LESSON-2-TRADITIONAL-DICHOTOMY-OF-PUBLIC-ADMINISTRATION-Public-administration.pdf

PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION LESSON 2: TRADITIONAL DICHOTOMYH OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION DESTROYED LAST MEETING ALERT!  Last meeting, we made mention that some scholars of the discipline of Public Administration have agreed that Policies, Institutions, and Programs of the government and the aim of impro...

PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION LESSON 2: TRADITIONAL DICHOTOMYH OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION DESTROYED LAST MEETING ALERT!  Last meeting, we made mention that some scholars of the discipline of Public Administration have agreed that Policies, Institutions, and Programs of the government and the aim of improving the same are the two (2) of most important subject matters.  Let us now discuss how Public Administration as a discipline had developed a focus on Policy Analysis and a breakaway from the Traditional Dichotomy of Public Administration: WHAT IS THE TRADITIONAL DICHOTOMY OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION? The traditional dichotomy in public administration refers to the idea that there should be a clear separation between politics and administration. This concept, often attributed to Woodrow Wilson and his essay "The Study of Administration" (1887), posits that:  Politics involves the making of policies, laws, and decisions by elected officials and politicians. It is concerned with the "what" of government—what policies and laws should be enacted to reflect the will of the people. (Political Considerations such as but not limited to Political Party membership and alliances).  Administration involves the implementation and management of these policies by public servants or bureaucrats. It is concerned with the "how" of government—how these policies and laws are executed and administered efficiently. WHY IS THIS DICHOTOMY SIGNIFICANT?  The traditional dichotomy suggests that public administrators should focus solely on efficiently implementing the decisions made by politicians without being influenced by political considerations. The idea was that this separation would prevent bureaucrats from engaging in political activities, thus ensuring neutrality, efficiency, and professionalism in administration.  Because of this commotion on the continuing criticism about the traditional dichotomy of Public Administration, Waldo’s Albert Sweitzer chair had funded a symposium at the Minnowbrook site of Syracuse University for “young public administrationist” scholars.  The Conference generated a whole collection of essays that collectively identified what was wrong with the field, what it failed to do, what it was not doing, what its weaknesses were, and how it should proceed.  It was a call for a “new Public Administration” and involved such heady and stormy concerns as the relevance of the field to ranging problems of the society, social change, adaptation of the discipline, the field’s scientific and moral authority, as well as nagging questions and empirical theory. DWIGHT WALDO (1913-2000) AS A CRITIQUE OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AS A DISCIPLINE AND PRACTICE Dwight Waldo (1913–2000) was an influential American political scientist and public administration scholar. He is best known for his critical views on the nature of public administration as both a discipline and a practice. Waldo challenged the traditional perspectives of public administration, particularly the idea that it could be purely scientific and value-free. His work emphasized the importance of values, ethics, and democratic principles in public administration. WALDO’S CRITICISMS ON PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION: "Acting Like a Profession Without Being One" Waldo's critique that public administration acts "like a profession without being one" refers to his observation that public administration often adopts the language, behavior, and self-image of a profession without meeting the criteria that typically define a profession. In general, a profession is characterized by specialized knowledge, formal training, a code of ethics, and autonomy in practice. Waldo argued that public administration, while aspiring to these standards, often lacks the coherent body of knowledge and autonomy that true professions like law or medicine possess. He believed that public administration was trying to establish itself as a profession to gain legitimacy and authority, but in doing so, it was neglecting its unique role and responsibilities in a democratic society. CRITICISMS BY WALDO: 1. Overemphasis on Efficiency: Waldo criticized the discipline's obsession with efficiency, which he saw as a carryover from the private sector. He argued that focusing solely on efficiency could undermine democratic values and ignore the broader purposes of government, such as justice, equity, and the public good.  Why is it a problem? Efficiency is about achieving the maximum output with the least input, which is often crucial in the private sector. However, in public administration, an excessive focus on efficiency can be problematic because it may lead to decisions that overlook or compromise other important values such as equity, justice, and public welfare. The goal of government is not just to be efficient but to serve the public in a fair and just manner.  Example Situation: Imagine a city government decides to streamline its social services by reducing the number of welfare caseworkers to save costs and improve efficiency. While this might reduce operational expenses, it could also result in longer wait times and less personalized service for vulnerable populations, ultimately harming those who rely on these services. 2. Neglect of Values and Ethics: Waldo was concerned that public administration often neglected the role of values and ethics in its theories and practices. He argued that administrative decisions are inherently political and value-laden, and therefore, public administrators should be more conscious of the ethical implications of their actions.  Why is it a problem? Public administration is not value-neutral; the decisions made by public administrators affect people's lives and reflect broader societal values. Ignoring the ethical dimensions of decisions can lead to actions that, while technically sound, may be morally questionable or detrimental to public trust.  Example Situation: Consider a situation where a public housing authority decides to demolish low-income housing to make way for luxury apartments as part of an urban renewal project. This decision may be financially beneficial and efficient, but it could displace low-income families, exacerbating homelessness and inequality. Ignoring the ethical implications of such a decision undermines the public's trust in government. 3. Separation from Politics: Waldo challenged the traditional dichotomy between politics and administration, which suggests that administrators should be neutral and only focus on implementing policies. He believed that public administration is inherently political and that administrators must engage with political values and realities rather than pretending they can remain entirely neutral.  Why is it a problem? The traditional view that politics and administration should be separate suggests that administrators should simply implement policies without considering the political context or values behind them. However, Waldo argued that public administration is inherently political because it involves making decisions that affect society. Pretending that administrators can remain neutral can lead to decisions that are out of touch with the political realities and values of the society they serve.  Example Situation: A public health agency tasked with implementing a controversial vaccination mandate might try to enforce the policy strictly, without engaging with the political and social concerns of the community. This could lead to public backlash, resistance to the policy, and a failure to achieve the desired public health outcomes. By not acknowledging the political aspects of the policy, the agency may struggle to gain public support and effectively implement the mandate. 4. Technocratic Approach: Waldo was critical of the technocratic approach to public administration, which emphasizes technical expertise and managerial skills over democratic engagement and responsiveness to citizens. He argued that this approach could lead to a disconnect between government and the people it serves.  Why is it a problem? A technocratic approach emphasizes technical expertise and managerial skills, often at the expense of democratic engagement and responsiveness to citizens' needs. While expertise is important, a government that relies too heavily on technocrats can become disconnected from the public, making decisions that serve narrow interests rather than the broader public good.  Example Situation: Suppose a city council relies on urban planners to design a new transportation system without involving the community in the decision-making process. The planners might prioritize technical efficiency and cost- effectiveness, leading to a system that is difficult for certain populations (like the elderly or disabled) to access. This could result in public dissatisfaction and a transportation system that doesn't meet the needs of all residents. Analyzing Dwight Waldo’s criticisms on the New Public Administration proposed by “young Public Administrationists,” that the New Public Administration seemed to have created more problems that it solved but it more or less served as statement of concern, a Public Administration manifesto of sorts of what should be addressed in the Discipline. PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND THE FOCUS TOWARDS POLICY ANALYSIS The turbulence of the 1960s, characterized by social movements, political protests, and significant policy initiatives, led to a reevaluation of Public Administration. The field began to shift from a focus on efficiency and technical aspects to a broader consideration of policy issues, social equity, and the ethical dimensions of governance. The events of the 1960s emphasized the need for public administrators to be more engaged with the complexities of policy-making and the societal impacts of their work. 1. CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT  Events: The 1960s saw the rise of the Civil Rights Movement, aiming to end racial segregation and discrimination against African Americans. Key events included the March on Washington (1963) and the passage of the Civil Rights Act (1964) and the Voting Rights Act (1965).  Impact on Public Administration: These events forced public administrators to address issues of racial equality and civil rights in policy implementation. There was an increased emphasis on ensuring that public policies were equitable and that all citizens had equal access to government services and opportunities. This shift highlighted the need for public administration to engage with and address social justice issues. 2.VIETNAM WAR  Events: The Vietnam War was a contentious issue, leading to widespread protests and societal divisions. The war’s escalation in the 1960s provoked significant public dissent and criticism of government policy.  Impact on Public Administration: The war's controversy exposed issues of government transparency and accountability. Public administrators had to manage the domestic impact of the war, including draft-related protests and veterans' care, which intensified scrutiny of governmental decisions and policy- making processes. This situation brought policy issues to the forefront of Public Administration as administrators grappled with managing both the war and its domestic repercussions. 3. GREAT SOCIETY PROGRAMS  Events: In response to the growing demand for social reform, President Lyndon B. Johnson introduced the Great Society programs in the mid-1960s. These programs aimed to eliminate poverty and improve living standards through initiatives like Medicare, Medicaid, and various education and housing programs.  Impact on Public Administration: The implementation of these expansive social programs required public administrators to develop and manage complex policies aimed at addressing poverty and improving social welfare. This shift led to a greater focus on policy analysis, program evaluation, and the effectiveness of government interventions in social issues. 4. URBAN RIOTS AND SOCIAL UNREST  Events: The 1960s experienced a series of urban riots and social unrest, often driven by racial tensions and economic disparities. Notable examples include the Watts riots (1965) and the Detroit riots (1967).  Impact on Public Administration: The civil unrest highlighted systemic inequalities and the failures of existing public policies to address underlying social issues. Public administration had to address the immediate needs arising from the riots and also reconsider approaches to urban policy and community relations, leading to a greater focus on the social dimensions of public policy and administration. 5. STUDENT AND ANTI-WAR PROTESTS Events: The decade saw significant student activism and anti-war protests, particularly on college campuses, where students challenged both domestic policies and U.S. involvement in Vietnam. Impact on Public Administration: These protests underscored the disconnect between government policies and public sentiment, pushing for greater responsiveness and transparency in policy-making. Public administrators were compelled to consider the voices of dissent and the broader impact of their policies on various segments of society. ANALYSIS ON THE SAID EVENTS IN RELATION TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION TO FINALLY FOCUS ON POLICY ANALYSIS  These public upheavals have shown Waldo that Public Administration should not only focus on the efficiency, effectivity, and economy of policies, institutions, and programs of the government. For instance, the build-build-build program, the government and public administration should not only focus on the construction of establishments and infrastructure (bridges, roads, and others): it should also consider the demands of the people after the technical component of the execution of the law. Waldo's critique suggests that public administrators should be actively involved in shaping and understanding the policies they implement, considering the social and political implications of their work.  Waldo is emphasizing that public administration must engage with the substance of public policies and the social issues they address, rather than merely executing them according to a predetermined plan. He argues that public administration should not adhere strictly to the traditional separation between politics and administration but should recognize and address the broader societal and ethical dimensions of its work. This perspective calls for a more integrated approach, where administrators are actively involved in shaping, understanding, and evaluating policies in the context of social needs and democratic principles. POLICY ANALYSIS: BECAME THE SINGLE MOST PREVALENT CATCHWORD AND ORGANIZING FRAMEWORK FOR THE STUDY OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS AND ADMINISTRATION (GARSON & OVERMAN, 1983) This is how Policy Analysis should be done in Public Administration as suggested by Waldo and the true nature of Public Administration as a discipline. 1. Beyond Execution of Public Policy  Traditional View: Imagine a city public works department is tasked with implementing a new policy to improve road maintenance. According to the traditional view, the department's role is to execute the policy efficiently, focusing on technical aspects like scheduling repairs and managing budgets.  Waldo’s Critique: Suppose the new road maintenance policy is part of a broader initiative aimed at reducing traffic accidents and improving safety in low-income neighborhoods. Waldo would argue that public administrators should not only implement the policy but also engage with the community to understand their specific needs and concerns. For example, if residents in a particular area have voiced concerns about unsafe pedestrian crossings, the administrators should consider these issues in their implementation strategy, perhaps by incorporating additional safety measures or addressing the underlying causes of accidents. 2.Addressing Social Issues  Traditional View: Consider a public health department responsible for implementing a new vaccination program. Under the traditional view, the focus is on administering vaccines and managing logistics.  Waldo’s Critique: If the vaccination program targets underserved communities with lower vaccination rates due to historical distrust of the healthcare system, Waldo would argue that administrators need to go beyond mere implementation. They should actively engage with community leaders, address cultural and historical barriers, and tailor the program to build trust and ensure effective outreach. This might involve working with local organizations to provide education and support, rather than simply distributing vaccines. 3. Beyond Politics-Administration Dichotomy  Traditional View: A city’s planning department is tasked with implementing zoning laws that were decided by elected officials. According to the traditional view, planners should focus solely on applying these laws without considering the political implications or community feedback.  Waldo’s Critique: Suppose the zoning laws involve redeveloping a neighborhood that has historically been home to a marginalized community. Waldo would argue that administrators should consider the political and social context of the policy. This means engaging with residents to understand their concerns about displacement, ensuring that redevelopment plans include affordable housing options, and addressing potential community impacts. Administrators should not just follow orders but also participate in discussions about the broader implications of the policy.