Use of methodology in turkish public administration research

Öz

Use of methodology in social sciences is increasingly being important since appropriate use of methodology contributes significantly in producing knowledge to any given area of study. Scholars of public administration need to focus on big questions to enhance their field as a science. Data and use of methodology are important and helpful to answer these big questions. This paper provides a broad perspective for Turkish public administration research. In this sense, the study includes an attempt to search answer for the question of “What is the current situation of public administration research in Turkey?”. There are also some essential sub-questions: Who are publishing articles in the Review of Public Administration (Amme İdaresi Dergisi) journal? Academicians and practitioners? It is important to find out the relation between practitioners who are in the field and academicians who use both theory and applied research in their studies. What are the main research topics of the public administration articles? Are these articles building theories or testing theories? What are the focus of these articles? Are there efficient research methods in these articles? What are the research steps? Are these researches funded by an institutions or other type of supporters? What kind of methods, experimental analyses or statistical techniques are applied in these articles? What type of data and unit of analysis have these articles? Data for this study were gathered from a content analysis of published articles in the Review of Public Administration (Amme İdaresi Dergisi) journal in Turkey.  This journal is the only one in the area of public administration which is indexed in Social Science Citation Index (SSCI). To analyze the data, T and Chi Square tests are applied. In order to explain strength and relation between different variables Levene’s test, Chi Square test and Phi (Coefficients) analysis methods were also applied. Around 700 articles, which were published in the journal during the 20 years between 1990 and 2009, were reviewed. These articles were coded in terms of descriptive information and their methodology usages. General information about the authors includes the number of authors, institutional information/affiliation of authors, academic degree of the first authors, and funding resources of the researches. In order to analyze (i) main research topics, (ii) the area of research, (iii) theory testing, and (iv) general approach, the study benefited from the methodologies of Stallings and Ferris (1988) and Houston and Delevan (1990). The findings, which are gathered by the study, are compared and contrasted with the similar studies in the literature, and then convergences and divergences were discussed. In addition, the public administration theory and research were evaluated together. There are some main findings of this study: (a) There is an increasing tendency in the number of authors within the articles published between 2000 and 2009. This means that authors from different areas and professions come together for academic research. (b) The first authors of the articles are mainly academicians, not practitioners. (c) During 1990s, topics within the majority of the articles were closely related to the area of public administration. In the next ten years, the number of these articles increased slightly. (d) The number of empirical studies in the articles increased between 1990s and 2000s, however, this increase is less than the number of empiric studies in the journals (like Public Administration Review in America) in Western countries. Many of the articles in Review of Public Administration journal lack qualitative and quantitative data. (e) Majority of the articles used statistical techniques for single or two variables. There are some articles which applied T test for one or two samples. In addition, there is only a small increase in the number of articles which used T test throughout 20 years between 1990 and 2009. In many articles, there are crosstabs, Chi Square, Mann Whitney U and T tests. (f) The number of articles which used primary source of data instead of secondary data has increased slightly between 1990 and 2009. (g) Majority of the articles used ‘individual’ as unit of analysis. In Summary, when articles in Review of Public Administration journal were analyzed carefully, it was found out that these articles were not very developed in terms of theory-building. Theory-building and research approaches within articles in Turkey are weaker than the ones in America which were published twenty years ago. Because there are some basic problems in the articles in Turkey such as a lack of clear theoretical and conceptual framework, ineffective research design, lack of qualitative and quantitative techniques. These findings illustrate that the use of methodology in fields of public administration in Turkey is quite less than Western countries.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• public administration,methodology,Review of Public Administration journal,content analysis

Türk kamu yönetimi araştırmalarında metodoloji kullanımı

Öz

Herhangi bir alanda yapılacak çalışma için uygun metodolojinin belirlenip kullanılması bilginin üretilmesine önemli ölçüde katkı sağlamaktadır. Sosyal bilimler için de metodoloji kullanımı önemini giderek artırmaktadır. Kamu yönetimi araştırmacıları bu alanı bir bilim dalı olarak geliştirmek için alana dair büyük sorulara odaklanmalıdırlar. Bu büyük sorulara cevap vermek için de veri ve metodoloji kullanımı önemli ve faydalıdır. Bu çalışma, Türk kamu yönetimi araştırmalarına genel bir bakış sunmaktadır. Bu çalışma için veriler, Türkiye'de Kamu Yönetimi Dergisi’nde (Amme İdaresi Dergisi) yayınlanan makalelerin içerik analizlerinden elde edilmiştir. 1990 ile 2009 yılları arasındaki 20 yıllık süre içerisinde bu dergide yayınlanmış olan yaklaşık 700 makale gözden geçirilmiştir. Çalışma kapsamında ulaşılan bulgular literatürdeki önceki benzer araştırmalarla karşılaştırılıp benzer ve farklı yönler tartışılmıştır. Buna ek olarak, kamu yönetimi teorisi ve araştırması birlikte incelenmiştir. Bu bulgular, Türkiye'de kamu yönetimi alanlarındaki metodoloji kullanımının Batı ülkelerinden oldukça az olduğunu göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• kamu yönetimi,metodoloji,Amme İdaresi Dergisi,içerik analizi

Kaynakça

1. ARI, Güler Sağlam; ARMUTLU, Can; TOSUNOĞLU, Nuray Güneri ve TOY, Banu Yücel (2005). “Nicel Araştırmalarda Metodoloji Sorunları: Yüksek Lisans Tezleri Üzerine Bir Araştırma”, Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 64(4), s. 16-36.
2. AYHAN, Emrah ve ÖNDER, Murat (2017). “Yeni Kamu Hizmeti Yaklaşımı: Yönetişime Açılan Bir Kapı“, Gazi İktisat ve İşletme Dergisi, 3(2), s. 19-48.
3. BEHN, Robert D. (1995). “The Big Questions of Public Management”, Public Administration Review, 55(4): 313-324.
4. BERKMAN, A. Ümit (1987). “Amme İdaresi Dergisi’nde Yayınlanan Makaleler ve Türk Yönetim Bilimi”, Amme İdaresi Dergisi, 20(4), s. 19‐42.
5. FORRER, J.; Kee, J.E. ve GABRİEL, S. (2007). “Not Your Father’s Public Administration”, Journal of Public Affairs Education, 13(2), 265-280.
6. GREEN, Keller; WAMSLEY, Gary. L. ve KELLER, Lawrence F. (1993). “Reconstituting Profession of Public Administration.” Public Administration Review. 53(6), s. 516-524.
7. HENRY, Nicholas (1995). Public Administration and Public Affairs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
8. HOUSTON, David J. ve SYBIL, M. Delevan (1990). “Public Administration Research: An Assessment of Journal Publications”, Public Administration Review, 50, s. 674-681.

9. KÖYLÜ, M. ve ÖNDER, M. (2017). “Karmaşıklık Kuramı ve Kamu Yönetiminde Uygulanması: Yalova Kent İçi Ulaşım Hizmetlerinin Dijital Modelleme ve Simülasyonu / Complexity Theory and Application in Public Admistration: Digital Modeling and Simulation of Yalova City Transportation Services.” SDÜ İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 22: Kayfor15 Özel Sayısı, (s. 1707-1726)
10. NEUMANN, W. Lawrence (2014). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches (7th edition). Edinburg: Pearson Education Limited.
11. ÖNDER, M. ve SAYGILI, H. (2018). “Yapay Zekâ ve Kamu Yönetimine Yansımaları / Artificial Intelligence and the Reflections on Public Administration”. Türk İdare Dergisi, 90(487).
12. ÖNDER, M. (2017). "Mevzuat Yapımında Düzenleyici Etki Analizi ve Uygulama Sorunları / Regulatory Impact Analysis in Legislation and Application Issues”, Türk İdare Dergisi, 89(485), s. 771-812.
13. ÖNDER, M. ve BROWER, R. S. (2013). “Public Administration Theory, Research, and Teaching: How Does Turkish Public Administration Differ?”, Journal of Public Affairs and Education, 19(1), s. 117-139.
14. PERRY, James L. ve KRAEMER, Kenneth L. (1986). “Research Methodology in the Public Administration Review: 1975-1984.”, Public Administration Review, 46, s. 215-226.
15. STALLINGS, Robert A. ve FERRIS, James A. (1988). “Public Administration Research: Work in PAR, 1940-1984”, Public Administration Review, 48(1), s. 580-587.
16. ÜSDİKEN, Behlül ve PASADEOS, Yorgo (1992). “Türkiye’de Yayınlanan Yönetimle İlgili Makalelerdeki Atıflar Üzerine Bir İnceleme”, Amme İdaresi Dergisi, 25(2), s. 107-134.
17. WALDO, Dwight (1968). “Public Administration”, The Journal of Politics, 30 (2), s. 443-479.
18. WRIGHT, Bradley E.; MANIGAULT, Lepora J. ve BLACK, Tamika R. (2004). “Quantitative research measurement in public administration: An assessment of journal publications”, Administration ve Society, 35(6), s. 747-764.
19. WILSON, Woodrow (1887). “The Study of Administration”, Political Science Quarterly, 2(2), s. 197-222. http://www.commentary.com/admin_thoughts_1887.pdf (Erişim: 28.12.2018)