This article argues that despite the widespread perception to the contrary, it is possible to articulate a classical liberal position on public administration that recognizes and confronts the problems of collective governance in the public domain, as opposed to either circumventing them or imposing institutional designs and policy standards not fully in accordance with the nature and structure of the collective phenomena in case. As such, the article revisits, clarifies, and elaborates a classical liberal inspired perspective on the problem of collective action and public governance, arguing for its distinctiveness while articulating its basic conceptual and theoretical elements.
AligicaP. D.TarkoV. (2014). Institutional resilience and economic systems: Lessons from Elinor Ostrom’s work. Comparative Economic Studies, 56, 52-76.
2.
BarryN. (1988). The invisible hand in economics and politics: A study in the two conflicting explanations of society: End-states and processes. London, England: Institute of Economic Affairs.
3.
BarryN. (2005). The tradition of spontaneous order: Bibliographical essay. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund.
4.
BerkesF.ColdingJ.FolkeC. (Eds.). (2003). Navigating social-ecological systems: Building resilience for complexity and change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
5.
BertelliA. M.LynnL. (2006). Madison’s managers: Public administration and the constitution. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
6.
BickersK. N.WilliamsJ. T. (2001). Public policy analysis: A political economy approach. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
7.
BouldingK. E.SingellL. D. (1974). Collected papers [of] K. E. Boulding: Toward a general social science. Denver: Colorado Associated University Press.
8.
BuchananJ. M. (1989). Explorations into constitutional economics. College Station: Texas A&M University Press.
9.
BuchananJ. M. (2011). The demand and supply of public goods. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund. (Original work published 1968)
10.
CookB. J. (1996). Bureaucracy and self-government. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
11.
CornuelleR. C. (1983). The healing America. New York, NY: G.P. Putnam’s.
12.
DenhardtR. B.DenhardtJ. V. (2003). The new public service: Serving, not steering. New York, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
13.
GordonS. (1999). Controlling the state: Constitutionalism from ancient Athens to today. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
14.
HayekF. A. (1967). Degrees of explanation. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. (Published initially in 1955; reprinted in Studies in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics, by
HayekF. A.1967, pp. 3-21)
15.
HayekF. A. (1967). Studies in philosophy, politics, and economics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
16.
HayekF. A. (1973). Law, legislation and liberty. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
17.
HayekF. A. (1978a). The constitution of liberty. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
18.
HayekF. A. (1978b). New studies in philosophy, politics, economics and the history of ideas. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
19.
HayekF. A. (1979). Law, legislation and liberty, Vol. 3: The political order of a free people. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
20.
LynnL. E.Jr. (2005). Public management: A concise history of the field. In
FerlieE.LynnL. E.Jr.PollittC. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of public management (pp. 27-50). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
21.
McGinnisM. D. (1999). Polycentricity and local public economies: Readings from the workshop in political theory and policy analysis. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
22.
NiskanenW. A. (1974). Bureaucracy and representative government. New York, NY: Transaction Publishers.
23.
OstromE. (1998). The comparative ctudy of public economies. Presented upon acceptance of the Frank E. Seidman Distinguished Award in Political Economy. Memphis, TN: P.K. Seidman Foundation.
24.
OstromE. (2005). Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
25.
OstromV. (1997). The meaning of democracy and the vulnerability of democracies: A response to Tocqueville’s challenge. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
26.
OstromV. (1999). Polycentricity. In McGinnisM. D. (Ed.), Polycentricity and local public economies (pp. 52-75). Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
27.
OstromV. (1973/2008). The intellectual crisis in American public administration. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.
28.
PolanyiM. (1951). The logic of liberty. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
29.
RaadscheldersJ. C. N. (2012). Public administration: The interdisciplinary study of government. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
30.
RosenbloomD. H.HahmS. D. (2010). Public administrative theory, performance, and accountability problems and prospects in diverse political environments. Administration & Society, 42(1, Suppl.), 4-10.
31.
RothbardM. (2004). Man, economy, and state. Auburn, AL: Ludwig von Mises Institute. (Original work published 1962)
32.
SalamonL. M.AnheierH. (1997). The civil society sector. Society, 34, 60-65.
