La nouvelle gestion publique et l'accroissement des marges de manœuvre : un terreau propice au développement de l'éthique?

Abstract: The administrative discretion of civil servants is a central topic in public administration literature. Some authors view it as necessary and beneficial, while other researchers see it is a source of widespread abuse. However, reforms inspired by the “new public management” taking place in a number of public administrations are promoting greater managerial flexibility. In parallel with these modernization initiatives directed at administration, scandals continue to shake politico‐administrative life, and ethical issues are increasingly at the heart of public action. It is within this context that we question the relationship between an increasing managerial discretion and the development of an ethics infrastructure. Which areas are at risk? Can ethics help overcome the potential abuses of power? How do managers perceive their ability to be flexible and the role of ethics in their work? How do you implement the ethical requirements developed in various standards documents? These are the principal themes addressed in this article that presents the findings of a qualitative case study conducted in a Quebec ministry in 2008–2009. Our results show that, contrary to what promoters of the new public management claim, managers have little, if any, discretionary power in matters of financial management. Their actions and decisions are strictly governed by hierarchical control mechanisms or a computer system. This explains in part why taking ownership of general principles and establishing an ethics infrastructure remain a formal process.     

Two conceptual approaches to Latin American social movements from the perspective of activists and scholars: A review essay

Steve Ellner is the director of the Center for Administrative and Economic Research of the Universidad de Oriente, Puerto La Cruz, Venezuela. He is the author ofOrganized Labor in Venezuela, 1958–1991: Behavior and Concerns in a Democratic Setting (Scholarly Resources) and coeditor ofThe Latin American Left: From the Fall of Allende to Perestroika (Westview Press), both published in 1993.     

Execution publicity and homicide in Georgia

A requisite of both general deterrence and brutalization theories of capital punishment is citizen awareness of executions. Yet this dimension is frequently left unmeasured in the literature on executions and homicide. Further, the current literature utilizes nationwide data, which introduces aggregation bias. The present study deals with these issues, testing the brutalization theory with data on publicized executions in the state of Georgia. Monthly data are used in order to capture any short-term brutalization effect. The results of a multivariate time-series model find that a publicized execution is associated with an increase of 2.6 homicides, or 6.8%, in the month of the publicized execution. Publicized executions were associated with an increase of 55 homicides during the time period analyzed. The results provide no support for the deterrence, victim mobilization, and normative validation perspectives on homicide. The findings can be interpreted, however, from several different varieties of brutalization theory.     

Stemming the flow of bood? The illusion of self-regulation

This paper considers the viability of the self-regulation of occupational safety. It reports upon case studies of six companies currently operating in the UK chemicals sector. These companies and this sector provide highly favourable ‘testing sites’ for self-regulatory practices. However, through an examination of the power and location of safety staff within organisations, forms of management accountability, the state of safety training, and the mechanisms for communicating compliance problems, it becomes clear that many of the fundamental elements of self-regulation are not being met. This highlights the dangers of placing faith in self-regulation as a strategy that can be generalized, and indicates that compliance with safety regulations and standards must be forced upon companies by various stakeholding groups.