Public administration theory has always struggled to find a clear-cut understanding of the publicness of public administration. There are at least five different approaches to distinguish public from private organizations. A closer examination shows that these five approaches are based on two conceptual versions of the publicness of public administration. The first conceptual version derives its understanding of publicness from “public goods,” whereas the second conceptual version involves the publicness of the “public interest.” These two versions are derived from two contravening ontological descriptions of publicness that have been developed in modern political theory. Both of these ontological descriptions have to be acknowledged as constitutive for understanding the publicness of public administration: Public administration can be seen as the empirical manifestation of the confrontation of these two meanings, which implies that “public administration” is constituted by an inconsistent conceptual framework.
Allison, G.T. (1992). Public and private management: Are they fundamentally alike in all unimportant particulars? In J. M. Shafritz & A. C. Hyde (Eds.), Classics of public administration (pp. 457-476). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. (Original work published 1980)
2.
Appleby, P.H. (1967). Policy and administration. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press. (Original work published 1945)
3.
Arendt, H. (1958). The human condition. Chicago : University of Chicago Press.
4.
Barber, B. (1984). Strong democracy. Participatory politics for a new age. Berkeley: University of California Press.
5.
Benn, S.I., & Gaus, G.F. (1983). The liberal conception of the public and the private . In S. I. Benn & G. F. Gaus (Eds.), Public and private in social life (pp. 31-65). London: Croom Helm .
6.
Bozeman, B. (1987). All organizations are public. Bridging public and private organizational theories. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
7.
Bozeman, B., & Bretschneider, S. (1994). The “publicness puzzle” in organization theory: A test of alternative explanations of differences between public and private organizations. J-Part , 4(2), 197-223.
8.
Chandler, J.A. (1991). Public administration and private management: Is there a difference. Public Administration, 69(3), 385-392.
9.
Dahl, R.A., & Lindblom, C.E. (1963). Politics, economics, and welfare. Planning and politico-economic systems resolved into basic social processes. New York: Harper & Row.
10.
de Tocqueville, A. (1998). Democracy in America (Abridged). Ware, UK: Wordsworth. (Original work published 1835)
11.
Dewey, J. (1954). The public and its problems. Athens, OH: Swallow Press. (Original work published 1927)
12.
Downs, A. (1967). Inside bureaucracy. Boston : Little, Brown.
13.
Evans, K.G. (2000). Reclaiming John Dewey. Democracy, inquiry, pragmatism, and public management. Administration & Society, 32(3), 308-328.
14.
Finer, S.E. (1999). The history of government from the earliest times. Volume II. Empires, monarchies, and the modern state. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
15.
Gaus, G.F. (1983). Public and private interests in liberal political economy. Old and new. In S. I. Benn & G. F. Gaus (Eds.), Public and private in social life (pp. 183-221). London: Croom Helm.
16.
Geuss, R. (2001). Public goods. Private goods. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
17.
Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action. Boston: Beacon.
18.
Haque, M.S. (1996). The intellectual crisis in public administration in the current epoch of privatization. Administration & Society, 27(4), 510-536.
19.
Haque, M.S. (2001). The diminishing publicness of public service under the current mode of governance. Public Administration Review , 61(1), 65-82.
20.
Hegel, G.W.F. (1970). Grundlinien der Philosophie des Rechts, oder Naturrecht und Staatswissenschaft im Grundrisse. Frankfurt am Main , Germany: Suhrkampf. (Original work published 1820)
21.
Hobsbawm, E. (2003). The age of extremes. 1914-1991. London: Abacus.
22.
Lambright, W.H. (1971). The Minnowbrook perspective and the future of public affairs: Public administration is public policy making. In F. Marini (Ed.), Toward a new public administration. The Minnowbrook perspective (pp. 332-345). Scranton, OH: Chandler.
23.
Landau, M. (1962). The concept of decision-making in the “field” of public administration. In S. Mailick & E. H. Van Ness (Eds.), Concepts and issues in administrative behavior (pp. 1-28). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
24.
Luton, L.S. (1996). What does it mean to say “public” administration? Administrative Theory & Praxis, 18(1), 138-146.
25.
Malkin, J., & Wildavsky, A. (1991). Why the traditional distinction between public and private goods should be abandoned. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 3(4), 255-378.
26.
McGraw, T.K. (1995). The public and private spheres in historical perspective . In R. J. Stillman (Ed.), Public administration. Concepts and cases (5th ed., pp. 454-472). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
27.
Mill, J.S. (1985). On liberty. London: Penguin. (Original work published 1859)
28.
Minogue, K.R. (1963). The liberal mind. London: Methuen.
29.
Moore, B. (1985). Privacy. Studies in social and cultural history . Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
30.
Murray, M.A. (1975). Comparing public and private management: An exploratory essay. Public Administration Review, 35(4), 364-371.
31.
Nozick, R. (1974). Anarchy, state, and utopia. Philadelphia: Basic Books.
32.
Osborne, D., & Gaebler, T. (1992). Reinventing government. How the entrepreneurial spirit is transforming the public sector. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
33.
Ostrom, V. (1989). The intellectual crisis in American public administration (2nd ed.). Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.
34.
Pesch, U. (2005). The predicaments of publicness. An inquiry into the conceptual ambiguity of public administration. Delft , the Netherlands: Eburon.
35.
Polanyi, K. (2001). The great transformation. The political and economic origins of our time. Boston: Beacon .
36.
Pollitt, C. (2003). The essential public manager. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.
37.
Pugh, D.S., Hickson, D.J., Hinings, C.R., & Turner, C. (1969). The context of organization structures. Administrative Science Quarterly, 14, 91-114.
38.
Rainey, H.G. (1997). Understanding and managing public organizations (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
39.
Rainey, H.G., Backoff, R.W., & Levine, C.L. (1976). Comparing public and private organizations. Public Administration Review, 36(2), 233-246.
40.
Rutgers, M.R. (2003). Tracing the idea of public administration: Towards a renaissance of public administration? In M. R. Rutgers (Ed.), Retracing public administration (pp. 1-36) Amsterdam: JAI.
41.
Saxonhouse, A.W. (1983). Classical Greek conceptions of public and private . In S. I. Benn & G. F. Gaus (Eds.), Public and private in social life (pp. 363-384). London: Croom Helm .
42.
Schubert, G. (1960). The public interest. A critique of the theory of a political concept. Glencoe: Free Press.
43.
Scott, P.G., & Falcone, S. (1998). Comparing public and private organizations. An exploratory analysis of three frameworks. American Review of Public Administration, 28(2), 126-145.
44.
Shields, P.M. (2003). The community of inquiry. Classical pragmatism and public administration. Administration & Society, 35(5), 510-538.
45.
Shields, P.M. (2005). Classical pragmatism does not need an upgrade: Lessons for public administration. Administration & Society , 37(4), 504-518.
46.
Simon, H.A. (1997). Administrative behavior. A study of decision-making processes in administrative organization. New York: Free Press. (Original work published 1948)
47.
Simon, H.A.,Smithburg,D. W., & Thompson, V.A. (1970). Public administration. New York: Knopf.
48.
Smith, A. (1998). An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations. A selected edition. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1776)
49.
Snider, K.F. (2000). Expertise or experimenting? Pragmatism and American public administration, 1920-1950. Administration & Society , 32(3), 329-354.
50.
Taylor, C. (1995). Philosophical arguments. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
51.
Van Riper, P.P. (1999). Why public administration: When not to privatize . Administrative Theory & Praxis, 21(3), 362-370.
52.
Waldo, D. (1968). Scope of the theory of public administration. In J. C. Charlesworth (Ed.), Theory and practice of public administration: Scope, objectives, and methods (pp. 2-26). Philadelphia: American Academy of Political and Social Sciences.
53.
Walton, A.S. (1983). Public and private interests: Hegel on civil society and the state. In S. I. Benn & G. F. Gaus (Eds.), Public and private in social life (pp. 249-266). London: Croom Helm.
54.
Wamsley, G.L., Goodsell, C.T., Rohr, J.A., Stivers, C.M., White, O.F., & Wolf, J.F. (1990). Public administration and the governance process: Shifting the political dialogue. In G. L. Wamsley, R. N. Bacher, C. T. Goodsell, P. S. Kronenberg , J. A. Rohr, C. M. Stivers, O. F. White, & J. F. Wolf (Eds.), Refounding public administration (pp. 31-51). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
55.
Wamsley, G.L., & Zald, M.N. (1973). The political economy of public organizations. A critique and approach to the study of public administration. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
56.
Weintraub, J. (1997). The theory and politics of the public/private distinction. In J. Weintraub & K. Kumar (Eds.), Public and private in thought and practice. Perspectives on a grand dichotomy (pp. 1-42). Chicago : University of Chicago Press.
57.
Wright, V. (2000). Blurring the public-private divide. In B. G. Peters & D. J. Savoie (Eds.), Governance in the twenty-first century: Revitalizing the public service (pp. 155-177). Montreal, Quebec , Canada: McGill-Queen's University Press.
