Comparative Public Administration in a Globalized World: Moving Beyond Standard Assumptions Toward Increased Understanding

• Published date: 01 March 2021
• Author: Zeger Wal,Caspar Berg,M. Shamsul Haque
• Date: 01 March 2021
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13373

Comparative Public Administration in a Globalized World: Moving Beyond Standard Assumptions Toward Increased Understanding 295

Abstract: Today’s globalized world calls for a deeper understanding of how and why administrative practices differ

across regions and what that means for theory and practice. However, empirical comparative studies in public

administration incorporating local and regional particularities in their design, constructs, and interpretation of results

are scarce, with the exception of studies on specific constructs such as public service motivation, professional values,

and emerging approaches to non-Western public administration. Consistently, scholars engaged in comparative studies

highlight theoretical, methodological, and empirical difficulties in comparing public agencies, employees, and practices

as the research instruments and assumptions used often originate from Western countries. Thus, there is a serious need

today for adopting more context-sensitive and balanced approaches to advance our scholarly understanding of systems

and practices in different regions. This symposium aims to advance comparative public administration by bringing

together novel empirical comparative contributions from scholars from different parts of the world.

Increasing interconnectedness, collaboration, and

competition in today’s globalized and multipolar

world necessitate a deeper understanding of how

and why administrative practices differ across regions

and what that implies for potential collaboration

and performance. Recent global concerns such as

the Coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, and the

vastly different ways in which governments have

addressed this crisis, with huge variance in public

health outcomes as a result, have further enhanced

the need for systematic and meaningful comparisons.

Sometimes, comparisons are rather superficial and

anecdotal and, thus, too easily dismissed (“the context

is just too different”), hampering mutual learning

and understanding and improving administrative

structures and practices (cf. Van der Wal,

Mussagulova, and Chen2021).

Until now, two contrasting scholarly perspectives

dominate the scholarly discourse in comparative public

administration. The first perspective emphasizes cross-

regional divergence as it suggests that public servants

in various hemispheres hold divergent sets of values

and attitudes engrained in their respective traditions.

In this oft-oversimplified view, the developing world’s

traditions are characterized by a collectivist approach,

top–down power structure, loyalty, subordination,

and patronage, whereas the ‘Western’ tradition is

claimed to be based on rule of law, political neutrality,

bureaucratic autonomy, and detached ‘managerial’

professionalism (Van der Wal, Mussagulova, and

Chen2021; Van der Wal and Yang2015).

The second perspective highlights global convergence

in administrative practices and norms resulting from

greater academic, economic, and political exchanges,

as well as the alleged universal adoption of New

Public Management and Good Governance paradigms

(Kettl2005; Mahbubani2013). Some even claim that

such universalistic models are preferable, implying

that Western-inspired transition should be embraced

rather than rejected on certain specific grounds. Once

again, this perspective often overgeneralizes complex

institutional and cultural realities.

Indeed, some studies highlight considerable

differences within each of the major traditions.

For instance, Asian countries under the Confucian

tradition, such as China, Singapore, Japan, and South

Korea, are not only distinct from non-Confucian

countries, but they themselves differ tremendously

in terms of the role of government and the nature of

administrative practices and behavior (e.g., ‘Japanese

exceptionalism’ versus ‘China’s market socialism’).

However, empirical comparative studies in public

administration that take into account local and

regional particularities in their design, constructs, and

results are scarce, with the exception of studies on

specific constructs such as public service motivation,

work values, performance appraisal, and emerging

approaches to non-Western public administration

(e.g., Drechsler2018). Consistently, scholars engaged

in comparative efforts highlight the theoretical,

methodological, and empirical difficulties in making

Zeger van der Wal

Caspar van den Berg

M. Shamsul Haque

National University of Singapore

University of Groningen

Comparative Public Administration in a Globalized World:

Moving Beyond Standard Assumptions Toward Increased

Understanding

Guest Editorial

Public Administration Review,

Vol. 81, Iss. 2, pp. 295–298. © 2021 by

The American Society for Public Administration.

DOI: 10.1111/puar.13373.

Zeger Van der Wal, PhD is adjunct

professor at the Lee Kuan Yew School

of Public Policy, National University of

Singapore, and professor by special

appointment at the Faculty of Governance

and Global Affairs, Leiden University. He is

a globally recognized public management

expert and recipient of many teaching and

research awards. He has (co)authored more

than 130 publications and serves on the

editorial boards of leading journals. He also

regularly consults for governments across

the globe.

Email: zvdwal@gmail.com

M. Shamsul Haque, PhD is Professor,

Department of Political Science, National

University of Singapore. He specializes in

public administration and governance. He

authored and edited several books and

published numerous articles in international

journals. He is Editor-in-Chief, Asian Journal

of Political Science, and Deputy Editor,

International Review of Administrative

Sciences.

Email: polhaque@nus.edu.sg

Caspar van den Berg, PhD is

Professor at the University of Groningen,

the Netherlands, and member of the

Council for Public Administration (ROB).

He has published widely on public

administration and governance issues,

including political-administrative relations,

regional governance arrangements and the

role of political advisors.

Email: c.f.van.den.berg@rug.nl