Abstract
In this article, I examine the nature of political practice in the Pacific Islands against two dominant measures of professionalization: incentive and institutionalist. Drawing from a range of qualitative data-interviews with politicians, published life histories, and observation-from across the region, I find that professionalization is largely unapparent against these measures. However, despite the likelihood that this absence will continue, the professional politician continues to be a standard against which political leadership in the Pacific is assessed, and thus poses a significant problem for would-be-reformers. In response to this dilemma, I find that the older idea of self-regulating professional ethics, usually disregarded by proponents of these newer and more managerial measures, has more to offer than might first appear.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 852-876 |
| Number of pages | 25 |
| Journal | Politics and Policy |
| Volume | 41 |
| Issue number | 6 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Dec 2013 |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Politicians and Professionalization in the Pacific Islands: Revisiting Self-Regulation?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver