The Intellectual Crisis in American Public Administration

by Vincent Ostrom, Vincent Ostrom

A classic book in the fields of public administration and political science since its publication in 1973, The Intellectual Crisis in American Public Administration examines various constitutional crises the nation has experienced since Watergate. This revised and expanded third edition extends the analysis to account for the most recent developments in American politics, up to and including the Clinton and Bush administrations.

About the Author:
Vincent Ostrom is Arthur F. Bentley Professor Emeritus of Political Science at Indiana University and Founding Director of the Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis

262 pages, Paperback

First published December 1, 1974

Reviews

[Otto Lehto · Rating 3 out of 5]

The importance of the "Ostromian" revolution in political science and economics, spearheaded by Vincent Ostrom & Elinor Ostrom, is still underappreciated. And while Elinor received her Nobel Prize, Vincent's work tends to get underappreciated and undervalued in some circles. And yet Vincent's reappraisal of the Madisonian and Tocquevillian principles of federated self-governance stands as the firm foundation upon which much subsequent work on "polycentric" governance is erected.

Reading this book, it is easy to appreciate the stridency and welcome impact of his critique of "Weberian" and "Wilsonian" public administration based on centralized, hierarchical model of decision-making. The idea of the model of the polycentric "compound republic" as a Kuhnian paradigm shift in the study of public administration is tempting and persuasive, since it opens up the space for new experimental and bottom-up methods of governance. It is also clear that the full appreciation of those ideas is sometimes hindered by the author's unsatisfactory writing style and inconclusive substantive arguments. His writing style, while mostly acceptable, can be cumbersome, repetitive, and lacking in structured argumentation. And with regard to substance, it seems to me that Ostrom does not sufficiently ground his analytical framework, which is full of strong normative claims and conceptual bifurcations, either theoretically or empirically. He relies predominantly on abstract theoretical arguments based on 18th century classic republican authors and the advances in neoclassical political economy in his own time. These are not a bad place to start, of course. But the applicability of abstract conceptions to specific issues (about, say, the administration of police forces, healthcare provision, or transportation in metropolitan areas) requires, it seems to me, more empirical evidence. (Incidentally, some of that evidence has been collated by V. Ostrom and his co-authors themselves, but this empirical case for polycentricity is not allowed to fully shine in this book.) In addition, some of the content of the book is outdated, given the time and context in which it was written. So, I would urge readers to primarily look elsewhere - say, into Elinor Ostrom's later works, or the contemporary works of Vlad Tarko or Peter Boettke - for a more up-to-date analysis of the potential value of decentralized governance.

Overall, the book is an important collection of papers, and it contains good historical context for the emergence of the Ostromian research program. It also introduces some key concepts and models, and some daring insights, that have wide application in political science and political economy. At the same time, the book has some structural and substantive weaknesses, in addition to the excusable fact that it is a product of its time, that make it somewhat passable. Nonetheless, I would urge readers to read at least Chapter 4: "A Theory of Democratic Administration."

[Namrta Sharma · Rating 4 out of 5]

The book is a series of essays in which the author analyses the intellectual crises in American Public Administration as a paradigm problem. The author draws attention of the students and practitioners of public administration to the failures of traditional theories of public administration to address the complexities of modern society and challenges before humans. A paradigm shift in the study of public administration, policy and political science is needed for an enhanced comprehension of the complex events around us.

The author challenges the erstwhile paradigm wherein Wilsonian theory of ‘centralization of power’ in a democracy and the ‘sovereign supreme concept of legislature’, Weber’s concepts of ‘bureaucracy’ and its ‘unity of command’ and Simon’s ‘bounded rationality’ are the key players. According to author, the overbearing centralization approaches in public administration theory and practice have led us to the crisis. The authors set out to critically analyze the historical ideas of centralized governance and highlights the many forms of decentralization and pluralism that exist and propounds developing a new paradigm. The vison of the founding fathers of United States of fragmented authority, overlapping jurisdictions, competing powers thus providing choices to people has been shadowed by the centralization approach in public administration. The author is fascinated by the approaches of Olson, Montesquieu or Tocqueville and deciphers their ideas to construct his arguments of polycentric powers in a democracy which he describes as democratic administration as a better alternative to bureaucratic administration. He then explores with the concepts of economics and applies them to provision of public goods and proposes multilayer model of self-governance for provision of public good.

The concept of democratic administration as illustrated by the author is neither new nor unexplored both in theory and practice. This has been propounded by James Madison and Alexander Hamilton, the founding fathers of the United Sates. The concept has also been explored by Dwight Waldo and Mary P. Follet. The main contribution of the author is the application of concepts of economics to public administration theory. If this qualifies as a new paradigm remains questionable.

[Kevin Gomez · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a fantastic book that answers the nuanced question of the development of an overreaching state. Despite the claims that Vincent Ostrom is difficult to read, I find this book to be very structured and easy to understand.

Full of wonderful information.

[Jonathan Madison · Rating 3 out of 5]

Great response to and critique of bureaucratic administration