行政司法的文化分析

2区 法学 Q1 Social Sciences Administrative Law Review Pub Date : 2009-03-02 DOI:10.5040/9781472560759.ch-008
S. Halliday, C. Scott
{"title":"行政司法的文化分析","authors":"S. Halliday, C. Scott","doi":"10.5040/9781472560759.ch-008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In recent years we have seen rapid change in the organisation of public management. Various developments, sometimes captured in the notion of the ‘new public management’, have significantly altered the character of public administration. This presents quite a challenge for theorists of administrative justice. The values and processes which infuse new public management sit in some tension with traditional conceptions of administrative justice, particularly within legal theory. To what extent should the concept be extended to embrace these real-world developments? Further, is there more to be said about administrative justice than is not captured by existing theory, even including a focus on new public management? These questions form the background to this article in which we develop a typology of administrative justice – an analytical framework which captures the variations in how ‘administrative justice’ might be conceived. Our analysis re-works the typologies of Mashaw, Adler and Kagan and places them in a wider framework developed from grid-group cultural theory. The analysis also draws attention to conceptions of administrative justice not previously discussed in the literature: decision-making by lottery, and decision-making by consensus.","PeriodicalId":51730,"journal":{"name":"Administrative Law Review","volume":"40 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-03-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Cultural Analysis of Administrative Justice\",\"authors\":\"S. Halliday, C. Scott\",\"doi\":\"10.5040/9781472560759.ch-008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In recent years we have seen rapid change in the organisation of public management. Various developments, sometimes captured in the notion of the ‘new public management’, have significantly altered the character of public administration. This presents quite a challenge for theorists of administrative justice. The values and processes which infuse new public management sit in some tension with traditional conceptions of administrative justice, particularly within legal theory. To what extent should the concept be extended to embrace these real-world developments? Further, is there more to be said about administrative justice than is not captured by existing theory, even including a focus on new public management? These questions form the background to this article in which we develop a typology of administrative justice – an analytical framework which captures the variations in how ‘administrative justice’ might be conceived. Our analysis re-works the typologies of Mashaw, Adler and Kagan and places them in a wider framework developed from grid-group cultural theory. The analysis also draws attention to conceptions of administrative justice not previously discussed in the literature: decision-making by lottery, and decision-making by consensus.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51730,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Administrative Law Review\",\"volume\":\"40 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-03-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"17\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Administrative Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5040/9781472560759.ch-008\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"法学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Administrative Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5040/9781472560759.ch-008","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"法学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

摘要

近年来,我们看到公共管理的组织发生了迅速的变化。各种发展,有时被称为“新公共管理”的概念,已大大改变了公共行政的性质。这对行政司法理论家提出了相当大的挑战。注入新公共管理的价值和程序与传统的行政正义概念,特别是在法律理论中,存在某种紧张关系。这个概念应该扩展到什么程度,以包含这些现实世界的发展?此外,关于行政正义,是否还有比现有理论所未涵盖的更多可说之处,甚至包括对新公共管理的关注?这些问题构成了本文的背景,在本文中,我们发展了行政司法的类型学——一个分析框架,它捕捉了如何理解“行政司法”的变化。我们的分析重新研究了马肖、阿德勒和卡根的类型学,并将它们置于从网格-群体文化理论发展而来的更广泛的框架中。分析还提请注意先前文献中未讨论的行政司法概念:抽签决策和协商一致决策。
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
A Cultural Analysis of Administrative Justice
In recent years we have seen rapid change in the organisation of public management. Various developments, sometimes captured in the notion of the ‘new public management’, have significantly altered the character of public administration. This presents quite a challenge for theorists of administrative justice. The values and processes which infuse new public management sit in some tension with traditional conceptions of administrative justice, particularly within legal theory. To what extent should the concept be extended to embrace these real-world developments? Further, is there more to be said about administrative justice than is not captured by existing theory, even including a focus on new public management? These questions form the background to this article in which we develop a typology of administrative justice – an analytical framework which captures the variations in how ‘administrative justice’ might be conceived. Our analysis re-works the typologies of Mashaw, Adler and Kagan and places them in a wider framework developed from grid-group cultural theory. The analysis also draws attention to conceptions of administrative justice not previously discussed in the literature: decision-making by lottery, and decision-making by consensus.
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
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Approach of the Administrative Court of Justice regarding to Extension of the Effect of Annulment of Regulations to the Time of Approval Analysis of the Effect of Whistleblowing on the Fiscal Discipline of Govermental companies Investigating the Requirements of the Decentralization System in the Social Security Organization Legislative policy of Iran Customs Law and its damages Investigating the violation of individuals' rights; An independent and neglected direction in the judicial supervision of the General Assembly of the Court of Administrative Justice
×
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