Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Paradigms of Public Administration

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Paradigms and Public Sector Reform

  • 493 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter examines the paradigms in the field of public administration and discusses how they influence and shape the characteristics of public administrative systems and practice. The chapter uses the notion of paradigms as described by Thomas Kuhn and provides a framework for understanding change in both a temporal and systemic sense. In the field of public administration, the paradigm concept is particularly helpful in understanding the problems that are faced, and how the public sector reforms that are selected to solve these puzzles shape the characteristics of the government. Paradigms in public administration, such as traditional public administration (TPA) and new public management (NPM) are examined. In addition, some models that are emerging as the post-NPM paradigm are also identified.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Aberbach, Joel D., and Tom Christensen. 2005. Citizens and Consumers. Public Management Review 7(2): 225–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alcoff, Linda Martin. 2013. Foucault’s Normative Epistemology. In A Companion to Foucault, eds. Christopher Falzon, Timothy O’Leary, and Jana Sawicki. Somerset: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alford, John, and Owen Hughes. 2008. Public Value Pragmatism as the Next Phase of Public Management. The American Review of Public Administration 38(2): 130–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alford, John, and Janine O’Flynn. 2009. Making Sense of Public Value: Concepts, Critiques and Emergent Meanings. International Journal of Public Administration 32: 171–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Askim, Jostein, Tom Christensen, Anne Lise Fimreite, and Per Laegreid. 2010. How to Assess Administrative Reform? Investigating the Adoption and Preliminary Impacts of the Norwegian Welfare Administrative Reform. Public Administration Review 88(1): 232–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Astley, W. Graham. 1985. Administrative Science as Socially Constructed Truth. Administrative Science Quarterly 30(4): 497–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barbour, Ian G. 1974. Myths, Models and Paradigms: A Comparative Study in Science and Religion. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barzelay, Michael. 2002. Origins of the NPM. In New Public Management: Current Trends and Future Prospects, eds. Kate McLaughlin, Stephen P. Osborne, and Ewan Ferlie. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bevir, Mark. 1999. Foucault, Power, and Institutions. Political Studies 47: 345–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2011. Public Administration as Storytelling. Public Administration 89(1): 183–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bevir, Mark, R.A.W. Rhodes, and Patrick Weller. 2003. Traditions of Governance: Interpreting the Changing Role of the Public Sector. Public Administration 81(1): 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bogason, Peter, and Juliet A. Musso. 2006. The Democratic Prospects of Network Governance. The American Review of Public Administration 36(3): 3–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouckaert, Geert, Steven Van de Walle, and Jarl K. Kampen. 2005. Potential for Comparative Public Opinion Research in Public Administration. International Review of Administrative Sciences 79(2): 229–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourgon, Jocelyne. 2009. New Governance and Public Administration: Towards a Dynamic Synthesis. Public lecture hosted by the Australian Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Canberra, Australia, February 24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Box, Richard C. 1999. Running Government Like a Business: Implications for Public Administration Theory and Practice. The American Review of Public Administration 29(1): 19–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Box, Richard, Gary S. Marshall, B.J. Reed, and Christine M. Reed. 2001. New Public Management and Substantive Democracy. Public Administration 61(5): 608–619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brandsen, Taco, and Sunhyuk Kim. 2010. Contextualizing the Meaning of Public Management Reforms: A Comparison of Netherlands and South Korea. International Review of Administrative Sciences 76(2): 367–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brinkerhoff, Derick W., and Jennifer M. Brinkerhoff. 2002. Governance Reforms and Failed States: Challenges and Implications. International Review of Administrative Sciences 68(4): 511–531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Capano, Giliberto. 2003. Administrative Traditions and Policy Change: When Policy Paradigms Matter. The Case of Italian Administrative Reform During the 1990s. Public Administration 81(4): 781–801.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, Tom. 2003. Organization Theory and Public Administration: Introduction. In Handbook of Public Administration, eds. B. Guy Peters, and Jon Pierre. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, Tom, and Per Laegreid. 2007. The Whole-of-Government Approach to Public Sector Reform. Public Administration Review 67(6): 1059–1066.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cole, Martin, and Greg Parston. 2006. Unlocking Public Value. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colebatch, Hal, and Peter Larmour. 1993. Market, Bureaucracy and Community: A Student’s Guide to Organisation. London: Pluto.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, Sandra, and Charlotte Dargie. 2002. New Public Management: A Discussion with Special Reference to UK Health. In New Public Management: Current Trends and Future Prospects, eds. Kate McLaughlin, Stephen P. Osborne, and Ewan Ferlie. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denhardt, Robert B., and Janet Vinzant Denhardt. 2000. The New Public Service: Serving Rather Than Steering. Public Administration Review 60(6): 549–559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drechsler, Wolfgang. 2013. Three Paradigms of Governance and Administration: Chinese, Western and Islamic. Society and Economy 35(3): 319–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunleavy, Patrick, Helen Margetts, Simon Bastow, and Jane Tinkler. 2006. New Public Management Is Dead—Long Live Digital-Era Governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 16(3): 467–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emerson, Kirk, Tina Nabatchi, and Stephen Balogh. 2011. An Integrative Framework for Collaborative Governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 22: 1–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foster, C.D. 2001. The Civil Service Under Stress: The Fall in Civil Service Power and Authority. Public Administration 79(3): 725–749.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, Michel. 1970. The Order of Things. London: Tavistock Publications Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1972. The Archaeology of Knowledge & the Discourse on Language. London: Tavistock Publications Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frederickson, H.George. 1976. The Lineage of New Public Administration. Administration and Society 8(2): 149–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geddes, Barbara. 2003. Paradigms and Sand Castles: Theory Building and Research Design in Comparative Politics. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Goodsell, Charles T. 1994. The Case for Bureaucracy: A Public Administration Polemic, 3rd edn. New Jersey: Chatham House Publishers Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gow, James Iain, and Caroline Dufour. 2000. Is the New Public Management a Paradigm? Does It Matter? International Review of Administrative Sciences 64(4): 573–597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, Andrew, and Bill Jenkins. 1995. From Public Administration to Public Management: Reassessing a Revolution. Public Administration 73(1): 75–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gualmini, Elisabetta. 2008. Restructuring Weberian Bureaucracy: Comparing Managerial Reforms in Europe and the United States. Public Administration 86(1): 75–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, Peter A. 1993. Policy Paradigms, Social Learning, and the State: The Case of Economic Policymaking in Britain. Comparative Politics 25(3): 275–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henry, Nicholas. 1975. Paradigms of Public Administration. Public Administration Review 35(4): 378–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, Carolyn J., and Laurence E. Lynn Jr. 2005. Is Hierarchical Governance in Decline? Evidence from Empirical Research. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 15(2): 173–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hood, Christopher. 1991. A Public Management for All Seasons? Public Administration 69: 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hood, Christopher, and Michael Jackson. 1996. Administrative Argument. Vermont: Dartmouth Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, Owen E. 2003. Public Management & Administration: An Introduction, 3rd edn. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, Sue. 2005. Whole-of-Government: Does Working Together Work? In Asia Pacific School of Economics and Government: Discussion Papers. Canberra.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, Henry. 1973. The Bureaucratization of the World. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, Lawrence R., and Donald F. Kettl. 2004. Assessing Public Management Reform Strategy in an International Context. In Research in Public Policy Analysis and Management. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaboolian, Linda. 1998. The New Public Management: Challenging the Boundaries of the Management vs. Administration Debate. Public Administration Review 58(3): 189–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, Gavin, Geoff Mulgan, and Stephen Muers. 2002. Creating Public Value: An Analytical Framework for Public Service Reform. United Kingdom: Discussion paper prepared by the Cabinet Office Strategy Unit.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, Janet M. 2005. The Dilemma of the Unsatisfied Customer in a Market Model of Public Administration. Public Administration Review 65(1): 76–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kersbergen, Kees Van, and Frans Van Waarden. 2004. ‘Governance’ as a Bridge between Disciplines: Cross-Disciplinary Inspiration Regarding Shifts in Governance and Problems of Governability, Accountability and Legitimacy. European Journal of Political Research 43(2): 143–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Pan Suk, John Halligan, Namshin Cho, Cheol H. Oh, and Angela M. Eikenberry. 2005. Toward Participatory and Transparent Governance: Report on the Sixth Global Forum on Reinventing Government. Public Administration Review 65(6): 646–654.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klijn, Erik-Hans. 2008. Complexity Theory and Public Administration: What’s New? Public Management Review 10(3): 299–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klijn, Erik-Hans, and Joop Koppenjan. 2012. Governance Network Theory: Past, Present and Future. Policy and Politics 40(4): 587–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knott, Jack H., and Thomas H. Hammond. 2003. Formal Theory and Public Administration. In Handbook of Public Administration, eds. B. Guy Peters, and Jon Pierre. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, Thomas. 1970. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. vol. 2. Chicago: The University of Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lane, Jan-Erik. 1997. Public Sector Reform: Only Deregulation, Privatization and Marketization? In Public Sector Reform: Rationale Trends and Problems, ed. Jan-Erik Lane. London: Sage Publications.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2005. Public Administration and Public Management: The Principal-Agent Perspective. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lane, Jan-Erik, and Joseph Wallis. 2009. Strategic Management and Public Leadership. Public Management Review 11(1): 101–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Light, Paul C. 2006. The Tides of Reform Revisited: Patterns in Making Government Work, 1945–2002. Public Administration Review 66(1): 6–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ling, Tom. 2002. Delivering Joined-Up Government in the UK: Dimensions, Issues and Problems. Public Administration 80(4): 615–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luton, Larry S. "Administrative State and Society: A Case Study of the United States of America." In Handbook of Public Administration, ed. B. Guy Peters and Jon Pierre. London: Sage Publications Ltd, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynn, Laurence E. 1998. The New Public Management: How to Transform a Theme into a Legacy. Public Administration Review 58(3): 231–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ——— 2006. Public Management: Old and New. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margetts, Helen, and Patrick Dunleavy. 2013. The Secondwave of Digital-Era Governance: A Quasi-Paradigm for Government on The Web. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society 371(1987): 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mills, Sara. 1997. Discourse. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, Mark H. 1995. Creating Public Value. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, Gareth. 1980. Metaphors, and Puzzle Solving in Organization Theory. Administrative Science Quarterly 25(4): 605–622.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrell, Kevin. 2009. Governance and the Public Good. Public Administration 87(3): 538–556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naugle, David K. 2002. Worldview: The History of a Concept. Cambridge: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman, Janet. 2002. The New Public Management, Modernization and Institutional Change. In New Public Management: Current Trends and Future Prospects, eds. Kate McLaughlin, Stephen P. Osborne, and Ewan Ferlie. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Flynn, Janine. 2007. From New Public Management to Public Value: Paradigmatic Change and Managerial Implications. The Australian Journal of Public Administration 66(3): 353–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, Johan P. 2005. Maybe It Is Time to Rediscover Bureaucracy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 16(1): 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, David, and Ted Gaebler. 1992. Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit Is Transforming the Public Sector. Reading, PA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, Stephen P. 2006. The New Public Governance? Public Management Review 8(3): 377–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Page, Stephen. 2005. What’s New About the New Public Management? Administrative Change in the Human Services. Public Administration Review 65(6): 713–727.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perry, James L., Annie Hondeghem, and Lois Recascino Wise. 2010. Revisiting the Motivational Bases of Public Service: Twenty Years of Research and an Agenda for the Future. Public Administration Review 70(5): 681–690.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peters, B. Guy, and Donald J. Savoie. 1994. Civil Service Reform: Misdiagnosing the Patient. Public Administration Review 54(5): 418–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pierre, Jon. 2009. Reinventing Governance, Reinventing Democracy? Policy and Politics 37(4): 591–609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollitt, Christopher. 2003. Joined-Up Government: A Survey. Political Studies Review 1(1): 34–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollock, James Kerr. 1937. The Cost of the Patronage System. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 189: 29–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raadschelders, Jos C.N. 2003. Administrative History: Introduction. In Handbook of Public Administration, ed. B. Guy Peters and Jon Pierre. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • ——— 2008. Understanding Government: Four Intellectual Traditions in the Study of Public Administration. Public Administration 86(4): 925–949.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ——— 2011. The Future of the Study of Public Administration: Embedding Research Object and Methodology in Epistemology and Ontology. Public Administration Review 71: 916–924.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, R.A.W. 1996. The New Governance: Governing Without Government. Political Studies 44(4): 652–667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, R.A.W., John Wanna, and Patrick Weller. 2008. Reinventing Westminster: How Public Executives Reframe Their World. Policy and Politics 36(4): 461–479.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rimington, John. 2009. Public Management and Administration: A Need for Evolution. The Political Quarterly 80(4): 562–568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rommel, Jan, and Johan Christiaens. 2006. Beyond the Paradigm Clashes in Public Administration. Administrative Theory and Praxis 28(4): 619–617.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roy, Jeffrey. 2008. Beyond Westminster Governance: Bringing Politics and Public Service into the Networked Era. Canadian Public Administration 51(4): 541–568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rugge, Fabio. 2003. Administrative Traditions in Western Europe. In Handbook of Public Administration, eds. B. Guy Peters, and Jon Pierre. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sager, Fritz, and Christian Rosser. 2009. Weber, Wilson, and Hegel: Theories of Modern Bureaucracy. Public Administration Review 69(6): 1136–1147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saint-Martin, Denis. 1998. The New Managerialism and the Policy Influence of Consultants in Government: An Historical-Institutionalist Analysis of Britain, Canada and France. Governance: An International Journal of Policy and Administration 11(3): 319–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, Majken, and Mary Jo Hatch. 1996. Living with Multiple Paradigms: The Case of Paradigm Interplay in Organizational Culture Studies. The Academy of Management Review 21(2): 529–557.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorauf, Frank J. 1959. Patronage and Party. Midwest Journal of Political Science 3(2): 115–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spicer, Michael. 2004. Public Administration, the History of Ideas, and the Reinventing Government Movement. Public Administration Review 64(3): 353–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stoker, Gerry. 2006. Public Value Management: A New Narrative for Networked Governance? The American Review of Public Administration 36(41): 41–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stout, Margaret. 2012. Competing Ontologies: A Primer for Public Administration. Public Administration Review 72(3): 388–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2010. Revisiting the (Lost) Art of Ideal-Typing in Public Administration. Administrative Theory & Praxis 32(4): 491–519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terry, Larry D. 2005. The Thinning of Administrative Institutions in the Hollow State. Administration and Society 37(4): 426–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Theriault, Sean M. 2003. Patronage, the Pendleton Act, and the Power of the People. The Journal of Politics 65(1): 50–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thoenig, Jean-Claude. 2003. Formal Theory and Public Administration. In Handbook of Public Administration, ed. B. Guy Peters and Jon Pierre. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN. 2005. Unlocking the Human Potential for Public Sector Performance. New York: United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vigoda, Eran. 2002. From Responsiveness to Collaboration: Governance, Citizens, and the Next Generation of Public Administration. Public Administration Review 62(5): 527–540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vigoda-Gadot, Eran, and Sagie Meiri. 2007. New Public Management Values and Person-Organization Fit: A Socio-Psychological Approach and Empirical Examination among Public Sector Personnel. Public Administration 86(1): 111–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vogel, Rick. 2009. Ideological Changes: A Kuhnian View of Endogenous Institutional Disruption. In Institutions and Ideology (Research in the Sociology of Organizations, Vol. 27), eds. Renate E. Meyer, Kerstin Sahlin, Marc J. Ventresca, and Peter Walgenbach, 85–113. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waldo, Dwight. 1955. The Study of Public Administration. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, Thomas C. 2010. The Perils of Paradigm Mentalities: Revisiting Kuhn, Lakatos, and Popper. Perspectives on Politics 8(2): 433–451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, Max. 1948. From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co. Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, Max. 1978. Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretative Sociology. vol. 1. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, Woodrow. 1887. The Study of Administration. Political Science Quarterly 2(2): 197–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Australian National University, Canberra, Australia

    Lhawang Ugyel

Authors
  1. Lhawang Ugyel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Ugyel, L. (2016). Paradigms of Public Administration. In: Paradigms and Public Sector Reform. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-40280-2_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation