Public Administration at the Millennium: The State of the Field

In 1993, the author analyzed the state of public administration for the American Political Science Association's book, Political Science: The State of the Field. This article reviews the state of public administration at the start of the new millennium: the field's big theoretical questions, enduring theoretical ideas, and its unanswered theoretical puzzles. In the middle of the twentieth century, public administration found itself under attack by both academics and practitioners for theory that provided only weak guidance. New approaches developed in the last third of the century-notably formal theory, network theory, and the "new public management"-have helped bridge the gap. In the end, however, the field's enduring problems are rooted deeply in historic conflicts in the American political tradition. These conflicts make it unlikely that the field will ever be able to escape the struggles that have long bedeviled it. But an understanding of the ways political tradition shapes administrative theory-and of the ways that administrative theory bring political traditions to life-helps provide keen insight into the theoretical issues that matter most. This article builds on my paper, "The State of the Discipline" (1993). Some selections from that paper reappear in revised form here. This article was also presented at the fifth national Public Management Research Conference, Texas A&M University, December 4, 1999. J-PART 10(2000): 1:7-34 At the beginning of the new millennium, public administration sits squarely in an historical paradox. It is a proud parent, both intellectually and organizationally, of the professional study of administration. The modern American state owes its basic structure and processes to the contributions public administration made. On the other hand, scholars are fighting over its identity, relevance, and focus. Meanwhile, practicing administrators who once would not have dreamed of launching a new program or restructuring an old one now often press boldly ahead without seeking the field's counsel. Within both the academic and public 7/Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory This content downloaded from 207.46.13.134 on Sat, 24 Dec 2016 05:15:57 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Public Administration at the Milennium policy communities, public administration is struggling to reassert its former intellectual predominance and redefine its foundations. Public administration builds from a self-evident importance. Bold policy ideas cannot go far without solid implementation. Elected officials the world over are seeking to reinvent and otherwise reform their bureaucracies because government performance has become even more politically crucial. Administration has, at least since Moses, been important (Wildavsky 1984). It has become only more central since. If spiraling social complexity has made government and its administration even more important, what ideas ought to guide the task of making government work? And if the field's driving ideas seem out of sync with the needs of government managers and with the dominating approaches of its related disciplines, what-if anything-should be done to change public administration's theories?