The emergence of the administrative burden literature has generated new theoretical, conceptual, and empirical knowledge. However, the accumulation of comparable knowledge is limited by the lack of validated measurement of core concepts. This article validates a four-item scale of burden tolerance, that is, people's acceptance of state actions that impose administrative burdens on citizens and residents interacting with government, using data from seven countries and 12 surveys. We illustrate the usefulness of the scale by examining its correlates. Burden tolerance varies substantially across the countries examined, but is generally higher for males, young adults, less well educated, those with good health, those who trust state actors more, and ideological conservatives. We demonstrate how the scale can be adapted to specific policy areas and that our generic scale correlates highly with the tolerance for burdens in such diverse domains as income supports, health insurance, passport renewals, and small business licensing.
{"title":"Burden tolerance: Developing a validated measurement instrument across seven countries","authors":"Martin Baekgaard, Aske Halling, Donald Moynihan","doi":"10.1111/puar.13835","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13835","url":null,"abstract":"The emergence of the administrative burden literature has generated new theoretical, conceptual, and empirical knowledge. However, the accumulation of comparable knowledge is limited by the lack of validated measurement of core concepts. This article validates a four-item scale of <i>burden tolerance</i>, that is, people's acceptance of state actions that impose administrative burdens on citizens and residents interacting with government, using data from seven countries and 12 surveys. We illustrate the usefulness of the scale by examining its correlates. Burden tolerance varies substantially across the countries examined, but is generally higher for males, young adults, less well educated, those with good health, those who trust state actors more, and ideological conservatives. We demonstrate how the scale can be adapted to specific policy areas and that our generic scale correlates highly with the tolerance for burdens in such diverse domains as income supports, health insurance, passport renewals, and small business licensing.","PeriodicalId":48431,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration Review","volume":"42 3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2024-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141092197","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This study analyzes public administrators' trust in citizens' capacities to participate in governance, their collaborative tendency, and the association between these factors and public administrators' willingness to implement citizen involvement efforts. The purpose of the study is to examine whether public administrators' trust in citizens' participatory capacities predicts a willingness to implement citizen participation efforts within the central administration of a Nordic welfare country. The central administration of Finland presents a counter case to previous studies, which have mostly focused on the United States. A unique survey of administrators, operationalized similarly to previous studies, was conducted, and analysis of the data provides both confirmatory and novel insights. The analysis finds that administrators' trust in citizens' participatory capacities strongly predicts their willingness to implement citizen participation initiatives. However, this relation can significantly decrease or increase depending on the degree to which administrators value the procedural legitimacy of collaborative governance.
{"title":"Trust, collaboration, and participation in governance: A Nordic perspective on public administrators' perceptions of citizen involvement","authors":"Isak Vento","doi":"10.1111/puar.13833","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13833","url":null,"abstract":"This study analyzes public administrators' trust in citizens' capacities to participate in governance, their collaborative tendency, and the association between these factors and public administrators' willingness to implement citizen involvement efforts. The purpose of the study is to examine whether public administrators' trust in citizens' participatory capacities predicts a willingness to implement citizen participation efforts within the central administration of a Nordic welfare country. The central administration of Finland presents a counter case to previous studies, which have mostly focused on the United States. A unique survey of administrators, operationalized similarly to previous studies, was conducted, and analysis of the data provides both confirmatory and novel insights. The analysis finds that administrators' trust in citizens' participatory capacities strongly predicts their willingness to implement citizen participation initiatives. However, this relation can significantly decrease or increase depending on the degree to which administrators value the procedural legitimacy of collaborative governance.","PeriodicalId":48431,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration Review","volume":"39 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2024-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141069434","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Public administration scholars have largely ignored American Indians and Alaska Natives in their studies of racial disparities in the federal service, despite strong reasons to believe they face discrimination. Using three large federal data sets (the American Community Survey, federal personnel records, and the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey), we compare the status of American Indians and Alaska Natives in the federal service to both Whites and other minorities. We find that, largely due to Indian Preference, American Indians and Alaska Natives are much more likely than Blacks, Whites, Latinos, and Asians to hold federal jobs, but they are highly concentrated in the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Indian Health Service, agencies with which they have a sordid and fraught history. This concentration allows them to work in positions that may advance the interests of their communities and increases their probabilities of being supervisors, but it does not prevent them from being among the poorest-paid and least-satisfied employees in the federal service.
{"title":"Indian Preference and the status of American Indians and Alaska Natives in the federal service: Employment, earnings, authority, and perceptions of fairness","authors":"Gregory B. Lewis, Jack F. Williams","doi":"10.1111/puar.13832","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13832","url":null,"abstract":"Public administration scholars have largely ignored American Indians and Alaska Natives in their studies of racial disparities in the federal service, despite strong reasons to believe they face discrimination. Using three large federal data sets (the American Community Survey, federal personnel records, and the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey), we compare the status of American Indians and Alaska Natives in the federal service to both Whites and other minorities. We find that, largely due to Indian Preference, American Indians and Alaska Natives are much more likely than Blacks, Whites, Latinos, and Asians to hold federal jobs, but they are highly concentrated in the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Indian Health Service, agencies with which they have a sordid and fraught history. This concentration allows them to work in positions that may advance the interests of their communities and increases their probabilities of being supervisors, but it does not prevent them from being among the poorest-paid and least-satisfied employees in the federal service.","PeriodicalId":48431,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration Review","volume":"50 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2024-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140961544","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
It is not easy to secure and sustain efficient interorganizational collaboration in hierarchically demarcated and functionally specialized public sectors. This article investigates whether and how public leaders can motivate and catalyze their own employees to engage in behaviors that foster and support collaboration across organizational jurisdictions. Using survey data from 555 occupational therapists in Danish municipalities, we employed an innovative scenario‐based research design including video vignettes and a centipede game to mimic real‐life collaboration. We show that clear and collaboration‐focused leadership has a positive and substantial effect on employees' engagement in an interorganizational collaboration with a regionally employed nurse. Further, the effects are stronger for respondents with higher public service motivation, higher collaborative self‐efficacy, more tenure, and at a younger age. The findings contribute to understanding public leadership and employee engagement in interorganizational collaboration and emphasize that leaders should carefully consider their context and communication when engaging their employees.
{"title":"Bridge over troubled waters? Experimental evidence into the influence of leadership on employees' collaborative engagement","authors":"Anders Barslund Grøn","doi":"10.1111/puar.13834","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13834","url":null,"abstract":"It is not easy to secure and sustain efficient interorganizational collaboration in hierarchically demarcated and functionally specialized public sectors. This article investigates whether and how public leaders can motivate and catalyze their own employees to engage in behaviors that foster and support collaboration across organizational jurisdictions. Using survey data from 555 occupational therapists in Danish municipalities, we employed an innovative scenario‐based research design including video vignettes and a centipede game to mimic real‐life collaboration. We show that clear and collaboration‐focused leadership has a positive and substantial effect on employees' engagement in an interorganizational collaboration with a regionally employed nurse. Further, the effects are stronger for respondents with higher public service motivation, higher collaborative self‐efficacy, more tenure, and at a younger age. The findings contribute to understanding public leadership and employee engagement in interorganizational collaboration and emphasize that leaders should carefully consider their context and communication when engaging their employees.","PeriodicalId":48431,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration Review","volume":"78 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2024-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140919868","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper serves as a renewed call for public management scholars and public leaders in liberal democracies to be the champions of accountability standards that are explicitly and implicitly inherent to liberal democratic forms of governance. This call is particularly salient amid increasing populism, polarization, and democratic backsliding. Drawing from the historical and contemporary political and legal philosophies of small‐l liberalism and democracy advanced throughout the ages, we define a set of seven liberal democratic accountability standards focusing on matters of authority, rights, tolerance, truth claims, and professional deference. We then consider how these standards relate to some of public administration and management's ongoing considerations of the politics‐administration dichotomy, citizen engagement, and network governance, and make the case for more explicit focus on liberal democratic accountability standards in public management scholarship.
{"title":"Liberal democratic accountability standards and public administration","authors":"Christopher Koliba","doi":"10.1111/puar.13831","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13831","url":null,"abstract":"This paper serves as a renewed call for public management scholars and public leaders in liberal democracies to be the champions of accountability standards that are explicitly and implicitly inherent to liberal democratic forms of governance. This call is particularly salient amid increasing populism, polarization, and democratic backsliding. Drawing from the historical and contemporary political and legal philosophies of small‐<jats:italic>l</jats:italic> liberalism and democracy advanced throughout the ages, we define a set of seven liberal democratic accountability standards focusing on matters of authority, rights, tolerance, truth claims, and professional deference. We then consider how these standards relate to some of public administration and management's ongoing considerations of the politics‐administration dichotomy, citizen engagement, and network governance, and make the case for more explicit focus on liberal democratic accountability standards in public management scholarship.","PeriodicalId":48431,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration Review","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2024-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140820023","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"American Society for Public Administration Code of Ethics","authors":"","doi":"10.1111/puar.13828","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13828","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48431,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration Review","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2024-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140643047","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Public Administration Review (PAR) is dedicated to advancing theory and practice in public administration. PAR serves a wide range of audiences globally. As the preeminent professional journal in public administration, Public Administration Review (PAR) strives to publish research that not only advances the science and theory of public administration, but also incorporates and addresses the realities of the practice of public administration.
The PAR editorial team takes pride in our rigorous review process. Although we strive for rigor, we also seek to provide quality service to our contributors. Operationally, this means we try to offer high quality, timely feedback. The standard time for full peer review is typically less than 90 days from receipt of a manuscript to an editor’s decision. If our internal editorial review concludes a manuscript is not suitable for full peer review, then we usually have a decision to authors within 14 days after submission of a manuscript.
As a professional journal, PAR encourages submissions from both scholars and practitioners. Regardless of the affiliations of our authors, our readers value research informed by practice and practice informed by research. Since its founding in 1940, PAR has regularly published articles contributed by practitioners.
{"title":"Information for Contributors","authors":"","doi":"10.1111/puar.13829","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13829","url":null,"abstract":"<h2> About the Journal</h2>\u0000<p><i>Public Administration Review</i> (<i>PAR</i>) is dedicated to advancing theory and practice in public administration. <i>PAR</i> serves a wide range of audiences globally. As the preeminent professional journal in public administration, <i>Public Administration Review</i> (<i>PAR</i>) strives to publish research that not only advances the science and theory of public administration, but also incorporates and addresses the realities of the practice of public administration.</p>\u0000<p>The <i>PAR</i> editorial team takes pride in our rigorous review process. Although we strive for rigor, we also seek to provide quality service to our contributors. Operationally, this means we try to offer high quality, timely feedback. The standard time for full peer review is typically less than 90 days from receipt of a manuscript to an editor’s decision. If our internal editorial review concludes a manuscript is not suitable for full peer review, then we usually have a decision to authors within 14 days after submission of a manuscript.</p>\u0000<p>As a professional journal, <i>PAR</i> encourages submissions from both scholars and practitioners. Regardless of the affiliations of our authors, our readers value research informed by practice and practice informed by research. Since its founding in 1940, <i>PAR</i> has regularly published articles contributed by practitioners.</p>","PeriodicalId":48431,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration Review","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2024-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140642983","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Neomi Frisch-Aviram, Gabriela Spanghero Lotta, Luciana Jordão de Carvalho
Organizations worldwide are concerned about workers using generative pretrained transformers (GPTs), which can generate human-like text in seconds at work. These organizations are setting rules on how and when to use GPTs. This article focuses on street-level bureaucrats' (SLBs) intentions to use GPTs even if their public organization does not allow its use (tech rule-breaking). Based on a mixed-methods exploratory design, using focus groups (N = 14) and a survey experiment (N = 279), we demonstrate that SLBs intend to break the rules and use GPTs when their competitors from the private sector have access to artificial intelligence (AI) tools. We discuss these findings in the context of hybrid forms of public management and the Promethean moment of GPTs.
{"title":"“Chat-Up”: The role of competition in street-level bureaucrats' willingness to break technological rules and use generative pre-trained transformers (GPTs)","authors":"Neomi Frisch-Aviram, Gabriela Spanghero Lotta, Luciana Jordão de Carvalho","doi":"10.1111/puar.13824","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13824","url":null,"abstract":"Organizations worldwide are concerned about workers using generative pretrained transformers (GPTs), which can generate human-like text in seconds at work. These organizations are setting rules on how and when to use GPTs. This article focuses on street-level bureaucrats' (SLBs) intentions to use GPTs even if their public organization does not allow its use (tech rule-breaking). Based on a mixed-methods exploratory design, using focus groups (<i>N</i> = 14) and a survey experiment (<i>N</i> = 279), we demonstrate that SLBs intend to break the rules and use GPTs when their competitors from the private sector have access to artificial intelligence (AI) tools. We discuss these findings in the context of hybrid forms of public management and the Promethean moment of GPTs.","PeriodicalId":48431,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration Review","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2024-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140642957","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Naim Kapucu, Andrew Parkin, Miriam Lumb, Russell Dippy
As the scale and intensity of disasters and crises continue to increase, planning and managing crises have become a critical policy and governance issue. Of particular importance to this topic is crisis coordination, as effective response and recovery support the continuity of operations of governments and businesses, and are essential to the economy, health, and public safety. This paper applies a network governance perspective to explore the practical application of intergovernmental crisis coordination in Australia with reference to the COVID‐19 crisis contributing to a better understanding of the role of governing bodies in dealing with major crises in a coordinated manner. This paper also highlights the need to leverage collaborative leadership, organizational capacity, and a culture of collaboration to develop robust and connected networks in addressing crisis coordination within Australia's complex federal system.
{"title":"Crisis coordination in complex intergovernmental systems: The case of Australia","authors":"Naim Kapucu, Andrew Parkin, Miriam Lumb, Russell Dippy","doi":"10.1111/puar.13830","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13830","url":null,"abstract":"As the scale and intensity of disasters and crises continue to increase, planning and managing crises have become a critical policy and governance issue. Of particular importance to this topic is crisis coordination, as effective response and recovery support the continuity of operations of governments and businesses, and are essential to the economy, health, and public safety. This paper applies a network governance perspective to explore the practical application of intergovernmental crisis coordination in Australia with reference to the COVID‐19 crisis contributing to a better understanding of the role of governing bodies in dealing with major crises in a coordinated manner. This paper also highlights the need to leverage collaborative leadership, organizational capacity, and a culture of collaboration to develop robust and connected networks in addressing crisis coordination within Australia's complex federal system.","PeriodicalId":48431,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration Review","volume":"193 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2024-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140622884","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：