Market fundamentalism, delusions and epistemic failures in policy and administration

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to overview and critique the over‐reach of highly ideological assumptions of neo‐classical economics into policy and governance terrains. The ontology and epistemology of neo‐classical economics know no bounds in their imperial extension to non‐market applications. The colonization of Public Administration in Australia, and elsewhere, is a vexing epistemological issue, demanding some reckoning.Design/methodology/approachThis deconstructive, critical essay seeks to provide a set of “check‐lists” of issues for those teaching, or proselytizing, governance within highly reduced public domains.FindingsThis paper moves an epistemological “audit” of “public choice theory” some steps forward, especially in the face of significant ideological and policy convergence, among putative social‐democratic governance regimes, regarding out‐sourcing, no‐bid contracting, agency “capture”, risk and a renewed urgency for necessary re‐regulation. The paper identifies policy imperatives for a new age of regulation after 35 years of prevailing “market fundamentalism”.Originality/valueThere has been much hubris associated with so‐called policy convergence in a globalized context. Deconstructing such hubris within a divergent world is long overdue for the next generation of scholars/policy apologists/rating agencies/and economists prone to some reflexivity in plying their “dismal” trade.

Crisis Communication Post Katrina: What are we Learning?

“…Obscured by the hidden, self-referential, deductive assumptions of Public Choice Theory and the Neo-liberal project (Kouzmin et al 2001), "Principal/Agent" fictions legitimize a massive scale of out-sourcing, off-shoring, partnering and privatization of public programs and service delivery to private, mostly unaccountable, "invisible" contractors operating under "commercial-in-confidence" provisions (Shane and Nixon 2007;Klein 2007), within the privatized state (Kouzmin 2007(Kouzmin , 2009Scahill 2007).…”

Calling on Jefferson: the ‘custodiary’ as the fourth estate in the Democratic Project

“…In the contemporary, neo-liberal era, where information and data collection have become key resources for governments, the traditional public service model of integrating internal functions (political and bureaucratic leadership) with external (political) imperatives have given way to a new governance model whereby technology and private sector initiatives combine to drive public-policy agendas (Brown 2005, Kouzmin 2009). …”

“…1)? At a time of a considerably reduced capacity of the sovereign state to govern society (Hirst 1994, Kouzmin 2009), the continued blurring of the private and public spheres limits an expanded view of freedom of access to information as well as its expression (Kakabadse et al 2003).…”

Symposium The Dismal (Delusional and Dangerous) “Science” of Economics and the “Capture” of Public Administration: Introduction—After the Neoliberal “Babble” and the “Silence”

“…(Royrvik, 2009, para. 13, emphasis added) For the past forty years, exaggerated, mystifying claims about unfettered markets, transforming technology, and the dynamism of democracy removed any signs of modesty within the dismal science of economics (Kouzmin, 2009). According to these delusions, history no longer mattered, and the present was constantly captured by one possible neoliberal, monetarist future (Gerlach & Hamilton, 2000).…”

“…In terms of fellow travelers, neoliberal economic babble based on PCT and its bastard child, new public management (NPM), might stand alongside with Marxist babble. Marxism, at least, had some empirical validation for theorizing and modeling crises (Kouzmin, 2009;.…”