PAD 6060 lecture thirteen
University of North Florida
Master of Public Administration program
PAD 6060 Public administration in modern society
Fall 2016
Civic responsibility
Responsible citizen of the week
Photo credit
Richard Dreyfuss
Responsible citizen
Lecture goals: Discuss the role (and especially any responsibilities!) of the public in public
administration.
Global citizenship?
It is worth raising the issue of ‘global citizenship’ in passing, and ask whether the US has (or we
Americans have) any civic obligations to the world we live in. Dimensions of the issue:
 US isolationism. The US, ironically, has a long history of this, and populist politicians and
pundits have, unfortunately, exploited this for political (or financial gain). A good example is
the anti-United Nations paranoia popular among some in the US (source).
 Global dysfunction. Yet the world is dysfunctional, with at least as many populist antiAmerican rabble rousers around the world as there are
anti-UN rabble rousers in the US (source, for a review of
a brilliant discussion of this). While the world is more
free now (source) than it has ever been, recent
fluctuations notwithstanding (source), there are still a lot
of dictatorships out there, a lot of anti-American
populism, and so I, for one, have no desire to see the US
become governed by a ‘global democracy’ any time soon
(and there are no realistic plans for this).
 US stinginess. We are about the stingiest rich country
when it comes to foreign aid (see right), which is
especially ironic given how so many Americans think
foreign aid is a large part of the US federal budget
(source). It isn’t, and most of it doesn’t go to the poorest
countries (source).
Page 1 of 9
PAD 6060 lecture thirteen



US generosity. Yet the US does give a lot of private ‘foreign aid’ (source, with mixed results,
source1 and source2) and, however much some folks on the left criticize our excessive
military spending, and however many mistakes we’ve made in using these forces, we do a lot
of good (or have destroyed a lot of bad) with those forces (see our lecture 7, page 4). As
Vaclav Havel put it: “It's not possible -- particularly in today's interconnected world -- for us
to remain entirely and permanently indifferent when massive and cruel crimes are committed
against people somewhere... Therefore it's a good thing that Saddam's regime is gone.”
Can’t go it alone. As we’ve discussed, one of the best recent books on global politics was
Paul Kennedy’s (1987) The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers. In a nutshell, Kennedy’s
argument was that the world had seen a succession of great powers over the previous 500
years. Each became the hegemonic power of the day because of a short term advantage over
the other powers. The hegemonic power gained a global empire and obligations as a result.
Inevitably, the other powers caught up (adopted the hegemon’s advantage), and so the
relative power of the hegemon declined, even as its absolute power continued to grow. The
hegemon became over-extended, and this led to the eventual decline of the hegemonic
power, to be replaced with another. In short, we can’t afford to be the world’s self-appointed,
often incompetent police force (source), and need to work with others (critics disagree).
American values. Respect for global opinion is one of our founding principles: “When in the
Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands
which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the
separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a
decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires…” – Declaration of Independence.
The rule of law
Before moving on we’ll recap some of what we’ve discussed about corruption and government
integrity, to set the stage for what might be called civic integrity. Keep in mind that the SchiavoCampo and McFerson book takes a 'global perspective' in looking at public management. So in a
world in which government in the US is relatively lawful and relatively uncorrupt, their
discussion focuses more on the 150 or so countries that don't share (as the remaining 50 or so do)
America's relatively clean, honest, effective government, as we saw in Table 1, lecture 1, as well
as Table 3, lecture 6.
The honesty, integrity and efficiency of bureaucracy matters. It matters first because the
bureaucracy has a huge impact on public policy. As Lipset argued:
"...it is impossible to understand the operation of a government simply by analysing the goals
of politicians in power and the non-governmental pressures on them. The members of the
civil service constitute one of the major houses of government with the power to initiate,
amend and veto actions proposed both other branches. The goals and values of the civil
service are often as important a part of the total complex of forces." (Lipset 1950, p. 309)
This is so for at least two reasons:
1. Legislators and executives 'require bureaucratic expertise' on myriad issues outside the
normal knowledge of the politician:
o How to craft legislation.
o Details regarding the technical parameters, as well as likely effects of policy proposals.
o Who to schmooze.
Page 2 of 9
PAD 6060 lecture thirteen
o
Where the toilets are, who has Friday afternoon happy hours, etc.
2. Bureaucratic competence matters -- "This report shows that the determining factor [in good
development outcomes] is the effectiveness of the state. An effective state is vital for the
provision of the goods and services -- and the rules and institutions -- that allow markets to
flourish and people to lead healthier, happier lives. Without it, sustainable development,
both economic and social, is impossible" (World Development Report 1997, p. 1).
Fun with data! But does this really matter? Some fun with data! Click the link...
Given that the corruption that does exist in the US is still significant, even if corruption is worse
elsewhere, this is clearly a serious issue for the US. By way of international comparison, just to
get a sense of what real corruption is, see Suharto, Ferdinand Marcos, and Mobutu Sese Seko,
with a bonus link!).
Beyond top-down corruption, corruption is equally pernicious when it permeates society. An
example from The Economist newsmagazine ("The long journey," 6 March 2006, special section
p. 11, click link).
That, ladies and gentlemen, is corruption as it is understood in most of the world.
Schiavo-Campo and McFerson on corruption
Corruption. A definition: "the abuse of public office for private gain" (Schiavo-Campo &
McFerson 2008, p. 416). Contrast this with Max Weber's classic description of bureaucracy (the
principles of which seek to fight this:
"Office holding is a 'vocation.' This is shown, first, in the requirement of a firmly prescribed
course of training… Furthermore, the position of the official is in the nature of a
duty... Entrance into an office, including one in the private economy, is considered an
acceptance of a specific obligation of faithful management in return for a secure existence." - Bureaucracy (1946).
Types of corruption:
 Bribes. Systematic ('syndicated') and individual, as "individual officials may seek or compete
for bribes in an ad hoc and uncoordinated fashion" (p. 417).
o Grand corruption (senior officials, major contracts and such) versus...
o ...petty corruption.
o Political corruption, versus…
o ...economic corruption.
 Waste, fraud and abuse. Another distinction that I find useful is "waste, fraud and
abuse.” For the taxpayer, it comes to the same thing if
 a $1 billion contract is awarded to an undeserving corporation that produces nothing of
public value because a public official is incompetent (waste); if
 a $1 billion contract is awarded to an undeserving corporation that produces nothing of
public value because the corporation bribed the official or misleads the contracting
agency (fraud); if
Page 3 of 9
PAD 6060 lecture thirteen

a corporation gets legislation passed that provides economic advantage to it, costing
consumers $1 billion (abuse); or if
 a public agency with a $1 billion budget produces nothing of public value, for whatever
reason.
Either way, $1 billion is lost. This is especially worth noting because although simple
corruption, in terms of favours in exchange for cash, is relatively rare in the US, 'waste, fraud
and abuse' is much more common. 'Pork' is an example of this.
Defenses of corruption. I've heard this sort of thing in the past, as well. Much to SchiavoCampo and McFerson's credit, they give it short shrift. Cultures in which it is common to go
around the system to get things done may occasionally have resulted in things getting done, but:
 The intermediary has invariably benefited from this more than the recipient of the favour.
 The poor and weak are rarely the beneficiaries of this intermediation.
In short, this is no substitute to a transparent, accountable, efficient, public-spirited government.
The costs of corruption. Massive direct costs. See the figures on p. 421-3.
o Indirect costs are perhaps more serious, in that the absence of 'the rule of law' results in
uncertainty. Uncertainty is death to investment, as investors are unable to project costs with
any degree of accuracy, and will go somewhere where the investment climate is less risky.
Schiavo-Campo and McFerson on ethics and integrity in the public sector
General context. The politician/bureaucrat relationship is clearly critical, given the role of
campaign donations in US elections. These donations can ‘buy’ access. This is not always bad:
 Corporations partly fund our democratic process, and...
 ...in a capitalist society, in which production is overwhelmingly put in the hands of private
corporations, it would be daft not to allow corporations access to policy makers.
 Barack Obama has also demonstrated that the money doesn't always (to paraphrase a classic
radical left perspective) go to the upper class white guy in a business suit who is a stooge for
business (source).
The global context. The global context has probably been a positive force of late for government
integrity. Societies are increasingly realizing that corruption is inefficient, and so a competitive
disadvantage, as the majority of citizens who are victims are increasingly demanding that the
corrupt minority be confronted. There is now a global movement to combat corruption, from
Transparency International (discussed earlier in this class), to the World Bank's development
indicators project, to the OECD Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Officials in
International Business. The US, for its part, has a Foreign Corrupt Practices Act which makes
bribing foreign officials a violation of the law (source, for a list of recent prosecutions).
Public service values: are universal! No one (whether an average citizen, an honest business
firm, or a dedicated public official) wants to be robbed or kicked in the head; whether by a
business firm, a thug on the street, or her/his government. Granted, lots of folks would like to use
government to rob and otherwise abuse people…
Page 4 of 9
PAD 6060 lecture thirteen
Managing for integrity: deregulation (removing 'red tape') can have the effect of removing some
of the useful ‘tape’ that helps prevent corruption, waste, fraud and abuse.
 Competence and managing for integrity: see the 'Big Dig' box on pages 431-2.
 Advantage business: A huge issue in the public/private sector, contracted interface is that the
incentive and resource advantage typically lies with the private sector.
o They can hire more lawyers that they can pay better (which, all else equal -- and all else
isn't -- will result in better lawyers), and...
o ... if they win, they get a share of the loot. This motivates.
 Foxes and henhouses. A second huge issue is that government corruption concerns often lead
to calls for contracting out to the private sector. That'll solve it (we tell ourselves). Yet it is
almost invariably private sector actors who are corrupting the blokes in the public sector.
Building an institutional infrastructure for public service ethics. Important facilitators:
 Political commitment -- if the ruling party, or ruling class are the problem, no solution is
possible until they are reformed or removed. This does happen, indeed is one reason the US
economy has suffered, as more and more countries have reduced the enormous comparative
disadvantages that corruption has given them!
 An assertive civil society! See, for instance, the impeachment of President Fernando Collor.
 Codes of conduct
 Professional socialization.
o See, for instance, the Code of Ethics of the American Society for Public Administration.
 Coordinating entities -- ombudspersons and such.
 Supportive public service conditions -- decent pay and working conditions.
 Effective legal framework.
 'Robust accountability mechanisms'.
Citizenship
So having established that government in the US has obligations to citizens, and that these
citizens enjoy the benefits of the Constitutional charge to “…provide for the common Defence
and general Welfare of the United States…”, where do the citizens come in? Are we nothing
more than market consumers and recipients of (i.e. ‘entitled to’!) the provision of defence and
welfare? If so, it bears repeating that we do pretty well out of our government, as illustrated in
Table 1, on the next page.
Citizenship. Marshall Dimock clearly saw the importance of citizenship, as "enhanced
citizenship is a much more reliable ally than self-interest and market forces" (1990, p. 21). He
later asserts that "business didn't want good government, the reason being that efficient
government tended to eat holes in business liberties" (p. 22).
Dimock on what citizenship is:
 "It is one of those holistic words that ties everything together and serves a number of vital
functions. It is more than a legal concept denoting rights and obligations to the political
state. Citizenship at its best is nothing short of a way of life. It is geared to the
commonwealth. It involves a sense of responsibility, self-induced, and a dedication to
Page 5 of 9
PAD 6060 lecture thirteen
collective need similar to what is found in well adjusted families throughout the world" (p.
21)...
"Americans need to replace too much selfishness with some kind of togetherness" (p. 22).
Table 1
Citizenship – different dimensions compared1
G-7 (+2)
US
UK
Canada
France
Germany
Italy
Japan
Sweden
Australia
BRICs (+3)
Brazil
Russia
India
China
S. Africa
Mexico
Nigeria
Democracy
Civil/
pol liberty
(Lack of)
Corruption
Public
service
quality
Economic freedom from
Gov
Gov
Gov
Ineffic’y size
regs
8.22
8.08
9.07
8.07
8.82
7.73
8.08
9.50
9.09
1
1
1
1
1
1
1.5
1
1
7.1
7.8
8.7
7.0
8.0
3.9
8.0
9.3
8.8
7.3
7.8
8.1
8.1
8.0
7.2
8.3
8.5
8.2
7.86
8.57
9.64
7.50
8.57
6.43
8.21
9.64
8.93
7.6
6.7
6.8
3.7
5.7
5.9
6.5
3.2
6.4
8.0
7.9
7.8
6.7
6.2
6.1
7.7
7.3
7.6
7.38
5.02
7.68
2.97
7.91
6.67
3.52
2
5
2.5
6.5
2
6
4
3.8
2.4
3.1
3.6
4.1
3.0
2.4
4.2
4.7
2.8
3.4
4.5
4.2
1.0
7.86
3.21
8.21
2.97
7.86
5.00
1.86
6.4
5.2
7.7
5.1
5.5
7.9
6.2
4.3
6.1
5.4
5.0
6.8
6.7
6.0
Dimock on what citizenship does:
 "It makes voters more enterprising and active and more inclined to shoulder responsibility.
 "It greatly eases the burden of administrators, reducing it by as much as 25 to 50 percent in
localities or countries where true consensuses exist (voluntary ones, not coerced).
 "Finally, despite attachment to a particular country, citizenship in its larger aspect is a viable
means to greater mutual accommodation and accord in the relations of nations. It may
become, in time, a substitute for divisive ideologies" (p. 21).
1
Data explanations/sources:
Democracy -- An aggregated democracy score, rated 0-10, with 10 = more democratic. Economist Intelligence Unit.
Liberty: Political and Civil -- From Freedom House, transformed in to 1-7 scales, with 1 = free, 7 = not free. The
score is the mean of the civil and political rating.
Corruption -- Corruption perceptions index, rated 0-10, with 10 = less corrupt. Transparency International.
Public services – The Failed State Index Public Services subscore reversed, so that higher scores reflect better public
services.
Government efficiency -- Functioning of government, rated 0-10, with higher = more effective government.
Economist Intelligence Unit.
Government Size and Regulations -- Economic freedom indicator, rated 0-10, with 10 = more economic freedom
(and so smaller government and less regulation). Fraser/Cato Institute.
Page 6 of 9
PAD 6060 lecture thirteen
Civic responsibility
Civic irresponsibility. Bill McGregor discusses an obvious implication of Dimock's discussion, a
central tenet of the communitarian thesis (click for a somewhat weighty and philosophical
discussion of communitarianism), and what I see as the major flaw in the Denhardts' (week 2)
‘New Public Service’: what to do if the public administrator seeks to create dialogue about
shared values, to broker interests among citizens and community groups, and all that; but it turns
out that some of these citizens and community groups don't share values (abortion v. choice; a
well-regulated militia v. right to bear arms; tax cuts for the rich v. social spending for the poor)?
Organized civic irresponsibility. Worse, as we've discussed already, the dynamics of some
advocacy groups require lack of consensus. As Wronski argued: "the techniques of sloganshouting and hysterical protests" (1971, p. 72) can be very effective for the manager of a policy
advocacy group seeking to generate more members, more revenue, and so maintain her job.
Inevitable trap for responsible administrators. Indeed, I worry that the New Public Service (as
McGregor puts it) "requires that careerists cheerfully put themselves at risk by educating and
sustaining an often querulous public" (McGregor 1984, p. 126). It is as if responsible public
service required ritual hari kari.
Civic irrationality. I relate this to the central warning in Charles Goodsell's Case for
Bureaucracy:
“…Government administration in America may be regarded as generally competent and
effective if we look at it in a balanced way and in relation to what is possible. Whereas
public bureaucracy in the United States, at all levels of government, inevitably involves
individual instances of waste, incompetence, abuse of power, and breakdown, it does on the
whole and in comparison to most countries and even the business sector in this country,
perform surprisingly well.
“I say ‘surprisingly because we Americans are taught throughout our lives, from hearth and
home on through school and career, that our government is a sea of waste, a swamp of
incompetence, a mountain of unchecked power, an endless plain of mediocrity. Our media
and politicians tell us that public bureaucracy is bloated in size, inefficient compared to
business, a stifling place to work, indifferent to ordinary citizens, the problem rather than the
solution. Bureaucrats – with the word uttered in contempt – are alleged in all quarters to be
lazy, incompetent, devious, even dangerous (p. 3).
“…Instead of addressing the many problems that do exist in bureaucracy, this attitude can
exacerbate them by encouraging the kinds of political rhetoric and policy that demoralize
agencies, adversely affecting their performance and encouraging the best staff members to
leave. Furthermore, it promotes a set of negative assumptions about government
employment that keeps the brightest of our young people from considering a public service
career” (p. 4).
Goodsell later argues :
"If, then, we (1) assume that progress is inevitable; (2) assign responsibility for progress to
government; (3) expect insoluble problems to be solved; and (4) hand over the job of solving
them to the bureaucrats -- what is the consequence? The consequence is that we set
bureaucracy up for failure" (p. 59).
Page 7 of 9
PAD 6060 lecture thirteen
This failure is even more likely if we disrespect and mock bureaucrats, again discouraging it as a
career.
Civic responsibilities. What McGregor (1984) emphasizes, rightly so I think, is that citizenship
involves more than rights, it also involves responsibilities.
 The Denhardts and rights of citizenship. The conception of citizenship presented by the
Denhardts is a rights based one: citizens have rights, and it is the responsibility of public
administrators to serve these to the citizens.
 Responsibilities of citizenship. What Goodsell and McGregor point out is that citizenship
must also be seen as a responsibility. Citizens don't have a right to demand things, which
public administrators then have an obligation to provide, especially reconciling conflicting
demands (abortion v. choice; a well-regulated militia v. right to bear arms; tax cuts for the
rich v. social spending for the poor) through dialogue to determine shared values. Instead,
citizens themselves have a responsibility to engage in dialogue and to compromise.
Civic irresponsibility. Instead, we get McGregor's identification of the problem:
"an extraordinary knowledge disparity exists between public service careerists... and a
civitas that wants problems solved. The gap is not only large, it appears to be growing and
the effects can only be worrisome. The knowledge gap may well contribute to mistrust of
institutions by citizens to know when things are not working but not able to say what the
possibilities for successful intervention are. The gap may explain some of the measured
contempt public bureaucrats have displayed toward an unknowing and disrespectful public"
(p. 127).
Note, too, that McGregor wrote this 30+ years ago.
Non-solutions:
 Education
 We can’t make people learn, and…
 …do we want government ‘educating’ citizens on policy?
 Participation
 Lack of this is part of the problem, and…
 …those who do participate, especially most effectively, are often wealthier and/or more
influential. This, therefore, is anti-democratic.
 Irresponsible participation among those who do participate is another part of the problem.
McGregor's solutions:
 Professional ethics. Relying on professional ethics to give the public administrator the
courage to 'educate' the public, in the sense of challenging them with the hard choices
that he implies above.
 Devolution. Devolving "responsibility for service delivery and production back to the
communities where the problems reside" (p. 128).
 Communication. "Nurturing a potentially argumentative public... a dominant ethic of
public service must be that careerists keep citizens fully informed about the possibilities
for public service... The democratic point is that the public need is for intelligently
organized information presented so that informed decisions can be made. Stonewalling
Page 8 of 9
PAD 6060 lecture thirteen

public scrutiny by dumping masses of unintelligible data into the laps of inquiring
citizens is as bad as shredding public records" (p. 128).
Protect public employees. "Three goals essential to the reconciliation of civism and
career public service.
 "One is to defend career administrators. Only a secure service will be willing to
make itself vulnerable to the experimentation recommended in this discussion...
 "A second goal is that of civic capital formation. Here the goal is to enhance the
knowledge base of public affairs so that citizens can understand how real public
affairs operate, how practical problems affect public affairs, what the action options
are, and what the criteria are by which options can be judged...
 "A third goal is to broaden the meaning of public service" (p. 130). This last point
refers more to the blurring of public and private (for and nonprofit) lines in the
provision of public services.
But at bottom, it seems to me that we can be saved only through civic
responsibility: an acceptance by we citizens that we have obligations to the
society that we live in, and that it is not government’s responsibility to make
us less irresponsible. Further, like an alcoholic, we need to accept that civic
irresponsibility lies at the root of most of the problems that plague us. Or, as
that noted philosopher Pogo the Possum put it:
Summary: civic irresponsibility may mean that we are doomed, but those of us who give a damn
might as well go down fighting!
References:
Goodsell, Charles (2003). The Case for Bureaucracy. CQ Press.
Lipset, Seymour Martin (1950). Agrarian Socialism: The Cooperative Commonwealth
Federation in Saskatchewan. Berkeley: University of California Press.
McGregor, Bill (1984). "The great paradox of democratic citizenship and public personnel
administration." Public Administration Review 44: 126-35. JSTOR link.
Wronski, W. (1971). "The public servant and protest groups." Canadian Public Administration
14(1): 65-72.
Page 9 of 9