A relação política-administraçãoQue se conclui da revisão sistemática da iteratura mais recente?

  1. José Dias Lopes 1
  2. Antonio Losada 2
  1. 1 ISEG/Ulisboa, Lisboa
  2. 2 Universidade de Santiago de Compostela
    info

    Universidade de Santiago de Compostela

    Santiago de Compostela, España

    ROR https://ror.org/030eybx10

Revista:
RIPS: Revista de investigaciones políticas y sociológicas

ISSN: 1577-239X

Año de publicación: 2022

Volumen: 21

Número: 1

Páginas: 22-57

Tipo: Artículo

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: RIPS: Revista de investigaciones políticas y sociológicas

Resumen

Pesquisas anteriores caracterizaram a literatura mais antiga (anterior a 2010) acerca da relação política-administração, concluindo que a estrutura de conhecimento dessa literatura se podia classificar como pré-paradigmática, pouco estruturada e muito assente em ensaios e não em evidência recolhida a partir de estudos empíricos. O conhecimento acerca da relação política-administração é fundamental para melhorar a eficiência da Administração Pública, assegurar o controlo democrático e a neutralidade da mesma, etc. O estudo que agora se apresenta retoma essas investigações anteriores, mas agora centrando-se na literatura mais recente, e tem por objetivo avaliar a literatura mais recente sobre o tema e perceber se se observam evoluções de natureza paradigmática face à literatura de períodos anteriores. O estudo incidiu sobre uma amostra de 20 artigos, publicados após 2010, e obtidos por pesquisa na Web of Science. Conclui-se que depois de 2010, o novo conhecimento resulta principalmente de estudos empíricos, e estes vão revelando que na prática da Administração Pública se vão alternando, consoante a situação, os modelos dicotómico e de complementaridade, criando-se assim uma configuração variável, no tempo e decorrente do tema, para o relacionamento política-administração. Não se podendo ainda falar da existência de um paradigma, mas parece ser possível falar-se de um protoparadigma, uma proposição que pode ser avaliada e caso se venha a confirmar, assumir-se efetivamente como um primeiro paradigma em Administração Pública. Essa proposição assenta na ideia da distinção, mas também da necessidade de trabalho em conjunto, dos dois corpos – eleitos e gestores públicos – e na ideia de alguma fluidez e variabilidade no modo como esse trabalho em conjunto ocorre.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • ALFORD, John, Jean HARTLEY, Sophie YATES e Owen HUGHES (2017) “Into the purple zone: Deconstructing the Politics/Administration distinction”, American Review of Public Administration, 47(7), 752-763. doi:10.1177/0275074016638481.
  • ANAND, Gopesh, Eric C. LARSON e Joseph T. MAHONEY (2020) “Thomas Kuhn on Paradigms”, Production and Operations Management, 29(7), 1650-1657. doi:10.1111/poms.13188.
  • BAUER, Michael W. e Stefan BECKER (2019) “Public Administration in Germany: Problems and Potential of a Fragmented Community”, International Journal of Public Administration, 42(11), 950-960, doi: 10.1080/01900692.2018.1560318.
  • BAZAN, Carlos, Hannah GAULTOIS, Arifusalam SHAIKH, Katie GILLESPIE, Sean FREDERICK, Ali AMJAD, et al. (2020) “A systematic literature review of the influence of the university’s environment and support system on the precursors of social entrepreneurial intention of students”, Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 9(4). doi:10.1186/s13731-020-0116-9.
  • BELLÒ, Benedetta e Alessandro SPANO (2015) “Governing the purple zone: How politicians influence public managers”, European Management Journal, 33(5), 354-365. doi:10.1016/j.emj.2015.04.002.
  • BELLOIR, Alexandre e Caspar van den BERG (2020) “Functional politicization in the Dutch senior civil service: Evidence from longitudinal surveys and qualitative research (2007-2019)”, NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, 13(2), 49-73. doi:10.2478/nispa-2020-0014.
  • BOYNE, George A., Oliver JAMES, Peter JOHN e Nicolai PETROVSKY (2010) “Does Political Change Affect Senior Management Turnover? An Empirical Analysis of Top-Tier Local Authorities in England”, Public Administration, 88(1), 136-153. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9299.2009.01751.x.
  • BOYNE, George A. (1996) “The Intellectual Crisis in British Public Administration: Is Public Management the Problem or the Solution?” Public Administration, 74(4), 679-694. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9299.1996.tb00890.x.
  • CHOHAN, Usman W. (2018) “Independent budget offices and the Politics–Administration dichotomy”, International Journal of Public Administration, 41(12), 1009-1017. doi:10.1080/01900692.2017.1317801.
  • CICEA, Claudiu (2020) “Performance in Public Management. A Research Agenda with Bibliometric Approach”, Administratie Si Management Public, 35, 109-123. doi:10.24818/amp/2020.35-07.
  • de GEUS, Christa J. C., Alex INGRAMS, Lars TUMMERS e Sanjay K. PANDEY (2020) “Organizational Citizenship Behavior in the Public Sector: A Systematic Literature Review and Future Research Agenda”, Public Administration Review, 80(1), 259-270. doi:10.1111/puar.13141.
  • de VRIES, Hanna, Victor BEKKERS e Lars TUMMERS (2016) “Innovation in the Public Sector: A Systematic Review and Future Research Agenda”, Public Administration, 94(1), 146-166. doi:10.1111/padm.12209.
  • DEMIR, Tansu (2009) “The Complementarity View: Exploring a Continuum in Political - Administrative Relations”, Public Administration Review, 69(5), 876-888. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2009.02037.x.
  • DEMIR, Tansu e Ronald C. NYHAN (2008) “The Politics-Administration Dichotomy: An Empirical Search for Correspondence between Theory and Practice”, Public Administration Review, 68(1), 81-96. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00839.x.
  • DUNN, Delmer e Jerome LEGGE Jr. (2002) “Public Administration and U.S. Local Governments”, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 12(3), 401-422.
  • ENANG, Iniobong, Darinka ASENOVA e Stephen J. BAILEY (2020) “Identifying influencing factors of sustainable public service transformation: a systematic literature review”, International Review of Administrative Sciences, April 2020, 1-23. doi:10.1177/0020852319896399.
  • FOTOS, Michael A. (2015) “Vincent Ostrom’s revolutionary science of association”, Public Choice, 163, 67-83. doi:10.1007/s11127-015-0235-1
  • FRENCH, P. Edward e David H. FOLZ (2004) “Executive Behavior and Decision Making in Small U.S. Cities”, American Review of Public Administration, 34(1), 52-66. doi:10.1177/0275074003259186.
  • FUNCK, Elin k. e Tom S. KARLSSON (2020). “Twenty-Five Years of Studying New Public Management in Public Administration: Accomplishments and Limitations”, Financial Accountability & Management, (em linha a 26 Julho 2019), 347-75. doi:10.1111/faam.12214.
  • GATTO, Robert (1993) “Public-administration, a political administrative dichotomy - a new Canadian direction from American history”, Public Personnel Management, 22(2), 313-322. doi: 10.1177/009102609302200211.
  • GEORGIOU, Ion (2014) “Seeing the forest for the trees: An atlas of the politics-administration dichotomy”, Public Administration Review, 74(2), 156-175. doi:10.1111/puar.12163.
  • GIACOMELLI, Giorgio (2020) “The role of hybrid professionals in the public sector: a review and research synthesis”, Public Management Review, 22(11), 1624-1651. doi:10.1080/14719037.2019.1642952.
  • GONZÁLEZ-BUSTAMANTE, Bastián (2020) “The politics-administration dichotomy: A case study of the Chilean executive during the democratic post-transition”, Bulletin of Latin American Research, 39(5), 582-597. doi:10.1111/blar.13044.
  • GOODNOW, Frank (1900) Politics and Administration. New York: Macmillan.
  • GOYANNES, Rodrigo, Gusmão CAIADO, Daniel MICHILINI e Adriana KARLA (2020) “Critical success factors-based taxonomy for Lean Public Management: a systematic review”, Production, 30. doi:10.1590/0103-6513.20200030.
  • HAQUE, M. Shamsul (1996) “The Intellectual Crisis in Public Administration in the Current Epoch of Privatization”, Administration and Society, 27(4), 510-536. doi:10.1177/009539979602700403.
  • HARRISON, David (2017). “Tourists, mobilities and paradigms”, Tourism Management, 63, 329-337. doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2017.07.002.
  • HARTLEY, Jean, John ALFORD, Owen HUGHES e Sophie YATES (2015) “Public value and political astuteness in the work of public managers: The art of the possible”, Public Administration, 93(1), 195-211. doi:10.1111/padm.12125.
  • HERMUS, Margot, Arwin van BUUREN e Victor BEKKERS (2020) “Applying design in public administration: a literature review to explore the state of the art”, Policy & Politics, 48(1), 21-48. doi:10.1332/030557319X15579230420126.
  • IKEANYIBE, Okechukwu Marcellus, Josephine OBIORJI, Nnabuike O. OSADEBE e Chuka E. UGWU (2020) “Politics, Peer Review and Performance Management in Africa: A Path to Credible Commitment for Nigerian Politicians?”, Public Administration Issues, (5), 35-58. doi:10.17323/1999-5431-2020-0-5-35-58.
  • KIM, Yoonho (2021) “Searching for Newness in Management Paradigms: An Analysis of Intellectual History in U.S. Public Administration”, American Review of Public Administration, 51(2), 79-106. doi:10.1177/0275074020956678.
  • KOÇ, Oktay, Abdullah KIRAY e Osman Abdullah GÜNAYDIN (2020). “Taking the Advantage of the Coercive Effects of Legal Arrangements in Shaping Public Servants’ Political Behaviors: The Case of the Hatch Act”, Istanbul Law Review, 78(4): 1989-2023. doi:10.26650/mecmua.2020.78.4.0009.
  • KUHN, T. S. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Chicago: Univ. Chicago.
  • LIBERATI, Alessandro, Douglas G. ALTMAN, Jennifer TETZLAFF, Cynthia MULROW, Peter C. GØTZSCHE, John P.A. IOANNIDIS, et al. (2009) “The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration”, PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000100. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100.
  • MA, Liang (2017) “Central Government Agencies in China: Toward a Research Agenda”, Economic and Political Studies, 5(2), 195-214. doi:10.1080/20954816.2017.1310793.
  • MAURO, Sara Giovanna, Lino CINQUINI e Giuseppe GROSSI (2017) “Insights into Performance-Based Budgeting in the Public Sector: A Literature Review and a Research Agenda”, Public Management Review, 19(7), 911-31. doi:10.1080/14719037.2016.1243810.
  • MOHER, David, Alessandro LIBERATI, Jennifer TETZLAFF, Douglas G. ALTMAN e PRISMA Group (2009) “Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement”, PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097.
  • MOLONEY, Kim e David H. ROSENBLOOM (2020) “Creating Space for Public Administration in International Organization Studies”, American Review of Public Administration, 50(3), 227-243. doi:10.1177/0275074019888498.
  • MONTJOY, Robert S. e Douglas J. WATSON (1995) “A Case for Reinterpreted Dichotomy of Politic and Administration as a Professional Standard in n Council-Manager Government”, Public Administration Review, 55(3), 231-239. doi:10.2307/3110241.
  • O’TOOLE, Laurence J. (1987) “Doctrines and Developments: Separation of Powers, the Politics-Administration Dichotomy, and the Rise of the Administrative State”, Public Administration Review, 47(1), 17-25.
  • ORR, Kevin e Mike BENNETT (2017) “Relational Leadership, Storytelling, and Narratives: Practices of Local Government Chief Executives”, Public Administration Review, 77(4), 515-527. doi:10.1111/puar.12680.
  • OSTROM, V. (1973). The Intellectual Crisis in American Public Administration, Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.
  • OVEREEM, Patrick (2008) “Beyond Heterodoxy: Dwight Waldo and the Politics-Administration Dichotomy”, Public Administration Review, 68(1), 36-45. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00833.x.
  • ÖZER, Akif M. (2015) “Rethinking the process of change in public administration with Dwight Waldo” [Kamu yönetiminde degisim sürecini dwight waldo ile yeniden düsünmek], Amme Idaresi Dergisi, 47(4), 1-30.
  • PAGE, Matthew J., Joanne E. Mckenzie, Patrick M. BOSSUYT, Isabelle BOUTRON, Tammy C. HOFFMANN, Cynthia D. MULROW, et al. (2021) “The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews”, PLoS Medicine, 18, e1003583. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1003583.
  • POLSBY, Nelson W. (1998). “Social science and scientific change: A Note on Thomas S. Kuhn’s Contribution”, Annual Review of Political Science, 1, 199–210.
  • RAHMAN, Hafizur e Zena SELDON (2016) “Spheres of decision-making in small and isolated municipalities: The Thompson-Nicola regional district”, Canadian Public Administration, 59(1), 153-174. doi:10.1111/capa.12163.
  • REYNOLDS, Harry W. (1993) “Public Administration and Public Policy: Old Perspectives, New Directions”, International Journal of Public Administration, 16(8), 1079-1103. doi:10.1080/01900699308524838.
  • ROBERTS, Alasdair (1994) “Demonstrating Neutrality: The Rockefeller Philanthropies and the Evolution of Public Administration, 1927-1936”, Public Management Review, 54(3), 221-228. doi: 10.2307/976724.
  • ROBERTS, Alasdair (2019) “Shaking hands with Hitler: The politics-administration dichotomy and engagement with fascism”, Public Administration Review, 79(2), 267-276. doi:10.1111/puar.13009.
  • ROMAN, Alexandru V. (2017) “The determinants of public administrators’ participation in policy formulation”, American Review of Public Administration, 47(1), 102-129. doi:10.1177/0275074015577799.
  • ROSENBLOOM, David (2008) “The Politics - Administration Dichotomy in U.S. Historical Context”, Public Administration Review, 68(1), 57-60. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00836.x.
  • ROSSER, Christian (2010) “Woodrow Wilson’s Administrative Thought and German Political Theory”, Public Administration Review, 70(4), 547-556. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2010.02175.x.
  • ROSSER, Christian (2013) “Examining frank J. Goodnow's hegelian heritage: A contribution to understanding progressive administrative theory”, Administration and Society, 45(9), 1063-1094. doi:10.1177/0095399712451898.
  • ROSSER, Christian e Céline MAVROT (2017) “Questioning the constitutional order: A comparison of the French and the U.S. Politics–Administration dichotomy controversies after World War II”, American Review of Public Administration, 47(7), 737-751. doi:10.1177/0275074016661629.
  • RUTGERS, Mark R. (1998) “Paradigm Lost: Crisis as Identity of the Study of Public Administration”, International Review of Administrative Sciences, 64(4), 553-564. doi:10.1177/002085239806400402.
  • SAGER, Fritz (2018) “Policy Evaluation and Democracy: Do they Fit?”, Evaluation and Program Planning, 69, 125-129. doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2017.08.004.
  • SAGER, Fritz e Christian ROSSER (2009) “Weber, Wilson, and Hegel: Theories of Modern Bureaucracy”, Public Administration Review, 69(6), 1136-1147. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2009.02071.x.
  • SINCLAIR, Amanda, Jeanette BARD e John ALFORD (1993) “What do chief Administrators do? Findings From Victoria”, Australian Journal of Public Administration, 52(1), 12-24. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8500.1993.tb00249.x.
  • STEINFELD, Joshua, Clifford MCCUE e Eric PRIER (2017) “Professionalism as social responsibility in procurement and administration”, European Business Review, 29(3), 320-343. doi:10.1108/EBR-02-2016-0044.
  • STOCKER, Nathan e Michelle THOMPSON-FAWCETT (2014) “'It's not like never-the-twain-shall-meet': Politician-staff relationship structures in local government”, Local Government Studies, 40(5), 791-808. doi:10.1080/03003930.2014.887563.
  • SVARA, James H. (1985) “Dichotomy and Duality: Reconceptualizing the Relationship Between Policy and Administration in Council-Manager Cities”, Public Administration Review, February, 45(1), 221-232. doi:10.2307/3110151.
  • SVARA, James H. (1998) “The Politics-Administration Dichotomy Model as Aberration”, Public Administration Review, 58(1), 51-58. doi:10.2307/976889.
  • SVARA, James H. (1999) “Complementarity of Politics and Administration as a Legitimate Alternative to the Dichotomy Model”, Administration and Society, 30(6), 676-705. doi:10.1177/00953999922019049.
  • SVARA, James H. (2001) “The myth of the dichotomy: Complementarity of politics and administration in the past and future of public administration”, Public Administration Review, 61(2), 176-183. doi:10.1111/0033-3352.00020.
  • TAHMASEBI, Reza e Seyyed Mohammad Mahdi MUSAVI. (2011). “Politics-Administration Dichotomy: A Century Debate”, Administratie Si Management Public 17(17), 130-143.
  • UGYEL, Lhawang (2017) “Relationship between politics and administration: A comparative analysis of legislation and governance in Pacific island governmental systems”, Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration, 39(3), 153-162. doi:10.1080/23276665.2017.1361626.
  • van DORP, Erik-Jan e Paul’t HART (2019) “Navigating the dichotomy: The top public servant's craft”, Public Administration, 97(4), 877-891. doi:10.1111/padm.12600.
  • WALDO, Dwight (1948) The Administrative State. New York: Ronald Press.
  • WALDO, Dwight (1952) “Development of Theory of Democratic Administration”, The American Political Science Review, 46(1), 81-103.
  • WALLE, Steven van de e Roxanne van DELFT (2015) “Publishing in Public Administration: Issues with Defining, Comparing, and Ranking the Output”, International Public Management Journal, 18(1), 87-107. doi:10.1080/10967494.2014.972482.
  • WILSON, Woodrow (1887) “The Study of Administration”, Political Science Quarterly, 2(2), 197-222.
  • ZAGARIA, Andrea, Agata ANDO’ e Alessandro ZENNARO (2020) “Psychology: a Giant with Feet of Clay”, Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 54, 521-562. doi:10.1007/s12124-020-09524-5
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet