Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Pages: 37 - 46 Abstract: AbstractHow can we empirically identify and measure policy learning' Through a problematized review, we develop a novel perspective to identifying, explaining, and addressing interconnected ontological, theoretical-contextual, and consequently, methodological challenges in the measurement of policy learning. We de-compose measurement as a three-fold endeavor, concerning: conceptual foundations, the design of measurement instruments, and their deployment in empirical research. Then, we synthesize exemplars of good practice across these three stages and offer a set of recommendations for the refinement of policy learning measurement, while maintaining theoretical and methodological pluralism. PubDate: Tue, 05 Mar 2024 00:00:00 GMT DOI: 10.1093/ppmgov/gvae001 Issue No:Vol. 7, No. 1-2 (2024)
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Pages: 47 - 59 Abstract: AbstractIt is often argued that uncertainty is an inherent characteristic of citizen–state interactions. It is therefore hardly surprising that many scholars of street-level bureaucracy have studied how frontline workers cope with and make discretionary decisions under uncertain conditions. However, citizens’ experiences of uncertainty have received limited attention in the street-level bureaucracy literature. This article argues that understanding citizens’ experiences of uncertainty is highly relevant because experiences of uncertainty are likely to affect mental well-being of individuals negatively. The article seeks to address this gap by building a conceptual framework for understanding and analyzing citizens’ experiences with uncertainty in state–citizen interactions based on theoretical insights from the existing literature and in-depth qualitative analysis of 20 narrative interviews with former coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients and their relatives concerning their encounter with health authorities. The article proposes a conceptual framework that distinguishes between epistemic uncertainty and moral uncertainty. Epistemic uncertainty concerns uncertainty about empirical facts or knowledge. Moral uncertainty concerns uncertainty about values due to conflicting or competing norms and values. The article illustrates how these forms of uncertainty may arise before, during, and after citizens’ interaction with frontline workers. PubDate: Sat, 02 Mar 2024 00:00:00 GMT DOI: 10.1093/ppmgov/gvae002 Issue No:Vol. 7, No. 1-2 (2024)
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Pages: 60 - 74 Abstract: AbstractA critical question in relation to inter-agency coordination is not only whether, but how, to coordinate. This question is particularly salient when agencies are subject to a top-down mandate. While inter-agency coordination can provide multiple benefits, agencies frequently have concerns about the potential risks of coordination. Differing coordination mechanisms may reduce or exacerbate those concerns. Depending on their coordination concerns, agencies will be inclined to favor certain mechanisms over others. Examination of the implementation of California’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, which mandates local agency coordination, indicates that coordination mechanism selection is influenced by which combination of concerns agencies hold, with autonomy considerations taking priority over other concerns. These findings suggest opportunities to improve the explanatory power of theories of inter-agency coordination by incorporating potential hierarchies of concerns, their distribution across the multiple agencies tasked with coordinating, and configurational effects. To this end, we propose a contingency theory of agency concerns and coordination mechanism choice under a mandate to coordinate. PubDate: Thu, 28 Mar 2024 00:00:00 GMT DOI: 10.1093/ppmgov/gvae003 Issue No:Vol. 7, No. 1-2 (2024)
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Pages: 1 - 12 Abstract: AbstractGlobal recognition that there are universal human rights and that governments have a duty to respect them, was one of the most important developments of the 20th century. In this century, though, human rights are challenged in many places. What role do scholars and practitioners in public administration play in protecting human rights' This question has not received adequate attention in the field. In this roundtable, nine scholars explore the different ways in which public administration scholarship and practice may contribute to the advancement of fundamental human rights. A general theme is the need within our field for more systematic attention to the subject of human rights. Contributors identify topics that deserve particular attention, such as the protection of democracy, the provision of services essential to personal security and development, and the empowerment of Indigenous peoples. PubDate: Sat, 18 Nov 2023 00:00:00 GMT DOI: 10.1093/ppmgov/gvad010 Issue No:Vol. 7, No. 1-2 (2023)
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Pages: 13 - 26 Abstract: AbstractThe legitimacy of democracy and civil rights is based upon laws and administrative procedures. The presence of a legal framework and its application by bureaucrats in their daily decisions are prerequisites for the democratic rule of law. This explains why, in contexts of democratic backsliding, legal frameworks are under attack. Scholars observed the role of public administration in processes of democratic backsliding, but there is still a gap in understanding the disputes around the legal framework. Here, we analyze the conflicts between politicians and bureaucrats around the legal framework in a context of democratic backsliding. Analyzing the case of Brazil under Bolsonaro’s Government, we draw on 164 interviews with bureaucrats to understand how both bureaucrats and politicians dispute the legitimacy, uses, and interpretations of the legal framework to attack or protect democratic institutions and civil rights. On one side, bureaucrats defend themselves and their legitimacy through existing rules and procedures. On the other side, politicians change or reinterpret the rules to fragilize bureaucrats’ decisions. In this process, both politicians and bureaucrats learn how to improve their strategies around the uses of legal frameworks. These findings contribute to understanding how the dynamics around the legal framework explain processes of democratic backsliding. PubDate: Wed, 13 Sep 2023 00:00:00 GMT DOI: 10.1093/ppmgov/gvad008 Issue No:Vol. 7, No. 1-2 (2023)
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Pages: 27 - 36 Abstract: AbstractThe discipline of public administration has grappled with concepts regarding the public for well over a century. Scholars from public opinion, public choice, and public value(s) have analyzed myriad elements of administration related to the public. Scholars also have applied numerous concepts from philosophical pragmatism to public administration. However, detailed explorations of the fundamental concept of the public remain surprisingly sparse. The public remains eclipsed by administration. In this essay, I analyze the concept of the public focusing on the works of John Dewey. Viewed through this lens, publics emerge when social interaction generates unreglated effects on communities that respond by organizing collective or state action, a process which I refer to as the realization of the pragmatic public. I juxtapose the theory with multiple extant literature on public administration, including public choice, transaction costs, and public value(s). I identify consistencies and inconsistencies to provide a pluralistic yet coherent framework in the hope of revealing points of departure for future theory development. Finally, I reframe and extend the pragmatic public by applying the insights of contemporary scholarship in networks and complexity theory. PubDate: Fri, 01 Dec 2023 00:00:00 GMT DOI: 10.1093/ppmgov/gvad011 Issue No:Vol. 7, No. 1-2 (2023)
Subscription journal
[425 journals]
