False globalism: Public administration in the United States in the twenty-first century

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

In 2012, two keystone scholarly institutions in U.S. public administration, NASPAA and Public Administration Review (PAR), began describing themselves as global enterprises, concerned with research and teaching on a globally inclusive basis. At first glance, this promise of a shift from national to global focus might reassure Global South scholars concerned about longstanding U.S. hegemony in public administration scholarship. However, these claims about a shift toward globality are unsupported by the evidence that has accumulated over the past decade. Neither NASPAA nor PAR has adequately addressed barriers to participation by the Global South in their activities, and neither has strong incentives to do so. In fact, false claims about global inclusivity may reinforce U.S. dominance within the field of public administration around the world. To promote diversity and inclusion within public administration scholarship, we must begin by questioning globality claims made by institutions like NASPAA and PAR, and adopting an approach to dialogue built on the principle of epistemic pluralism.