The Development of Representative Bureaucracy from Past to Present and Its Effects on the Legitimacy of Bureaucracy

Öz

In this study, the development of the concept of representative bureaucracy and its impact on the social legitimacy of bureaucracy, which is one of the important consequences of the representation of social differences in bureaucracy, are theoretically investigated. The concept of representative bureaucracy was invented to protect the existing class structure of the bureaucracy against the possibility of a change in political power. The concept has become widespread with a constant emphasis on democratization, expanding in meaning and application while keeping its basic objectives constant. Do representative bureaucracy practices facilitate the existence of bureaucracy by supporting the existing bureaucratic structure and functioning in the society, as well as aiming at democratization in the bureaucratic field? The answer to the question was sought. This study was conducted with the exploratory research technique, one of the qualitative research techniques. The idea of representative bureaucracy was initially developed to preserve the class structure of society. After the 1960s, the representation of social differences in the bureaucracy was ensured and expanded to ensure wider participation and support in the bureaucracy. The concept of representative bureaucracy has turned into a bureaucratic tool for solving the social and economic problems of countries and has encouraged political and bureaucratic participation. It was used as a solution to the problem of the alienation of society from the economic system and the state and the decline in legitimacy. Key Words: Representative Bureaucracy, Legitimacy, Participation JEL Classification: H59, D73, H10

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Representative Bureaucracy
• Legitimacy
• Participation

Geçmişten Günümüze Temsilî Bürokrasi Anlayışının Gelişimi ve Bürokrasinin Meşruiyeti Üzerindeki Etkileri

Öz

Bu çalışmada, temsilî bürokrasi kavramının gelişimi ve toplumsal farklılıkların bürokrasi içerisinde temsilinin önemli sonuçlarından birisi olan bürokrasinin toplumsal meşruiyeti üzerindeki etkisi teorik olarak araştırılmıştır. Temsilî bürokrasi kavramı, bürokrasinin, siyasal iktidarın değişimi ihtimaline karşı mevcut sınıfsal yapısının korunması için icat edilmiş bir kavramdır. Kavram, temel hedefleri sabit kalacak şekilde anlamı ve uygulama alanı genişleyerek ve sürekli bir demokratikleşme vurgusu yapılarak yaygınlaşmıştır. Temsilî bürokrasi uygulamaları, bürokratik alanda demokratikleşmeyi hedeflemenin yanı sıra toplumda mevcut bürokratik yapı ve işleyişe destek sağlayarak, bürokrasinin varlığını sürdürmesini kolaylaştırmakta mıdır? Sorusuna cevap aranmıştır. Bu çalışma, nitel araştırma tekniklerinden keşfedici araştırma tekniği ile yapılmıştır. Temsilî bürokrasi düşüncesi, başlangıçta, toplumun sınıfsal yapısının korunması için geliştirilmiştir. 1960’lı yıllardan sonra ise toplumsal farklılıkların bürokraside temsili sağlanarak, bürokrasiye daha geniş katılım ve destek sağlamak için yaygınlaştırılmıştır. Temsilî bürokrasi kavramı, ülkelerin, toplumsal ve ekonomik sorunlarının çözümünde bürokratik bir araca dönüşmüş, siyasal ve bürokratik katılımı teşvik etmiştir. Toplumun iktisadî sisteme ve devlete yabancılaşması ve meşruiyetin azalması sorununa bir çözüm aracı olarak kullanılmıştır. Anahtar Kelimeler: Temsilî Bürokrasi, Meşruiyet, Katılım JEL Sınıflandırması: H59, D73, H10

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Temsilî Bürokrasi
• Meşruiyet
• Katılım

Kaynakça

1. Adusah-Karikari, A.; Ohemeng, F. L. K. (2014); Representative Bureaucracy in the Public Service? A Critical Analysis of the Challenges Confronting Women in the Civil Service of Gana, International Journal of Public Administration, 37, 568-580. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2013.879882
2. Aragón, J. (2007); Political Legitimacy and Democracy, Entry in the Edited Volume Encyclopedia of Campaigns, Elections, and Electoral Behavior. (ed. Kenneth F. Warren) Sage Publications(forthcoming)https://www.luc.edu/media/lucedu/dccirp/pdfs/articlesforresourc/Article_-_Aragon_Trelles,_Jorge_2.pdf 04,05,2023.
3. Arslan, M.; Lamba M.; Öztop, S. (2020); Transformation of Passive Representation into Symbolic Representation in the Framework of Representative Bureaucracy Approach: A Field Research on the Gendarmarie and the Police, Temsili Bürokrasi Yaklaşımı Çerçevesinde Pasif Temsilin Sembolik Temsile Dönüşümü: Jandarma ve Polis Teşkilatı Üzerine Bir Araştırma, Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 7, (2), 418-444. https://doi.org/10.30798/makuiibf.692039
4. Aşkar, G. (2019); Bürokraside Temsil Sorunu: Temsili Bürokrasi Yaklaşımı, Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 59, 95-104.
5. Burchard, G. K. (2017); Representative Bureaucracy in German Public Schools: An Assessment of the Mechanisms of Passive Representation, Florida International University FIU Digital Commons, Basılmamış Doktora Tezi, FIU Electronic Theses and Dissertations, University Graduate School. https://dx.doi.org/10.25148/etd.FIDC001944
6. Campbell, J. W. (2021); Representative Bureaucracy, Immigrants, and Trust in Government: A Cross-National Study, Public Administration Issues, 6 (Special Issue II, Electronic Edition), 7-23. https://vgmu.hse.ru/data/2021/11/16/1443571375/2_Bloc_Engl_2_6_21.pdf 14.02.2023.
7. Clements, K. P. (2014); What is Legitimacy and Why Does it Matter for Peace?, Accord an International Review of Peace Initiatives, Issue 25, Legitimacy and Peace Processes From Coercion to Consent (Ed.: Alexander Ramsbotham and Achim Wennmann), Conciliation Resources, London, 13-25. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280029194_What_is_Legitimacy_and_why_does_it_matter_for_peace 10.02.2023.
8. Croucamp, P. (2022); Bureaucratic Society Liberalism and Liberationism: Institutional Compromies and Bureaucratic Management, Silander, D. C., van der Elst, H. And Heydenrych, P. (Ed.) South Africa’s Democracy at the Crossroads, Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, 65-79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/978-1-80262-927-920221005.

9. Ding, F.; Lu J., Ricci N. M. (2021); How Bureaucratic Representation Affects Public Organizaitonal Performance: A Meta-Analysis, Public Administration Review, 81, (6),1003-1018. DOI:10.1111/puar.13361 .
10. Durmuş, M. (2021); Temsili Bürokrasi Sıfır Toplamlı Bir Oyun Mudur? Literatür Kapsamında Bir Değerlendirme, Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 14, (1), 68-81. https://doi.org/10.25287/ohuiibf.697538.
11. Edwards, V. L. (2013); Theory of Participation for 21st Century Governance, International Journal of Organization Theory and Behavior, 16, (1), 1-28. DOI:10.1108/IJOTB-16-01-2013-B001
12. Elias, N., Rishel M. (2013); Shifting Diversity Perspectives and New Avenues for Representative Bureaucracy, Public Administration Quarterly, FALL, 37, (3), 331-372. https://academicworks.cuny.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1513&context=jj_pubs
13. Evans, J. W. (1974); Defining Representative Bureaucracy, Public Administration Review, 34, (6), ss.628-631. https://doi.org/10.2307/974367
14. Frug, G. E. (1984); The Ideology of Bureaucracy in American Law, Harvard Law Review, Vol. 97, No.6, 1276-1388. https://doi.org/10.2307/1340969
15. Fidan, M.B. (2018); Nitel Araştırmalar ve Dönüşümsellik: Bir Kritik Analitik Düşünme Prartiği, Akademik Platform Eğitim ve Değişim Dergisi, Cilt:1, Sayı:2, 23-35. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/900113 25.05.2023.
16. Grimmelikhuijsen, S.; Jilke S., Olsen A. L., Tummers L. (2017); Behavioral Public Administration: Combining İnsights Public Administration and Psychology, Public Administration Review, Vol.: 77, (1), 45-56. DOI:10.1111/puar.12609
17. Hameş, Ö. (2021); Temsili Bürokrasi ve Uygulamaları ve Türkiye, Basılmamış Doktora Tezi, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.
18. Hatley, T. L. (2021); A Study of Disproportionality in Discipline for Black Girls in Texas: Does District Type Matter?, Basılmamış Doktora Tezi, The University of Texas at Arlington. https://rc.library.uta.edu/uta-ir/bitstream/handle/10106/30038/HATLEY-DISSERTATION-2021.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
19. Headley, A. M. (2022); Accountability and Police Use of Force: Interactive Effects Between Minority Representation and Civilian Review Boards, Public Management Review, 24:11, 1682-1704. DOI:10.1080/14719037.2021.1916066
20. Karlsson-Vinkhuyzen, S. (2018); Legitimacy, In C. Ansell & J. Torfing (Eds.), Handbook of Theories of Governance, 194-204. file:///C:/Users/LENOVO/Downloads/Legitimacy%20.pdf 09.02.2023.
21. Kelly, R. M. (1998); An İnclusive Democratic Polity, Representative Bureaucracies, and the New Public Management, Public Administration Review, May-June, 58, (3), 201-208.
22. Kemp, L. J., Mathias, M., Raji M. (2018); Representative Bureaucracy in the Arab Gulf States, Internatiol Journal of Public Sector Management, 32, (3), 230-246. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-07-2017-0198
23. Lamba, M.; Tatlısu, İ. M. (2019); Kadın Temsili Boyutuyla Temsili Bürokrasi Yaklaşımı: Türkiye’deki Üniversitelerin Üst Yönetim Organları Üzerine Bir İnceleme”, Türk İdare Dergisi, Yıl:91, Haziran, (488), 375-390. file:///C:/Users/LENOVO/Downloads/12-KadnTemsiliBoyutuylaTemsiliBrokrasiYaklamTrkiyedekiniversitelerinstYnetimOrganlarzerineBirnceleme%20.pdf 10.02.2023.
24. Landes, X., (2017); Consensus and Liberal Legitimacy: From First to Second Best?. Les Ateliers de L'éthique, 12(1), 84–106. http://dx.doi.org/10.7202/1042279ar
25. Leland, S.; Read, D. C. (2013); Representative Bureaucracy, Public-Private Partnerships, and Urban Development, Journal of Place Management and Development, 6, (2), 86-101. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JPMD-04-2012-0015
26. Nagel, M. and Peters, B.G. (2021); Identity and Representation: Representative Bureaucracy in the European Union, Machin, A. and Meidert, N. (Ed.), Political İdentification in Europe: Comunity in Crisis?., Emerald Publising Limited, Bingley, 161-178.
27. Nicholson-Crotty, J., Grissom, J. A.; Nicholson-Crotty, S. (2011); Bureaucratic Representation, Distributional Equity, and Democratic Values in the Administration of Public Programs, The journal of Politics, 73, (2), April, 582-596. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0022381611000144
28. Pavone, T. (2013); A Critical Review of Daniel Carpenter’s The Forging of Bureaucratic Autonomy, A Critical Review of Daniel Carpenter's The Forging of Bureaucratic (studylib.net) 05.05. 2023.
29. Perez, P. C. (2016); Access to Teachers of Color and Outcomes for Black and Hispanic Students: Evidence From Representative Bureaucracy, Basılmamış Doktora Tezi, Office of Graduate and Professional Studies of Texas A&M University.
30. Riccucci, N. M.; Van Ryzin, G.; Lavena, C. F. (2014); Representative Bureaucracy in Politing: Does it Increase Perceived Legitimacy? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24 (3), 537-551. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muu006
31. Roman, A. (2015); The Roles Assumed by Public Administrators: The Link Between Administrative Discretion and Represention, Public Administration Quarterly, Winter, 39, (4), 595-644. file:///C:/Users/LENOVO/Downloads/TheRolesAssumedByPublicAdministratorsTheLinkBetweenAdministrativeDiscretionAndRepresentation.pdf
32. Rossman, D.; Shanahan, E. A.; Krawitz, N. “N.” (2012); Defining and Achieving Normative Democratic Values in Participatory Budgeting Processes, Public Administration Review, 72, (1), 56-67. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41433143 10.02.2023
33. Shjarback, J.; Decker, S.; Rojek, J.J.; Brunson, R. K. (2016); Minorty Representation in Policing and Racial Profiling, Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 40, (4), 748-767. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/PIJPSM-09-2016-0145
34. Shneider, L. R. (2021); The Influence of Bureaucracy on the Performance of Public Organizations, Sustainable Business International Journal, SBIJ94, Abril, Maio, 1-14. file:///C:/Users/LENOVO/Downloads/50526-Texto%20do%20Artigo-174139-1-10-20210630%20.pdf 11.02.2023
35. Smith, N.; (2017); What Drives Legitimacy in Government?, A Global Discussion Paper, Centre for Public İmpact a BCG Fountation, What-drives-legitimacy-in-government1.pdf (centreforpublicimpact.org) 04.05.2023.
36. Sowa, Jessica E.; Selden, S. C. (2003); Aministrative Discretion and Active Representation: An Expansion of the Theory of Representative Bureaucracy, Public Administration Review, November/December, 63, (6), 700-710. file:///C:/Users/LENOVO/Downloads/Administrative_Discretion_and_Active_Rep.pdf 01.02.2023
37. Stillman, P. G. (1974); Concepts of Legitimacy, Polity, Vol. 7, No.1, Palgrave Macmillan Journals, 32-56. https://doi.org/10.2307/3234268
38. Teobald, N. A.; Haider-Markel, D. P. (2009); Race, Bureaucracy, and Symbolic Representation: Interactions Between Citizens and Police, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: J-PART, 19, (2), 409-426. doi:10.1093/jopart/mun006
39. Townsend, A. (2018); A Woman’s Place”: Exploring the Leadership Journeys of Women in Government Using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis, Basılmamış Doktora Tezi, College of Professional Studies Northeastern University Boston.
40. Wright, B. E. (2015); The Science of Public Administration: Problems, Presumptions, Progress, and Possibilities, Public Administration Review, 75, (6), 795-805. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/puar.12468