践行社会公平:推进公共行政第四支柱的呼吁

A. Mulyadi, B. Kusumasari, Y. T. Keban
{"title":"践行社会公平:推进公共行政第四支柱的呼吁","authors":"A. Mulyadi, B. Kusumasari, Y. T. Keban","doi":"10.20476/jbb.v25i2.9824","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Once had been emphasized in the New Public Administration (Frederickson, 1990), equity is subsequently named as the fourth pillar of public administration by the National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA) in 2005, together with the other three pillars, namely Economy, Efficiency, and Effectiveness (called as the 4E’s). The pillar of equity emerged with the development of public administration reflecting the success of economic development in both developed and developing countries that still raise injustice issues. Keban (2001) stated that social equity and social justice must be fundamental principles in public administration. Subarsono (2008) and Kumorotomo (2014) also confirmed that for choosing public policy alternatives, one of the variables to consider is “able to promote equity and fairness in society” or guarantee equal resources across the country. Unfortunately, of the four pillars of public administration, the application of equity is still far behind that of the other three pillars: economy, efficiency, and effectiveness (Andrews & Van de Walle, 2012; Wang & Mastracci, 2012; Johnson-III, 2011; Charbonneau & Riccucci, 2008; Miller, Kerr, & Ritter, 2008). To precisely declare social justice as an objective of public policy is still not much of a challenge to the public administrator (Wooldridge & Gooden, 2009). This review is intended to discuss and examine the emerging issue of social equity in public administration and its application on the public policy performance measurement that has not received the same attention as the other three pillars. This is expected to provide an academic contribution to advance equity in the development of public administration particularly in Indonesia.","PeriodicalId":8986,"journal":{"name":"Bisnis & Birokrasi Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Walking the Talk on Social Equity: A Call for Advancing the Fourth Pillar of Public Administration\",\"authors\":\"A. Mulyadi, B. Kusumasari, Y. T. Keban\",\"doi\":\"10.20476/jbb.v25i2.9824\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Once had been emphasized in the New Public Administration (Frederickson, 1990), equity is subsequently named as the fourth pillar of public administration by the National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA) in 2005, together with the other three pillars, namely Economy, Efficiency, and Effectiveness (called as the 4E’s). The pillar of equity emerged with the development of public administration reflecting the success of economic development in both developed and developing countries that still raise injustice issues. Keban (2001) stated that social equity and social justice must be fundamental principles in public administration. Subarsono (2008) and Kumorotomo (2014) also confirmed that for choosing public policy alternatives, one of the variables to consider is “able to promote equity and fairness in society” or guarantee equal resources across the country. Unfortunately, of the four pillars of public administration, the application of equity is still far behind that of the other three pillars: economy, efficiency, and effectiveness (Andrews & Van de Walle, 2012; Wang & Mastracci, 2012; Johnson-III, 2011; Charbonneau & Riccucci, 2008; Miller, Kerr, & Ritter, 2008). To precisely declare social justice as an objective of public policy is still not much of a challenge to the public administrator (Wooldridge & Gooden, 2009). This review is intended to discuss and examine the emerging issue of social equity in public administration and its application on the public policy performance measurement that has not received the same attention as the other three pillars. This is expected to provide an academic contribution to advance equity in the development of public administration particularly in Indonesia.\",\"PeriodicalId\":8986,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bisnis & Birokrasi Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-09-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bisnis & Birokrasi Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.20476/jbb.v25i2.9824\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bisnis & Birokrasi Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20476/jbb.v25i2.9824","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

《新公共管理》(Frederickson, 1990)曾强调公平,2005年,美国国家公共管理学院(NAPA)将公平与经济(Economy)、效率(Efficiency)和效果(Effectiveness)这三大支柱(被称为4E)一起命名为公共管理的第四大支柱。公平的支柱是随着公共行政的发展而出现的,这反映了发达国家和发展中国家经济发展的成功,这些国家仍然引起不公正的问题。Keban(2001)指出,社会公平和社会正义必须是公共管理的基本原则。Subarsono(2008)和Kumorotomo(2014)也证实,在选择公共政策方案时,要考虑的变量之一是“能否促进社会的公平与公平”或保证全国资源的平等。不幸的是,在公共行政的四大支柱中,公平的应用仍然远远落后于其他三大支柱:经济、效率和有效性(Andrews & Van de Walle, 2012;Wang & Mastracci, 2012;约翰逊三世,2011;Charbonneau & Riccucci, 2008;Miller, Kerr, & Ritter, 2008)。准确地宣布社会正义作为公共政策的目标,对公共行政人员来说仍然不是一个太大的挑战(Wooldridge & Gooden, 2009)。本次审查旨在讨论和审查公共行政中的社会公平问题及其在公共政策绩效衡量方面的应用,这一问题没有像其他三个支柱那样受到同样的关注。预期这将对促进特别是印度尼西亚公共行政发展的公平性作出学术贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Walking the Talk on Social Equity: A Call for Advancing the Fourth Pillar of Public Administration
Once had been emphasized in the New Public Administration (Frederickson, 1990), equity is subsequently named as the fourth pillar of public administration by the National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA) in 2005, together with the other three pillars, namely Economy, Efficiency, and Effectiveness (called as the 4E’s). The pillar of equity emerged with the development of public administration reflecting the success of economic development in both developed and developing countries that still raise injustice issues. Keban (2001) stated that social equity and social justice must be fundamental principles in public administration. Subarsono (2008) and Kumorotomo (2014) also confirmed that for choosing public policy alternatives, one of the variables to consider is “able to promote equity and fairness in society” or guarantee equal resources across the country. Unfortunately, of the four pillars of public administration, the application of equity is still far behind that of the other three pillars: economy, efficiency, and effectiveness (Andrews & Van de Walle, 2012; Wang & Mastracci, 2012; Johnson-III, 2011; Charbonneau & Riccucci, 2008; Miller, Kerr, & Ritter, 2008). To precisely declare social justice as an objective of public policy is still not much of a challenge to the public administrator (Wooldridge & Gooden, 2009). This review is intended to discuss and examine the emerging issue of social equity in public administration and its application on the public policy performance measurement that has not received the same attention as the other three pillars. This is expected to provide an academic contribution to advance equity in the development of public administration particularly in Indonesia.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
LEADERSHIP THEORY IN DIGITAL ERA: A PRELIMINARY RESEARCH FOR LEADERSHIP IN CROWDFUNDING DIGITAL STARTUP Organizational Conflict Model in Managing Indigenous Papuans Local Economic Development: A Case Study of Jayapura Accountability Model of Financial Management in the Public Sector: A Study on Panggungharjo Village Budget The Role of the Government Regulation in Online Transportation: A Model Validation Reversing Democracy: Examining the Nagari Institution in West Sumatra, Indonesia
×
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