Responsible public bureaucracy
A rationale and a framework for analysis
Datos Bibliográficos
| ID | 9784748 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Kenneth Kernaghan (Brock University, autor de correspondencia) |
| Año | 1973 |
| Volumen | 16 |
| Número | 4 |
| Páginas | 572-603 |
| Fecha de publicación | 1973-12-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sí |
| Open Access | Sí |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Revista | Canadian Public Administration (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores de la revista | ISSN: 0008-4840 • E-ISSN: 1754-7121 |
| Editorial | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1754-7121.1973.tb01636.x |
| OpenAlex | W2089930343 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citas recibidas | 14 |
| Referencias citadas | 4 |
The longstanding concern of scholars and practitioners for the re conciliation of administrative power and administrative responsibility has become more acute in recent years. Both the conventional theory and the existing practice relating to administrative responsibility are inadequate for the needs of contemporary public bureaucracies. A distinction between objective and subjective responsibility provides a focus on the sources of administrative responsibility and on the values of public servants. In this essay, these two elements are examined separately by means of an institutional framework and a value framework for administrative decision‐making. Then the theoretical bonds between the two frameworks are demonstrated with reference to administrative responsibility. The links between the concepts of administrative responsibility and the public interest serve as a base for a description of two hypothetically extreme types of bureaucrat — the objectively responsible and the subjectively responsible official. A number of hypotheses relating to administrative responsibility are formulated and the conclusion is drawn that subjective responsibility is becoming increasingly important for the achievement of responsible public bureaucracy. Sommaire. Le désir de longue date des théoriciens et des praticiens de réconcilier pouvoir administratif et responsabilité administrative s'est intensifié au cours des dernières années. La théone classique et la pratique existante de la responsabilité administrative sont insuffisantes pour répondre aux besoins des bureaucraties publiques contemporaines. En faisant une distinction entre la responsabilité objective et la responsabilité subjective, on peut dégager les sources de la responsabilité administrative et les valeurs des fonctionnaires. Dam cette étude, l'auteur examine séparément ces deux éléments à l'aide d'un cadre d'analyse institutionnel et normatif de la prise de décision en administration. Il démontre ensuite les rapports théoriques entre ces deux cadres d'analyse en ce qui concerne la responsabilité administrative. Les liens entre les concepts de responsabilité administrative et d'intérêt public servent de base à la description de deux types hypothétiques extrêmes de bureaucrats:le fonctionnaire responsable objectivement et le fonctionnaire responsable subjectivement. L'auteur formule un certain nombre d'hypothèses sur la responsabilité administrative et terrnine en disant que la responsabilité subjective devient de plus en plus importante pour parvenir à une bureaucratie publique responsable
Bureaucracy · Economics · Political science · Politics · Welfare economics · Law · Ombudsman and Human Rights · Public Administration
A Comparative Study of Zambia and Mozambique
Power, Parliament and Public Servants in Canada
Administrative responsibility in a developing country
Rationality and the Problems of Administrative Theory
Government “responsibility” and responsible government
Teaching Ethics in Public Administration Courses
Codes of ethics and administrative responsibility
Technical decisions and public accountability
Changing concepts of power and responsibility in the Canadian public service
Conscience and conformity
Politics, policy and public servants
The conscience of the bureaucrat
Legislators, Bureaucrats, and Canadian Democracy
The global relevance of Canadian public administration? A bibliometric research note
| Obras citantes distintas | 14 |
|---|---|
| Citas por año | 0,27 |
| Intervalo de citas | 1974 - 2018 (45) |
| Velocidad de citación | historical |
| Altamente citado | No |
| Tipos de cita | Neutras: 14 |