The article attempts to make a discourse analysis on Korean public administration research for the past half century, in terms of Jacque Lacan's theory of the four fundamental discourses. Of the four discourses, the master discourse and university discourse are dominant, while the analytic discourse and hysteric discourse are marginalized. Previous studies have served or justified the three master signifiers in Korean public administration (the hierarchical political power, capitalism, and the U.S. public administration), with little attempt to challenge and change those master signifiers. Some structured mechanisms, like the hierarchical structure of governance and the tripartite disciplinary network, have contributed to the discourse (re)production. The article argues for making efforts to dissolve those reproduction mechanisms, and for a change of discourses in Korean public administration research.We should admit rather that power produces knowledge (and not simply by encouraging it because it serves power or by applying it because it is useful); that power and knowledge directly imply one another; that there I would like to thank N.

This paper reviews public organization research in Korea conducted during the last five years. To frame the discussion, earlier research is also reviewed, and a direction for future research is suggested. The major characteristics of past research are summarized as "apolitical," in the sense that it simply introduced positivist theories from the United States and ignored the relationship between public organization problems and authoritarian governments in Korea. This "apolitical" orientation produced two major issues: questioning the relevancy of the research and "Koreanization" of the U.S. theories. The "apolitical" trend continues in recent research, as do the issues. The paper suggests a "political" approach as an antithesis to an "apolitical" one for the direction of future research in Korea.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract