Government, at its core, is about who gets what, when, and how (Lasswell 1950). The institutions that people create to make these decisions reflect their values, traditions, culture, and history. The structure of governmental institutions is based on the relationship between government and the people, and on how government is needed to prevent harm to society from âthe rule of individualsâ unreflected desires and emotionsâ (Yang and Rutgers 2017, p. 800). How a country goes about addressing this need is based on a societyâs values. For instance, Confucianism relies primarily on moral officials, whereas the Western tradition resorts to objective laws and institutions. These differences in values determine the relationships between the government and the people (e.g., government for the people, government by the people, or government of the people).
The clearest institution for showing how the relationship between the government and the people affects institutions is the legal system. âWestern natural rights theories ... âregard society and the state as outcomes of a contract between rational individualsâ (Greer and Lim 1998, p. 85)â (Yang and Rutgers 2017, p. 791). In such societies, the underlying construct is that people must be protected from the tyranny of government and authority, and the best way to do that is with objective laws. In the Western tradition, the law exists to protect the people from the government (e.g., the rule of law). In the West, there is a âconstitutional, legal, economic, political and professionalâ but not moral justification for government (Frederickson 2002, p. 610).
On the other hand, âConfucian good government relies on ethical persons to maintain a social hierarchy and harmony to ensure the natural orderâ (Yang and Rutgers 2017, p. 791). In the East, the law exists to give the government the authoritative responsibility to take care of the people properly (e.g., the rule by law); there is a moral justification for government (Frederickson 2002). For instance, in Confucian society, justice and fairness is the rulerâs responsibility to the people and this is rule by law (Im et al. 2013). In these nations, there is a paternalistic relationship between bureaucracy and the people; the king and the bureaucracy are seen as caregivers to the people. Indeed, because of this âin Confucian political philosophy, it is more important to have virtuous people in government than have a good system of laws (Tan 2011, p. 470)â (Drechsler 2018, p. 28).
Weberian and modern Western models of government value expertise, rationality, and neutrality. Virtue is preeminent in East Asian thought (Tao 2018, p. 73; Park 2013). As Park (2013, p. 71) writes, âgreater emphasis is placed on the virtuous ruling class than on the development of social institutions to protect the governed from the governing classâ. Indeed, the definition of âpublicâ in the Asian context includes several dimensions, one of which comprises justice, togetherness, and communal spirit. Justice is an ethical concept with bearing on the actions of humankind but not determined by them. These dimensions of public result in a âcomplex construct denoting a ruling authority that governs in a fair and just mannerâ (Im et al. 2013, p. 288). Scholars writing about social equity often argue for a more normative approach to implementing policy; in this way, it is possible that âAsianâ public administration may be more ahead of the curve than Western public administration.
The people who implement the law are public administrators. The United Statesâ National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA ) has identified four pillars of public administration: economy, efficiency, effectiveness, and social equity. These four pillars embody the public service values that should guide public administratorsâ decision making with regards to who gets what, when, and how. Given their importance, it is worth reflecting on them here.
Economy is âthe careful or sparing use of resourcesâ (Norman-Major 2011, p. 234). More specifically, public administrators should manage scarce resources with particular attention to âexpending the fewest resources for an agreed upon level of public servicesâ (Frederickson 2010, p. xv).
Public administrators should strive for efficiency; they should strive to achieve the âmost, the best, or the most preferable public services for available resourcesâ (Frederickson 2010, p. xv).
Effectiveness is âbeing successful in producing the desired result or accomplishing set goalsâ (Norman-Major 2011, p. 236).
Social equity was added as the fourth pillar by NAPA fairly recently. Rather than who gets what, when, and how, social equity is about asking âfor whom is this program good?â (Guy and McCandless 2012, p. S12). Equity is most commonly defined by its synonyms: equality, justice, and fairness. More often than not, the terms are used interchangeably. As a result, social equity is a term that is âused very looselyâŚas if it meant the same thing as equalityâ (Cooper 2003, p. 6). And âconcepts of equity, justice, and fairness are so amalgamated in the literate that distinguishing between them is difficult at bestâ (Murray and Davis 2001, p. 578).
Scholars and practitioners find it difficult to define social equity. One only has to look at Table 1.1 to see the many definitions of social equity provided by researchers over the last several decades. In their survey of social equity in public administration, Svara and Brunet (2004, p. 100) found that âdefinitions can range from simple fairness to equal treatment to redistribution and reducing inequalities in societyâ.
Table 1.1
Definitions of social equity in public administration
Source | Definition |
|---|---|
Johnson and Svara (2011, pp. 3, 17) | âEquality in a society with deep social and economic disparities. It embodies the goals that the members of all social groups will have the same prospects for success and same opportunity to be protected from the adversities of lifeâ âThe âsocialâ aspect of equity means that public administrators are particularly attentive to differences in fairness and justice based on important social characteristicsâ |
Frederickson (2010, p. 55) | âSocial equity is: (1) The basis for a just democratic society; (2) Influences the behavior of organizational man; (3) The legal basis for distributing public services; (4) The practical basis for distributing public services; (5) A challenge for research and analysisâ |
Shafritz et al. (2009, p. 454) | âFairness in the delivery of public services; it is egalitarianism in actionâthe principle that each citizen, regardless of economic resources or personal traits, deserves and has a right to be given equal treatment by the political systemâ |
Svara and Brunet (2004, p. 100) | âThe definition of social equity can range from simple fairness and equal treatment to redistribution and reducing inequalitiesâ |
Rawls (1971, p. 250) | âA principle of justice as âfairnessâ in which âeach person is to have an equal right to the most extensive basic liberty compatible with a similar liberty for allââ |
Denhardt et al. (2014, p. 105) | âEquity, of course, involves a sense of fairness or justiceâspecifically, the correction of existing imbalances in the distribution of social and political values. In contrast to equal treatment for all, equity proposes that benefits be greater for those most disadvantagedâ |
National Association of Public Administration | âThe fair, just, and equitable management of all institutions serving the public directly or by contract, and the fair and equitable distribution of public services, and implementation of public policy, and the commitment to promote fairness, justice, and equity in the formation of public policyâ |
World Bank (2006, p. 2) | âSocial equity means equal access to the opportunities that allow people to pursue a life of their own choosing and to avoid extreme deprivation in outcomesâthat is, equality in rights, resources and voiceâ |
International Monetary Fund (2007, p. 106) | âEquality of rights refers to equality under the law, whether cu... |