Sembolik Temsil Bağlamında Bürokrasinin Geleceğine Yönelik Bir Değerlendirme

Year 2021, Volume: 1 Issue: 1, 81 - 94, 17.06.2021

Merve Durmuş

Abstract

Çalışma, son zamanlarda oldukça önem atfedilen temsili bürokrasinin türlerinden olan ve “bürokratlar hiçbir eylemde bulunmasalar dahi sadece bürokratik temsilin sağlanmasıyla vatandaşlar üzerinde sembolik bir etki bırakacağı” savından hareket eden sembolik temsilin sağladığı faydalar bağlamında bürokrasinin geleceğini tartışmak amacıyla yapılmıştır. Bu kapsamda zamanla vatandaş nezdinde oldukça kötücül bir imaj oluşturmuş bürokrasinin meşruiyetinin sağlanması açısından oldukça etkin bir mekanizma olduğu iddia edilen sembolik temsile yönelik yapılan çalışmalar incelenmiş ve bu savın doğruluğu değerlendirilmeye çalışılmıştır. Sonuç olarak ise, sembolik temsilin sağlanması ile bürokrasi ve vatandaş arasındaki güvene dayalı ilişkinin tesis edilerek meşru bir bürokratik algı oluştuğu, ayrıca vatandaşlarda oluşan bu algının, onların bürokratlarla kamu hizmetinin üretilmesinde iş birliği yapması bağlamında istekli davranmasını sağladığı da görülmüştür. Böylece sembolik temsilin, bürokrasinin halk gözündeki pejoratif algısının olumluya döndürülmesinde önemli bir mekanizma olduğu kanısına varılmıştır.

Keywords

Bürokrasi, Temsili Bürokrasi, Sembolik Temsil

References

• Andrews, R., Boyne, G. A., Meier, K, J., O’Toole Jr. L. J. ve Walker, R. M. (2005). Representative Bureaucracy, Organizational Strategy, and Public Service Performance: An Empirical Analysis of English Local Government. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, JPART 15, ss.489–50. doi: 10.1093/jopart/mui032.
• Anzia, S. ve Berry, C. (2011). The Jackie (and Jill) Robinson Effect: Why Do Congresswom- en Outperform Congressmen?. American Journal of Political Science, 55(3), ss. 478-493. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2011.00512.x
• Bradbury, M. ve Kellough, J. E. (2008). Representative bureaucracy: Exploring the potential for active representation in local government. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Vol:18(4), ss. 697-714. doi: 10.1093/jopart/mum033
• D’Agostino, M.J. (2015). The Difference that Women Make: Government Performance and Women-Led Agencies. Administration and Society, 47(5), ss. 532-548. doi:10.1177/0095399714548267
• Denhardt, R. B. (2002). Trust as capacity: The role of integrity and responsiveness. Public Organization Review, 2(1), 65-76.
• Dolan, J. (2000). The Senior Executive Service: Gender, Attitudes, and Representative Bureaucracy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: J-PART, 10(3), ss. 513-529. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024279
• Dollar, D., Fisman, R. ve Gatti, R. (2001). Are Women Really the ‘Fairer’ Sex? Corruption and Women in Government. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 46 (4), ss. 423-429. doi:10.1016/S0167-2681(01)00169-X
• Gade, D. M., & Wilkins, V. M. (2012). Where did you serve? Veteran identity, representative bureaucracy, and vocational rehabilitation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 23(2), 267-288. doi:10.1093/jopart/mus030
• Grimmelikhuijsen, S., Jilke, S., Olsen, A. L., & Tummers, L. (2017). Behavioral public administration: Combining insights from public administration and psychology. Public Administration Review, 77(1), ss.45-56. doi:10.1111/puar.12609
• Herbert, Adam W. (1974). The Minority Administrator: Problems, Prospects, and Challenges. Public Administration Review 34, ss. 556-63.
• Hong S. (2016). Representative Bureaucracy, Organization Integrity, and Citizen Coproduction: Does and Increase in Police. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 35(1), ss. 11-33. doi:10.1002/pam.21876
• Hong, S. (2017). Black in Blue: Racial profiling and representative bureaucracy in policing revisited. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 27, ss.547–61. doi:10.1093/jopart/mux012
• Kennedy, B. A., Butz, A. M., Lajevardi, N., ve Nanes, M. J. (2017). Race and representative bureaucracy in American policing. New York: Springer International Publishing.
• Krislov, S. (1974). Representative Bureaucracy. New Jersey: Englewood Cliffs.
• Larson, A.D. (1973). Representative bureaucracy and administrative responsibility. Midwest Review of Public Admin, 7, ss.79-90.
• Lim, H. H. (2006). Representative bureaucracy: Rethinking substantive effects and active representation. Public administration review, 66(2), ss.193-204. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00572.x
• Lipsky M. (1980). Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
• Meier, K. (1975). Representative Bureaucracy: An Empirical Analysis. American Political Science Review, 69(2), ss.526-542. doi:10.2307/1959084
• Meier, K. J. (1993). Latinos and representative bureaucracy testing the Thompson and Henderson hypotheses. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 3(4), ss.393-414. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a037178
• Meier, K. J. ve Nicholson-Crotty J. (2006). Gender, Representative Bureaucracy, and Law Enforcement: The Case of Sexual Assault. Public Administration Review, 66, ss. 850-860. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00653.x
• Meier, K. J., & Nigro, L. G. (1976). Representative bureaucracy and policy preferences: A study in the attitudes of federal executives. Public Administration Review, 36(4), ss.458-469.
• Meier, K. J., ve Stewart Jr, J. (1992). The impact of representative bureaucracies: Educational systems and public policies. The American Review of Public Administration, 22(3), ss.157-171.
• Mosher, F. C. (1968). Democracy And The Public Service. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
• Nicholson-Crotty, J., ve Miller, S. M. (2012). Bureaucratic effectiveness and influence in the legislature. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22(2), ss.347-371. doi: 10.1093/jopart/mur054
• Olsen, J. P. (2005). Maybe It Is Time to Rediscover Bureaucracy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16(1), ss.1–24. doi:10.1093/jopart/mui027
• Riccucci, N. M., ve Saidel, J. R. (1997). The representativeness of state-level bureaucratic leaders: A missing piece of the representative bureaucracy puzzle. Public Administration Review, ss.423-430.
• Riccucci, N. M., ve Van Ryzin, G. G. (2017). Representative bureaucracy: A lever to enhance social equity, coproduction, and democracy. Public Administration Review, 77 (1), ss.21–30. doi:10.1111/puar.12649
• Riccucci, N. M., Van Ryzin, G. G. ve Lavena, C. F. (2014). Representative bureaucracy in policing: Does it increase perceived legitimacy?. Journal Of Public Administration Research And Theory, 24(3), ss.537-551. doi:10.1093/jopart/muu006
• Riccucci, N. M., Van Ryzin, G. G. ve Li, H. (2016). Representative bureaucracy and the willingness to coproduce: An experimental study. Public Administration Review, 76(1), ss.121–130. doi:10.1111/puar.12401
• Seymour, S., ve Ray, J. (2015). Grads of historically black colleges have well-being edge. Gallup. com, 1127.
• Subramaniam, V. (1967). Representative bureaucracy: A reassessment. The American Political Science Review, 61(4), ss.1010-1019.
• Thielemann G. ve Steward J. Jr. (1996). A Demand Side Perspective on the Importance of Representative Bureaucracy: AIDS, Ethnicity, Gender and Sexual Orientation. Public Administration Review, 56, ss. 168-173