What Do We Mean by ‘Rethinking Regulation’?

This article identifies and discusses several different conceptions of regulatory reform. It subsequently looks at available evidence on trends in regulatory burdens and on the results of regulatory reform activity undertaken over the past 30 years. Thirdly, it identifies and briefly discusses the range of tools that are typically employed in implementing regulatory reform policies. It then examines some of the regulatory problems that implementation of the reform agenda has itself brought forth. It concludes with some comments which seek to assess the report of the Better Regulation Taskforce in the context of the broad overview of regulatory reform set out in the preceding sections of the article.     

Public Engagement for Informing Science and Technology Policy: What Do We Know,What Do We Need to Know,and How Will We Get There?

This article examines social science relevant to public engagements and identifies the challenges to the goal of meaningful public input into science and technology policy. Specifically, when considering “which forms, features, and conditions of public engagement are optimal for what purposes, and why?” we find social science has not clarified matters. We offer a model to guide systematic research that defines and empirically connects variations in features and types of public engagement activities to specifically defined variations in effective processes and outcomes. The specification of models, as we have done, will guide policy makers, practitioners, and the public in determining what kinds of engagement techniques are optimal for what kinds of purposes. Our model is presented to start conversations and inspire research that in the future should help to ensure meaningful public participation that meets the promise of contributing thoughtful societal values and perspectives into governmental policies impacting science and technology research.     

Caveat Emptor: What Do We Know about Public Administration Evidence and How Do We Know It?

This article provides an overview of a new feature in Public Administration Review called Evidence in Public Administration. This feature was created to provide a space in which scholars and practitioners of public administration can meet to engage in a dialogue about evidence in public decision making. In this feature, we will shine a light on the evidence needed to make effective decisions and examinations of the evidence that currently exists for contemporary public sector efforts. We explicitly want to create a resource for both practitioners and scholars to consult when trying to find evidence on a particular topic and to know the limitations and parameters of that evidence. This article lays out the purpose, scope, and rationale for the feature, as well as a call to engage in this endeavor.     

‘Genre Blurring’ and Public Administration: What Can We Learn from Ethnography?

This article seeks to broaden the craft of public administration by ‘blurring genres’. First, I explain the phrase ‘blurring genres’. Second, I provide some examples of early work in administrative ethnography. Third, I compare this early, modernist‐empiricist ethnography with interpretive ethnography, suggesting researchers confront three choices: naturalism vs. anti‐naturalism; intensive vs. hit‐and‐run fieldwork; and generalisation vs. local knowledge. After this general discussion, and fourth, I discuss the more prosaic issues that confront anyone seeking to use ethnography to study public administration and look at fieldwork roles, relevance, time, evidence and fieldwork relationships. Fifth, I describe and illustrate the several tools students of public administration can use as well as observation and interviews; namely, focus groups, para‐ethnography, visual ethnography, and storytelling. Finally, I conclude that ethnographic fieldwork provides texture, depth and nuance, and lets interviewees explain the meaning of their actions. It is an indispensable tool and a graphic example of how to enrich public administration by drawing on the theories and methods of the humanities.     

Communication with the Environment? Non-human Nature in the Theories of Jürgen Habermas

The theories of Jürgen Habermas provide us with a powerful analytical tool for the analysis of politics, including social movements. However, they are lacking in one particular area, the analysis of environmental politics. The reasons behind these difficulties can be traced through the development of Habermas's work and lie in the inability of non-human nature to participate in language-based discourse. The dilemma is acute – the ecocentric moral position needs grounding in the rationality of discourse if it is not to slip into possibly dangerous irrationality, but how can such a grounding occur? This article reviews the development of discussion in this area and investigates advocacy as a possible resolution of the problem.     

What Do We Talk About Now? Reflecting on Publications in AJPA 1970–2015

This article reflects on 45 years of articles published in the Australian Journal of Public Administration (AJPA), providing commentary not only on the journal's status and future but also the state of public administration in Australia. The analysis builds on a first study conducted in 1997, continuing the themes of institutional affiliation, subject matter and research methodology as key categories for AJPA article analysis. The context for the analysis is the advent of the journal's new editorial team. The article concludes that several opportunities present themselves for AJPA's future including performing a strategic stocktake of the discipline and debating its merits as well as marking out what might make for a peculiarly Australian form of public administration (if any) in the contemporary era.     

What Exactly Have We Learned from Decades of Applying “Business Solutions” to Public Organizations?

Editor's Note: The Perspectives in this issue are from prominent higher education leaders with roots in public administration and public policy. I asked the contributors to reflect upon experiences or principles grounded in our field that they have found meaningful during the course of their careers. My thanks to Rebecca Blank, Michael Crow, Mark Emmert and Kenneth Ruscio for their thoughtful and stimulating essays. JLP     

What Causes Unethical Behavior? A Meta‐Analysis to Set an Agenda for Public Administration Research

This article uses meta‐analysis to synthesize 137 experiments in 73 articles on the causes of unethical behavior. Results show that exposure to in‐group members who misbehave or to others who benefit from unethical actions, greed, egocentrism, self‐justification, exposure to incremental dishonesty, loss aversion, challenging performance goals, or time pressure increase unethical behavior. In contrast, monitoring of employees, moral reminders, and individuals’ willingness to maintain a positive self‐view decrease unethical conduct. Findings on the effect of self‐control depletion on unethical behavior are mixed. Results also present subgroup analyses and several measures of study heterogeneity and likelihood of publication bias. The implications are of interest to both scholars and practitioners. The article concludes by discussing which of the factors analyzed should gain prominence in public administration research and uncovering several unexplored causes of unethical behavior.     

What Can Performance Information Do to Legislators? A Budget‐Decision Experiment with Legislators

Studies on the influence of performance information on budgeting decisions have produced contradictory findings. This article offers a framework of the parliamentary context that links performance information to legislators’ budgeting decisions. The framework suggests that the impact on politicians’ allocations will differ depending on whether performance information is reflected in the budget proposal, whether the allocation issue concerns a politically difficult trade‐off for the decision maker, and whether information falls into a receptive partisan mind. The experimental study uses 57 actual legislators. The results show that the introduction of performance information into legislators’ deliberation process leads to stronger deviations from the status quo allocation. This difference occurs because performance information highlights more clearly the expected consequences of budgetary changes and allows for more pronounced reactions. More informed decisions, however, might make compromise among legislators more difficult because individual positions will become more polarized.     

What is a Community Service Obligation (CSO)? An Analysis of the Issues Involved in Identifying and Accounting for CSOs within Public Sector Organisations

he meaning of the term 'community service obligation' (CSO) has been a point of conjecture in recent years. This paper highlights the importance of CSOs within the context of the accountability of public sector organisations. In particular the paper advocates the need to formulate an agreed definition of a CSO. The paper seeks to distil such a definition by using academics and GBE representatives as authoritative opinions.     

What Have We Learned about the Performance of Council‐Manager Government? A Review and Synthesis of the Research

The 100th anniversary of the International City/County Management Association provides an excellent point to review and assess research on the performance of the council‐manager form of government. The development of the council‐manager form arguably has been the most important innovation in American local government over the last century, yet its impact on the performance of municipal governments is not well understood. This article reviews and assesses the empirical evidence for 10 propositions that council‐manager governments perform better than mayor‐council governments. This evidence indicates that although progress has been made on demonstrating differences in representation and functionality, the proposition that council‐manager governments are better managed than mayor‐council governments has yet to be seriously engaged in this literature. Filling this critical gap requires progress in two areas: the development of theory to explain why council‐manager governments are better‐managed organizations and the production of evidence assessing the major propositions of this theory.     

Reflections and findings on the critical citizen: Civic education – What for?

Abstract.  The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe proclaimed the year 2005 the 'European Year of Democratic Citizenship through Education', but the question is: What does the democracy-promoting citizen look like? This article focuses on the question of whether satisfied and supportive citizens or critical citizens have attitudes that promote democracy. The discussion of this question is based on empirical results from a survey of German citizens (N = 2,000), applying bivariate and multivariate methods. Political criticism is measured by indicators of dissatisfaction, attentiveness and system preference; five types of citizens are constructed: satisfied-attentive, satisfied-inattentive, dissatisfied-attentive, dissatisfied-inattentive citizens with a preference for a democratic system, and one type preferring nondemocratic systems. The article examines which of these types are more consistent with the 'ideal citizen'– defined as a citizen who participates, is well-informed, identifies with democracy and politics, has good internal efficacy and is willing to defend democracy. The data show that attentive citizens are more likely to promote democracy than inattentive ones. Attentive citizens are politically more knowledgeable, identify more strongly with the democratic system, feel more politically competent and are more willing to defend democracy. Political satisfaction or dissatisfaction has less of an influence on these dispositions.