IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v51y1957i02p346-368_07.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

“The Public Interest†in Administrative Decision-Making: Theorem, Theosophy, or Theory?

Author

Listed:
  • Schubert, Glendon A.

Abstract

Textbooks in public administration customarily conclude with a section on administrative responsibility. The charitable inference is that this location betokens the saving of the best till last, rather than the appendage of an afterthought. Herbert Kaufman might explain it as the preoccupation of the past generation of political scientists with the legitimation of the efficient exercise of administrative power to subserve the goals of the social state, with a consequent sublimation of the emerging problem of the control of large, professionalized bureaucracies. However that may be, it does seem clear that, with the exception of administrative decisions which adversely affect “civil liberties,†most political scientists have been content to let lawyers and defenders of the free enterprise system worry about the restraint of administrative action.

Suggested Citation

  • Schubert, Glendon A., 1957. "“The Public Interest†in Administrative Decision-Making: Theorem, Theosophy, or Theory?," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 51(2), pages 346-368, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:51:y:1957:i:02:p:346-368_07
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0003055400071070/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:51:y:1957:i:02:p:346-368_07. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.