P18 Taking Democracy Seriously: Considerations for Research and Engagement

Panel chairs

Corresponding Chair and Review Group Chair:

Christopher Koliba, University of Kansas, USA - ckoliba@ku.edu

Panel Co-Chairs:

Rosemary O’Leary, University of Kansas, USA

Richard Callahan, University of San Francisco, USA

The rise of populist movements and political conflict across the globe is not only stressing democracies but calling for public administration scholars and educators to recognize how best to prepare and defend democratic standards in those jurisdictions functioning in small “l” liberal democratic governance systems (Koliba, 2024).  This panel focuses on topics related to the empirical evidence of “democratic backsliding” (Bauer and Becker, 2021) and the administrative, advocacy, and normative responses of our profession to these troubling trends.  These trends are calling for us to revisit some of our core assumptions regarding the relationship between politics and administration (Callahan and Mau, 2024), and how public administrators express their ethics of dissent (O’Leary, 2020), as well as to what extent is public administration invisible or “submerged” (Scheffler and Walters, 2024) .  In addition, such trends have implications for the future of the democratic anchorage of the Neo-Webarian state (Boukhaert, 2023).

This panel aligns with the IRSPM 2025 conference themes of “Citizen-Government Interactions, Civic Engagement, and Social Capital,” and “Social Equity and Sustainability.”  Democratic backsliding is, paradoxically, fueled by extensive citizen engagement in politics, as populist movements are, unto themselves, products of democratic systems.  Democratic backsliding gives cause to critically examine questions relating to citizen authority, the importance of well-informed citizens,  the role of social movements and civil society, and efforts to rebuilt the democratic social contract to overcome the growing deep divisions resulting in and  from political polarization.  It also focuses on questions of sustainability and social equity in relation to democratic governance, by raising questions such as: How can (or even should?) democracy be sustained?  To what extent is social equity a “meta-standard” of democratic governance?  And what are the implications for equity and sustainability when democratic standards are transgressed?

The papers of this panel will consider how the public administration and public management fields respond to these crisis by posing and responding to both empirical and normative questions.

• What is the normative basis on which democratic governance rests most relevant to our field?
• How are democratic institutions of the “administrative state” impacted by enacted or proposed reforms to administrative authority being promoted and passed by populist political leaders and parties?
• What is the relationship between public administration and political parties in states experiencing populist movements?
• What role do citizen perceptions of government performance play in political polarization?
• What role can and do public administrators play in expressing dissent?
• What roles do trust, truth, and honesty play in fueling democratic backsliding?
• How is the politics-administrative dichotomy being revisited and revised?
• How are communities, particularly underrepresented groups, impacted by democratic backsliding?
• How do our contemporary public management theories, such as the New Public Governance, New Public Management, Public Leadership, and Network Governance, account for democratic norms?  Are they taken for granted, or do these theories and frameworks exist across types of political systems?

Broadly, we seek papers relating to democratic governance, its characteristics, threats facing it, reforms needed to sustain it, and responses of our field to trends in democratic governance.

References:

Bauer, Michael W and Stefan Becker. “Democratic Backsliding, Populism, and Public. Administration.” Perspectives on Public Management and Governance 3, no. 1 (2020): 19–31. https://doi.org/10.1093/ppmgov/gvz026.

Bouckaert, Geert. “The Neo-Weberian State: From Ideal Type Model to Reality?” Max Weber Studies 23, no. 1 (2023): 13–59. https://doi.org/10.1353/max.2023.0002.

Callahan, R., & Mau, T. A. Reconceptualizing the politics-administration dichotomy to better understand public leadership in the twenty-first century: a multilateral actors model. The American Review of Public Administration, 54(3), (2024): 229-241.

Koliba, C. Liberal Democratic Accountability Standards and Public Administration.  Public Administration Review. Volume (2024): 1-11. DOI: 10.1111/puar.13831

O’Leary, R.The Ethics of Dissent: Managing Guerrilla Government, 3rd edition. Washington D.C.:  Congressional Quarterly Press (2020).

Scheffler, G. & Walters, D.E. The submerged administrative state, Wisconsin Law Review. 789 (2024): 789-858. https://doi.org/10.59015/wlr.YWNV5159