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

Kouzmin, Alexander

doi:10.2753/atp1084-1806320301

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On this latter point, Walzer (1983) and Ramos (1981) are relevant because they understood that delimiting the market, to be successful, would need to "be regulated politically and delimited as an enclave among other enclaves constituting the total social fabric" (p. 158). Notwithstanding the implementation barriers in achieving this policy goal, Ramos and Walzer do infer a critical role here for public administration in any boundary revision debate-that is, any such boundary revision will require the rethinking of the field's inexorable ties to a "cognitive politics" in which the penetration of a market-centered approach to public affairs has taken on a strong hold concerning the direction of the field 6 (Adams & Balfour, 2010;Farmer, 2010;Kouzmin, 2009Kouzmin, , 2010Ramos, 1981;Ventriss, 1998Ventriss, , 2000Ventriss, , 2010.…”

Section: Delimitation Of the Market: Toward A Discussion Of Policy Boundariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Economic Crisis of 2008 and Its Substantive Implications for Public Affairs

Ventriss

2013

The American Review of Public Administration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the intellectually and pragmatic challenges posed by the economic crisis of 2008 on public administration and public policy. It will be argued that we need to confront 5 major challenges that will,hopefully, provoke a more lively debate in the field about the substantive implications of this economic crisis. While these 5 challenges are hardly exhaustive, such challenges may force us to ask different questions that could elevate and enrich the intellectual enterprise we aspire to be.

show abstract