Where are we coming from? Are there any useful lessons from our administrative history
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 9784585 |
|---|---|
| Authors | James Iain Gow (Université de Montréal, corresponding author), J E Hodgetts, John Hodgetts (0000-0002-8425-853X, University of Toronto) |
| Year | 2003 |
| Volume | 46 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 178-201 |
| Publication date | 2003-06-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Canadian Public Administration (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0008-4840 • E-ISSN: 1754-7121 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1754-7121.2003.tb00911.x |
| OpenAlex | W2071244128 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 4 |
| References cited | 18 |
This article challenges the notion that contemporary conditions are so new that there are no useful lessons to be learned from administrative history. Beginning with the observation that many recent innovations in public organizations were foreshadowed under the United Canadas, 1841–1867, it asks why they were gradually abandoned over the first century of Confederation, only to be revived recently. For reasons of efficiency and democratic governance, the department became the keystone organization of Canadian public administration, and bureaucracy the key decision‐making technology. Changes in economic conditions, technology, élite ideology and political culture led to the introduction of public management as an alternative to bureaucracy. Neither form has met all the needs of politicians, public servants and citizens. One lesson of the past is that other values, like representativeness, will assert themselves with the result that the system will continue to evolve. Sommaire: Cet article conteste la notion voulant que les conditions contemporaines sont si nouvelles qu'il n'y a pas de leçon utile à chercher dans I'histoire administrative. Partant de I'observation que plusieurs innovations récentes en organisation publique avaient leur pendant sous les Canadas Unis, 1841–1867, I'article cherche à comprendre pourquoi celles‐ci furent graduellement abandonnées pendant le premier siècle de la Confédération puis redécouvertes récemment. Pour des raisons d'efficience et de gouveme démocratique, le ministère devint I'organisation de préférence au sein de I'administration publique canadienne, tandis que la bureaucratie devint le mode décisionnel préféré. Des changements aux conditions économiques, à la technologie, à I'idélogie des élites et à la culture politique ont menéà I'introdudion du management public comme alternative à la bureaucratie. Aucun de ces changements n'a satisfait tous les besoins des politiciens, des fonctionnaires et des citoyens. Le passé suggère que d'autres valeurs, telle la représentativité, vont s'imposer, poussant le système àévoluer encore
Administration (probate law · Bureaucracy · Democracy · Ethnology · Humanities · Ideology · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Accounting and Organizational Management · Canadian Identity and History · Law · Philosophy · Public Administration · Public Policy and Administration Research
Institutional Amnesia
Value Change and Reorientations in Citizen-State Relations
Creating Crises and Avoiding Blame
Individualism, Civic Virtue, and Public Administration
Reflections on Public Administration, Past and Present
Distant Mirrors
Canadian Senior Civil Servants and Transitions of Government
Is the New Public Management a Paradigm? Does it Matter
Challenge and Response
The design of public organizations for the 21st century
The Andersen‐Comsoc affair
The state in business
What is wrong with the new public management
Creating a Corporate Culture
The "Reinventing Government" Exercise
The Tapestry Vision of Canadian Multiculturalism
Interest Group Litigation and the Embedded State
Emerging Conflicts in the Doctrines of Public Administration
| Unique citing works | 4 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,18 |
| Citation span | 2004 - 2023 (20) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 2 |