Aims and structure of this course

The discipline of public administration started with an explicit goal to develop the effectiveness of state governing in a value-free and non-partisan way. The idea was that the study of state practices could help progress the rationality, efficiency and effectiveness of modern bureaucracies (Adams, 1992; van Ostaijen, 2016). With that particular history in mind, it is not surprising that Public Administration (PA), according to some, has developed itself as a science that focuses on what Burawoy calls ‘professional’ and ‘policy’ types of PA (Buraway, 2005; Karré, Schillemans, Van der Steen, & Van der Wal, 2017; van Ostaijen & Jhagroe, 2020). However, PA is also home to a body of research focusing on the political nature of seemingly neutral policy processes (Waldo, 1948; Wildavsky, 1979; Stone, 1997; Wolf, 2017) and research that focuses on the ways in which policy making is led by values and meaning-making rather than by rational action (Rein & Schon,1977; Yanow, 2010; Van Hulst, 2012; Wagenaar, 2011, Metze, 2017). These approaches have become known as “interpretive” or sometimes “critical” research.

As an alternative to more instrumental approaches, critical and interpretive approaches in public administration research address issues of power and domination (critical) next to sensemaking, values, meaning-making and improvisation (interpretive). Critical and interpretive research in Public Administration have a family resemblance. To some, they go hand in hand while others consider them as quite distinct. In any case, they find each other in a reflexive ambition to question (implicit) hegemonic paradigms and values that inform both theory and practice of public administration (Hajer et all, 1993; Burawoy, 2005; Bovens, 2016; Triantafillou, 2017), while exploring alternative modes of governing and social organization. Questions that illustrate these approaches can include: how do categories used in migration policy racialize citizens? In what way do cooperatives (e.g. energy, food) challenge and transform institutional legitimacy? How do stakeholder perceptions of an infrastructure project relate to democratic values? Or how do local policy makers interpret smart city and big data solutions?

The aim of this 3-day course is explore and discuss key insights from critical and interpretive studies in Public Administration research, and how this could inform or relate to your own research project. By focusing on key concepts and debates, the course provides a reflexive space for (young) scholars committed to deepen their understanding of critical and interpretive research. The course is not only meant for those who want to do critical or interpretive research, but also for those who are interested in the philosophies and practices underlying such research and – possibly – exploring how to incorporate these in their own research projects.

Outline

Day 1: Interpretive research in PA and policy analysis

Day 2: Critical research in PA and policy analysis

Day 3: Doing CIPA research that matters

In the afternoon sessions on day 1 and day 2, students will present short papers in addressing a key challenge or dilemma in their own research. The instructors will cover the morning sessions, and for the first two afternoon sessions, two invited guest experts will contribute:

• dr. John Boswell – University of Southampton
• dr. Tamara Metze – TU/ Delft