Suchergebnisse

'Governance, Administration and Development: Making the State Work' by Mark Turner and David Hume is reviewed.

The article is concerned with the development of unionism in Papua New Guinea (PNG). In particular it looks at the first attempt to establish a peak union council in this country when as the Territory of Papua New Guinea it was under Australian administration. (DÜI-Sen)

In 1969, construction began on Conzinc Riotinto Australia's huge copper and gold mine at Panguna on the island of Bougainville in what was then the Australian-administered Territory of Papua New Guinea. The mining project was unlike any Australians had previously undertaken, and its construction created complexities which Australian managers and industrial relations systems had not previously encountered. The complexity of employment relations on this project was increased by the political environment of colonial rule and the responses of Australian workers and unions. This article looks at the development of the first industrial agreement during the mine's construction phase and places it in the context of the creation of a sustainable bargaining structure, which succeeded in mitigating industrial conflict for two decades before the outbreak of a wider armed conflict.

In 1969, construction began on Conzinc Riotinto Australia's huge copper and gold mine at Panguna on the island of Bougainville in what was then the Australian-administered Territory of Papua New Guinea. The mining project was unlike any Australians had previously undertaken, and its construction created complexities which Australian managers and industrial relations systems had not previously encountered. The complexity of employment relations on this project was increased by the political environment of colonial rule and the responses of Australian workers and unions. This article looks at the development of the first industrial agreement during the mine's construction phase and places it in the context of the creation of a sustainable bargaining structure, which succeeded in mitigating industrial conflict for two decades before the outbreak of a wider armed conflict.

Knowledge is the latest buzzword in public administration, yet contemporary debates demonstrate a poor understanding of how knowledge is constructed and valued and of how public administration knowledge frames are changing in response to major structural shifts in political imperatives. In particular the retreat from economic rationalism and the embracing of social and human capital ideas with the search for 'third ways' and 'triple bottom lines' are bringing more constructivist knowledge frames back into play. In this way centralised 'rational/expert' knowledge is being challenged by knowledge arising from cooperative, local inquiry and multiple knowledge frames are now being brought to bear in public administration. Yet public administration, as a profession, seems unsure of whether this is an elegant finesse implying little real change or an exposure of the naked pretension of previously dominant unitary frameworks. This article uses a historical comparison to show how changes in the ontology and epistemology of public administration are demanding new skills of contemporary public administrators.

Contemporary public sector reforms in Australia have been dominated by efficiency, productivity and contestability considerations captured in National Competition Policy (NCP). Both in the reform process in general and in the NCP processes in particular, the lack of priority attributed to non-economic concerns such as coordination, equity, representation, political accountability, consultation and distributive outcomes has been a serious omission. The idea of public interst, once central to democratic public administration, has re-emerged to challenge the perceived excesses of economic rationalism as the unifying idea of reform. Although public interest stands in a long tradition in public administration, it is a complex and contested idea which requires significiant development if it is to have policy utility in the reform process. Nonetheless public interest may be viewed as an analytical frame which enables a rebalancing of the ideas which influence policymaking. In this paper it is argued that substantive situational manifestations of public interest can be used to complement rather than undermine the efficiency, productivity and contestability objectives of public sector reform.

Contemporary public sector reforms in Australia have been dominated by efficiency, productivity and contestability considerations captured in National Competition Policy (NCP). Both in the reform process in general and in the NCP processes in particular, the lack of priority attributed to non-economic concerns such as coordination, equity, representation, political accountability, consultation and distributive outcomes has been a serious omission. The idea of public interst, once central to democratic public administration, has re-emerged to challenge the perceived excesses of economic rationalism as the unifying idea of reform. Although public interest stands in a long tradition in public administration, it is a complex and contested idea which requires significiant development if it is to have policy utility in the reform process. Nonetheless public interest may be viewed as an analytical frame which enables a rebalancing of the ideas which influence policymaking. In this paper it is argued that substantive situational manifestations of public interest can be used to complement rather than undermine the efficiency, productivity and contestability objectives of public sector reform.