The objective is to assess the validity of one general proposition that has been central to much of the thinking and theorizing among students of comparative public administration. It is that the political roles ofpublic bureaucracies vary systematically with the regime types. This proposition is examined in the context of two disparate political systems; Korea and Turkey. The data are derived from personal interviews conducted with 232 Turkish and 225 Korean civil servants of the highest ranks. The analysis focuses on three aspects of the bureaucracy: its policy-making role, its accountability to the public, and the character of its professional norms. The evidence lends no support for the proposition and thereby raises some questions about its validity.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Agger, R.E., D. Goldrich, and E. Swanson (1964) The Rulers and the RuledNew York: John Wiley.
2.
Anderson, J.E. (1975) Public Policy MakingNew York : Praeger.
3.
Bark, D.S. and C.J. Lee (1976) "Bureaucratic elite and developmental orientations," in D. S. Suh and C. J. Lee (eds.) Political Leadership in KoreaSeattle: Univ. of Washington Press.
4.
Bent, F.T.1969. "The Turkish bureaucracy as an agent of change."J. of Comparative Administration1: 47-64.
5.
Braibanti, R. (1966) Asian Bureaucratic Systems Emergent from the British Imperial TraditionDurham, NC: Duke Univ. Press.
6.
Chambers, R.L. (1964) "The civil bureaucracy: Turkey," in R. E. Ward and D. A. Rustow (eds.) Political Modernization in Japan and Turkey.Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press.
7.
Crozier, M. (1964) The Bureaucratic PhenomenonChicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
8.
Dahl, R.A. (1963) A Preface to Democratic TheoryChicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
9.
Diamant, A. (1970) "Bureaucracy in developmental movement regimes." in F. W. Rigg (ed.) Frontiers on Development Administration.Durham: Duke Univ. Press.
10.
Dodd, C.H. (1965) "Administrative reform in Turkey."Public Administration43
11.
. Eisenstadt, S.N. (1973) Tradition, Change and ModernityNew York: Wiley.
12.
Esman, M.J. (1966) "The politics of development administration," in J. D. Montgomery and W. J. Siffin (eds.) Approaches to Development: Politics, Administration and Change.New York: McGraw-Hill.
13.
Fainsod, M. (1963) "Bureaucracy and modernization: the Russian and Soviet case," in J. Lapalombara (ed.) Bureaucracy and Political DevelopmentPrinceton: Princeton Univ. Press.
14.
Frey, F.W. (1975) "Patterns of elite politics in Turkey," in G. Lenczowski (ed.) Political Elites in the Middle East.Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research.
15.
Gorvine, A. (1965) "The civil service under the revolutionary government in Pakistan."Middle East J.19: 321-336
16.
. Gusfield, I.R. (1967) "Tradition and modernity: misplaced polarities in the study of change."Amer. J. of Sociology72: 351-362
17.
. Hamilton, W.B. (1964) The Transfer of InstitutionsDurham, NC: Duke Univ. Press.
18.
Heady, F. (1966) Public Administration: A Comparative PerspectiveEnglewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall .
19.
Henderson, K. (1969) "Comparative public administration: the identity crisis."J. of Comparative Administration1: 65-84.
20.
Heper, M. (1976a) "Political modernization as reflected in bureaucratic change: the Turkish bureaucracy and a 'historical bureaucratic empire' tradition ." Int. J. of Middle East Studies7: 507-521.
21.
——— (1976b) "The recalcitrance of the Turkish public bureaucracy to "bourgeois politics': a multi-factor political stratification analysis."Middle East J.30: 485-500
22.
. ——— (1977) "Negative bureaucratic politics in a modernizing context: the Turkish case."J. of South Asian and Middle Eastern Studies1: 65-84
23.
. Jones, C.O. (1977) An Introduction to the Study of Public PolicyBelmont, CA: Wadsworth.
24.
Jewell, M.E. and C.L. Kim (1976) "Sources of support for the legislature in a developing country."Comparative Pol. Studies8: 461-489.
25.
Kim, C.L. and B.K. Woo (1972) "Political representation in the Korean national assembly."Midwest J. of Pol. Sci.16: 626-651
26.
. Mardin, S. (1971) "Ideology and religion in the Turkish revolution ." Int. J. of Middle East StudiesII: 197-211
Milne, R.S. (1969) "Differentiation and administrative development."J. of Comparative Administration3: 213-233
29.
. Özbudun, E. (1970) "Established revolution vs. unfinished revolution: contrasting patterns of democratization in Mexico and Turkey," in S. P. Huntington and C. H. Moore (eds.) Authoritarian Politics in Modern Society: The Dynamics of Established One-Party System.New York: Basic Books.
30.
Presthus, R.V. (1961) "Weberian v. welfare bureaucracy in a traditional society."Administrative Sci. Q.6: 1-24.
31.
Presthus, R.V. and W. Monopoli (1977) "Bureaucracy in the United States and Canada: social, attitudinal and behavioral variables."Int. J. of Comparative Sociology18: 176-190
32.
. Riggs, F.W. (1963) "Bureaucrats and political development: a paradoxical view." in J. LaPalombara (ed.) Bureaucracy and Political Development.Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press.
33.
Roos, L.L., Jr. and N.P. Roos (1971) Managers of Modernization Organizations and Elites in Turkey (1950-1969Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.
34.
Savage, P. (1976) "Optimism and pessimism in comparative public administration."Public Administration Rev.36: 415-423
35.
. Shaw, S.J. (1970) "The central legislative councils in the nineteenth century reform movement before 1876."Int. J. of Middle East StudiesI: 51-84.
36.
Shiner, L.E. (1975) "Tradition and modernity: an ideal-type gone astray."Comparative Studies in Society and History17: 245-252.
37.
Sigelman, L. (1976) "In search of comparative administration."Public Administration Rev.36: 621-625
38.
. Szyliowicz, J.S. (1975) "Elites and modernization in Turkey," in F. Tachau (ed.) Political Elites and Political Development in the Middle EastNew York: John Wiley.
39.
Weiker, W.F. (1968) "The Ottoman bureaucracy: modernization and reform."Admin. Sci. Q.13: 451-470.
