Exit, Voice, Loyalty Revisited

Abstract

The ascendance of public choice theory in public administration scholarship and practice has contributed to America's increasing vulnerability to state crimes against democracy. Hirschman's framework of "exit, voice, and loyalty" helps to explain the implications of public choice theory. In practice, the theory's dominance has led to expanded opportunities for exit at the expense of opportunities and conditions necessary for popular control of government through voice. A "forensic public administration" is needed to detect and investigate patterns in elite decision-making indicative of enduring efforts to game democratic processes.

Extending Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Managing Dissent in Public Lands Agencies

“…More recently in the public administration literature, the Hirschman (1970) typology has been tested in the context of the public work force by examining the effects of loyalty and voice on intention to leave (Lee & Whitford, 2008), and later, how pay interacts with the other mechanisms (Whitford & Lee, 2015). Finally, exit, voice, loyalty, and neglect have also been used to critique public choice theory and neoliberalism's focus on markets that puts too heavy an emphasis on exit as a means for citizens to vote with their feet and move when dissatisfied (Witt, 2011). For example, when states perform crimes against democracy (i.e., expansion of government secrecy during and after the cold war) exit alone is not enough; citizens must also be able to raise their voice (Witt, 2011).…”

“…Finally, exit, voice, loyalty, and neglect have also been used to critique public choice theory and neoliberalism's focus on markets that puts too heavy an emphasis on exit as a means for citizens to vote with their feet and move when dissatisfied (Witt, 2011). For example, when states perform crimes against democracy (i.e., expansion of government secrecy during and after the cold war) exit alone is not enough; citizens must also be able to raise their voice (Witt, 2011).…”