Public Administration and politics

Thèmes abordés

Public Administration - Administration Publique, Bureaucracy - bureaucratie, Officials - fonctionnaires, Independence - Indépendance, Politics - politique, Max Weber

Résumé du document

Why a subdue Public Administration to politics is not desirable?

David H. Rosenbloom and Robert S. Kravchuk's textbook on Public Administration defined three general approaches to administrative theory and practice: the management one, the political one, and the legal one which emphasizes legalistic concerns. As the purpose of this essay is to study the relationships between politics and Public Administration, I will use the political approach. According to the traditional definition, Public Administration is supposed to execute politics' will. In Woodrow Wilson's words, it is "the government in action".

From this brief definition, two things can be said: firstly, a clear dichotomy between politics and Public Administration exists. Secondly, politics is considered as superior to Public Administration: one could say that public administrators are the "servants" and the political actors, the masters. Indeed, politics take the decisions that the public administrators have to implement.

But this superiority of politics can lead to a domination of Public Administration, this is what can be called a "complete subdue Public Administration". It implies strict obedience of Public Administration, inhibition, control, lack of liberty in bureaucrats' action and disciplinary measures if those restrictions are not respected.

The purpose of this essay is to show why this kind of Public Administration is not desirable and why the balance of powers between Public Administration and politics should not be too asymmetric. It will be seen several "degrees" of domination: from "complete" subdue Public Administration to a more moderate one with the Weber's thought.

For that, I will develop three main arguments:

1.The "primitive model" of a complete subdue PA is now outdated.
2.The Weber's model of a devoted but neutral PA is not totally satisfactory.
3.There are many benefits to more independence.

Extraits

[...] Kravchuk's textbook on Public Administration defined three general approaches to administrative theory and practice: the management one, the political one, and the legal one which emphasizes legalistic concerns. As the purpose of this essay is to study the relationships between politics and Public Administration, I will use the political approach. According to the traditional definition, Public Administration is supposed to execute politics' will. In Woodrow Wilson's words, it is government in action”. From this brief definition, two things can be said: firstly, a clear dichotomy between politics and Public Administration exists. [...]

[...] Politics and administrators have specific and different roles: politics take decisions and bureaucracy implements. - He wants to avoid the abuses of the past by laying down the respect of the rules. Max Weber wants to develop what lawyers call the “procedural which is at the very foundation of democratic government. Indeed, conversely, the absence of procedural guarantees leads to absolutism[4]. - He thinks that Public Administration has a role in our democratic systems: it implements the political decisions with neutrality and efficiency. [...]

[...] Actually, this new philosophy of Administration is close to the private management of the firms. The Public Management” is one of those philosophies: since the 1980's, it has been used to modernize Public Administration toward a more market-oriented vision of the public sector. Rationality and efficiency are at the core of the NPM; it even suggests, as it has been said before, that citizens are consumers who should be well-served and satisfied. The consequence of that is the new perception of bureaucracy in the Modern States: Administrations develop more and more a legitimacy based on their expertise and efficiency My suggestions for a better model of Public Administration Granting more leeway to bureaucrats Even if the politics should keep a superior position over Public Administration, more leeway should be granted to bureaucrats. [...]

[...] In this NPM's perspective, the Weberian model is not satisfactory. Indeed, according to Max Weber, bureaucracies are only supposed to serve democratic purposes, contrary to the theorists of NPM who think that bureaucracies must serve citizen's needs as well through its efficiency and its market model (citizens are considered as customers). All those critics of Weber's model lead us to consider the benefits of more independence in the Public Administration. iii. The benefits of more independencE in the Public aDministration 1. Which benefits to more independence? [...]

[...] And according to him, nothing was supposed to be more rational than the organization of bureaucracy. Contrary to the “primitive model” where the bureaucrats had to give personal allegiance to their superior and where favouritism reigned, Max Weber wants the bureaucrats to be free but respectful to the discipline and hierarchy of administration. Indeed, in Weber's conception, bureaucracy is a pure model of the “legal domination”, where rationality and the respect of the rules are the main features. Subordination and neutrality Thus, in Max Weber's view, bureaucrats are neutral tools well-disciplined who aim at implementing political decisions. [...]