Interviewing in Public Administration

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philippe Zittoun
Keyword(s):  
Public Administration ◽  
Policy Process ◽  
Social Relationship ◽  
Qualitative Interview ◽  
Production Of Knowledge ◽  
Process Work ◽  
Epistemological Analysis

Qualitative interview is one of the most important methods used to understand how public administration and the policy process work. It essentially involves questioning actors to obtain exclusive data about their day-to-day activities, their production of knowledge, the arguments they use, their relationships, the discrete meetings they participate in, their struggles, their strategies, and so on. Privileging “how” over “why,” it allows researchers to consider interviewees as witnesses of their own activities, enabling them to access the daily happenings within the administration, rather than as analysts from whom “good” and “acceptable” reasons are sought to justify their actions. These interviews must be analyzed exclusively by the interviewer, which supposes an epistemological analysis of the discourse and also requires researchers to bear in mind that any interview is a social relationship between the interviewer and the interviewee and necessarily leads to data bias, even though experience and several tips can help limit these biases.

Public Administration and Policy Process, Analysis, and Advocacy

2021 ◽  
pp. 348-389
Author(s):  
Douglas F. Morgan ◽  
Richard T. Green ◽  
Craig W. Shinn ◽  
Kent S. Robinson ◽  
Margaret E. Banyan
Keyword(s):  
Public Administration ◽  
Policy Process ◽  
Process Analysis

Taking Public Administration Seriously

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-45
Author(s):  
Joseph Heath
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Policy Process ◽  
Civil Service ◽  
Democratic Legitimacy ◽  
Administrative Power ◽  
Liberal Democratic ◽  
The One ◽  
Public Decision

This chapter begins with a series of examples that illustrate the power wielded by unelected state officials. This power includes not only discretion but also control over the policy process, as well as the ability to bring pressure to bear upon elected officials. The exercise of this administrative power, far from being an imperfection in the system, contributes a great deal to the quality of public decision-making. But it raises a difficult normative question concerning how unelected officials can wield power in a way that is consistent with the commitment to political neutrality of the permanent civil service and to the more general principles of democratic legitimacy that govern liberal-democratic states. A contrast is drawn between this position and the one defended by Pierre Rosanvallon.

The impossibility of a universal public service perspective

2017 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 222-236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret Stout
Keyword(s):  
Public Administration ◽  
Public Service ◽  
Policy Process ◽  
Degree Programs ◽  
Public Administrators ◽  
Public Governance ◽  
Global Context ◽  
Lofty Goal ◽  
Theories Of Leadership ◽  
Service Perspective

The international accrediting organization for public service pedagogy, the Network of Schools of Public Policy, Affairs, and Administration, has established and adopted “universal competencies” that Master of Public Administration degree programs are expected to develop to establish a “global standard in public service education” ( http://www.naspaa.org/ ). This lofty goal suggests that there is one best way to prepare public administration students to: (a) lead and manage in public governance; (b) participate in and contribute to the policy process; (c) analyze, synthesize, think critically, solve problems, and make decisions; (d) articulate and apply a public service perspective; and (e) communicate and interact productively with a diverse and changing workforce and citizenry. While the universality of these competencies is not disputed, there are definitely competing ways to approach these various tasks. There are many different theories of leadership and management. Differing roles for public administrators in the policy process are each considered legitimate. Based on these differences, what can be articulated and successfully applied as a public service perspective will also differ situationally, particularly when considering the dynamic and diverse global context. This article explores this challenge and the implications it represents for instructors seeking to socialize students into the profession of public service and build their capacity “to articulate and apply a public service perspective” in consideration of “a diverse and changing workforce and citizenry.” Successful pedagogical approaches to this conundrum are explored and the article concludes with discussion of the potential usefulness of this approach in the global context, given the diversity of public service contexts in which graduates may find themselves.

Public Economics: Taxes in America: What Everyone Needs to Know

2013 ◽  
Vol 51 (4) ◽  
pp. 1199-1200
Author(s):  
Julie Berry Cullen
Keyword(s):  
Public Administration ◽  
Policy Process ◽  
Public Economics ◽  
Policy Research ◽  
Public Affairs ◽  
Income Taxes ◽  
Law School ◽  
University Of Michigan ◽  
Business Economics ◽  
The University

Julie Berry Cullen of University of California, San Diego reviews, “Taxes in America: What Everyone Needs to Know” by Leonard E. Burman and Joel Slemrod. The Econlit abstract of this book begins: “Explores how the U.S. tax system works, how it affects people and businesses, and how it might be made better. Discusses the basics of taxes; personal income taxes; business income taxes; taxing spending; other kinds of taxes; taxes and the economy; the hidden welfare state; the burden of taxation; tax administration and enforcement; misperceptions and reality in the policy process; tax myths; and tax reform. Burman is Daniel Patrick Moynihan Professor of Public Affairs in the Maxwell School and is with the Departments of Public Administration and Economics and the Law School at Syracuse University. Slemrod is Paul W. McCracken Collegiate Professor of Business Economics and Public Policy in the Stephen M. Ross School of Business, Director of the Office of Tax Policy Research in the Ross School of Business, and Professor and Chair in the Department of Economics at the University of Michigan.”

scholarly journals Sujetos colectivos y procesos de trabajo interrogados en triálogo coproductivo. Acerca de la producción social de conocimiento

2017 ◽  
pp. 255
Author(s):  
Alberto L. Bialakowsky ◽  
Cecilia Lusnich ◽  
Delia Elena Franco ◽  
José Manuel Grima ◽  
Omar Navarro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Critical Point ◽  
Knowledge Production ◽  
Social Relationship ◽  
Subjective Effects ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Production Of Knowledge ◽  
Research Production ◽  
Cognitive Research ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
The Social

ResumenEl énfasis de los aspectos conceptuales y epistemológicos planteados aquí, invita a elaborar y profundizar una mirada compleja como posibilidad para de-velar y des-ficcionalizar procesos, como así sus efectos sociales y subjetivos, promoviendo como punto de partida una interrogación colectiva, no transferida. Sus productos y sus efectos se reflejan en una resignificación que condensa la valoración de su producción cognoscitiva investigativa y el instrumento convergente en su resistencia. Paralelamente, nos dirigimos a revisar desde una perspectiva crítica la producción usual del saber y la relación social entre investigadorinvestigado y el lugar de la ciencia como afluente del cambio.Palabras clave: producción de conocimiento; sujetos colectivos; coproducción investigativa.Abstract The emphasis of the conceptual and epistemological issues raised here invite you to develop a deeper and more complex viewpoint as a possibility to bring to light and break the myths around processes, as well as their social and subjective effects, promoting a collective question as a starting point, not transferred. Their products and effects are reflected on a new meaning that condenses the assessment of their cognitive research production and the converged instrument in their resistance. In parallel, a review of the usual production of knowledge and the social relationship between researcher and the product researched from a critical point of view and the place of science as a means of change has been addressed.Key words: knowledge production; collective subjects, co-research production.

scholarly journals Artificial Intelligence in Enforcement: Epistemological Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 75
Author(s):  
Alexey I. Ovchinnikov ◽  
Alexey Yu. Mamychev ◽  
Tatiana S. Yatsenko ◽  
Artur Kravchenko ◽  
Yuri A. Kolesnikov
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Hermeneutic Circle ◽  
Administrative Functions ◽  
Legal Problems ◽  
Key Factor ◽  
General Norm ◽  
Epistemological Analysis ◽  
Artificial Intelligence Systems

The presented study examines the epistemological and philosophical and legal problems of the introduction of artificial intelligence systems in law enforcement. The article discusses the problematic implementation and use of artificial intelligence to automate the enforcement process, the judiciary and public administration. It is shown that the latter is considered without taking into account a key factor - the specifics of the intellectual process of bringing the general norm to a particular case. The authors show that for artificial intelligence systems, the contextuality of the principles of law is not achievable, while it is extremely necessary in law enforcement. In AI, contextual intellectual procedures cannot be programmed, since the ratio between the norm and the context of its interpretation involves a break through the hermeneutic circle in which the norm is a part and the context of the norm (industry principles) is a whole. The limited possibilities of using artificial intelligence systems in justice are also discussed, it is proved that digitalization in this area will be only instrumental in nature, and the administrative functions of robotic technologies are quite problematic and generally ineffective in the spiritual, moral and ethical dimension.

scholarly journals Catalyzing Innovation: Governance Enablers of Nature-Based Solutions

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 1971
Author(s):  
Juliette G. C. Martin ◽  
Anna Scolobig ◽  
JoAnne Linnerooth-Bayer ◽  
Wei Liu ◽  
Jörg Balsiger
Keyword(s):  
Public Administration ◽  
Policy Process ◽  
Financial Incentives ◽  
Social Economic ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Community Based ◽  
The Public ◽  
Pressure Groups ◽  
Societal Challenges ◽  
Wide Range

There is growing recognition that using the properties of nature through nature-based solutions (NBS) can help to provide viable and cost-effective solutions to a wide range of societal challenges, including disaster risk reduction (DRR). However, NBS realization depends critically on the governance framework that enables the NBS policy process. Drawing from three case studies in Nocera Inferiore (Italy), Munich (Germany), and Wolong (China), we identify key governance enablers—the contextual preconditions, policy processes, and institutions—that proved essential for NBS initiation, planning, design, and implementation. In the three cases, interviews confirm the success of the NBS measures and their benefits in terms not only of DRR but of multiple ecological and social–economic co-benefits. Results highlight critical governance enablers of NBS, including: polycentric governance (novel arrangements in the public administration that involved multiple institutional scales and/or sectors); co-design (innovative stakeholder participatory processes that influenced the final NBS); pro-NBS interest and coalition groups (organized pressure groups that advocated for an NBS); and financial incentives (financing community-based implementation and monitoring of NBS). Findings show that the transition to NBS can contribute to multiple global agendas, including DRR, climate change adaptation, and sustainable development.

Biological approaches to public administration and public policy

2019 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 113-116
Author(s):  
Christopher W. Larimer ◽  
Steven A. Peterson
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Policy Process ◽  
Life Sciences ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Biological Perspective ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
The Relationship

AbstractThis special issue considers the relationship of the life sciences to both public policy and public administration. This makes sense because the bureaucratic process and public administration are deeply involved in the policy process and the development of substantive public policy. The two subjects are intertwined. And a biological perspective can illuminate many aspects of both. That is the focus of this issue.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document