Kamu Yönetimi ve Ahlak: Yönetsel Ahlak Üzerine Düşünmek mi? Yoksa Modern Kamu Yönetimini Yeniden Düşünmek mi?

Yönetsel ahlak ile ilgili çalışmalarda genel olarak ahlaken uygun olmayan davranışların neler olduğu üzerinde durulmaktadır. Kamu yönetimi için neyin ahlaki olduğunu tanımlamaya çalışan etik yaklaşımlar oldukça kısıtlıdır ve genelde birbirine rakip iki teorik çerçeve etrafında kümelenmektedir: Bürokratik etos ve demokratik etos. Bu iki etos, felsefi açıdan ‘temel-arayıcı’ teorilerdir. Bu çalışma, “temel-arayıcı karşıtı” postmodern bir yaklaşımın geliştirilebileceğini ve ancak böyle bir bakış açısının yönetsel ahlak üzerine yürütülen tartışmayı olması gereken doğru yerine taşıyabileceğini iddia etmektedir. Bu yaklaşımla bakıldığında, “Öteki için olmak” şeklinde özetlenebilecek “temel-arayıcı karşıtı” ahlak anlayışı kamu yönetimi kimliğinin yeniden düşünülmesini gerekli kılmaktadır.

Public Administration and Ethics: Thinking Administrative Ethics or Re-Thinking Modern Public Administration?

In general, studies on administrative ethics tend to emphasize inappropriate ethical behaviour in public administration. Ethical approaches, which attempt to define what is ethical for public administration, however, are scarce and clustered around two rival theoretical frameworks: Bureaucratic and democratic ethos. Both ethoses are foundational theories. This paper asserts that an anti-foundational postmodern perspective which wholly rejects foundational moral positions can be developed and that only such a perspective can push the debate on administrative ethics to where it should be. In this respect, an anti-foundational ethical perspective accepting the understanding of “being for the Other” necessitates the re-thinking of the very identity of public administration.

___

Bailey, Stephan K. (1964), “Ethics and the Public Service”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 24, s. 234–243.
Bauman, Zygmunt (1997), Modernite ve Holocaust, (Çeviri: Süha Sertabiboğlu), Sarmal Yayınevi, İstanbul.
Best, Shaun (1998), “Zygmunt Bauman: Personal Reflections Within The Mainstream of Modernity”, British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 49, No.2, s. 311–321.
Brady, Neil ve Woller, Garry M. (1996), “Administrative Ethics and Judgments of Utility: Reconciling the Competing Theories”, American Review of Public Administration, Vol. 26, s. 309–326.
Budrillard, Jean (2002), Simgesel Değiş Tokuş ve Ölüm, (Çeviri: Oğuz Adanır) Boğaziçi Üniversitesi Yayınevi, İstanbul.
Chandler, Ralph Clark (1984), “The Public Administrator as Representative Citizen: A New Role for the New Century”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 44, s. 196–206.
Chandler, Ralph Clark (1994), “Deontological Dimensions of Administrative Ethics”, Cooper, Terry L. (Ed.), Handbook of Administrative Ethics, NY.
Cooper, Terry L. (1984), “Citizenship and Professionalism in Public Administration”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 44, s. 143–149.
Cooper, Terry L. (1991), An Ethic of Citizenship for Public Administration, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Englewoood Cliffs.
Fox, Charles (1994), “The Use of Philosophy in Administrative Ethics”, Cooper, Terry L. (Ed.), Handbook of Administrative Ethics, NY: Marcel Dekker içinde.
Frankena, W. K. (1963), Ethics, Englewood Cliffs, Nj: Prentice-Hall.
Frederickson, George H. (1982), “The Recovery of Civism in Public Administration”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 42, s. 501–508.
Frederickson, George H. (1993), “Ethics and Public Administration: Some Assertions”, Frederickson, George H. (Ed.), Ethics and Public Administration, Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe içinde.
Gawthrop, Louis C. (1984), “Civis, Civitas, and Civilitas: A New Focus for the Year 2000”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 44, s. 101–107.
Golembiewski, Robert (1962), “Organization as a Moral Problem”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 22, s. 51–58.
Harmon, Michael M. (1974), “Social Equity and Organizational Man: Motivation, and Organizational Democracy”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 34, s. 11–18.
Harmon, Michael M. (1995), Responsibility as Paradox: A Critique of Rational Discourse on Government, NY: Sage Publications.
Hart, David K. (1974), “Social Equity, Justice, and the Equitable Administrator”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 34, s. 3–11.
Hart, David K. (1984), “The Virtuous Citizen, the Honorable Bureaucrat and ‘Public’ Administration”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 44, s. 111–120.
Hejka-Ekins, April (1988) “Teaching Ethics in Public Administration”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 48, s. 885–891.
Levitan, David M. (1942), “The Neutrality of the Public Service”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 2, s. 317–323.
Levitan, David M. (1943), “Political Ends and Administrative Means”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 3, s. 353–362.
Leys, Wayne A. (1943), “Ethics and Administrative Discretion”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 3, s. 10–23.
Leys, Wayne A. (1944), Ethics and Social Policy, NY: Prentice-Hall.
Lilla, Mark (1981), “Ethos, ‘Ethics’, and the Public Service”, The Public Interest, Vol. 63 (Winter), s. 3–17.
MacIntyre, Alasdair (1984), After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory, Notre Dame, IN.: Notre Dame University Press.
Marx, Fritz Morstein (1949), “Administrative Ethics and the Rule of Law”, The American Political Science Review, Vol. 43, s. 1119–1144.
Mason, Mark (1997), “In Defense of a Dialectical Ethic Beyond Postmodern Morality, www.ed.uiuc.edu/eps/pes-yearbook/97-Docs/97contents.html.
Nagel, T. (1986), The View from Nowhere, NY: Oxford University Press.
Pops, Gerald M. (1994), “A Teleological Approach to Administrative Ethics”, Cooper, Terry L. (Ed.), Handbook of Administrative Ethics, NY.
Pugh, Darrell L. (1991), “The Origins of Ethical Frameworks in Public Administration”, Bowman, James B. (Ed.), Ethical Frontiers in Public Management: Seeking New Strategies for Resolving Ethical Dilemmas, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass içinde.
Richardson, William D. ve Nigro, Lloyd G. (1987) “Administrative Ethics and Founding Thought: Constitutional Correctives, Honor, and Education”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 47, s. 367–376.
Richardson, William D. ve Nigro, Lloyd G. (1991), “The Constitution and Administrative Ethics in America”, Administration & Society, Vol. 23, No. 3, s. 275–288.
Rohr, John A. (1976), “The Study of Ethics in the P.A. Curriculum”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 36.
Rohr, John A. (1978), Ethics for Bureaucrats: An Essay on Law and Values, (2nd Ed.) NY: Marcel Dekker.
Scott, William G. ve Hart, David K. (1973), “Administrative Crisis: The Neglect of Metaphysical Speculation”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 33, s. 415–432.
Simon, Herbert (1947), Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision–Making Processes in Administrative Organizations, NY: Macmillan.
Storing, Herbert J. (1964), “The Critical Link: Public Administration, Responsibility, and the Public Interest”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 24, s. 43–52.
Thompson, Dennis F. (1987), Political Ethics and Public Office, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wakefıeld, Susan (1976), “Ethics and the Public Service: A Case for Individual Responsibility”, Public Administration Review, Vol. 36, s. 659–672.
Woller, Garry M. (1998), “Toward A Reconciliation of the Bureaucratic and Democratic Ethos”, Administration & Society, March.
Woller, Garry M. And Patterson, Kelly G. (1997) “Public Administration Ethics: A Postmodern Perspective”, American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 41, No. 1, s. 103–118.