By B. Guy Peters
The comparative examine of public coverage as soon as promised to make significant contributions to our figuring out of presidency. a lot of that promise now seems unfulfilled. What bills for this decline in highbrow fortunes and alter in highbrow style? evaluating Public Bureaucracies seeks to appreciate why. one of many central solutions is that there's no with ease approved and established variable that might enable comparative public management to comply to the standard canons of social examine. against this, comparative public coverage has a ready-made based variable in public expenditure. Peters discusses 4 attainable based variables for comparative public management. the 1st is personnel—the quantity and kind of people that paintings for presidency. moment, the quantity and sort of agencies that shape executive can recommend very much concerning the constitution of presidency. 3rd, the habit of participants is clearly vital for figuring out what truly occurs in government—such because the extents to which bureaucracies approximate the budget-maximizing habit posited by way of economists. Ginally, the relative energy of civil servants within the policymaking approach is a significant component in institutional politics in modern business societies.
Read Online or Download Comparing public bureaucracies: problems of theory and method PDF
Best public affairs & administration books
In accordance with contributions from teachers and improvement practitioners, this booklet indicates a number of methods and strategies for effectively enforcing governance reforms. It info six concerns that play a serious position within the technique of enforcing governance reforms in actual global political contexts: 1.
Previously a statistical appendix to the realm improvement stories, this e-book has confirmed to be an outstanding good fortune as a free-standing e-book. it's been enlarged to incorporate greater than eighty tables and six hundred symptoms, and has proved to be a useful resource to people who research company possibilities in constructing nations and rising markets.
Formal structures of accomplished making plans and performance-based administration have an extended if disappointing heritage in American executive. this can be illustrated such a lot dramatically by way of the failure of software budgeting (PPB) within the Sixties and resurrection of that administration approach in a handful of organisations during the last decade.
Extra resources for Comparing public bureaucracies: problems of theory and method
In fairness, some of the overreaction is now being corrected in the course of the resurgence of institutional analysis in political science (March and Olsen, 1984; Peters, 1985a). In addition, the burgeoning interest in the concept of the state (Benjamin and Page 12 Elkin, 1985; Dyson, 1980) may as it develops, require more attention to be paid to political institutions such as the public bureaucracy. Much must still be done, however, to develop approaches to comparative public administration which will be fully respectable to other colleagues in the social sciences while still capturing the nuanced interpretations that are necessary for an understanding of the operations of the modern bureaucracies and their roles in niaking public policy.
As noted above, this question has been subjected to much attitudinal investigation and has also been discussed by those more interested in practical politics than in academic research. Many political appointees in the Reagan administration, for example, have attempted, with the assistance of the Heritage Foundation, to find ways of making the federal bureaucracy more responsive to their own self-proclaimed ''radical agenda" (Butler, Sanera, and Weinrod, 1984). " is a question with a long history.
It is perhaps especially instructive that, although the comparative study of public policy began explicitly as a "subfield" within academic political science much later than comparative administration, in the eyes of most people (I believe) it has made greater progress than has comparative administration, especially if progress is measured by the canons of normal social science (Hancock, 1983). Any number of models and theories have been developed to explain differences in policy and at least some of these models have been subjected to empirical testing (Bunce, 1984; Flora and Heidenheimer, 1981; Heidenheimer, Heclo, and Adams, 1984; Lehner, 1985; Leichter, 1979).
Comparing public bureaucracies: problems of theory and method by B. Guy Peters