Normative Public Policy, the “Public Value,” and Value Conflicts

Ethics and values shape public policy processes and analysis. Public administration and policy have “normative” aspects, and normative public policy explores the role and relevancy of beliefs, interests, goals, values, and principles in public policy and management. The roots of normative discussions on efficiency, effectiveness, and economy go back to the early days of the field. After the mid-1960s, a discussion of ethics and values regained importance in public administration and policy, emphasizing diversity, equality, and fairness. Since the late 1970s, market-based approaches have become dominant with an increased focus on efficiency, economy, market, and customer-orientation. Yet, a critique of market-based approaches (especially the new public management [NPM]) and values has been developing since the 1990s. The public value management’s (PVM) new emphasis on the “public value” seems to challenge the NPM approach and some premises of the classical public administration. Based on a literature review and hermeneutics, this chapter first discusses normative public policy, public values, and principles. Second, a general review of the PVM, its comparison with the NPM and a discussion on the “public value” is presented. Finally, value conflicts in public policy processes are explored with specific reference to the case of justice and efficiency in welfare.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Buy Now

eBook EUR 106.99 Price includes VAT (France)

Softcover Book EUR 137.14 Price includes VAT (France)

Hardcover Book EUR 137.14 Price includes VAT (France)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Similar content being viewed by others

Public Value Performance: What Does It Mean to Create Value in the Public Sector?

Policy Contexts, Consequences and Controversies

Public Value Management and New Public Governance: Key Traits, Issues and Developments

Notes

Two other subfields of public policy are the study and science of public policy. The study of public policy specifies what the subject matter of the discipline is and focuses on what governments do (Dye 1987:2). The science of public policy is about how to systematically study and analyze the acts of governments and their causes or reasons, circumstances, methods of execution, and outcomes or impacts on the target population (Dye 1987:7).

References

• Alford J, Hughes O (2008) Public value pragmatism as the next phase of public management. American Review of Public Administration (38)2:130–148. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074008314203ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Alford J, O’Flynn J (2009) Making sense of public value: Concepts, critiques and emergent meanings. International Journal of Public Administration 32(3):171–191. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900690902732731
• Badia F, Borin E, Donato F (2014) Co-governing public value in local authorities. In: Guthrie, J, Marcon G, Russo S, Farneti F (eds), Public value management, measurement and reporting. Emerald, Bradford, pp 269–289. ChapterGoogle Scholar
• Barth TJ (1996) Administering in the public interest: The facilitative role for public administrators. In: Wamsley GL, James FW (eds), Refounding democratic public administration. Sage, London, pp 168–197. Google Scholar
• Benington J, Moore MH (2011) Public value in complex and changing times. In: Benington J, Moore MH (eds), Public value, theory and practice. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, Switzerland, pp 1–30. Google Scholar
• Blake J, Davis K (1964) Norms, values, and sanctions. In: Faris R (ed), Handbook of modern sociology. Rand McNally, Chicago, pp 456–484. Google Scholar
• Bojang MBS (2021) Appraising public value in the public sector: Re-evaluation of the strategic triangle. SEISENSE Journal of Management 4(2):1–10. https://doi.org/10.33215/sjom.v4i2.551ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Bovaird T (2008) Emergent strategic management and planning mechanisms in complex adaptive systems: The case of the UK best value initiative. Public Management Review 10(3):319–340. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719030802002741ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Bozeman B (2007) Public values and public interest: Rescuing public management from economic individualism. Georgetown University Press, Washington DC. Google Scholar
• Bozeman B (2002) Public-value failure. When efficient markets may not do. PAR 62(2):145–161. https://doi.org/10.1111/0033-3352.00165ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Britannica (2022) Normative ethics. https://www.britannica.com/topic/normative-ethics. Accessed: 25 Oct 2022.
• Broussine M (2003) Public leadership. In: Löffler L, Bovaird T (eds), Public management and governance. Routledge, London, pp. 175–188. Google Scholar
• Bryson JM, Crosby BC, Bloomberg L (2014) Public value governance: Moving beyond traditional public administration and new public management. Public Administration Review 74(4):445–456. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12238ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Cohen, J. 1996. Procedure and substance in deliberative democracy. In: Benhabib S (ed) Democracy and difference. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, pp 95–119. ChapterGoogle Scholar
• Colglazier FW (1991) Scientific uncertainties, public policy, and global warming: How sure is sure enough? Policy Studies Journal 9(2):61–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.1991.tb01882.xArticleGoogle Scholar
• Cox III RW, Rhodes T, Huberts L, Kolthoff E (2009) Introduction. In: Cox III RW (ed) Ethics and integrity in public administration: Concepts and cases. Routledge, New York, pp vii-xii. Google Scholar
• Dahl A, Soss J (2014) Neoliberalism for the common good? Public value governance and the downsizing of democracy. PAR 74(4):496–504. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12191ArticleGoogle Scholar
• de Graaf G, Paanakker H (2022) Dilemmas and craftsmanship practices: Strategies for empirically uncovering values and value conflicts. In: Espedal G, Lovaas BJ, Sirris S, Wæraas A (eds), Researching values: Methodological approaches for understanding values work in organizations and leadership. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, Switzerland, pp 83–113. Google Scholar
• DeForest Molina A (2012) The heart of the profession: Understanding public service values. Journal of Public Affairs Education 18(2):375–396. https://doi.org/10.1080/15236803.2012.12001689ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Dixit AK, Weibull JW (2007) Political polarization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104:7351–7356. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0702071104ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Dollery B, Worthington A (1996) The evaluation of public policy: Normative economic theories of government failure. Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics, 7(1):27–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/02601079X9600700103ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Downs GW, Larkey PD (1986) The search for the government efficiency: From hubris to helplessness. Random House, New York. Google Scholar
• Dunleavy P, Hood C (1994) From old public administration to new public management. Public Money & Management 14(3):9–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540969409387823ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Dye, TR (1987) Understanding public policy. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J. Google Scholar
• Eryılmaz B (2008) Etik kültürü geliştirmek. Türk İdare Dergisi 458:1–12. Google Scholar
• Espedal G, Lovaas BJ, Sirris S, Wæraas A (eds) (2022) Researching values: Methodological approaches for understanding values work in organizations and leadership. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, Switzerland. Google Scholar
• Fischer F, Forester J (eds) (1987) Confronting values in policy analysis: The politics of criteria. Sage, Newbury Park, CA. Google Scholar
• Frederickson HG (1997) The Spirit of public administration. Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco. Google Scholar
• Friedman M, Friedman R (1980) Free to choose. Harcourt Brace Javanovich, New York. Google Scholar
• Fung A (2015) Putting the public back into governance: The challenges of citizen participation and its future. PAR 75(4):513–522. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12361ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Galbraith JK (1992) The culture of contentment. Sinclair-Stevenson, London. Google Scholar
• Galbraith JK (1996) The Good society: The humane agenda. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston. Google Scholar
• Glazer N (1988) The limits of social policy. Harvard University Press, Cambridge. Google Scholar
• Harmon MM (1971) Normative theory and public administration: Some suggestions for redefinition of administrative responsibility. In: Marini F (ed), Toward a new public administration: The Minnowbrook perspective. Chandler Publishing Company, Scranton & London, pp 172–185. Google Scholar
• Harris D (1987) Justifying state welfare. Basil Blackwell, Oxford. Google Scholar
• Harvey D (1973) Social justice and the city. The John Hopkins University Press Baltimore. Google Scholar
• Hauptmann, E (1996) Putting choice before democracy: A critique of rational choice. SUNY Press, Albany. Google Scholar
• Hayek FA (1976) The road to serfdom: A classic warning against the dangers to freedom inherent in social planning. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago. BookGoogle Scholar
• Hayek FA (1984) The essence of Hayek. Edited by Nishiyama C, Leube KR. Hoover Institution Press, Stanford. Google Scholar
• Hefetz A, Warner, M (2004) Privatization and its reverse: Explaining the dynamics of the government contracting process. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 14(2):171–190. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muh012ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Hood C (1991) A public management for all seasons? Public Administration 69(1):3–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.1991.tb00779.xArticleGoogle Scholar
• Horner L, Hazel L (2005) Adding public value. The Work Foundation, London. Google Scholar
• Ingram H, Schneider A (2006) Policy analysis for democracy. In: Moran M, Rein M, Goodin RE (eds), The oxford handbook of public policy. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 169–189. Google Scholar
• Jørgensen TB, Bozeman B (2007) Public values: An inventory. Administration &Society 39(3):354–381. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399707300703
• Karkın N (2015) Kamu değeri kavramı ve kamu değeri yönetiminin kamu yönetimi kuramı bağlamındaki yeri. In: Köseoğlu Ö, Sobacı MZ (eds), Kamu yönetiminde paradigma arayışları: Yeni kamu işletmeciliği ve ötesi. Dora, Bursa, pp 249–272. Google Scholar
• Karkın N (2018) Kamu değeri. In: Mamur-Işıkçı Y, Alacadağlı E (eds), Kamu yönetimi ansiklopedisi. Astana Yayınları, Ankara, pp 398–402. Google Scholar
• Kelly G, Mulgan G, Muers, S (2002) Creating public value: An analytical framework for public service reform. Discussion paper prepared by the Cabinet Office Strategy Unit, United Kingdom. Google Scholar
• Kernaghan K (2003) Integrating values into public service: The values statement as centerpiece. PAR 63(6):711–719. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6210.00334ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Köseoğlu Ö, Sobacı, MZ (2015) Kamu yönetimi kuramının geleceği: Yeni kamu işletmeciliğinden hibritleşmeye doğru. In: Köseoğlu Ö, Sobacı MZ (eds), Kamu yönetiminde paradigma arayışları: Yeni kamu işletmeciliği ve ötesi. Dora, Bursa, pp 297–314. Google Scholar
• Köseoğlu Ö, Tuncer A (2014) Kamu yönetiminde yeni bir yaklaşım olarak kamu değeri: Kavramsal ve kuramsal açıdan bir tartışma. Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi 12 (24):145–170. Google Scholar
• Kuçuradi I (2003) Etik ve etikler. Türkiye Mühendislik Haberleri 423(1):7–9. Google Scholar
• Levy JM (1995) Essential microeconomics for public policy analysis. Praeger, Westport. Google Scholar
• Long N (1954) Public policy and administration: The goals of rationality and responsibility. PAR 14:22–31. https://doi.org/10.2307/972965ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Lowi TJ (1969) The end of liberalism: Ideology, policy and the crisis of public authority. Norton, New York. Google Scholar
• Lynch TD, Lynch CE (2009) Democratic morality: Back to the future. In: Cox III RW (ed), Ethics and integrity in public administration: Concepts and cases. Routledge, New York, pp 5–25. Google Scholar
• Mayer C (2018) Prosperity-better business makes the greater good. Oxford Uni. Press, Oxford. Google Scholar
• Meynhardt T (2009) Public value inside: What is public value creation? International Journal for Public Administration 32(3–4):192–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900690902732632ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Meynhardt T (2022) Public value. In: List RA et al. (eds.), International encyclopedia of civil society. Springer, Switzerland AG, pp 1–10. Google Scholar
• Moon JD (1993) Citizenship and welfare: Social democratic and liberal perspectives. In: Wilson WJ (ed), Sociology and public agenda. Sage, Newbury Park, CA. Google Scholar
• Moore MH (1993) Public value as the focus of strategy. Keynote speech, National Conference of the Royal Institute of Administration Australia, November 18, 1993, Melbourne, Australia. Google Scholar
• Moore, MH (1995) Creating public value: Strategic management in government. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. Google Scholar
• Moore, MH (2013) Recognizing public value. Harvard University Press, Cambridge. BookGoogle Scholar
• Moore MH, Braga AA (2004) Police performance measurement: A normative framework. Criminal Justice Ethics 23(1):3–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/0731129X.2004.9992156
• Murray C (1984) Losing ground: American social policy: 1950–1980. Basic Books, New York. Google Scholar
• Oakley K, Naylor R, Lee, D (2006) Giving them what they want: The construction of the public in ‘public value.’ Paper presented at “media and social change,” conference organized by the ESRC Centre for Research on Socio-Cultural Change. BOP Consulting, London. Google Scholar
• OECD (2005) Managing conflict of interest in the public sector. OECD, Paris. https://www.oecd.org/corruption/ethics/49107986.pdf. Accessed: 09 Dec 2022. BookGoogle Scholar
• OECD/UN-HABITAT/UNOPS (2021) Global state of national urban policy 2021: Achieving sustainable development goals and delivering climate action. OECD, Paris. https://www.oecd.org/publications/global-state-of-national-urban-policy-2021-96eee083-en.htm. Accessed: 18 Aug 2022. Google Scholar
• O’Flynn, J (2007) From new public management to public value: Paradigmatic change and managerial implications. The Australian Journal of Public Administration 66 (3):353–366. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8500.2007.00545.xArticleGoogle Scholar
• Ömürgönülşen U (2003) Kamu sektörünün yönetimi sorununa yeni bir yaklaşım: Yeni kamu işletmeciliği. In: Acar M, Özgür H (eds), Çağdaş kamu yönetimi-I: Konular-kuramlar-kavramlar. Nobel, Ankara, pp 3–44. Google Scholar
• Ömürgönülşen U, Öktem MK (2009) A preliminary discussion o the link between normative and empirical research in public administration: The case of public service ethics. H.Ü. İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi 27(2):217–243. Google Scholar
• Özgür H (2003) Yeni kamu yönetimi hareketi. In: Acar M, Özgür H (eds), Çağdaş kamu yönetimi I. Nobel Yayınları, Ankara, pp 183–224. Google Scholar
• Özgür H, Ciğeroğlu Öztepe M (2015) Amerikan yeni kamu yönetimi hareketi (YKYH): Sosyal adalet ve hakkaniyet odaklı bir kamu yönetimi arayışı. In: Köseoğlu Ö, Sobacı MZ (eds), Kamu yönetiminde paradigma arayışları: Yeni kamu işletmeciliği ve ötesi. Dora, Bursa, pp 97–127. Google Scholar
• Paanakker H, Reynaers AM (2020) Value contextuality in public service delivery. An analysis of street-level craftsmanship and public-private partnerships. Public Integrity 22(3):245–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/10999922.2020.1715128ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Pill M (2021) Governing cities: Politics and policy. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. BookGoogle Scholar
• Poama A (2018) Application or construction? Two types of public policy ethics. In: Lever A, Poama A (eds), The Routledge handbook of ethics and public policy. Routledge, New York, pp 37–50. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315461731ChapterGoogle Scholar
• Rawls J (1971) A theory of justice. Harvard University Press, Cambridge. BookGoogle Scholar
• Rein M (2006) Reframing problematic policies. In: Moran M, Rein M, Goodin RE (eds), The oxford handbook of public policy. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 389–405. Google Scholar
• Rhodes RWA, Wanna J (2007) The Limits to public value, or rescuing responsible government from the platonic guardians. The Australian Journal of Public Administration 66(4):406–421. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8500.2007.00553.xArticleGoogle Scholar
• Richardson HS (1997) Practical reasoning about final ends. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Google Scholar
• Robert C, Zeckhauser R (2011) The methodology of normative policy analysis. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 30:613–643. https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.20578ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Rutgers M (2008) Sorting out public values? On the contingency of value classifications in public administration. Administrative Theory and Praxis 30(1):92–113. https://doi.org/10.1080/10841806.2008.11029617ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Salamon LM (1989) Beyond privatization: The tools of government action. The Urban Institute Press, Washington, D.C. Google Scholar
• Sallan Gül S (2006) Sosyal devlet bitti yaşasın piyasa: Yeni liberalizm ve muhafazakarlık kıskacında refah devleti. E-babil, Ankara. Google Scholar
• Smith R (2004) Focusing on public value: Something new and something old. The Australian Journal of Public Administration 63(4):68–79. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8500.2004.00403.xArticleGoogle Scholar
• Sowell T (1987) A Conflict of visions: Ideological origins of political struggles. William Morrow and Company, Inc., New York. Google Scholar
• Soyocak Özalp S, (2020) Yönetim tartışmalarında kamu yararından kamu tercihine ve kamu değerine. Akademik Hassasiyetler 7(13):241–265. Google Scholar
• Stoker G (2006) Public value management: A new narrative for networked governance? The American Review of Public Administration 36(1):41–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074005282583ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Stone DA (1988) Policy paradox and political reason. Scott, Foresman and Company, Glenview, IL. Google Scholar
• Surel Y (2000) The role of cognitive and normative frames in policy-making. Journal of European Public Policy 7(4):495–512. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760050165334
• Talbot C (2006) Paradoxes and prospects of ‘public value’. Paper presented at Tenth international research symposium on public management (IRSPM X), Glasgow. Google Scholar
• Talbot C (2008) Measuring public value: A competing values approach. A paper for the Work Foundation. file:///C:/Users/user/Downloads/Measuring_Public_Value.pdf. Accessed 10 Dec 2022. Google Scholar
• UNDP (United Nations Development Programme), OPHI (Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative) (2022) 2022 global multidimensional poverty index (MPI): Unpacking deprivation bundles to reduce multidimensional poverty. New York. https://hdr.undp.org/system/files/documents/hdp-document/2022mpireportenpdf.pdf Accessed: 12 Jan 2023.
• UN-HABITAT (2014) The evolution of national urban policies: A global overview. UN-HABITAT, Nairobi. http://www.citiesalliance.org/sites/citiesalliance.org/files/National%20Urban%20Policies.pdf. Accessed: 25 Aug 2022. Google Scholar
• Usta, S, Kocaoğlu M (2015) Kamu yönetiminde etik davranış ilkeleri: Kırşehir belediyesi çalışanlarının etik algıları üzerine bir araştırma. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi 20(3):153–173. Google Scholar
• Van der Wal Z (2008) Value solidity: An empirical perspective on the differences, similarities, and conflicts between the organizational values of government and business. VU University, Amsterdam. Google Scholar
• Van Wart M (1998) Changing public sector values. Garland Publishing, New York. Google Scholar
• von der Pfordten D (2012) Five elements of normative ethics: A general theory of normative individualism. Ethical Theory Moral Practice 15:449–471. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-011-9299-2ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Wagenaar H (1999) Value pluralism in public administration. Administrative Theory and Praxis 21:443–449. https://doi.org/10.1080/10841806.1999.11643400ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Walzer M (1983) Spheres of justice: A defense of pluralism and equality. Basic Books, New York. Google Scholar
• Wamsley GL (1996) A public philosophy and ontological discourse as the basis for normatively grounded theorizing in public administration. In: Wamsley GL, James FW (eds), Refounding democratic public administration. Sage, London, pp 351–401. Google Scholar
• Weimer DL (2002) Enriching public discourse: Policy analysis in representative democracies. The Good Society 11:61–65. https://doi.org/10.1353/gso.2002.0020ArticleGoogle Scholar
• West K, Davis P (2011) What is the public value of government action? Towards a (new) pragmatic approach to values questions in public endeavors. Public Administration 89(2):226–241. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2010.01847.xArticleGoogle Scholar
• White LD (1926) Introduction to the study of public administration. The Macmillan Company, New York. Google Scholar
• Williams I, Shearer H (2011) Appraising public value: Past, present and futures. Public Administration 89(4):1367–1384. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2011.01942.xArticleGoogle Scholar
• Wilson W (1887) The study of administration. Political Science Quarterly 2(2):197–222. https://doi.org/10.2307/2139277ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Winship C (2012) Policy analysis as puzzle solving. In: Moran M, Rein M, Goodin RE (eds), The Oxford handbook of public policy. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 109–123. Google Scholar
• Yotawut M (2018) Examining progress in research on public value. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences 39:168–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kjss.2017.12.005ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Zeybekoğlu S (2021) Max Weber’in bürokrasi modeli: Bir yeniden okuma denemesi. MAKÜ İİBF Dergisi 8(2):651–681. https://doi.org/10.30798/makuiibf.790081ArticleGoogle Scholar

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

1. Süleyman Demirel University, Isparta, Turkey Hüseyin Gül

1. Hüseyin Gül