{"title":"The Adaptable Country: How Canada Can Survive the Twenty-First Century. By Alasdair Roberts, Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press. 2024. pp. 192. $24.95 CAD (paperback). ISBN: 9780228022008","authors":"Eric S. Zeemering","doi":"10.1111/puar.13915","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13915","url":null,"abstract":"Click on the article title to read more.","PeriodicalId":48431,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration Review","volume":"88 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2024-12-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142763177","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":"Street-Level Public Servants Case Studies for a New Generation of Public Administration. By Sara R. Rinfret (Eds). New York: Routledge. 2024. p. 220, Paperback $48.95 paperback edition, $170.00 Hardback edition, $36.71 eBook, ISBN 9781032417509","authors":"Md Eyasin Ul Islam Pavel","doi":"10.1111/puar.13913","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13913","url":null,"abstract":"Click on the article title to read more.","PeriodicalId":48431,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration Review","volume":"208 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2024-12-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142763178","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}
Paw H. Hansen, Mogens Jin Pedersen, Jurgen Willems
In response to workloads and service demands, frontline workers often prioritize among their clients when delivering public services. This article examines the implications of such bureaucratic prioritization on democratic governance, specifically the public's attitudes toward how frontline workers prioritize among clients. Using data from a pre-registered, rank-based conjoint survey experiment conducted among residents (n = 2655) in Denmark, the Netherlands, and New Zealand, we explore two key aspects of bureaucratic prioritization from the public's perspective: (1) citizens' preferences on how teachers should prioritize among students and (2) citizens' beliefs about how teachers do prioritize among students. Our findings reveal general alignments between the public's normative preferences, their descriptive beliefs, and the prioritization tendencies of real-life teachers as documented in previous research. We discuss the implications of these results in terms of administrative legitimacy and the governance perspective of New Public Service.
{"title":"Bureaucratic prioritizing among clients in the eyes of the public: Experimental evidence from three countries","authors":"Paw H. Hansen, Mogens Jin Pedersen, Jurgen Willems","doi":"10.1111/puar.13904","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13904","url":null,"abstract":"In response to workloads and service demands, frontline workers often prioritize among their clients when delivering public services. This article examines the implications of such bureaucratic prioritization on democratic governance, specifically the public's attitudes toward how frontline workers prioritize among clients. Using data from a pre-registered, rank-based conjoint survey experiment conducted among residents (<i>n</i> = 2655) in Denmark, the Netherlands, and New Zealand, we explore two key aspects of bureaucratic prioritization from the public's perspective: (1) citizens' preferences on how teachers <i>should</i> prioritize among students and (2) citizens' beliefs about how teachers <i>do</i> prioritize among students. Our findings reveal general alignments between the public's normative preferences, their descriptive beliefs, and the prioritization tendencies of real-life teachers as documented in previous research. We discuss the implications of these results in terms of administrative legitimacy and the governance perspective of New Public Service.","PeriodicalId":48431,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration Review","volume":"74 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142758562","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}
Although public administration scholars have long been studying discriminative behavior of frontline servants of public service organizations, whether and to what extent Asians and noncitizen immigrants may suffer from frontline discrimination in the United States lacks evidential support. To fill this gap, we conducted a corresponding field experiment in the U.S. nursing home market (N = 6428). Our findings identify substantial discrimination against Asians and noncitizen immigrants. Holding other factors constant, nursing homes with long‐term care services in the United States are less responsive to and less likely to offer services to Asians and noncitizen immigrants, compared to Whites and citizens, respectively. Such discrimination is observed in all public, private for‐profit, and nonprofit nursing homes, whereas private for‐profit nursing homes demonstrated less discrimination. This study has implications for describing frontline discrimination in government‐regulated public service organizations and for scholarly understanding of the mechanism of such discrimination.
{"title":"No country for model minorities: Evidence of discrimination against Asian noncitizen immigrants in the U.S. nursing home market","authors":"Chengxin Xu, Danbee Lee","doi":"10.1111/puar.13907","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13907","url":null,"abstract":"Although public administration scholars have long been studying discriminative behavior of frontline servants of public service organizations, whether and to what extent Asians and noncitizen immigrants may suffer from frontline discrimination in the United States lacks evidential support. To fill this gap, we conducted a corresponding field experiment in the U.S. nursing home market (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 6428). Our findings identify substantial discrimination against Asians and noncitizen immigrants. Holding other factors constant, nursing homes with long‐term care services in the United States are less responsive to and less likely to offer services to Asians and noncitizen immigrants, compared to Whites and citizens, respectively. Such discrimination is observed in all public, private for‐profit, and nonprofit nursing homes, whereas private for‐profit nursing homes demonstrated less discrimination. This study has implications for describing frontline discrimination in government‐regulated public service organizations and for scholarly understanding of the mechanism of such discrimination.","PeriodicalId":48431,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration Review","volume":"81 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2024-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142756113","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}
Libertarian paternalism (LP) draws on behavioral economics to advocate for noncoercive, nonfiscal policy interventions to improve individual well-being. However, growing criticism is encouraging behavioral policymaking—long dominated by LP approaches—to consider more structural and fiscally impactful interventions as valid responses to behavioral findings. Keynesian social philosophy allows behavioral policymaking to incorporate these new perspectives alongside existing LP approaches.
{"title":"Being good and doing good in behavioral policymaking","authors":"Stuart Mills","doi":"10.1111/puar.13908","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13908","url":null,"abstract":"Libertarian paternalism (LP) draws on behavioral economics to advocate for noncoercive, nonfiscal policy interventions to improve individual well-being. However, growing criticism is encouraging behavioral policymaking—long dominated by LP approaches—to consider more structural and fiscally impactful interventions as valid responses to behavioral findings. Keynesian social philosophy allows behavioral policymaking to incorporate these new perspectives alongside existing LP approaches.","PeriodicalId":48431,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration Review","volume":"115 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2024-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142742787","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}
Elected chief executives in the United States—that is, governors and presidents—routinely attempt to achieve their domestic policy goals by influencing the decision-making of public agencies. I provide empirical assessments of the two most frequently theorized elected executive influence tactics: political appointments and the centralization of agency decision-making. Using an expansive survey of the leaders in over 1800 state agencies, observational and experimental evidence are used to evaluate the effectiveness of these tactics. I find that state agency leaders believe that the appointment of officials to key agency posts allows the governor to better achieve his or her policy objectives than centralizing decision-making, and Republican governors are seen as more successful in using these tactics than Democratic ones. Overall, the results provide a real-world sense of how one government institution—the elected chief executive—tries to steer the policymaking of public managers and the government agencies that they lead.
{"title":"Executive policymaking influence via the administrative apparatus","authors":"Susan Webb Yackee","doi":"10.1111/puar.13899","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13899","url":null,"abstract":"Elected chief executives in the United States—that is, governors and presidents—routinely attempt to achieve their domestic policy goals by influencing the decision-making of public agencies. I provide empirical assessments of the two most frequently theorized elected executive influence tactics: political appointments and the centralization of agency decision-making. Using an expansive survey of the leaders in over 1800 state agencies, observational and experimental evidence are used to evaluate the effectiveness of these tactics. I find that state agency leaders believe that the appointment of officials to key agency posts allows the governor to better achieve his or her policy objectives than centralizing decision-making, and Republican governors are seen as more successful in using these tactics than Democratic ones. Overall, the results provide a real-world sense of how one government institution—the elected chief executive—tries to steer the policymaking of public managers and the government agencies that they lead.","PeriodicalId":48431,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration Review","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2024-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142684531","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}
How can understanding the practice of government ministers help us to understand changes in public administration over time? Interviews with former UK ministers suggest that their practice has changed over the last 25 years. Their executive role has been accentuated as they have come to emphasize the importance of delivery and implementation to policy making. Reasons for that are examined, and consideration is given to how that shift in emphasis affects the ministers–civil servant relationship.
{"title":"The evolving practice of UK Government ministers","authors":"Leighton Andrews, Sarah Gilmore","doi":"10.1111/puar.13902","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13902","url":null,"abstract":"How can understanding the <jats:italic>practice</jats:italic> of government ministers help us to understand changes in public administration over time? Interviews with former UK ministers suggest that their practice has changed over the last 25 years. Their executive role has been accentuated as they have come to emphasize the importance of delivery and implementation to policy making. Reasons for that are examined, and consideration is given to how that shift in emphasis affects the ministers–civil servant relationship.","PeriodicalId":48431,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration Review","volume":"81 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2024-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142678505","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 sector professionals are often negatively portrayed with ascriptions such as “ineffective” and “lazy.” Such negative connotations might disadvantage public sector organizations when trying to attract applicants, as it can reflect negatively on individuals' social identities. With this pre-registered experimental study, we examine stereotypes of public and private sector workers with and without a signal of specific professions present across both the public and private sector. We examine how this influences attraction in the initial phases of a job search before tangible job attributes become visible. Our study among 290 job seeking citizens in the United Kingdom provides evidence for a generic public sector worker bias, but the bias diminishes when the specific profession is known. Furthermore, we find that job seekers are less attracted to public employment and that this relationship is influenced by a negativity bias against public sector workers. We discuss implications of the study.
{"title":"First impressions: An analysis of professional stereotypes and their impact on sector attraction","authors":"Mette Jakobsen, Fabian Homberg","doi":"10.1111/puar.13900","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13900","url":null,"abstract":"Public sector professionals are often negatively portrayed with ascriptions such as “ineffective” and “lazy.” Such negative connotations might disadvantage public sector organizations when trying to attract applicants, as it can reflect negatively on individuals' social identities. With this pre-registered experimental study, we examine stereotypes of public and private sector workers with and without a signal of specific professions present across both the public and private sector. We examine how this influences attraction in the initial phases of a job search before tangible job attributes become visible. Our study among 290 job seeking citizens in the United Kingdom provides evidence for a generic public sector worker bias, but the bias diminishes when the specific profession is known. Furthermore, we find that job seekers are less attracted to public employment and that this relationship is influenced by a negativity bias against public sector workers. We discuss implications of the study.","PeriodicalId":48431,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration Review","volume":"115 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142670379","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}
Chengxin Xu, Yuan (Daniel) Cheng, Shuping Wang, Weston Merrick, Patrick Carter
Evidence-based practice (EBP) has become a global public management movement to improve constituents' lives through government decision making. However, how civil servants' decisions are influenced by scientific evidence remains unanswered. In this study, we answer two related research questions: (1) How do different elements of evidence impact civil servants' program preferences? (2) How does the rating of evidence influence their program preferences? Collaborating with major governmental and nonprofit agencies that promote the use of EBPs, we invited civil servants from three U.S. state governments to a paired conjoint experiment. Our analysis shows that: Civil servants prefer programs with evidence that is: (1) from their own states; (2) more recent; (3) shows positive effect on people from different demographic groups; and is (4) created by independent government teams and university research teams. We also find the “evidence-based” rating drives civil servants' preferences toward evidence with higher internal validity.
{"title":"Evaluating use of evidence in U.S. state governments: A conjoint analysis","authors":"Chengxin Xu, Yuan (Daniel) Cheng, Shuping Wang, Weston Merrick, Patrick Carter","doi":"10.1111/puar.13903","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13903","url":null,"abstract":"Evidence-based practice (EBP) has become a global public management movement to improve constituents' lives through government decision making. However, how civil servants' decisions are influenced by scientific evidence remains unanswered. In this study, we answer two related research questions: (1) How do different elements of evidence impact civil servants' program preferences? (2) How does the rating of evidence influence their program preferences? Collaborating with major governmental and nonprofit agencies that promote the use of EBPs, we invited civil servants from three U.S. state governments to a paired conjoint experiment. Our analysis shows that: Civil servants prefer programs with evidence that is: (1) from their own states; (2) more recent; (3) shows positive effect on people from different demographic groups; and is (4) created by independent government teams and university research teams. We also find the “evidence-based” rating drives civil servants' preferences toward evidence with higher internal validity.","PeriodicalId":48431,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration Review","volume":"21 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2024-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142665278","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}
With the digitization of administrative systems, governments have gained access to rich data about their administrative operations. How governments leverage such data to improve their administration—what we call government analytics—will shape government effectiveness. This article summarizes a conceptual framework which showcases that data can help diagnose and improve all components of a public administration production function—from inputs such as personnel and goods, to processes and management practices, to outputs and outcomes. We then assess to what extent public administration scholarship analyses these data sources and can thus inform government analytics. A review of 689 quantitative articles in two public administration journals in 2013–2023 finds that 50% draw on surveys of public employees and 25% on surveys of citizens or firms. By contrast, administrative micro data (14% of articles) are underexploited. Practitioners and scholars would thus do well to expand the data sources used to inform better government.
{"title":"How scholars can support government analytics: Combining employee surveys with more administrative data sources towards a better understanding of how government functions","authors":"Daniel Rogger, Christian Schuster","doi":"10.1111/puar.13894","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13894","url":null,"abstract":"With the digitization of administrative systems, governments have gained access to rich data about their administrative operations. How governments leverage such data to improve their administration—what we call government analytics—will shape government effectiveness. This article summarizes a conceptual framework which showcases that data can help diagnose and improve all components of a public administration production function—from inputs such as personnel and goods, to processes and management practices, to outputs and outcomes. We then assess to what extent public administration scholarship analyses these data sources and can thus inform government analytics. A review of 689 quantitative articles in two public administration journals in 2013–2023 finds that 50% draw on surveys of public employees and 25% on surveys of citizens or firms. By contrast, administrative micro data (14% of articles) are underexploited. Practitioners and scholars would thus do well to expand the data sources used to inform better government.","PeriodicalId":48431,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration Review","volume":"216 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2024-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142637173","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：