Controlling Administrative Discretion Promotes Social Equity? Evidence from a Natural Experiment

Although social equity has been a formal pillar of public administration for decades, identifying mechanisms through which public officials inadvertently reproduce unfair conditions remains a relevant topic. In particular, it is important to understand how the habits and practices of street‐level bureaucrats may result in an unjust allocation of public resources. This article provides evidence on how the administrative discretion conferred on school principals may result in an efficient but unfair condition regarding the allocation of students across schools, thus undermining social equity. By exploiting a natural experiment, we are able to provide reliable evidence on how controlling administrative discretion decreases the segregation of students based on their socioeconomic status.     

Social equity and LGBTQ populations in African public administration: A macro- and micro-approach

How do public administrators understand social equity toward lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) individuals and communities? To better understand social equity, this study uses data on the views of public and nonprofit administrators in 33 countries in Africa on LGB people. Based on these responses, we gain a better understanding of homophobia in public administrators. Furthermore, this data helps public administrators to explore how social equity might look differently to public and nonprofit administrators in different countries. Building on this foundation, this study proposes understanding social equity from both a Micro (individual) and a Macro (cultural)-perspective. Bringing in this micro- and macro-perspective can help public administrators and researchers to discuss how individuals and organizations identify “vulnerable” populations and appropriate ways to support vulnerable groups.     

Maximizing social equity as a pillar of public administration: An examination of cannabis dispensary licensing in Pennsylvania

Public administration upholds four pillars of an administrative practice: economy, efficiency, effectiveness, and social equity. The question arises, however, how do administrators balance effectiveness and social equity when implementing policy? Can the values contributing to administrative decisions be measured? This study leverages the expansion of medical cannabis programs in the states to interrogate these questions. The awarding of dispensary licenses in Pennsylvania affords the ability to determine the effect of social equity scoring on license award decisions, relative to criteria that represent the other pillars. The results show that safety and business acumen were the most important determining factors in the awarding of licenses, both effectiveness concerns. Social equity does not emerge as a significant determinant until the second round of licensing. This study then discusses the future of social equity provisions for cannabis policy, as well as what the findings mean for social equity in public administration.     

Federal and State Public Forest Administration in the New Millennium: Revisiting Herbert Kaufman's The Forest Ranger

Herbert Kaufman's 1960 investigation of federal forest rangers provided important insights into administrative discretion, agency culture, and natural resource policy making. Subsequent studies of Forest Service administration have documented that agency's change over time, mirroring broad changes in federal public administration. But little is known about state forest administration. This article describes results from a survey of line officers in 48 state forest agencies, as well as state forest statute analysis. Results indicate systematic state–federal differences in legal constraints, citizen interactions, and the forest administrators themselves. Though these differences foster state administrator decision making based on professional expertise, they do not encourage the incorporation of stakeholder views into agency policy making, nor do they yield a bureaucracy that represents a diverse constituency. State forest administrators perceive substantial external challenges to their professional discretion, but it remains to be seen whether state forest agencies will change to more closely resemble their federal counterpart.     

Taken for Granted? Managing for Social Equity in Grant Programs

Managing for social equity performance has long been a goal without much guidance for public managers. We examine social equity performance in the context of indirect governance through the administration of grant programs and, more specifically, the matching of policy responses (grant funding) to social needs. Grant program managers must allocate funding to match needs while also ensuring accountability, but common administrative models that rely on competition can undermine social equity performance. We develop a unique framework to analyze the relative social equity performance of four models of grant administration in general. These models are defined by whether competitions or formulas are used to select grantees and to allocate funding. We test the implications of the framework in an analysis of funding distributions from the nonentitlement Community Development Block Grant program in four states. Our findings suggest that social equity in grant programs is better served when grantors do not rely solely on competitive grant contracting in the selection and distribution of grant funds, which is typical in grant administration. However, policy makers and managers can design institutional arrangements that utilize competition, but in a manner that does not create a bias against more socially equitable funding decisions.     

New Public Governance in the Baltic States: Flexible Administration and Rule Bending

Abstract

The New Public Governance approach advocates a more flexible and participatory public administration as means to higher efficiency and increased legitimacy. Increasing flexibility and thereby public employees’ discretion, however, may pose a risk to equality and impartiality, core values in democratic and rule-of-law societies. Using a survey among Baltic public employees, this article explores this risk. We ask whether public employees’ preferences for flexible rule application go hand in hand with acceptance of bending the rules, even if it means a breach of impartiality. We find that this is the case. We also find that contrary to what the New Public Governance approach expects, neither citizen participation nor generalized trust works as a control on rule bending. On a positive note, however, we find that control mechanisms associated with Weberian Public Administration lessen acceptance for bending the rules.     

PAR’s Social Equity Footprint

During the 75th anniversary of Public Administration Review (PAR), this article examines the social equity scholarship published in PAR from 1940 to 2013. Less than 5 percent of all articles published in PAR since its inception focus on social equity. The articles published in PAR are primarily concentrated within the areas of personnel and public policy. Very few articles were published in the areas of budgeting or ethics. While social equity scholarship published in PAR has made a valuable contribution to understanding the career inequities of women and minorities in the public sector, scholars and professionals need to more thoroughly examine the black box of agency practice and structural inequities to examine why they persist. The challenge for future social equity research in public administration is to examine broader dimensions of equity and to understand how social inequities in administration can be mitigated.     

Administrative Discretion and Active Representation: An Expansion of the Theory of Representative Bureaucracy

Recent studies of the theory of representative bureaucracy have focused on active representation, whereby administrators in public organizations work to advance the interests of particular groups, achieving policy outcomes that directly address the needs of those groups. The concept of administrative discretion is central to these studies, as an administrator must have the discretion to produce results that reflect the values and beliefs of these groups. While the presence of discretion is often implied in these studies, few have examined it explicitly. Using data from the Farmer's Home Administration, we explore whether administrators who perceive themselves as having more discretion enact policy outcomes that are more representative of minority interests. The results strongly support the conclusion that administrators who perceive themselves as possessing significant discretion and who assume the role of minority representative in their agencies are more likely to enact policy outcomes that favor minority interests.     

Restoring the Rule of Law to Public Administration: What Frank Goodnow Got Right and Leonard White Didn't

Although the rule of law is universally regarded as a fundamental principle of democratic governance, the field of public administration continues to exhibit the "anti-legal temper" that emerged in the 1920s, when Leonard White's managerialism largely displaced Frank Goodnow's emphasis on the intimacy of law and administration. Although administrative law is a distinguished subfield of scholarship and practice within public administration, the consensus view within the profession seems to be that law is one of many constraints on administrative discretion rather than its source, a challenge to administrative leadership rather than its guiding principle. In addition to unacceptably narrowing the range of values infusing public administration, such a view undermines the profession's ability to contribute to the design of our governance arrangements at a time when constitutional institutions are being seriously challenged. To fulfill its constitutional role, public administration must commit itself to the rule of law as an institution that secures its legitimacy.     

In Good Company: Why Social Capital Matters for Women during Disaster Recovery

Although social capital has made inroads into the public administration literature, little is known about the gender dimensions of social capital in the context of a disaster. This article examines what kind of benefits, if any, social capital offers for women who are affected by disasters. Studying this question is important because it would help public administrators overcome the unique vulnerabilities of women and strengthen their capabilities in preparing for, responding to, and recovering from disasters. This case study of the city of Gölcük, Turkey, suggests that social capital offers benefits for women affected by disasters because it is therapeutic in nature and helps women gain empowerment and avoid the stigma of public assistance. The article offers lessons on how public administrators could build social capital in disaster‐stricken communities by enabling face‐to‐face interaction, initiating leadership programs, and putting in place institutions and policies that are conducive to collective action.     

The importance of discretion for welfare services to minorities: Examining workload and anti-immigration attitudes

Migration influx in Western countries resulting in increasingly diverse societies results in more complex situations for bureaucrats in their client interactions in welfare organizations. The role of discretion for services to clients has received much attention in the public administration research and therefore this study explores the relation among perceived workload, anti-immigration attitudes, perceived discretion, and perceived difficulty in working with migrants. The paper examines the function of perceived discretion as moderator or mediator variable in this constellation. The relations are examined by using structural equation modelling based on a survey among Swedish welfare bureaucrats (N = 1,319). The results show that heavier perceived workload increased the likelihood of experiencing work with migrants as difficult and that greater perceived discretion decreased the likelihood of experiencing work with migrants as difficult. The results suggest that perceived discretion functions as a mediator for the relation between perceived workload and difficulty in work with migrants: potentially functioning as a ‘buffer’ for organizational pressure. We also found that bureaucrats who hold negative attitudes towards migrants were more likely to express their work with migrants as more difficult. This paper contributes to the public administration literature by increasing our knowledge on how discretion has significance in relation to when bureaucrat's behaviour is determined by specific organizational and personal factors.     

Reimagining race and gender in public administration and public policy: Insights from an interdisciplinary systematic review

Public administration scholarship on race and gender is motivated by normative concerns about social equity, and dominated by work on bureaucracy and its representativeness. Despite decades of research on race and gender in public administration, there has been limited engagement with racializing and gendering processes. Relatedly, scant attention is paid to other disciplines that center on race and gender in theorizing. The purpose of this review is to explore public administration scholarship on race and gender in the context of allied social science disciplines, reveal limits of current approaches in public administration, and articulate strategies for enhancing understanding of race and gender in public administration scholarship. We use bibliometric and content analysis methods to map the intellectual structure of social science scholarship on race and gender, highlight public administration's place in this structure, and compare public administration scholarship on race and gender with other social science disciplines.     

Frances Harriet Williams: Unsung Social Equity Pioneer

Frances Harriet Williams was an unsung social equity pioneer in the field of public administration. Long before the Minnowbrook I Conference convened in the 1960s to discuss the importance of fairness in the provision of public services, Williams successfully promoted values of social equity and racial fairness within public administration scholarly and practitioner communities. Raised by progressive parents in the South, Williams was the only high‐ranking African‐American woman in the federal government during President Franklin D. Roosevelt's administration. She was directly involved in leading the Office of Price Administration to a staff that was at least 13 percent black when the rest of government was no more than 1 percent black. This work was the focus of her 1947 article in Public Administration Review, the first publication on racial equity to appear in the field's flagship journal. Her efforts and accomplishments undergird many of the ideals and practices that constitute the concept of social equity in public administration today.     

Gender and the Personal Shaping of Public Administration in the United States: Mary Anderson and the Women's Bureau, 1920–1930

Scholars of public administration in the United States traditionally view the 1920s as a decade when the administrative orthodoxy, emphasizing efficiency and organizational structure, dominated the field. This viewpoint recently has been challenged by arguments that the social justice–oriented views of women progressives and the philosophy of pragmatism also influenced public administration. However, no one has examined how women public administrators implemented exceptions to the prevailing, masculine viewpoints of administrative objectivity and the strict dichotomy between politics and administration during the 1920s. Using Mary Anderson (1872–1964), the longtime director of the U.S. Department of Labor's Women's Bureau, as a case study, this article examines how her experiences as a woman worker and labor organizer influenced her advocacy of an alternative view of public administration, and how, from 1920 through 1930, she established the Women's Bureau within the prevailing orthodoxy yet also made the government agency a notable exception through its vigorous support of social justice feminism, particularly during and after the 1926 national Women's Industrial Conference.     

Administrative (de)centralization,performance equity,and outcome achievement in rural contexts: An empirical study of U.S. child welfare systems

Whether public services are better delivered through centralized or decentralized administrative systems is one of the most enduring debates in public administration. This article contributes to the debate with a study of program outcome achievement in U.S. child welfare services. We examine whether centralized state‐administered or decentralized county‐administered systems are more successful at realizing desired outcomes, which exhibit greater performance equity, and which are more successful at securing program outcomes in rural settings. Using a coarsened exact matching approach to quasi‐experimental research, we find that centralized child welfare systems exhibit greater success at achieving desired outcomes—in both rural contexts and overall. No discernible difference is found in centralized and decentralized systems' performance equity; outcome disparities exist under both structures. The study thus lends credence to centralization arguments, but at the same time cautions that centralized administration is not a structural panacea.     

行政裁量控制中的裁量基准和公众参与

行政裁量在行政管理领域中被广泛地采用,没有行政裁量就没有行政管理。行政裁量权的合理运行,可以起到维护公共利益和公共秩序,提高行政效率的重要作用。为了规范行政裁量权的行使,确有必要通过裁量控制中的公众参与的三大程序制度对它加以控制。     

Sand in the machinery? Comparing bureaucrats' and politicians' attitudes toward public sector reform

Abstract.   This article addresses the general notion that bureaucrats may oppose the introduction of reforms in the public sector, and that their views concerning reform will differ from that of politicians. Such a situation may create a sense of conflict between the two spheres, but different views on public sector reform can also follow other conflict dimensions. Two such dimensions are outlined: the one between political parties, and the one between a political-administrative elite and a group of more peripheral politicians and administrators. The hypotheses set forward are tested by comparing local authority politicians' and administrative leaders' views on public sector reform. The data does not support the notion of general conflict between politicians and administrators, or that of conflict of interest between an elite and a more peripheral group. In general, politicians and administrators have rather similar views, but there is a wide difference between political parties. The administration places itself somewhat in the middle between political extremes, being moderately positive towards most reforms.