Paper Title: Trends and gaps: A meta-review of representative bureaucracy
Principal investigator: Viviane Pires Ribeiro
Authors: Sebawit G. Bishu and Alexis R. Kennedy
Location of the Intervention: United States
Sample Size: 96 articles
Main theme: Economic Policy and Governance
Main Variable of Interest: Representative bureaucracy
Type of InterventionMeta-review of representative bureaucracy
Methodology: Literature review
Given that the theoretical framework of representative bureaucracy explores the link between the social and demographic characteristics of bureaucrats and their likelihood of taking actions that benefit citizens with whom they share identities, Bishu and Kennedy (2020) analyze 96 articles on representative bureaucracy to explore how the theoretical framework is described, applied, and tracks the contextual development of representative bureaucracy over time. Thus, the authors conclude that representative bureaucracy has been applied in limited geographical, methodological, and political areas. That is, the absence of studies focusing on intersectional identities, different geographical and political contexts, and more qualitative and mixed methods hinders an understanding of the link between passive and active representation.
Evaluation Context
The theoretical framework of representative bureaucracy has been one of the ways in which scholars of political science and public administration approach the question of how well government officials serve the public. Representative bureaucracy theory posits that bureaucracies that share demographic characteristics with the public are more likely to make decisions that benefit those they serve. In a democratic state, this helps to legitimize the actions of government bureaucrats.
Through this theory, it is possible to recognize that, under certain circumstances, there is a link between representation and bureaucratic decisions that affect minorities and women. Studies of representative bureaucracy examine the circumstances in which representation produces, or does not produce, positive outcomes for traditionally underrepresented groups. Although several studies apply the theory of representative bureaucracy to examine the effects of representation on outcomes that benefit minority groups, the existing literature lacks an in-depth analysis of the theory's application, thus missing the opportunity to examine the strength and limitations of its broader application.
Intervention Details
Bishu and Kennedy (2020) conduct an analysis of 96 peer-reviewed journal articles focusing on representative bureaucracy. Given that the need for diversity and inclusion in bureaucracies is currently a critical discourse, the authors aim to achieve three objectives. First, they seek to document conceptual applications of the theoretical framework of representative bureaucracy, identifying the historical development of bureaucracy along with its conceptual evolution. This objective serves two purposes. Firstly, it aims to trace the conceptual development of the theory over time. Furthermore, it aims to understand the trends in the types of issues addressed and questions asked when the theory is applied. Secondly, the authors seek to discover contextual and analytical applications of the theoretical framework to highlight where representative bureaucracy has been widely applied, where it has been minimally applied, and where it is absent. Thirdly, they provide an assessment of how representative bureaucracy has been tested. This helps to highlight the different dimensions within which the theoretical framework has been used, as well as to identify its strengths, gaps, and limitations.
To collect articles focused on representative bureaucracy, the authors consulted and examined the reference list of each of the collected articles. The total list includes 227 articles, eight book chapters, 33 books, and four dissertations. Through the review, articles that did not directly focus on representative bureaucracy and that were from other areas outside of public administration were eliminated. The main focus of the study was the analysis of empirical articles, in addition to theoretical articles that shed new light on the definition and application of the theoretical framework. Furthermore, for the analysis, only articles published in peer-reviewed journals were included, thus excluding book chapters, books, reviews, and responses to books and dissertations. The final database included 96 articles from peer-reviewed journals.
Methodology Details
A two-stage content analysis was conducted by Bishu and Kennedy (2020). In the first stage, the authors jointly selected the 96 articles to be included in the review. In the second stage, they identified the thematic areas that guided the development of the coding instrument. Coding instruments were generated to describe how the theoretical framework of representative bureaucracy is applied. In the second stage, they independently used the coding instrument to code each of the 96 articles. After coding all 96 articles, they compared the coding results. When the coding results differed, the authors reached a consensus on the coding decisions.
The coding procedure used was as follows: (a) creating categories into which themes are coded; (b) defining categories based on the authors' understanding of the literature; and (c) reading articles and coding relevant themes by placing them into established categories. The coding was done to allow for both quantitative analysis (by counting specific themes using an Excel spreadsheet) and qualitative analysis (by grouping specific themes using NVivo software).
Results
The study conducted by Bishu and Kennedy (2020) shows that most studies using the theoretical framework are applied within limited political and geographic contexts. Limiting the political and geographic context in which representative bureaucracy is tested poses a number of challenges to the development of the theoretical framework. The first challenge concerns understanding whether representative bureaucracy produces similar results in different policy areas. Applying the theoretical framework in different policy areas can take different forms as a result of different outcomes. Similarly, little is known about whether the results of representative bureaucracy outside the US context are similar to those found within its borders. Third, an equally important challenge is the meaningful operationalization of representation in various geographic contexts. A review of the existing literature suggests that little is known about how disparities in access to services due to where people live are affected by differences in gender, race/ethnicity, class, region, or social identities. Therefore, there is a need to expand the application of representative bureaucracy beyond the geographic context of the US and the policy areas of education and law enforcement. This will help to test the theoretical framework in new areas, inform its generalizability, and identify its usefulness and potential conceptual limitations.
Another way to assess the use of representative bureaucracy is to examine the method used to analyze data in previous studies. A review of the existing literature reveals that the theoretical framework has been applied in limited methodological contexts. While the application of quantitative methods helps researchers uncover trends and associations, qualitative methods help discover how and why representational processes generate results. On the other hand, the application of mixed methods approaches can address questions of association and why or how processes produce specific results. The lack of diverse methodological application suggests that questions that can only be answered with qualitative or mixed methods remain unanswered, limiting the development and usefulness of the theoretical framework.
Lessons in Public Policy
Based on a review of 96 articles on representative bureaucracy, Bishu and Kennedy (2020) report that there is ample room to expand and develop the theoretical framework. The future application of representative bureaucracy should extend the definition and operationalization of representation beyond the dichotomies of gender and race identities. The authors encourage researchers to look at representation in terms of intersectional identities and forms of demographic identities other than gender and race that are lacking in the existing literature. The study recommends expanding the application of the theoretical framework beyond the geographic location of the US, into less explored policy areas, and applying diverse analytical methods to increase the generalizability of representative bureaucracy theory and better understand why it produces certain results. Furthermore, the review suggests that practical applications of the theoretical framework should be further studied not only to work towards recruiting a more diverse workforce, but also to train the existing workforce to be more inclusive of diverse populations.
In addition to actively recruiting and promoting members of minority populations and women into the bureaucracy, organizations must also lead and train their current workforce on social equity and how to be allies. Ignoring whites, white men, and men who make up a large portion of the government workforce exacerbates the divide between white and non-white individuals and men and women, and reinforces otherness rather than inclusion. Therefore, future research on representative bureaucracy should consider how to change the workforce by including more people who represent marginalized populations, as well as training those already in government to be allies of underprivileged groups.
References
BISHU, Sebawit G.; KENNEDY, Alexis R. Trends and gaps: A meta-review of representative bureaucracy. Review of Public Personnel Administration, v. 40, no. 4, p. 559-588, 2020.
