Economists in Government Bureaucracies

Johan Christensen
{"title":"Economists in Government Bureaucracies","authors":"Johan Christensen","doi":"10.1108/S0195-631020180000033011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Despite Max Weber’s assertion that bureaucracy is domination on the basis of knowledge, mainstream public administration literature has paid little attention to the role of experts and expertise in bureaucratic organisations. A particular blind spot concerns the academic professions or disciplines that supply the experts and expert knowledge used in government bureaucracies. It is well known that the educational composition of the civil service varies across countries and over time. However, knowledge about what explains the varying position of expert professions within state bureaucracies is scarce. The chapter examines this issue through a comparative-historical investigation of the role in government of a particular expert profession, namely economists. Focusing on a small set of countries – Norway, Denmark, New Zealand and Ireland – over the period from 1930 to 1990, it poses the question: How can we account for the variation in the position of economists within government bureaucracies across countries and over time? To answer this question, the chapter draws on theory from the sociological literature on professions and historical-institutionalist work on the influence of economic ideas.","PeriodicalId":84475,"journal":{"name":"Comparative social research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/S0195-631020180000033011","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Comparative social research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/S0195-631020180000033011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Despite Max Weber’s assertion that bureaucracy is domination on the basis of knowledge, mainstream public administration literature has paid little attention to the role of experts and expertise in bureaucratic organisations. A particular blind spot concerns the academic professions or disciplines that supply the experts and expert knowledge used in government bureaucracies. It is well known that the educational composition of the civil service varies across countries and over time. However, knowledge about what explains the varying position of expert professions within state bureaucracies is scarce. The chapter examines this issue through a comparative-historical investigation of the role in government of a particular expert profession, namely economists. Focusing on a small set of countries – Norway, Denmark, New Zealand and Ireland – over the period from 1930 to 1990, it poses the question: How can we account for the variation in the position of economists within government bureaucracies across countries and over time? To answer this question, the chapter draws on theory from the sociological literature on professions and historical-institutionalist work on the influence of economic ideas.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
政府官僚机构中的经济学家
尽管马克斯·韦伯(Max Weber)断言官僚主义是基于知识的统治,但主流公共行政文献很少关注专家和专业知识在官僚组织中的作用。一个特别的盲点涉及为政府官僚机构提供专家和专业知识的学术专业或学科。众所周知,公务员的教育构成因国家和时间而异。然而,关于如何解释专家职业在国家官僚机构中的不同地位的知识却很少。本章通过对一个特定的专家职业,即经济学家在政府中的作用的比较历史调查来研究这个问题。聚焦于1930年至1990年期间的一小部分国家——挪威、丹麦、新西兰和爱尔兰,它提出了一个问题:我们如何解释经济学家在不同国家和不同时期政府官僚机构中的地位变化?为了回答这个问题,本章借鉴了关于职业的社会学文献和关于经济思想影响的历史制度主义著作中的理论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Index Governance by Hybrid Advisory Committees – A Hallmark of Social Democracy? Prelims Bureaucracy and Society in Transition The Impact and Interpretation of Weber’s Bureaucratic Ideal Type in Organisation Theory and Public Administration
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1