nach oben

Policy Sciences

Erschienen in:

18.07.2016 | Discussion and Commentary

Technocracy and democracy as spheres of justice in public policy

verfasst von: Bruce Gilley

Erschienen in: Policy Sciences | Ausgabe 1/2017

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

There is a long-standing debate about the proper application of democratic versus technocratic approaches to decision-making in public policy. This paper seeks to clarify the debate by applying Michael Walzer’s notion of “spheres of justice,” wherein both democracy and technocracy could be seen as distinctive approaches to justice that need to be protected from the domination of the other. The paper shows how the debate on democracy versus technocracy has evolved in both theoretical and applied settings in a manner that reflects the “domination” of one approach by the other. It elaborates the argument through several concrete examples drawn from comparative politics, public policy, and public management. It then explores how the “spheres” approach implies the need for an interpretive mechanism in order to mediate the competing notions of justice in particular policy issues.

Vorheriger Artikel There at the beginning: we’re still “emerging,” maybe forever

Nächster Artikel Policy Conflict Framework

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Barr, M. D. (2008). Singapore: The limits of a technocratic approach to health care. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 38(3), 395–416.CrossRef

Beetham, D. (1999). Democracy and human rights. Cambridge: Polity.

Bell, D. (1973). The coming of post-industrial society: A venture in social forecasting. New York: Basic Books.

Bendix, R. (1978). Kings or people: Power and the mandate to rule. Berkeley, London: University of California Press.

Biesta, G. (2007). Why “What Works” won’t work: Evidence-based practice and the democratic deficit in educational research. Educational Theory, 57(1), 1–22.CrossRef

Bluhm, W. T., & Heineman, R. A. (2007). Ethics and public policy: Method and cases. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Boaz, A., & Nutley, S. (2009). Evidence-based policy and practice. In A. G. Bovaird & E. Löffler (Eds.), Public management and governance (2nd ed., pp. 327–342). London: Routledge.

Boswell, C. (2009). The political uses of expert knowledge: Immigration policy and social research. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Brandon, J. (1933). Technocracy or democracy; which shall govern our industries?. Hollis, NY: C. A. Baker.

Caplan, B. D. (2007). The myth of the rational voter: Why democracies choose bad policies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Centeno, M. A., & Silva, P. (1998). The politics of expertise in Latin America (Latin American studies series). New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.CrossRef

Churchill, R. S. (1965). Twenty-one years. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Copeland, A., & American Water Works Association. (2016). Water fluoridation principles and practices. Manual of water supply (6th ed., Vol. M4). Denver, CO: American Water Works Association.

Crain, R. L., Katz, E., & Rosenthal, D. B. (1969). The politics of community conflict: The fluoridation decision. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.

Crick, B. (1962 (1993)). In defence of politics (4th ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Dargent, E. (2015). Technocracy and democracy in Latin America: The experts running government. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

Denhardt, J., & Denhardt, R. (2011). Leadership. In M. Bevir (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of governance (pp. 419–435). Los Angeles: SAGE.CrossRef

Edelenbos, J., van Schie, N., & Gerrits, L. (2010). Organizing interfaces between government institutions and interactive governance. Policy Sciences, 43(1), 73–94. doi:10.1007/s11077-009-9086-2.CrossRef

Farrell, K. N. (2011). Snow white and the wicked problems of the west: A look at the lines between empirical description and normative prescription. Science, Technology and Human Values, 36(3), 334–361. doi:10.1177/0162243910385796.CrossRef

Fischer, F., & Forester, J. (1987). Confronting values in policy analysis: The politics of criteria (Vol. 14). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Fischer, M., & Leifeld, P. (2015). Policy forums: Why do they exist and what are they used for? Policy Sciences, 48(3), 363–382. doi:10.1007/s11077-015-9224-y.CrossRef

Flyvbjerg, B. (1998). Rationality and power: Democracy in practice (Morality and society). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Freeze, R. A., & Lehr, J. H. (2009). The fluoride wars: How a modest public health measure became America’s longest-running political melodrama. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.CrossRef

Funtowicz, S. O., & Ravetz, J. R. (1990). Uncertainty and quality in science for policy. Theory and decision library series A, philosophy and methodology of the social sciences (Vol. 15). Dordrecht and Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Habermas, J. (1972). Knowledge and human interests. London: Heinemann.

Haidt, J. (2012). The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion (1st ed.). New York: Pantheon Books.

Hajer, M. (2003). Policy without polity? Policy analysis and the institutional void. Policy Sciences, 36(2), 175–195. doi:10.1023/a:1024834510939.CrossRef

Hardasmalani, R. (2016, July 2). Once a money spinner, can Singapore’s casinos beat the odds? Today Newspaper (Singapore), p. 12.

Hayek, F. A. (1944). The road to serfdom. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Heazle, M., & Kane, J. (2016). Policy legitimacy, science and political authority: Knowledge and action in liberal democracies. New York: Routledge.

Heineman, R. A. (2002). The world of the policy analyst: Rationality, values, and politics (3rd ed.). New York: Chatham House Publishers.

Hendriks, C. M. (2009). Policy design without democracy? Making democratic sense of transition management. Policy Sciences, 42(4), 341–368. doi:10.1007/s11077-009-9095-1.CrossRef

Ingram, H., & Schneider, A. (2006). Policy analysis for democracy. In M. Moran, M. Rein, & R. E. Goodin (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of public policy (pp. 169–189). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Institute of Policy Studies. (2005). Forum on casino proposal. Singapore: Institute of Policy Studies, National University of Singapore.

Jacobs, L. R., & King, D. S. (2016). Fed power: How finance wins and democratic accountability is restored. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Kooiman, J. (2003). Governing as governance. London: SAGE.

Krause, G. A. (2013). Representative democracy and policy-making in the administrative state: Is agency policy-making necessarily better? Journal of Public Policy, 33(02), 111–135. doi:10.1017/S0143814X13000044.CrossRef

Lee, K.Y. (2015, March 27). IRs needed for S’pore to keep abreast of the top cities. Straits Times Newspaper (Singapore), p. 6.

Leighninger, M., & Bradley, B. (2006). The next form of democracy: How expert rule is giving way to shared governance-and why politics will never be the same. Nashville, Tenn.: Vanderbilt University Press.

Matinga, M. N., Clancy, J. S., & Annegarn, H. J. (2014). Explaining the non-implementation of health-improving policies related to solid fuels use in South Africa. Energy Policy, 68, 53–59. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2013.10.040.CrossRef

Mayersohn, A. (2015, October 6). The people’s technocracy. Boston Review, p. 35.

Ministry of Trade and Industry. (2005). Statement by prime minister Lee Hsien Loong on proposal to develop integrated resorts. In G. o. S. Ministry of Trade and Industry (Ed.), (Vol. 18 April). Singapore.

Morgenthau, H. J. (1946). Scientific man vs. power politics. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago press.

Neumark, D., & Wascher, W. L. (2007). Minimum wages and employment. Foundations and Trends in Microeconomics, 3(1–2), 1–182.

Noveck, B. S. (2015). Smart citizens, smarter state: The technologies of expertise and the future of governing. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRef

Parliament of Singapore. (2005). Debate on annual budget statement. (Vol. 2 March). Singapore.

Pascal, B. (1670 (1961)). The Pensées (Vol. L110). Baltimore: Penguin Books.

Pechan, P. (2011). Safe or not safe: Deciding what risks to accept in our environment and food. New York: Springer.CrossRef

Pereira, A. G., & Funtowicz, S. (2009). Science for policy: New challenges, new opportunities (Ecological economics and human well-being). New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Pew Research Center. (2015). Public and Scientists’ Views on Science and Society. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. http://www.pewinternet.org/files/2015/01/PI_ScienceandSociety_Report_012915.pdf.

Sam, M. P., & Scherer, J. (2006). The steering group as policy advice instrument: A case of “Consultocracy” in stadium subsidy deliberations. Policy Sciences, 39(2), 169–181. doi:10.1007/s11077-006-9014-7.CrossRef

Schwartz, G. (1991). Myth of the Ford Pinto case. Rutgers Law Review, 43(4), 1013–1068.

Segatti, A. (2011). Reforming South African Immigration Policy in the Post apartheid Period (1990–2010). In A. Segatti & L. Landau (Eds.), Contemporary migration to South Africa (pp. 31–65). Washington, DC: World Bank.

Shearman, D. J. C., & Smith, J. W. (2007). The climate change challenge and the failure of democracy (Politics and the environment). Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.

Sim, J. (2013). The casino and modernity: A case study of the integrated resorts in Singapore. Singapore: National University of Singapore.

Sorensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2009). Making governance networks effective and democratic through metagovernance. Public Administration, 87(2), 234–258. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9299.2009.01753.x.CrossRef

Spence, D. (2003). The benefits of agency policy-making: Perspectives from positive theory. In G. A. Krause & K. J. Meier (Eds.), Politics, policy, and organizations: Frontiers in the scientific study of bureaucracy (pp. 104–129). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Spicer, M. W. (2010). In defense of politics in public administration: A value pluralist perspective (Public Administration). Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.

Thayyil, N. (2014). Biotechnology regulation and GMOs: Law, technology and public contestations in Europe (Biotechnology regulation). Cheltenham and Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.

Trappenburg, M. (2000). In defence of pure pluralism: Two readings of Walzer’s spheres of justice. Journal of Political Philosophy, 8(3), 343.CrossRef

Walker, D. M. (2007). Benefit-cost analysis: Problems in quantifying the social costs and benefits of gambling. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 66(3), 609–645.CrossRef

Walker, D. M., & Kelly, S. M. (2011). The roots of modern ‘social cost of gambling’ estimates. Economic Affairs, 31(1), 38–42.CrossRef

Walzer, M. (1983). Spheres of justice: A defense of pluralism and equality. New York: Basic Books.

Wu, S.-T., & Chen, Y.-S. (2015). The social, economic, and environmental impacts of casino gambling on the residents of Macau and Singapore. Tourism Management, 48(2), 285–298.CrossRef

Titel: Technocracy and democracy as spheres of justice in public policy
verfasst von: Bruce Gilley
Publikationsdatum: 18.07.2016
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Policy Sciences / Ausgabe 1/2017
Print ISSN: 0032-2687
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-0891
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-016-9260-2

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2017

Policy Conflict Framework

Policy advisory systems: change dynamics and sources of variation

Dynamics in the Dutch policy advisory system: externalization, politicization and the legacy of pillarization

There at the beginning: we’re still “emerging,” maybe forever

Assessing 30 years of Westminster policy advisory system experience

Think tanks and strategic policy-making: the contribution of think tanks to policy advisory systems

Premium Partner