Robustness and the governance sin of bureaucratic animosity

Adam Masters*

*Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterpeer-review

    Abstract

    We expect our governance systems to be robust. When they are challenged by internal or external actors, ideally they are sufficiently flexible and appropriately thought out to cope and function for the betterment of society. A governance system incapable of resisting challenges is soon replaced-or so we would hope. Unfortunately, lived experiences for many find that bureaucratic inertia gives a new meaning to robustness-the system survives and continues to roll on despite its flawed integrity. Robustness as a value thus has two interpretations-it is good when it protects the processes of governance from spurious challenges; and robustness is bad when a techno-rational mindset violates the integrity of governance to cause harm to the governed.

    Original languageEnglish
    Title of host publicationQuality of Governance
    Subtitle of host publicationValues and Violations
    PublisherPalgrave Macmillan
    Pages215-234
    Number of pages20
    ISBN (Electronic)9783030215224
    ISBN (Print)9783030215217
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2019

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Robustness and the governance sin of bureaucratic animosity'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this