness, and shamelessness from exile, in a blaze of light, crowned and accompanied by a numerous chorus, extolling and flattering them by calling insolence good education; anarchy, freedom; wastefulness, magnificence; and shamelessness, courage.⁽²⁾

The deliverance inherent in Plato is the sure knowledge that virtue does not lie finally in what one can achieve in the political world, including the public good served in feeding the poor and bringing social justice to the disinherited. We work to achieve the good, yes; indeed, we may pour out our lives in service to democratic ideals. But virtue is a personal condition of the mind and spirit. In a calculous of inherent worth, prostitutes may be more virtuous than virgins. Virtue may be present in me while I endure any physical or temporal condition, including slavery, the dissolution of the Roman Empire, the trivialization of the Christian Church, or the collapse of the American Republic. Authentic freedom, and whatever wisdom has been given to me, exists in my being and only there. I can enslave myself, of course, and that includes slavery to any appetite, including the passion to be or do good.

Such reasoning is a useful antilogistic ingredient in dealing with the cascading series of manifestos in American public life telling us that we cannot live together; we cannot work together; we are not in this together; we are not Americans who have something in common, but racial, ethnic, gender, or sexually identified groups who demand to be recognized only or exclusively as different. I require that you recognize that we have nothing in common with one another. If goodness or greatness of soul is a capacity that each man and woman has, as Plato argued, then it is also true that each of us has a similar capacity for evil. The theologians of the Middle Ages called that capacity sin and defined it as separation from God, moral principle, and each other.     

The Integration of Best Environmental Management Practices in Corporate Strategy: Empirical Evidence From Italian Local Governments

Local governments represent an important moving force in promoting sustainable development policies as they make up the level of governance closest to the citizens. The aim of this article is to examine whether Italian local governments exercise de facto their vital role in fostering sustainable development policies. In particular, we analyzed municipality behavior about adopting “green management strategies.” We investigated the main factors identified in management literature which might boost the adoption of these strategies. Several implications ensue from our findings. In particular, the research provides information to improve local government attitudes toward the sustainable development challenge.     

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⁾     

Book Reviews/Comptes rendus

This article examines a major instance of United States' (US) involvement in Zaïre during the 1970s and 1980s. The paper looks at an under-studied rural development scheme, known as the North Shaba Project/Projet du Nord Shaba (PNS), which was funded by USAID from 1976 to 1986.The PNS increased maize exports from northern Shaba (Katanga) to central and southern cities in the province and aimed to curtail workers’ discontent by providing cheap food for them. Its quantitative successes and “bottom-up” rhetoric led USAID officials to call the PNS an “obscured revolution”. Unlike its colonial precedents and its post-colonial contemporaries, the project attempted to integrate village farmers’ expertise in order to drive production and provide an opportunity to change existing patterns of “top-down” development. Yet, although anthropologists facilitated some significant intercultural exchanges, the project did not wholly rely on local farming techniques. Instead, the PNS's major outcome was to briefly address the Zaïrian regime's neglect of agricultural production, thus helping it survive despite the financial pressures it was under during the 1970s and the 1980s.     

URBAN MANAGEMENT AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT AS NEW INSTITUTIONS IN THE NEW UKRAINE

Local government and modern urban management techniques will play a key role in the transition of Ukraine's institutions from a communist to a free economy and society. This paper provides a historic context for this transition, discusses the problems encountered in building urban management capacities and local government institutions, and explores what it will take to achieve real change.

The paper places the problems of revitalization and rebuilding of these Ukrainian institutions in historical perspective, with special attention to inherited patterns of Soviet administrative culture. The Sovietization of urban planning and administration, and living standards and the creation of nomenklature (the main governmental “human resource”), are analyzed as the starting point for rebuilding Ukraine's local governments. The paper traces the main sources and consequences of “continuous institutional crisis,” such as distrust, corruption, and deterioration of the capabilities of the Ukrainian state. Also examined are the current effects of economic globalization on the development of local and urban governments.

Following a review of Ukrainian “path dependence” and recent difficulties in institutional building, the paper outlines the most important tasks for future development and an agenda for Ukraine's “institutional entrepreneurs.” The paper emphasizes that it is vital to create a professional, rule-based bureaucracy and merit-based municipal civil service.     

CAN TEACHING BE SAVED?

ABSTRACT

Future generations of professors may be harder to recruit and to retain compared to the current generation of nearly-retired senior faculty. This is especially the case in public colleges and universities. The condition of academic life in public higher education at the beginning of the twenty-first century was not enviable. Decades of sacking and pillaging by external and internal forces have left the professoriat stranded in purgatory, overrun by larger numbers of under prepared students and evaluated by pseudo processes. The professoriat has also contributed to the demise of liberal learning by substituting escapism for scholarship and by rolling over for various forms of coercion and financial seduction.

This essay discusses one person's teaching experience in the context of evolving cultural norms about learning, of professional standards pertinent to teaching, and of the psycho-social consequences for college teachers of the secular anti-intellectual drift in post-literate society. Public college and university teaching in the last decade of the twentieth century, for most workaday faculty not heavily endowed with external research funds or not capable of manipulating endless leaves of absence, has been a voyage of uncertainty. The combined effects of triumphant managerialism, techno-idolatry, political correctness and bureaucratic rationalization have subverted public higher education, and the subversion has occurred with the willing collusion of many “insiders” in the academic establishment. Worse: so engrained is the system of incentives for self-preservation (on the part of administrators and faculty) and evasion of accountability (on the part of students) that the system is unable and unwilling to correct its own dysfunctions. The absence of complaint from the “consumers” of higher education, students and their parents, is not the result of good institutional performance. It is, unhappily, the result of tacit collusion in the willingness to certify mediocrity and call it excellence.

Many volumes would be required to diagnose and prescribe remedies for the entire matrix in which public higher education now finds itself. Space does not permit comprehensiveness here. Instead, I offer admittedly selective perceptions of my own teaching experiences of more than two decades, as related to the problems cited in the preceding paragraph. However, I doubt that it is a singular view. More than a personal cri de coeur, it represents the frustration of a generation of educators who have seen public higher education seduced and sacked by some of the same forces that might have been expected to nourish and protect it: including the educators themselves.

Of course, the cynical saying of one of my colleagues remains true: “Institutions never lose: individuals always do.” And he is right–higher education will endure and prosper, even if those who still remember what education is forare marginalized or driven into another line of work. No one can doubt that American colleges and universities have succeeded as organizationsand in the pursuit of organizational values over the past two or three decades: many are richer, larger, and as marketing savvy as the most endowed Fortune 500 corporation. Whether American higher education still has anything useful to say about American society and culture is another, and more arguable, matter. There is significant risk that institutional value distortion has pushed the critical faculties of students and teachers into a Phantom Zone of indifference or even hostility, relative to what “really” matters to the governing boards and administrations of many institutions of higher learning. The commingling of academic institutional and organizational–corporatist values has another side: it has betrayed many students by asking of them as little as possible, and many professors by rewarding them for their entertainment value.     

Russian Central Government Budgeting and Public Sector Reform Discourses: Paradigms,Hybrids, and a “Third Way”

ABSTRACT

This study explores how public sector reform discourses are reflected in Russian central government budgeting. Through the lenses of institutional logics, Russian central government budgeting is considered to be a social institution that is influenced by rivaling reform paradigms: Public Administration, New Public Management (NPM), the Neo-Weberian State, and New Public Governance. Although NPM has dominated the agenda during the last decade, all four have been presented in “talks” and “decisions” regarding government budgeting. The empirical evidence illustrates that the implementation of management accounting techniques in the Russian public sector has coincided with and contradicted the construction of the Russian version of bureaucratic governance, which is referred to as the vertical of power. Having been accompanied by participatory mechanisms and a re-evaluation of the Soviet legacy, the reforms have created prerequisites for various outcomes at the level of budgeting practices: conflicts, as in the UK, and hybridization, as in Finland.     

The Benefits of Globalization: Why More for South Korea than Mexico?

ABSTRACT

This article examines the arguments for globalization and analyzes Mexico’s “maquiladora experience,” which indicates that globalization alone does not bring about a higher standard of living. The primary reason that Mexico has not benefitted as much as might be expected from globalization has to do with the poor quality of its governance, referring especially to public administration. This assertion is supported by a comparison of Mexico and South Korea. In explaining South Korea’s greater success, Political Elasticity (PE) theory is introduced, suggesting that political power needs to become elastic in two meanings of this word: a “rubber band” meaning (referring to the ability of leaders to delegate power without losing or diminishing it) and “a balloon meaning” (having to do with the ability of leaders to reliably influence the behavior of the general public). Based upon studies of rural and industrial development, South Korea is shown to be more politically elastic than Mexico. This article concludes by examining the lessons that Mexico can learn from Korea’s experience.     

A working model to help institutionalize quality improvements in local governments

This article describes a working model designed to help leadership in public management introduce quality improvements and eventually facilitate transformations to quality organizations (TQO). By quality improvements and transformations to quality organizations -- whether in government, public education, public health, or other fields of activity -- we mean those institutional changes which reliably achieve ever greater effectiveness in accomplishing mission and responsively achieve ever higher levels of measurable service to public “customers.”

This article discusses the development of an organizational assessment instrument which the authors designed for the County of Los Angeles. Building on the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award and the President's Award in the USA, as well as on the review of other state and local criteria and comments received through a national review process, the authors formulated criteria of quality management with a view toward public service customers, particularly at local levels of government.

The model described has been initially applied to conduct self-assessments in four departments of Los Angeles County. It is also intended for broader use by administrative practitioners and scholars interested in the organizational change process. This article reports the development of the working model and identifies some lessons learned. The purpose of this article is threefold: (1) to inform about quality developments in the County of Los Angeles, (2) to present the working model as a point of departure for dialogue about the role which quality criteria might play in strengthening local governments more broadly, and (3) to consider the working model's possible use in facilitating shared mutual learning across geographic and other boundaries electronically.