Public Administration: Contemporary Issues and Considerations in Pakistan
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study aims to delineate the issues affecting the contemporary public administration and highlight the scholarly tension in its theoretical and intellectual aspects. The emerging problems faced by the discipline encompass the historical conflicts, limitation complications, and vagueness in scope, definition, and methodology of public administration. In a context of technological growth, integration of business and nonprofits, unfixed limitations of legality to public policy making and execution, traditional tug of war of politics and administration dichotomy by practitioners also address the public administration in doldrums. Influencing impacts of globalization, complementary approaches to public administration, outdated boundary lines between administration, transparency and administrative accountability, bureaucratic flaws and acceptance of managerial innovative techniques raise the questions in the discipline. The given literature of public administration issues entailed to identify the paradigm tension, limitation and scope, definitional vagueness, contradicting approach, and teaching and methodological tautness. Attaining the purpose of the research exploratory method and secondary source of the data collection used to meet the criteria of the study.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
Reference
Asgarov, s., alakbarov, m., aliev, z., babayev, n., chiladze, g., datskovsky, i. I. & kohl, o (2014). Public administration: challenges and solutions.
Aslam, G. (2019). Decentralization reforms in dictatorial regimes as a survival strategy: Evidence from Pakistan. International Political Science Review, 40(1), 126-142.
BOJANG, M. B.(2018). Identity issues of public administration in Turkey. A Paper presented at 4th International Students Conference for Social Sciences, NEVŞEHİR Turkey NOVEMBER 22-24, 2018.
Bretschneider, S. (2003). Information technology, e-government, and institutional change.
Brian W. Head and John Alford (2013) Wicked Problems: Implications for Public Policy and Management, Administration & Society 2015, Vol. 47(6) 711 –739
Burnham, J. 1942. The Managerial Revolution. London: Putnam.
Chandio, A. R., Brohi, I. A., Ahmed, S., Ali, M., & Gadhi, G. N. (2019). Administrative ethics with special reference to Islam. GSJ, 7(7).
Cupps, D. S. (1977). Emerging problems of citizen participation. Public administration review, 478-487.
Dahl, R. A. (2018). The science of public administration: Three problems. In Democracy bureaucracy, and the study of administration (pp. 60-76).
Englehart, Judith. 2001. The Marriage between Theory and Practice. Public Administration Review 61(3): 371–74.
GÜNEŞ, Z. (2009), Evaluation of Reforms in Turkish Public Administration After 1980s, MA Thesis, University of Vaasa, Finland
Hashmi, S. H. (Ed.). (1989). The State of Social Sciences in Pakistan. Quaid-i-Azam University.
Head, B. W., & Alford, J. (2015). Wicked problems: Implications for public policy and management. Administration & society, 47(6), 711-739.
Hood, C. (1995), Emerging issues in public administration. Public administration, 73(1), 165-183.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.1995.tb00822.
Howlett, M. (2020). Challenges in applying design thinking to public policy: dealing with the varieties of policy formulation and their vicissitudes. Policy & Politics, 48(1), 49-65. doi:10.1332/030557319x15613699681219.
Hughes, O. E. (1998). The traditional model of public administration. In Public Management and Administration (pp. 22-51). Palgrave, London.
Hummel, Ralph. 1991. Stories Managers Tell: Why They Are Valid as Science. Public Administration Review 51(1): 31– 41.
Jabeen, N. (2004). Public administration education in Pakistan: Issues, challenges and opportunities. Frontiers of Public Administration, 163.
Jabeen, N. (2004). Public administration education in Pakistan: Issues, challenges and opportunities. Frontiers of Public Administration, 163.
Kamal, D. M., & Batool, D. S. (2021). Institutional Failure: A Challenge to Good Governance in Pakistan. South Asian Studies, 1(35).
Krane, D. (2015). Democracy, public administrators, and public policy. In Democracy and public administration (pp. 33-51). Routledge.
Kuhlmann, S., Proeller, I., Schimanke, D., & Ziekow, J. (2021). German Public Administration: Background and Key Issues. In Public Administration in Germany (pp. 1-13). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
Lan, Z., & Anders, K. K. (2000). A paradigmatic view of contemporary public administration research: An empirical test. Administration & society, 32(2), 138-165.
LaPorte Jr, R. (1981). Civil and military bureaucracy in Pakistan. Department of State Washington Dc Office of External Research.
Liao, Y. (2018). Toward a pragmatic model of public responsiveness: implications for enhancing public administrators’ responsiveness to citizen demands. International Journal of Public Administration, 41(2), 159-169.
Margetts, H. (2012). Information technology in government: Britain and America. Routledge.
Margetts, H. (2012). Information technology in government: Britain and America. Routledge.
Milakovich, M. E. (2010). The Internet and increased citizen participation in government. JeDEM-eJournal of eDemocracy and Open Government, 2(1), 1-9.
Northrop, A. (2003). Information technology and public administration: the view from the profession. In Public information technology: policy and management issues (pp. 1 19). IGI Global. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-59140-060-8.ch001.
Ostrom, V. (2008). The intellectual crisis in American public administration. University of Alabama Press.
Popescu, L. D., & Puscasu, M. (2015). EVOLUTION OF ADMINISTRATION AND PUBLIC FUNCTION. In International Scientific Conference" Strategies XXI" (Vol. 3, p. 175). " Carol I" National Defence University.
Pugh, D. L. (1989). Professionalism in public administration: Problems, perspectives, and the role of ASPA. Public Administration Review, 1-8.
Robson, W.A. 1948. Public administration today. London: Stevens.
RUTGERS, M. R. (2010), Theory and Scope of Public Administration: An Introduction to the Study’s Epistemology, Foundation of Public Administration, pp. 1-45
Şaylan, G. and Sezen, S. (2000), The Paradigmatic crises of Public Administration and Teaching Curriculum: Turkish Case. The paper presented at the Annual Conference of the International Association of Schools and Institutions, held in Beijing 10-13 July 2000.
Schumpeter, J. A. (2013). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. routledge. Seifert, J.W. (2003) 'A primer on e-government: Sectors, stages, opportunities, and challenges of online governance', DTIC Document.
Spicer, M. (2004). Public administration, the history of ideas, and the reinventing government movement. Public Administration Review, 64(3), 353-362. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2004.00379.x.
Tahmasebi, R., & Musavi, S. M. M. (2011). Politics-Administration Dichotomy: A Century Debate. Administration & Public Management Review, 17.
Usman Khan, D., & Aziz ur Rehman, D. (2021). Civil bureaucracy and democracy in pakistan: do they mutually coexist?. PalArch's Journal of Archaeology of Egypt/Egyptology, 18(4), 677-687.
van Buuren, A., Lewis, J. M., Guy Peters, B., & Voorberg, W. (2020). Improving public policy and administration: exploring the potential of design. Policy & Politics, 48(1), 319. https://doi.org/10.1332/030557319X15579230420063.
Ventriss, Curtis M. 1991. Contemporary Issues in American Public Administration Education: The Search for an Educational Focus. Public Administration Review 51(1): 4–12.
Waldo, D. (1968), Scope of the Theory of Public Administration. In: J.C. Charlesworth (ed.), Theory and Practice of Public Administration: Scope, Objectives, and Methods (pp. 8 9). Philadelphia: The American Academy of Political and Social Science.
Willbern, Y. (1954). Professionalization in the public service: Too little or too much?. Public Administration Review, 14(1), 13-21.
Wright, B. E., Hassan, S., & Park, J. (2016). Does a public service ethic encourage ethical behaviour? Public service motivation, ethical leadership and the willingness to report ethical problems. Public Administration, 94(3), 647-663.