{"title":"公共管理中普遍知识的悖论:探索非洲和亚洲的背景","authors":"M. Haque","doi":"10.1080/02185377.2022.2063148","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The purpose of this article is to explore the paradoxes of ‘universal knowledge’ in public administration that claims cross-cultural relevance and validity, while remains highly parochial (non-universal) in terms of representing mostly the Western administrative traditions imposed and imitated worldwide. It re-examines African and Asian public administration knowledge to explain how the borrowed Western knowledge de-indigenized local administrative traditions, and how it continued to remain exclusive in terms of severe underrepresentation of African and Asian scholars and institutions in the processes of knowledge production, utilization and ownership. The article critically reviews existing literature to evaluate publications (books, articles and reports) on the origins, theories and practical models of public administration in Africa and Asia. It concludes that what is often presented as universal knowledge in the field is actually based on its inherent Eurocentric parochialism.","PeriodicalId":44333,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Political Science","volume":"30 1","pages":"19 - 34"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Paradoxes of universal knowledge in public administration: exploring the contexts of Africa and Asia\",\"authors\":\"M. Haque\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02185377.2022.2063148\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The purpose of this article is to explore the paradoxes of ‘universal knowledge’ in public administration that claims cross-cultural relevance and validity, while remains highly parochial (non-universal) in terms of representing mostly the Western administrative traditions imposed and imitated worldwide. It re-examines African and Asian public administration knowledge to explain how the borrowed Western knowledge de-indigenized local administrative traditions, and how it continued to remain exclusive in terms of severe underrepresentation of African and Asian scholars and institutions in the processes of knowledge production, utilization and ownership. The article critically reviews existing literature to evaluate publications (books, articles and reports) on the origins, theories and practical models of public administration in Africa and Asia. It concludes that what is often presented as universal knowledge in the field is actually based on its inherent Eurocentric parochialism.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44333,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asian Journal of Political Science\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"19 - 34\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asian Journal of Political Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02185377.2022.2063148\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Political Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02185377.2022.2063148","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Paradoxes of universal knowledge in public administration: exploring the contexts of Africa and Asia
ABSTRACT The purpose of this article is to explore the paradoxes of ‘universal knowledge’ in public administration that claims cross-cultural relevance and validity, while remains highly parochial (non-universal) in terms of representing mostly the Western administrative traditions imposed and imitated worldwide. It re-examines African and Asian public administration knowledge to explain how the borrowed Western knowledge de-indigenized local administrative traditions, and how it continued to remain exclusive in terms of severe underrepresentation of African and Asian scholars and institutions in the processes of knowledge production, utilization and ownership. The article critically reviews existing literature to evaluate publications (books, articles and reports) on the origins, theories and practical models of public administration in Africa and Asia. It concludes that what is often presented as universal knowledge in the field is actually based on its inherent Eurocentric parochialism.
期刊介绍:
Asian Journal of Political Science ( AJPS) is an international refereed journal affiliated to the Graduate School of Public Administration, Seoul National University. Published since 1993, AJPS is a leading journal on Asian politics and governance. It publishes high-quality original articles in major areas of political science, including comparative politics, political thought, international relations, public policy, and public administration, with specific reference to Asian regions and countries. AJPS aims to address some of the most contemporary political and administrative issues in Asia (especially in East, South, and Southeast Asia) at the local, national, and global levels. The journal can be of great value to academic experts, researchers, and students in the above areas of political science as well as to practical policy makers, state institutions, and international agencies.