Abstract

The politics-administration dichotomy is a concept that has been widely debated in the field of political science. It suggests that politics and administration should be treated as two separate entities. This paper undertakes a detailed historical analysis of the politics-administration dichotomy, presents scholars’ critiques against the theory, discusses subsequent modified versions of the theory, reviews empirical implementations of the theory, and finally, the paper will present the concept of “Dynamical Political-Administration Dichotomy” toward building and synthesizing the theory of politics and administration dichotomy. To achieve this, the research reviews the founding literature and investigates the theoretical and empirical justifications behind the concept and assesses its contemporary relevance and how the politics-administration relationship has evolved. The paper also explores the literature for the theory implementation in practice through public policy formation and execution/administration, with special discussion of the most recent debate over Trump’s Schedule F proposal and its implications. The paper concludes by proposing a unified framework called the “Dynamical Political-Administration Dichotomy,” which builds on existing theories by treating the boundary between politics and administration as fluid rather than fixed, which allows the relationship to shift between more dichotomized and more interactive forms depending on the situation. By integrating the strengths of earlier theories, this approach aims to help administrators and politicians address challenges more effectively. By doing so, the research hopes to contribute to the ongoing debate in the political and administrative disciplines and provide insights into the complex relationship between politics and administration.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.