English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The theory of public bureaucracy has made dramatic progress over the last few decades. From the pioneering work of Downs, Tullock, and Niskanen to the more recent theories of political control and delegation, the field has put together a sophisticated analytic base for understanding how politics—and the strategies and policy goals of the legislative, executive, and judicial players who exercise political authority—determine how public bureaucracy is organized and ultimately how it performs. My aim in this paper is to review this literature and offer perspective on its content and direction. Along the way I argue that, as this literature has developed and matured, technical issues have come to dominate scholarly attention, and that the normal science now governing the theory—a standardization that testifies to its very success—has been limiting and even misleading in important respects, to the point that fundamental aspects of bureaucracy and its politics are being pushed aside. All told, the progress from the early days has been astonishing. But some rethinking is in order.

Delegation, Control, and the Study of Public Bureaucracy