Understanding and explaining civil service reform: A reply to Dowding and James

Abstract

Dowding and James's response to our critique of the bureau-shaping model makes some important criticisms that we welcome.(1) However, we suggest that they ignore the empirical evidence we presented in our original article (because of their narrow definition of acceptable data) and we believe that they misunderstand our arguments because of the positivist paradigm within which they operate. Our response covers three main issues – epistemology, methods and evidence.

(1) D. Marsh, D. Richards and M. J. Smith, ‘Bureaucrats, Politicians and Reform in Whitehall: Analysing the Bureau-shaping Model’, British Journal of Political Science, 30 (2000), 461–82.

Metadata

Authors/Creators:	Marsh, D. Richards, D. Smith, M.J.
Copyright, Publisher and Additional Information:	© 2004 Cambridge University Press. Reproduced in accordance with the publisher's self-archiving policy.
Dates:	Published: January 2004
Institution:	The University of Sheffield
Academic Units:	The University of Sheffield > Faculty of Social Sciences (Sheffield) > Department of Politics and International Relations (Sheffield)
Depositing User:	Repository Assistant
Date Deposited:	05 Sep 2006
Last Modified:	12 Jun 2014 03:18
Published Version:	http://journals.cambridge.org/article_S00071234032...
Status:	Published
Publisher:	Cambridge University Press
Refereed:	Yes
Identification Number:	https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123403260397

CORE (COnnecting REpositories)

Understanding and explaining civil service reform: A reply to Dowding and James

Abstract

Metadata

Download

smithmj2

Export

Statistics