Public Administration - Report Example

Public administration Introduction Public philosophy is based on the concept of public service and public orientation. It is supported by the ideals of service, of equalizing wealth, and of ensuring that all people would be able to benefit from government services. This paper will present a positive statement of public philosophy. It will be grounded in public administration in the governance process. It will also consider answering the following questions: What is the public interest; How should interactions across governance structures be structured; How should human nature and beliefs be characterized; What kind of equality is just; Whose ethics do we follow; and What truth should guide the people? Body 1. What is the public interest? Public interest can be defined by first defining ‘public’ and ‘interest’. Public refers to the activities of all people and it also refers to the people in general (Madhav, 2006). Interest on the other hand refers to the right or share in property (Madhav, 2006). Public interest as a term refers to the well-being of the public or the attention which people have allocated in relation to certain events. It is also a term which refers to political movements which are within public interest which may be associated with the support allocated to the general public and civic activities (Madhav, 2006). In a wider context, it also refers to what is generally beneficial to the public and the people. In effect, public interest refers to the consideration given to what would best serve the people and what would ultimately benefit the overall goals of the state. 2. How should we best structure interactions across governance actors? Interactions across government actors can best be structured based on coordination, cooperation, and multi-leveled governance. There are various departments which are installed for the adequate management of government functions. Multi-level governance includes the coordination of different functions, offices, and responsibilities (Marks, 1993). It acknowledges the changing interactions between state actors which are installed at different levels of governance. This governance also cuts through domains of domestic and international governance which are often set apart from each other (Marks, 1993). This structure is the best structure to apply across governance actors because it is “a system of continuous negotiation among nested governments at several territorial tiers” (Marks, 1993). In this system, the local, national, and even international actors and governments are imbedded into the system and policy networks. This system also acknowledges that the interactions between government actors are frequent but also complex. As such, there is a need for the different actors to work and coordinate with each other based on their level in the system and their functions as actors (Marks, 2003). The need for integration has been seen one too many times in the government and multilevel working ensures that all actors cooperate with each other in order to achieve strong goals and implement effective processes (Bache, 2005). It also ensures that the vertical and horizontal linkages of government processes are secured – from the institutional, financial to the informational aspects of governance. Capacity-building within each level and from each actor is therefore a crucial element of governance within this system (Bache, 2005). 3. How do we characterize human nature and beliefs? Hobbes has a strong characterization for human nature and beliefs. Hobbes believes that there are three states of nature; firstly, that most sovereigns are in a state with respect to one another (Lloyd, 2008). Secondly, he believed that civilized individuals used to be in the state and other people, belonged to savage places in America. Lastly, he also believed that the state of nature is recognized by individuals whose peaceful living collapsed during the civil war. In effect, as the state of nature’s requirement for private judgment is based on vague concepts, there are elements which declare qualities which must be avoided or feared (Lloyd, 2008). Hobbes’ thoughts seem to promote the existence of an imagined state of isolation for individuals which prefer private judgments. However, other individuals believe that Hobbes’ beliefs have been coined in terms of childhood obedience to parents in relation to nurturing parents (Lloyd, 2008). This concept of caring does not have to be construed away from Hobbes’ ideas about conflict in the state of nature. Human nature seems to be doomed to disaster when people are left to interact with each based on individual judgments. This is not however a viable rationality because people by nature are fully rational, but they may be caught up in a situation which prompts them to act individually in ways which may be logical to them but is sub-optimal for all (Lloyd, 2008). In effect, individuals in a state of nature may be fully rational but are trapped in a dilemma. Human nature and beliefs are therefore ideally within logical parameters and considerations, however, situations may drive them to different paths or different decisions. In turn, these decisions impact on their belief systems and actions. 4. What kind of equality is just? The kind of equality which may be considered just is one which is focused on the equitable distribution of benefits, as well as burdens (Konow, 2003). The benefits, as well as the burdens cover a huge range of social life and carry on different forms, including income, political power, shelter, healthcare, and military service, as well as similar governmental elements. Equitability and fairness must therefore be understood in relation to minimum wage laws; in relation to affirmative action, it includes public education, litigation, and military conscription (Konow, 2003). Equality and justice is mostly regarded as an important element of social sciences. It is also construed flexibly in terms of the parties involved and the terminologies which define it. Equality which is just must also be based on theories which incorporate concern for the well-being of the people (Konow, 2003). Equality is associated with opportunity, proportions, as well as rights. The element of egalitarianism and strong improved outcomes is the end goal of equality. It also serves as the basis for the equality or near equality of incomes, based on the fact that people have equal value. In order to define equality as just, there is also a need to review from what context it is being considered. Context is the way by which the general importance of the principle is being established (Konow, 2003). The principle of equality calls for a group of individuals and principles that the context provides. It is an approach which provides the tools to combine various values and behavior which may sometimes be too difficult to explain. In effect, developing countries may emphasize the fulfillment of need, and not so much on efficiency or accountability (Konow, 2003). This is because, in these countries, it is more important for them to fulfill their needs, not to ensure accountability among their leaders. 5. Whose ethics do we follow? What truth should guide us? The ethics that we should follow must be based on our firm perspectives and judgment. Being optimists on human judgment and on the extent of moral principles among humans, the more liberal route can be followed. In these instances, the attention of people would not be on the issue of social or political order, but on ensuring liberty and on defining social justice, as well as fulfilling democratic principles (Williams, 2005). If on the other hand, we are not optimistic about human morals in politics, strict limitations must be applied. In effect, the ethics of the sovereign must govern. The issue of dictatorship may be raised at this point however, it is an issue which can be guarded by the people in general. The truth which must therefore guide us must be our personal truth, our human nature. Human nature promotes a sense of welfare and equality among the people. Human nature can also be tempered by distributive justice and the truths of our actions and their consequences are often uppermost in the minds of the people. Conclusion Based on the above discussion, political philosophy is based on various political ideals which are inherent in any human discussion. Human nature is one of critical thinking and of dutiful concessions to justice. This must therefore be trusted by the leaders. While the laws of society can help control wrongdoings, the liberties of man can easily overwhelm the concepts of right and wrong. The sovereign can then engage in managing the political activities in order to ensure that man’s activities would not destroy the foundations of the state. References Bache, I. (2005). Europeanization and Britain: Towards Multi-level governance? Paper prepared for the EUSA 9th Biennal Conference in Austin, Texas. Konow, J. (2003). Distributive justice. Retrieved 18 March 2012 from http://myweb.lmu.edu/jkonow/Distributive%20Justice.pdf Lloyd, S. (2008). Hobbess Moral and Political Philosophy. Stanford University. Retrieved 18 March 2012 from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hobbes-moral/#FurQueAboStaNat Madhav, S. (2006). The right to information and public interest. Retrieved 17 March 2012 from http://www.rtigateway.org.in/Documents/Articles/Public%20Interest.pdf Marks, G. (1993). Structural policy and Multi-level governance in the EC in: A. Cafruny and G. Rosenthal (ed.) The State of the European Community: The Maastricht Debate and Beyond. New York: Boulder. Williams, G. (2005). Hobbes: Moral and Political Philosophy. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 18 March 2012 from http://www.iep.utm.edu/hobmoral/#SH5a Read More