Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Within democratic systems, public organizations carry out a large number of functions, ranging from provision of education, health, and national security and regulation of financial markets to ensuring equal treatment for all. These bodies perform these functions because delegation is imperative: Elected politicians lack the time, expertise, and resources both to enact and implement laws and to delegate these tasks to public organizations. To perform their tasks, these bodies need a certain level of autonomy from democratic oversight. The laws they implement often contain goals, such as “national security” and “social welfare,” that need further specification before they can be attained. Also, several different approaches and policy instruments to complex social problems may exist, and the choice of approach or policy instrument requires experience and knowledge of these social problems. Public organizations are staffed by civil servants with such experience and knowledge, but they need some level of autonomy to analyze social problems and to choose the best possible course of action for addressing these. Administrative autonomy revolves around a delicate balance. On the one hand, if public organizations lack administrative autonomy, they run the danger of being micromanaged by politicians. On the other hand, if there is too much administrative autonomy, politicians and voters run the risk of having created public organizations that are nonresponsive to democratic preferences.

Administrative autonomy is therefore a core concept in the study of public administration. At its heart lie democratic-theoretical questions concerning the relationship between voters, politicians, and civil servants as well as rational-instrumental issues concerning the management and design of effective and efficient public policies. As a theoretical concept, administrative autonomy represents an abstract social construct. Under this lemma, the background of the concept of administrative autonomy within the field of public administration is discussed first. Next, the various attributes and dimensions of the concept of administrative autonomy are described. Finally, an overview of theories of administrative autonomy is provided.

The Concept of Autonomy in the Study of Public Administration

In the field of public administration, the concept of administrative autonomy has been enjoying the close attention of many scholars for more than several decades (see, e.g., Daniel Carpenter, 2001; Peter Clark & James Wilson, 1961; Anthony Downs, 1967; Philip Selznick, 1957). Administrative autonomy is considered a sine qua non for nothing less than the “survival” of a public organization. To survive competition with other public organizations over scarce resources, the attaining of a substantial degree of administrative autonomy is seen as a critical goal: “Autonomy gives an organization a reasonably stable claim to resources and thus places it in a more favorable position from which to compete for those resources” (Clark & Wilson, 1961, p. 158). Ad min istrative autonomy as the lifeblood of successful public organizations is still a vivid argument in contemporary public administration scholarship. In his study of the modernization of the American bureaucracy during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, Carpenter (2001) ascribes the success of various agencies, among them the U.S. Postal Service and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, to their leaderships' capabilities to forge autonomy for their organization.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading