Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
SUSS POL 353 Study Unit 5 Centring Public Administration Structures …
SUSS POL 353 Study Unit 5 Centring Public
Administration Structures
around the Citizen
Chapter 1 Public Administration and Designs of Government
Unitary vs Federal Designs of Government - Why implement Federalism?
Federalism Increases Democratic Accountability
Relation to public administration?
Democracy and decision-making
: Democratic politics is about who gets what (i.e. resource distribution) and ' By the people for the people' notion (i.e. citizen participation). Therefore,
citizens should have say and rights in policy-making and distribution of goods and services
Requires checks and balances
: institutional veto players to control the ease with which status quo can be amended
Allowing for the Voice of the Citizen to be heard
Self-government is critical
: more effective and useful to allow those who are directly affected by a decision or a policy to make decisions, as it directly concerns their needs and desires
Central government
civil servants may visit regions and
collect information
Drawback to unitary
unitary / centralised/homogenous governments/ concentration of power is not healthy and in extreme cases, can be considered as
tyrannical
Assumes that country is homogenous
, which is not necessarily true of many SEA and other countries
decisions made in a centralised, unitary manner
does not allow the voice of the citizen to be heard as much as power is
concentrated in the hands of the unitary government
What exactly is Federalism and How does it differ from other State Structures?
Diffusion of Power in Federal Structures
Federalism
: government being
separated into layers
in a vertical design.
allows
citizens
to retain some control over
decision-making
allows a more
nuanced form of policy formulation and implementation
that better reflects the needs and wants of the region
At least 2 levels of government
: power and sovereignty is shared among different levels of government (i.e. Central gov/Provisional/ State/ regional/ etc)
citizen is subject to both the authority of the central government, as well as the lower-level governments.
Independence/ autonomy
: Each level (central and local) should each have some levels of independence/jurisdiction over policy realms/
competences
Some
competences are
exclusive to central government
(macroeconomic policy/defence etc)
Some
competences are
shared
(e.g. education) to jointly provide public goods and services
In Gist
:
Power and sovereignty
over policymaking and implementation can thus be considered as “
constitutionally split between at least two territorial levels
so that independent governmental units at each level have final authority in at least one policy realm
Power Distribution: Layer Cake and Marble Cake Federalism
Layer cake
-
competences
that central government and local governments have
been allocated are
distinct
and do not overlap with each other.
Marble cake
- few hard and fast lines of distinction as to what constitutes national, state or local responsibilities;
intermixing of competences
Power Distribution: Symmetric and Asymmetric Federalism
Symmetric
- each territorial units of a federal state possess
equal powers
relative to the central government
Local gov power
Constitutionally guaranteed
and can challenge the central government if they see fit
Asymmetric
-
some
territorial units of the state enjoy “
more extensive powers than others
, relative to the central government”
Maybe a result of the outstanding difference in terms of ethnicity, religion, language etc
Oates’ Fiscal Federalism - When should Power be Distributed to Lower Level Governments
?
Maximising effectiveness
: to maximise the effectiveness of policymaking and policy implementation, it
should first be understood which functions
and instruments are
best centralised or
placed
under lower levels
of government
local government purview
: Lower levels of government should have control over the provision of goods and services whose consumption is limited to their own jurisdiction
in doing so, such provision of public goods and services
will raise levels of efficiency and effectiveness
Subsidiarity
: mandates the
localisation of problem-solving
Central Gov should only exercise authority that
cannot be performed effectively at a more local level,
is deemed necessary at the central level (national concern)
if the issue of political authority would better be dealt
with at the (central) level
So Why would Countries choose Federal Structures?
high number of ethnolinguistic, religious, class
cleavages
that are geographically concentrated
More
nuanced policymaking
and implementation
Efficiency, accountability and governance
informed,
responsive policymaking
Increase accountability
and better management of resources and funds when lower-level government competes for resources
Avoids one-size fits
all emanating from central government which can be dangerous and destabilising if minorities feel marginalised by uneven representation in public service delivery
Structural Criteria of Unitary and Federal Countries
What makes a Federal Country federal?
In order to be classified as a federal structure, a country must satisfy at least the following t
hree structural criteria
Independence
both the central government and other levels of governments (e.g. at the regions) must have independent
bases of authority
bases of authority should be elected
independently of one another
Direct Governance
each level of government must have the
authority to act independently
of each other in at least one policy realm (authority must be constitutionally protected)
power-sharing must occur in such a way that each
citizen is governed by both the central and lower
levels of government
Geopolitical Division
a country must be
divided
into mutually exclusive regional governments
these divisions must be
constitutionally guaranteed
divisions and powers shared
cannot be unilaterally abolished
or recalled by central government
Decentralisation: Federal or Something In-Between?
Decentralisation seems to be more commonly seen + more useful way to assess the impact of the design of government in public administration as it
sometimes is unclear exactly where policy is made in practice
Politically fluid
: power distribution may be looser and can include the
transfer of planning, decision-making or administrative authority
from the central government to lower levels
Power/authority trade-offs
: Local governments may enjoy
some degree of autonomy
that is neither guaranteed nor permanent BUT
still allows citizens to enjoy increased democratic accountability
, nuanced public service delivery and helps to decouple lower-level governments from central governments, thus instilling “confidence among local communities to govern their own affairs
Decentralisation in Southeast Asian countries
Case Study: Decentralisation Struggles in Thailand
Case Study: Federalism, Decentralisation or Centralisation in
Malaysia?
The Effects of Decentralisation
increases political stability and representation and
reduces citizen coercion
via tailor-made public administration plans, that are especially useful in heterogeneous countries with geographically concentrated ethnolinguistic minorities
eliminates bureaucratic red tape
by increasing time, resource and issue sensitivity of civil servants
more effective outreach and
better penetration
of national and local government policies in more remote regions
allows
local governments to have oversight of local public service providers
to ensure effective and efficient delivery of public goods and services
Chapter 2 Ethics in Public Administration
Definition
: “broad norms that delineate how public servants should exercise judgment and discretion in carrying out their official duties”
The Role of Morals and Ethics in Public Administration
.
Upholding image
: As representatives of the government, public officials are thus expected to act ethically and observe a common code of right conduct
.
Public values
: A responsible public administration structure is one that is citizen-centric and focuses on increasing public value of its services
public administration structures must
demonstrate
that they are
accountable
for their actions,
transparent
in their operations accessible by citizens,
responsive to citizens
and allow citizens to participate in policymaking and implementation
.
Moral exemplars
: Civil servants and public administrators are actually moral agents as the nature of their public duties are centred on the “
embodiment and execution of societally sanctioned values
”
.
Potential abuse
: Without administrative ethics that seeks to “regulate official’s behaviour towards citizens” civil servants in such environments
may become unresponsive to citizens and even abuse their positions
and powers to fulfil their own vested interests.
What is Ethics and Why is it Important in Public Administration?
Ethical Decision-Making by Civil Servants
.
Conflict-resolution
: ensure that their decision-making is
shaped by basic moral
and ethical guidelines for “determining
how conflicts
in human interests are
to be settled
and for optimising mutual benefit of people living together in groups”
.
Justifiable Framework
: Guided by ethics, public administrators thus can ensure that their decisions and activities are devoid of “arbitrariness, capriciousness, and unpredictability”
The Nexus between Accountability, Transparency and Ethics
.
Ethics and Accountability
: ethics can be considered as a form of “inner-check” on public administrators’ own conduct and to be accountable to the citizens and the society they serve. Citizens expect public administrators “to
honour public trust and not to misappropriate public interest
by indulging in abuse of power or personal corruption”. Thus Public admin are
answerable
.
Negative effects
Conversely, some scholars argue that a push for transparency and accountability
can actually be counter-productive
in some instances, especially in governments
with weak political and administrative institutions
in the real world, as indicated below
.
Lack of ownership/responsibility
: Public policy is long-term and often may be fraught with unintended or unforeseen circumstances, and civil servants and elected politicians may not be inclined to take complete responsibility for developments that may not necessarily be in their hands
.
Short-term workarounds
: Demands for accountability and transparency may convince civil servants and elected politicians to prefer making administrative decisions that produce policies that have short-term, easily verifiable results, rather than optimal policy outcomes that may be less easily quantifiable and more substantive in the long term
.
Lack of clarity
: Even where data is available, it either may not necessarily be presented in a meaningful or easily digestible format for the ordinary citizen or it may involve manipulation (such as greenwashing) by the agencies involved
“Ethics vs Administration” or “Ethics in Administration”?
Ethics in the Southeast Asian Public Service
Case Study: Improving Anti-Corruption Initiatives in Malaysia
Case Study: Systemic Corruption in Thailand