Imagining an Otherwise Global Public Administration

Abstract

Global public administration remains an incomplete project with contested notions of its aims and objectives. Given its disputed nature we focus on developing a negative definition of global public administration. We argue that a global public administration cannot be based on a singular ontology, western epistemology and Eurocentric research agenda. Moreover, a truly global public administration must not be committed to myopic limitations concerning its scope, historicity, objectives and research methods. To help foster discussion toward reimagining a different public administration, based on the postcolonial work of Khatibi, we argue for an otherwise thinking about global public administration. This would require looking with alterity for inspiration and insight, looking back to learn from history, looking differently to formulate new questions through new lenses, looking inwards at disciplinary exclusions, and looking dialectically to navigate the macro-micro research divide.

Building global public administration knowledge: Leveraging the power of collaboration

“…With respect to variations attributable to geography, scholars (Haque, 2022;Perry, 2016;van der Wal et al, 2021) have written about the need to contextualize research to better understand a large range of factors-history, politicoideological, and sociocultural-that affect administrative systems and practices. Many have written about various forms of parochialism, among them American, Anglophone, and epistemic parochialism (Candler et al, 2010) and Eurocentric and Western parochialism (Haque, 2022;Nisar & Masood, 2023).…”