IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/revpol/v43y2026i3ne70058.html

The Dejudicialization of the German Federal Bureaucracy: An Organizational Perspective on Policy‐Related Knowledge

Author

Listed:
  • Marian Döhler

Abstract

Using data from a long‐term survey of senior civil servants (1970–2021), this study investigates the declining share of jurists in federal ministerial departments in Germany. The mechanisms driving this trend and its subsequent effects are discussed from an organizational perspective, highlighting the influence of environmental pressure and the increasing importance of science and expert knowledge in policy formulation. The study applies contingency theory to explain the phenomenon of dejudicialization and its uneven distribution across ministerial departments. The findings indicate that ministerial departments operating in science‐driven policy domains are more likely to hire civil servants with policy‐related expertise. In contrast, those in law‐focused policy domains tend to prefer personnel with legal training. A key consequence of a more diverse senior civil servant staff is a more open attitude toward external scientific advice than was previously the case. In contrast, ministerial departments dominated by jurists still rely more on their in‐house expertise. 本研究利用一项针对高级公务员的长期调查数据(1970–2021),探讨了德国联邦部级部门中法学家比例下降的现象。并从组织视角探讨了推动这一趋势及其后续影响的机制,强调了环境压力以及科学和专家知识在政策制定中日益重要的作用。本研究运用权变理论来解释非司法化现象及其在各部级部门之间的不均衡分布。研究结果表明,在以科学为主导的政策领域的部级部门更有可能聘用具有政策相关专业知识的公务员。相比之下,在以法律为重点的政策领域的部级部门则更倾向于聘用接受过法律培训的人员。高级公务员队伍更加多元化的一个关键结果是,他们对外部科学建议的态度比以往更加开放。相比之下,以法学家为主的部级部门仍然更加依赖其内部专业知识。 Utilizando datos de una encuesta a largo plazo de altos funcionarios públicos (1970–2021), este estudio investiga la proporción decreciente de juristas en los departamentos ministeriales federales en Alemania. Los mecanismos que impulsan esta tendencia y sus efectos subsiguientes se discuten desde una perspectiva organizacional, destacando la influencia de la presión ambiental y la creciente importancia de la ciencia y el conocimiento experto en la formulación de políticas. El estudio aplica la teoría de contingencia para explicar el fenómeno de la desjudicialización y su distribución desigual entre los departamentos ministeriales. Los hallazgos indican que los departamentos ministeriales que operan en dominios de políticas impulsados por la ciencia tienen mayor probabilidad de contratar a funcionarios públicos con experiencia relacionada con políticas. Por el contrario, aquellos en dominios de políticas centrados en el derecho tienden a preferir personal con capacitación legal. Una consecuencia clave de una plantilla de altos funcionarios públicos más diversa es una actitud más abierta hacia el asesoramiento científico externo que antes. Por el contrario, los departamentos ministeriales dominados por juristas aún dependen más de su experiencia interna.

Suggested Citation

  • Marian Döhler, 2026. "The Dejudicialization of the German Federal Bureaucracy: An Organizational Perspective on Policy‐Related Knowledge," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 43(3), May.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:43:y:2026:i:3:n:e70058
    DOI: 10.1111/ropr.70058
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.70058
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ropr.70058?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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:bla:revpol:v:43:y:2026:i:3:n:e70058. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipsonea.html .

    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.