公共行政学方法论流派——兼论公共行政学方法论的统一性和差异性问题

The Methodological Schools of Public Administration

公共行政学的历史也是公共行政学方法论流派不断诞生,各流派之间争论、互补和共同发展的历史。公共行政学曾因西蒙和沃尔多在方法论上的分歧而引发了公共行政学的身份危机、思想危机和认同危机。上述危机与学者们对公共行政知识和方法论的"多元化及其统一性"问题缺乏合理的回答紧密相关。如果从公共行政知识类型出发,将公共行政学方法论流派划分为实证主义方法论流派、技术设计方法论流派、评估研究方法论流派、诠释主义方法论流派、批判主义方法论流派,进而寻求这些方法论流派的统一性和差异性,可以发现一个更具一般性的公共行政研究方法论框架。

The history of public administration is the one in which the methodology schools are born incessantly and the schools are argued, renewed and developed with each other. There were identity, intellectual and legitimacy crisis in public administration because of the differences of methodologies between H.Simon and D.Waldo. The crisis is tied tightly with the lack of whole and inclusive reorganizations by scholars to the diversifications of knowledge and methodologies of public administration. If we begin with the types of knowledge and seek the unity and difference of Methodology schools, which can be divided into positivism methodology, methodology of technical design, methodology of evaluation, interpretation methodology and criticism methodology, we would find a general methodology for Public Administration.