Abstract
The complex relationship between science and politics has been a perennial issue in public administration. In this debate it is important to distinguish between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ politics, and between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ science. The Covid-19 pandemic has valorised the importance of science in shaping governmental responses, and has tended to contrast politics negatively with science. However, technocratic approaches to policymaking downplay the importance of politics in policymaking. Two case studies, of countries where there have been markedly different pandemic outcomes are used to illustrate the relationship between science and politics during this public health crisis – New Zealand and Brazil. In New Zealand there has been a positive and effective, if technocratic, relationship between science and politics, while in Brazil the relationship between the two domains has been fraught.
Highlights
The tension between liberal democratic values, on the one hand, and governments’ need for scientific and technical expertise, on the other, has been a perennial theme in the scholarly literature of public administration (Waldo, 1948)
We examine what can be seen as a ‘meta’ issue – the overarching relationship between science and politics in public policymaking, in regard to the pandemic, with comparative references to the cases of New Zealand and Brazil
Covid-19 has clearly shown that strong governmental capacity is essential in effectively responding for the public good. Lindblom demonstrated in his seminal article, ‘The Science of Muddling Through’, that political rationality is less about means-ends choice, than it is about the quest for collective agreement on political and policy action (Lindblom, 1959)
Summary
The tension between liberal democratic values, on the one hand, and governments’ need for scientific and technical expertise, on the other, has been a perennial theme in the scholarly literature of public administration (Waldo, 1948). At the time when concern over climate change was beginning to gain public attention, mainly in the 1980s, the scientific consensus was more emergent, more contested, and less embraced by politicians driven by different partisan and electoral agendas This has been even more true of political advice generated by the social sciences, including that discipline which has aspired to be the most like the natural sciences – economics. Covid-19 has clearly shown that strong governmental capacity is essential in effectively responding for the public good Lindblom demonstrated in his seminal article, ‘The Science of Muddling Through’, that political rationality is less about means-ends choice, than it is about the quest for collective agreement on political and policy action (Lindblom, 1959). Smart phones and social media had not become addictive, when there were far fewer sources of instant gratification, like fast food outlets and movie platforms, far fewer leisure-time options, and when more people enjoyed their leisure by reading books
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
