Administrative Law and Governmentality: Politics and Discretion in a Changing State of Sovereignty

Howe, Louis E.

doi:10.1080/10841806.2002.11029340

Cited by 9 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, further questions arise and need addressing before judgement on this putative resurgence of the public domain, and some degree of trust in government, can be made:How are states to confront a range of intractable issues flowing from the social/economic exclusionary consequences of globalization (Farazmand, 2002)?Is public authority exercising any supervisory role where there is no strong social or political values to combat those of profit and growth, now even more considerably enhanced through the theory of “Regulatory Takings” (Epstein, 1985), whereby multi‐national corporations sue the taxpayer, under NAFTA, if they believe public regulation has damaged corporate “future” profits? Citizens might wish to debate whether government, acting to protect public interest, should be compelled to pay multi‐nationals for limiting or “taking” future profits.The market place is currently privatizing “futures” through 30 to 80‐year partnership and franchise agreements, whilst “Informatic Liberalism” (Howe, 2002) involves the rolling back many government‐administered policies of regulation to accommodate, and entrench, economic models of action and stressing policy action ideologically independent of governance and/or re‐regulation.The understood dimensions and regulatory imperatives of the “Risk Society” (Beck, 1992) need further scrutiny in light of complexity and contingency introduced by globalization (MacDonald, 2002). How will the devolution of decision making flow from the local significance of globalization?…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Market fundamentalism, delusions and epistemic failures in policy and administration

Kouzmin

2009

Asia-Pacific J of Bus Admin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to overview and critique the over‐reach of highly ideological assumptions of neo‐classical economics into policy and governance terrains. The ontology and epistemology of neo‐classical economics know no bounds in their imperial extension to non‐market applications. The colonization of Public Administration in Australia, and elsewhere, is a vexing epistemological issue, demanding some reckoning.Design/methodology/approachThis deconstructive, critical essay seeks to provide a set of “check‐lists” of issues for those teaching, or proselytizing, governance within highly reduced public domains.FindingsThis paper moves an epistemological “audit” of “public choice theory” some steps forward, especially in the face of significant ideological and policy convergence, among putative social‐democratic governance regimes, regarding out‐sourcing, no‐bid contracting, agency “capture”, risk and a renewed urgency for necessary re‐regulation. The paper identifies policy imperatives for a new age of regulation after 35 years of prevailing “market fundamentalism”.Originality/valueThere has been much hubris associated with so‐called policy convergence in a globalized context. Deconstructing such hubris within a divergent world is long overdue for the next generation of scholars/policy apologists/rating agencies/and economists prone to some reflexivity in plying their “dismal” trade.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Market fundamentalism, delusions and epistemic failures in policy and administration

Kouzmin

2009

Asia-Pacific J of Bus Admin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Often, the policy must be changed and revised because it takes into account the experience gained. Also, the policies are oft en subject to various interpretation (Keeler, 2013;Howe, 2014;McHarg, 2017). In such cases, the administrator is responsible for policy implementation, can use their discretion in policy interpret.…”

Section: Service Function Of Government Versusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Logic Model of Governance Innovation and Public Policy in Public Service

Andhika

Nurasa

Karlina

et al. 2018

pgr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research aims to provide additional qualitative evidence of the logical relationship between governance innovation and public policy in public services in Indonesia with adopting the logic model. The logic model is often not adopting in the formulation of policies that resulted in the implementation of public sector innovation such as cannot show more significant results. Also this model is believed to contribute in planning and evaluation of government programs. Most of this article based on the literature study and direct observation. The study also refers to some cases were chosen deliberately and treated as evidence by using a descriptive qualitative approach for developing an argument and conceptual framework accordingly. This research resulted in some information. First, governance innovation will provide multi-benefits, not only for the government but will involve a range of other institutions. Second, public policy is treated as a formal legal basis to keep programs planning and evaluation. That way this article is expected to contribute to the knowledge development of logical relationships among governance innovation and public policy in the diﬀerent local contexts Indonesia from countries which often becomes a reference in managing public service innovation.

show abstract

“…However, the return to the law also plays a central role in Ostrom's (1989) diagnosis of public administration's crisis and, more derivatively, in Frederickson (1997). Along quite different (and in my view, more productive) lines, Howe (2002) has offered a suggestive Foucauldian reading of administrative law that critically links constitutionalism with the field's many dichotomies. The most direct interrogation of the bureaucracy's subservience to the law and political representation and the law's presupposed relation to legitimate and ethical action I have read appears in Farmer (1995, pp.…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Constitution as Executive Order

Catlaw

2005

Administration & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article offers a new strategy for examining the legitimacy question in public administration and representative government. A genealogy of political discourses is proposed to suggest that political forms have historically relied on a constitutive exclusion. The U.S. Constitution and administrative state are conceived of as events in this genealogy but are unique in that both deny the ontologically constitutive effect of the exclusion. Administration and constitutionalism are described as liberal political technologies, deployed to re-present and fabricate “the People,” that is, to bring into reality the organic totality that is ontologically presupposed.

show abstract

Administrative Law and Governmentality: Politics and Discretion in a Changing State of Sovereignty

Cited by 9 publications

References 26 publications

Market fundamentalism, delusions and epistemic failures in policy and administration

Market fundamentalism, delusions and epistemic failures in policy and administration

Logic Model of Governance Innovation and Public Policy in Public Service

Constitution as Executive Order

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About