Abstract
Traditionally, a distinction is made between a descriptive or empirical part of the science of public administration on the one hand, and a prescriptive or normative part on the other (Van Braam 1986: 607–609). The descriptive or empirical part consists of analyses and explanations of facts, whereas the prescriptive or normative part is primarily directed at evaluating phenomena in order to contribute to the improvement of public governance and administration. At the same time, a distinction is made between empirical and normative aspects of the object of the science of public administration: public administration itself. This double usage of the distinction is already confusing in itself. Matters become even more confused when this usage is related to the different possible answers to the following questions:
1. Is it possible to make descriptive, as well as normative scientific statements about factual aspects of public administration?
2. Is it possible to make descriptive, as well as normative scientific statements about normative aspects of public administration?
1. Is it possible to make descriptive, as well as normative scientific statements about factual aspects of public administration?
2. Is it possible to make descriptive, as well as normative scientific statements about normative aspects of public administration?
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Title of host publication | Political Institutions and Public Policy |
| Subtitle of host publication | Perspectives on European Decision Making |
| Editors | Bernard Steunenberg, Frans van Vught |
| Place of Publication | Dordrecht |
| Publisher | Kluwer Academic Publishers |
| Pages | 67-81 |
| Number of pages | 15 |
| ISBN (Electronic) | 978-94-015-8603-0 |
| ISBN (Print) | 978-90-481-4818-9 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 1997 |
Keywords
- Governance
- Government
- Policy
- Political science
- Politics