Speaking truth to power

Political Advisers’ and Civil Servants’ Responses to Perceived Harmful Policy Proposals

Datos Bibliográficos

ID7322933
AutoresBirgitta Niklasson (0000-0001-9035-8556, University of Gothenburg), Peter Munk Christiansen (0000-0001-8808-500X, Aarhus University, autor de correspondencia), Patrik Öhberg (0000-0002-7433-8552, University of Gothenburg)
Año2019
Volumen40
Número3
Páginas492-512
Fecha de publicación2019-02-06
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaJournal of Public Policy (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0143-814X • E-ISSN: 1469-7815
EditorialCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/s0143814x18000508
OpenAlexW2913571674
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas9
Referencias citadas51

How are civil servants and politically appointed advisers likely to respond to policy proposals that they believe will harm their countries severely even if they are legal? Based on the different loyalties and roles of political advisors (PA) and civil servants (CS), we hypothesise that (1) PAs are more likely to voice internally, (2) CSs are more likely to voice externally and (3) CSs in functionally politicised systems are more likely to stay silent. These hypotheses are tested on – and partially supported by – data collected through two surveys directed to the ministerial staffs in Denmark and Sweden. PAs are more likely to voice internally, but none of the two groups is particularly keen to voice externally. The propensity to voice concerns in case of perceived harmful policy proposals depends on the kind as well as the level of politicisation

Civil servant · Civil servants · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Power (physics · Sociology · Law · Policy Transfer and Learning · Political and Economic history of UK and US · Psychology · Public Administration · Public Policy and Administration Research · Social Psychology