Behavioral Public Administration: Combining Insights from Public Administration and Psychology

Behavioral public administration is the analysis of public administration from the micro‐level perspective of individual behavior and attitudes by drawing on insights from psychology on the behavior of individuals and groups. The authors discuss how scholars in public administration currently draw on theories and methods from psychology and related fields and point to research in public administration that could benefit from further integration. An analysis of public administration topics through a psychological lens can be useful to confirm, add nuance to, or extend classical public administration theories. As such, behavioral public administration complements traditional public administration. Furthermore, it could be a two‐way street for psychologists who want to test the external validity of their theories in a political‐administrative setting. Finally, four principles are proposed to narrow the gap between public administration and psychology.     

A Matter of Fairness: The Equity of Urban General Assistance

General assistance is the "safety net" of the welfare system, γet, most general assistance programs reflect the goals of cost containment more clearly than the goal of equity. Data from a 1982 survey of general assistance programs provide the basis for a causal analysis. The substantial variation across states seems based on willingness to provide services, rather than need. State welfare commitment is the most influential explanation on general assistance coverage, although per capita income, percent metropolitan, political culture, and percent unemployment also have some effect. Perhaps centralization at the federal level will provide equitable coverage; however, the current political environment makes such an outcome unlikely without major changes in public opinion.     

多视角的公共行政观——评《公共行政学：管理、政治和法律途径》一书

《公共行政学:管理、政治和法律途径》一书是美国著名行政学家戴维·H·罗森布鲁姆和罗伯特·S·克拉夫丘克的力作,是一部在国际公共行政学领域中享有盛誉的经典著作.首先总结了该书提出的三种不同视角的公共行政观、公共行政未来发展九大趋势及坚持传统公共行政范式,力图将(新)公共管理纳入其框架之中的主要观点.其次,分析了该书将法律途径纳入研究视角、多视角地研究公共行政的多元公共行政观及重视公共行政中民主宪政的重要性三方面的贡献及创新之处.再次,指出本书中的三点不足之处:其一是并未达到作者所预期的"合各种途径"的目的;其二是结构略显庞杂,论述不够深入、细致;其三是视角较为狭隘,仅局限于美国.最后,对于该书对我国的借鉴与启示作用,认为:一方面由于中、美国情差异很大,应该慎重对待该书中的相关理论;另一方面应借鉴该书中适用中国的经验、方法,推进中国公共行政理论与实践的发展.     

公共服务、公共管理与法国公共行政的现代化

本文基于胡德(Hood)的新公共管理思想和霍尔(Hall)与赖特(Wright)的新历史制度主义观点,分析了法国最近的几次改革及其相关理念,认为如果不同的政府都采用私营部门的管理方法来解决相似的问题,那么,改革的具体内容则依每个国家自身的环境,或先天条件而定.     

Designing Public Participation: Managing Problem Settings and Social Equity

Researchers suggest that inequity and disparities in public participation in the policy‐making process will go hand in hand unless public managers and community leaders are attentive to these concerns when they are designing participation opportunities. Previous research has considered how the design of participatory opportunities can address inequity, but it has provided few insights into what is behind design choices. This article provides a theoretical framework that links public managers' and community leaders' perspectives on their own political efficacy and sources of their efficacy, yielding four types of “designers.” The research hypothesizes that these types have different narratives of social equity in participation that affect their design choices. Data from more than 100 public managers and community leaders provide preliminary support for these relationships. Findings suggest that inequitable public participation will persist unless designers consider what is behind their choices, focusing first on understanding the problem setting, or their narrative of equity in public participation.     

The Science of Public Administration: Problems,Presumptions, Progress,and Possibilities

Nearly 70 years ago, Dahl noted the difficulty of constructing a science of public administration that was plagued by three interrelated problems: values, behavior, and culture. Underlying all three problems was the presumption that public administration could establish a set of universal principles independent of moral or political ends, individual human differences, or social influences. In discussing these three broad and easily accessible themes, Dahl did more than identify and critique the field's problems and presumptions. He also provided a road map to move the field forward and establish a science of public administration. Drawing on the framework provided by Dahl, this article argues that the field has made considerable progress in recognizing, if not addressing, each problem raised by Dahl. Even so, several current presumptions or omissions are also identified that, if challenged, can provide additional possibilities to advance the science of public administration.     

Coproduction and Equity in Public Service Delivery

Public managers and researchers devote much attention to the benefits of coproduction, or the mixing of the productive efforts of public employees and citizens in public service design and delivery. One concern, however, is the distributional consequences of coproduction. This article proposes that disadvantaged citizens may be constrained by a lack of knowledge or other resources necessary to contribute to and benefit from the coproduction process. From this assumption, the authors develop the theoretical argument that if coproduction programs were designed to lift constraints on disadvantaged citizens, they might increase both efficiency and equity. This claim is tested using a field experiment on educational services. A coproduction program providing immigrant parents with knowledge and materials useful to their children's early educational development had a substantial positive impact on the educational outcomes of disadvantaged children, thereby diminishing inequity. Economically, the program was more efficient than later compensation of low‐performing children.     

Public Value Governance: Moving Beyond Traditional Public Administration and the New Public Management

A new public administration movement is emerging to move beyond traditional public administration and New Public Management. The new movement is a response to the challenges of a networked, multisector, no‐one‐wholly‐in‐charge world and to the shortcomings of previous public administration approaches. In the new approach, values beyond efficiency and effectiveness—and especially democratic values—are prominent. Government has a special role to play as a guarantor of public values, but citizens as well as businesses and nonprofit organizations are also important as active public problem solvers. The article highlights value‐related issues in the new approach and presents an agenda for research and action to be pursued if the new approach is to fulfill its promise.