IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jothpo/v7y1995i2p157-167.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bureaucrats as Public Policy-Makers and Their Self-Interests

Author

Listed:
  • Morten Egeberg

Abstract

That public bureaucrats, like most other people, might pursue their private interests as voters, job applicants and union members is hardly surprising. It is the postulate that bureaucrats' self-interested behavior penetrates their role as public decision-makers that represents a challenge, empirical-theoretically as well as normatively. To assess the assumption that bureaucrats' self-interests affect bureaucrats' decisions in their capacity as officials (the self-interest hypothesis), two main points are made. First, the probability that self-interests are conceived and made operational in different issue areas is considered. Second, it is argued that the explanatory power of bureaucrats' self-interests has to depend on characteristics of the self-interest phenomenon itself, for instance whether it is dealt with as a variable or a constant. Moreover, it has to depend on the relative importance of other explanations.

Suggested Citation

  • Morten Egeberg, 1995. "Bureaucrats as Public Policy-Makers and Their Self-Interests," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 7(2), pages 157-167, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jothpo:v:7:y:1995:i:2:p:157-167
    DOI: 10.1177/0951692895007002003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0951692895007002003
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0951692895007002003?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. March, James G. & Olson, Johan P., 1983. "Organizing Political Life: What Administrative Reorganization Tells Us about Government," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 77(2), pages 281-296, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Schmidt, Torsten, 2001. "Finanzreformen in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland: Analyse der Veränderungen der Finanzverfassung von 1949 bis 1989," RWI Schriften, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, volume 67, number 67.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Batory Agnes & Svensson Sara, 2019. "The fuzzy concept of collaborative governance: A systematic review of the state of the art," Central European Journal of Public Policy, Sciendo, vol. 13(2), pages 28-39, December.
    2. Kelman, Steven J. & Myers, Jeff, 2009. "Successfully Executing Ambitious Strategies in Government: An Empirical Analysis," Scholarly Articles 4481609, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    3. Jarle Trondal & Stefan Gänzle & Benjamin Leruth, 2022. "Differentiation in the European Union in Post‐Brexit and ‐Pandemic Times: Macro‐Level Developments with Meso‐Level Consequences," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(S1), pages 26-37, September.
    4. A Radian, 1984. "The Dynamics of Policy Formation: Income Tax Rates in Israel, 1948–1975," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 2(3), pages 271-284, September.
    5. Tom Christensen & Liang Ma, 2020. "Coordination Structures and Mechanisms for Crisis Management in China: Challenges of Complexity," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 19-36, March.
    6. Marie Nilsen & Trond Kongsvik & Stian Antonsen, 2022. "Taming Proteus: Challenges for Risk Regulation of Powerful Digital Labor Platforms," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(10), pages 1-23, May.
    7. Joel D. Aberbach & Tom Christensen, 2018. "Academic Autonomy and Freedom under Pressure: Severely Limited, or Alive and Kicking?," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 487-506, December.
    8. Tom Christensen & Liang Ma, 2021. "Comparing SARS and COVID-19: Challenges of Governance Capacity and Legitimacy," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 629-645, December.
    9. Baulenas, Eulàlia & Sotirov, Metodi, 2020. "Cross-sectoral policy integration at the forest and water nexus: National level instrument choices and integration drivers in the European Union," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    10. Schroeter, Eckhard & Roeber, Manfred, 2004. "Governing the Capital — Comparing Institutional Reform in Berlin, London and Paris," Institute of European Studies, Working Paper Series qt9km4z5vf, Institute of European Studies, UC Berkeley.
    11. Peregrine Schwartz-Shea & Randy T. Simmons, 1991. "Egoism, Parochialism, and Universalism," Rationality and Society, , vol. 3(1), pages 106-132, January.
    12. Jeremy Hall, 2007. "Implications of Success and Persistence for Public Sector Performance," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 281-297, September.
    13. Covaleski, Mark A. & Dirsmith, Mark W. & Weiss, Jane M., 2013. "The social construction, challenge and transformation of a budgetary regime: The endogenization of welfare regulation by institutional entrepreneurs," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 333-364.
    14. Yihong Liu & Tom Christensen, 2022. "The long‐term development of crisis management in China—Continuity, institutional punctuations and reforms," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(3), pages 282-302, May.
    15. Covaleski, Mark A. & Dirsmith, Mark W., 1995. "The preservation and use of public resources: Transforming the immoral into the merely factual," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 20(2-3), pages 147-173.
    16. Tayyeb Ali Khan & Tom Christensen, 2021. "Challenges of Implementing a Performance and Reward System in Higher Education Institutions in Pakistan: Perceptions of Top Leaders in Contending Regulatory Bodies," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 243-262, June.
    17. Tony Kinder & Jari Stenvall & Antti Talonen, 2023. "Logics and Agency in Public Management Research," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 159-180, March.
    18. Soo-Young Lee & Taesik Yun & Andrew B. Whitford & Jae Young Lim, 2020. "The Reorganization of the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and Its Effects," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 647-663, December.
    19. Matei, Lucica & Iancu, Diana Camelia, 2009. "On the Way to Modernization: The 'Good Enough' Governance Making in Romania," MPRA Paper 18941, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 28 May 2009.
    20. Oszlak, Oscar, 2001. "The Civil Service in Latin America and the Caribbean: Situation and Future Challenges," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 4285, Inter-American Development Bank.

    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:sae:jothpo:v:7:y:1995:i:2:p:157-167. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.