Administrative Responsibility Revisited

Abstract

The dominant approaches to administrative responsibility have been preoccupied with defining, mobilizing, and rehabilitating an intelligible and reliable "public, " one that provides an unambiguous source of guidance and an unimpeachable defense against critics of discretionary authority. This emphasis on building moral consensus on public purposes overestimates the ability of political scientists and public administrators to effect fundamental social change. A more realistic and practical approach to administrative responsibility acknowledges that the public is often divided and inattentive and that political institutions are often incapable of articulating unambiguous policy directives. Under these circumstances, the ability of individual administrators to assess conflicting demands and claims on their loyalty ought to be the primary focus of a viable account of administrative responsibility. The ideal of individual moral autonomy best captures the strengths of character required for this kind of responsible administrative decision making.