SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Amme İdaresi Dergisi / 2007 / Cilt: 40 - Sayı: 4

New Public Administration and Deliberative Democracy Within the Framework of Hebermas's Criticism of Systems Theory

Habermas'ın Sistem Kuramı Eleştirisi Çerçevesinde Yeni Kamu İşletmeciliği ve Müzakereci Demokrasi

A. Argun AKDOĞAN
Pages
21–44
Publication Date
2022-10-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In this paper, similaraties between the traditional and new public administration on their approach to technology and rationality are examined and the prospect for new public management to solve the problems of purposive-instrumental rationality through new methods of participation such as deliberative democracy, is discussed.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Although the fundemental principles and assumptions of the purposive-instrumental rationality approach are used by the new public management, no reference is given in the related literature to the source of this approach, i.e., systems theory.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The assessment of the new public management in the context of systems theory which is used to analyze traditional new public management; can facilitate the examination of conceptual ties between these two different approaches.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In this paper, similaraties between the traditional and new public administration on their approach to technology and rationality are examined and the prospect for new public management to solve the problems of purposive-instrumental rationality through new methods of participation such as deliberative democracy, is discussed.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Although the fundemental principles and assumptions of the purposive-instrumental rationality approach are used by the new public management, no reference is given in the related literature to the source of this approach, i.e., systems theory. The assessment of the new public management in the context of systems theory which is used to analyze traditional new public management; can facilitate the examination of conceptual ties between these two different approaches. Criticisms directed by Habermas to the bureacratic organization of the Welfare State are also valid for new public management. In this paper, similaraties between the traditional and new public administration on their approach to technology and rationality are examined and the prospect for new public management to solve the problems of purposive-instrumental rationality through new methods of participation such as deliberative democracy, is discussed.

Özet

Amaçsal-araçsal ussallık yaklaşımının temel ilke ve önermeleri yeni kamu işletmeciliğinde de kullanılmasına karşın ilgili yazında bu yaklaşımın kaynağı olan sistem kuramına atıfta bulunulmamaktadır. Yeni kamu işletmeciliğinin, geleneksel kamu yönetimini çözümlemekte kullanılmış olan sistem kuramı çerçevesinde tartışılması, bu iki farklı yaklaşım arasındaki kuramsal bağların incelenmesini kolaylaştırabilir. Sistem kuramı temelinde Habermas’ın Refah Devleti’nin bürokratik örgütlenmesine yönelttiği eleştiriler, yeni kamu işletmeciliği için de büyük ölçüde geçerlidir. Bu çalışmada, geleneksel ve yeni kamu yönetimi anlayışının teknoloji ve ussallığa yaklaşımlarındaki benzerlikler incelenerek, yeni kamu işletmeciliğinin müzakereci demokrasi gibi yeni katılım mekanizmalarıyla amaçsal-araçsal ussallık sorunlarını ne ölçüde çözebileceği tartışılmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

AKDOĞAN, A. A. (2022). New Public Administration and Deliberative Democracy Within the Framework of Hebermas's Criticism of Systems Theory. Amme İdaresi Dergisi, Cilt: 40 - Sayı: 4, 21–44. https://ajindex.com/articles/435483

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (21)

  1. Akbulut, Ö. (2007), “Kamu Yönetiminde İşletmecilik Sorunu”, Mülkiye, No. 254, s.73-86.
  2. Armstrong, A. (1998), “A Comparative Analysis: New Public Management-the Way Ahead?”, Australian Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 57, No. 2, s. 12-26.
  3. Benhabib, S. (1998), “Toward a Deliberative Model of Democratic Legitimacy”, Benhabib, S. (Ed.) Democracy and Difference: Dilemmas of Citizenship in Contemporary Europe, Princeton University Press, s. 67-94.
  4. Borgman, A. (1992),
  5. Crossing the Postmodern Divide, University of Chicago Press,
  6. Chicago. Braaten, J. (1991), Habermas’s Critical Theory of Society, State University of New York Press,
  7. Albany. Cooke, M. (2000), “Five Arguments for Deliberative Democracy”, Political Studies, Vol. 48, No.5, s. 947-69.
  8. Crozier, M., Huntington, S. P. ve Watanuki, J. (Ed.) (1975),
  9. The Crisis of Democracy, New York University Press,
  10. NY. Denhardt, R. B. (1981), “Toward a Critical Theory of Public Organization”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 41, No. 6, s. 628-635.
  11. DiTomaso, N. (1978), “The Expropriation of the Means of Administration: Class struggle Over the U.S. Department of Labor”, Kapitalistate, Vol. 7, s. 81-105.
  12. Dryzek, J.S. (2000), Deliberative Democracy and Beyond: Liberals, Critics, Contestations, Oxford University Press,
  13. Oxford. Dryzek, J. S. (2001), “Legitimacy and Economy in Deliberative Democracy”, Political Theory, Vol. 29, No. 5, s. 651-669.
  14. Easton, D. (1953),
  15. The Political System, Knopf, New York. Eccleshall, R. (1992), “Michael Oakeshott and Skeptical Conservatism”, Tivey, L. and Wright, A. (Ed.) Political Thought since 1945:
  16. Philosophy, Science and Ideology, Edward Elgar, Hants, UK, s. 173-195.
  17. Fay, B. (1975),
  18. Social Theory and Political Practice, Allen & Unwin, London. Fischer, F. (1990), Technocracy and the Politics of Expertise, Sage, Newbury Park, NY. Giddens, A. (1971), Capitalism and Modern Social Theory: An Analysis of the Writings of Marx, Durkheim and Max Weber, Cambridge University Press,
  19. Cambridge. Güzelsarı, S. (2004), “Kamu Yönetimi Disiplininde Yeni Kamu İşletmeciliği ve Yönetişim Yaklaşımları”, Öktem, K. ve Ömürgönülşen, U. (Ed.), Kamu Yönetimi, Gelişimi ve Güncel Sorunlar, İmaj, Ankara, s. 85-138.
  20. Finlayson, J. G. (2005), Habermas: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford University Press,
  21. Oxford. Green, D. (1988), The New Right: The Counter-Revolution in Political Economic and Social Tought, Harvester and Wheatsheaf, NY. Habermas, J. (1970), “Toward a Theory of Communicative Competence”, Dreitzel, H. P. (