However, this operation is compromised the claim of neutrality and even exteriorly of administrative action, not being equal, or ability to access or capability organization of interests (White, 1994).
The extension of areas of intervention, the profound transformation of the instruments and forms of administrative action does not contradict the public administration's crisis in a shed specific: the inability of centralized, bureaucratic model to effectively manage corporate postindustrial (Norma, 2010). These qualities seem particularly adapted to changing conditions and complex of modern societies. Specifically, it accuses the administration of waste, rigidity, slowness and lack efficiency, and a growing divorce society.
Two movements, especially, have tried to give a satisfactory solution to this mismatch between public administrations: The decentralized power that has been observed in European countries last decade and the demand for participation, both closely connected. In either case it is not to replace the prevailing model, but to provide the same output. Decentralization, which has its peak in the territory, is structured on the idea public administration closer to citizens, easing the center of decision-making particularly relevant to specific communities (Smith, 2010). Decentralization should allow not only substantial improvement of hypertrophy central structures, with an immediate impact on the effectiveness of management and use of resources, but also a greater adaptation to the needs social and a revival of public spirit.
Decentralization, by itself, has been unable to satisfy this ambitious program. Been reproduced in many cases, the defects of the model and its capacity for innovation has been much limited expectations aroused by it. If decentralization is to empower self-determination to the local authorities, the participation is conveyed on the public access to the public administration a different perspective (White, 1994). The participation of the realization...
It is, therefore, to arbitrate mechanisms that provide direct access to the public (Smith, 2010).
The forms, methods, specific content participation are not defined in the participatory discourse as an ideological movement. However participation in the various ways in which it has been collected, involves setting question of the essential features of contemporary administrations (Norma, 2010). Thus, the elimination of secret, etc. administrative processes, access to decision-making centers, congestion, etc. In short, the idea of, a certain openness and democratization clashes with an organization, or rather a series of organizations which in themselves are a-democratic based on strict criteria of hierarchy and authority. Western countries have been at levels that, by turning off their charge more argumentative have not altered substantially modes of action of the administrative organization. Because, in effect, that the participation is not limited to public relations operation with users, should be made in all stages of the administrative process (proposal development, decision), at all levels and in all (White, 1994). Finally, participation may have contradictory effects with their own assumptions as they can encourage the bureaucracy by requiring an entire organ parallel administration of conciliation, arbitration and control.
References
Smith, Kevin B. And Licari, Michael J. (2010). Public Administration -- Power and Politics in the Fourth Branch of Government, ISBN 1-933220-04-X
White, Jay D. And Guy B. Adams. (1994). Research in public administration: reflections on theory and practice?.
Norma M. Riccucci, (2010). Public Administration: Traditions of Inquiry and Philosophies of Knowledge Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
