Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Theory of Representative Bureaucracy

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Representative Bureaucracy and Performance

Part of the book series: Executive Politics and Governance ((EXPOLGOV))

Abstract

This chapter provides the theoretical foundation for the empirical analysis that follows, focusing on the theory of representative bureaucracy. It begins with a discussion of bureaucratic accountability and the various means used to control the bureaucracy, including representative bureaucracy. The discussion then critically examines the theory of representative bureaucracy, its assumptions, and predictions. The empirical evidence linking bureaucratic representation to organizational outcomes, including performance, is reviewed. The chapter then introduces the concept of workforce diversity, discusses the distinction between this newer concept and bureaucratic representation, explains how workforce diversity can impact performance, and offers a brief review of the empirical evidence regarding workforce diversity’s effects on performance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Wave 5 of the WVS was conducted from 2005 to 2009 and Wave 6 from 2010 to 2014 by the World Values Survey Association (2018). The WVS consists of nationally representative surveys conducted in almost 100 countries.

References

  • Andrews, R., Ashworth, R., & Meier, K. J. (2014). Representative bureaucracy and fire service performance. International Public Management Journal, 17, 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Appleby, P. H. (1952). Morality and administration in democratic government. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Auditor-General South Africa. (2013). PMFA 2012–2013: Consolidated general report on national and provincial audit outcomes. Pretoria: Auditor-General South Africa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balla, S. J. (1998). Administrative procedures and political control of the bureaucracy. American Political Science Review, 92, 663–673.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bearfield, D. A. (2009). Equity at the intersection: Public administration and the study of gender. Public Administration Review, 69, 383–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, S. T., Villado, A. J., Lukasik, M. A., Belau, L., & Briggs, A. L. (2011). Getting specific about demographic diversity variable and team performance relationships: A meta-analysis. Journal of Management, 37, 709–743.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, M. (1999). The performance effects of pay dispersion on individuals and organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 25–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradbury, M. D., & Kellough, J. E. (2008). Representative bureaucracy: Exploring the potential for active representation in local government. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18, 697–714.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradbury, M. D., & Kellough, J. E. (2011). Representative bureaucracy: Assessing the evidence on active representation. American Review of Public Administration, 41, 157–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breslin, R. A., Pandey, S., & Riccucci, N. M. (2017). Intersectionality in public leadership research: A review and future research agenda. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 37, 160–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, R. A., & Frank, J. (2006). Race and officer decision making: Examining differences in arrest outcomes between black and white officers. Justice Quarterly, 23, 96–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brudney, J. L., Herbert, T., & Wright, D. S. (2000). From organizational values to organizational roles: Examining representative bureaucracy in state administration. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10, 491–512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choi, S., & Rainey, H. G. (2010). Managing diversity in US federal agencies: Effects of diversity and diversity management on employee perceptions of organizational performance. Public Administration Review, 70, 109–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Close, B.R., & Mason, P.L. (2006). After the traffic stops: Officer characteristics and enforcement actions. Topics in Economic Analysis & Policy, 6, 1–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, D. M. (1998). Amateur government. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 8, 450–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, T., & Moyer, L. (2008). Gender, race, and intersectionality on the federal appellate bench. Political Research Quarterly, 61, 219–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: Black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 140, 139–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denhardt, K. G. (1989). The management of ideals: A political perspective on ethics. Public Administration Review, 49, 187–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA). (1995). White paper on the transformation of the public service. Pretoria: DPSA.

    Google Scholar 

  • DPSA. (1997). Green paper on a conceptual framework for affirmative action and the management of diversity in the public service. Pretoria: DPSA.

    Google Scholar 

  • DPSA. (1998). White paper on affirmative action in the public service. Pretoria: DPSA.

    Google Scholar 

  • DPSA. (2016). Annual report on employment equity in the public service 2015/2016. Pretoria: DPSA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dolan, J. (2002). Representative bureaucracy in the federal executive: Gender and spending priorities. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 12, 353–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellemers, N., Van den Heuvel, H., De Gilder, D., Maass, A., & Bonvini, A. (2004). The underrepresentation of women in science: Differential commitment or the queen bee syndrome? British Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 315–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez, S., Malatesta, D., & Smith, C. R. (2013). Race, gender, and government contracting: Different explanations or new prospects for theory? Public Administration Review, 73, 109–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frankental, S., & Sichone, O. (2005). South Africa’s diverse peoples: A reference sourcebook. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gade, D. M., & Wilkins, V. M. (2013). Where did you serve? Veteran identity, representative bureaucracy, and vocational rehabilitation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 23, 267–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia-Retamero, R., & López-Zafra, E. (2006). Prejudice against women in male-congenial environments: Perceptions of gender role congruity in leadership. Sex Roles, 55, 51–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilliard-Matthews, S., Kowalski, B. R., & Lundman, R. J. (2008). Officer race and citizen-reported traffic ticket decisions by police in 1999 and 2002. Police Quarterly, 11, 202–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gooden, S., & Portillo, S. (2011). Advancing social equity in the Minnowbrook tradition. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21, i61–i76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodnow, F. J. (1900). Politics and administration. New York: Russell and Russell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gormley, W. T., & Balla, S. J. (2013). Bureaucracy and democracy: Accountability and performance (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: CQ Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grissom, J. A., Nicholson-Crotty, J., & Nicholson-Crotty, S. (2009). Race, region, and representative bureaucracy. Public Administration Review, 69, 911–919.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habyarimana, J., Humphreys, M., Posner, D. N., & Weinstein, J. M. (2009). Coethnicity: Diversity and the dilemmas of collective action. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, D. A., & Klein, K. J. (2007). What’s the difference? Diversity constructs as separation, variety, or disparity in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32, 1199–1228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heclo, H. (1977). A government of strangers: Executive politics in Washington. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hindera, J. J. (1993). Representative bureaucracy: Imprimis evidence of active representation in the EEOC district offices. Social Science Quarterly, 74, 95–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hindera, J. J., & Young, C. D. (1998). Representative bureaucracy: The theoretical implications of statistical interaction. Political Research Quarterly, 51, 655–671.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hong, S. (2015). Representative bureaucracy, organizational integrity, and citizen coproduction: Does an increase in policy ethnic representativeness reduce crime? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 35, 11–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horowitz, S. K., & Horowitz, I. B. (2007). The effects of team diversity on team outcomes: A meta-analytic review of team demography. Journal of Management, 33, 987–1015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jeffery, A. (2009). People’s war: New light on the struggle for South Africa. Johannesburg: Jonathan Ball.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeffery, A. (2014). BEE: Helping or hurting? Cape Town: Tafelberg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 305–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joshi, A., & Roh, H. (2009). The role of context in work team diversity research: A meta-analytic review. Academy of Management Journal, 52, 599–627.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joshi, A., Liao, H., & Roh, H. (2011). Bridging domains in workplace demography research: A review and reconceptualization. Journal of Management, 37, 521–552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahn, S. B., & Louw, V. (2011). Women’s representativeness in the South African public service. Journal of Public Administration, 46, 669–682.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keiser, L. R. (2010). Representative bureaucracy. In R. F. Durant (Ed.), Oxford handbook of American bureaucracy (pp. 1–20). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keiser, L. R., Wilkins, V. M., Meier, K. J., & Holland, C. A. (2002). Lipstick and logarithms: Gender, institutional context, and representative bureaucracy. American Political Science Review, 96, 553–564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kingsley, J. D. (1944). Representative bureaucracy. Yellow Springs, OH: Antioch Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, B. (2012). Unraveling representative bureaucracy. Administration & Society, 46, 395–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krislov, S. (1974). Representative bureaucracy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lim, H. (2006). Representative bureaucracy: Rethinking substantive effects and active representation. Public Administration Review, 66, 193–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipsky, M. (1983). Street-level bureaucracy: The dilemmas of the individual in public services. New York: Russell Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Long, N. E. (1952). Bureaucracy and constitutionalism. American Political Science Review, 46, 808–818.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marais, H. (2011). South Africa limits to change: The political economy of transition. London: Zed Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marwick, A. (1964). Middle opinion in the thirties: Planning, progress and political ‘agreement’. English Historical Review, 79, 285–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maynard-Moody, S. W., & Musheno, M. (2003). Cops, teachers, counselors: Stories from the front lines of public service. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • McCubbins, M. D., Noll, R. G., & Weingast, B. R. (1987). Administrative procedures as instruments of political control. Journal of Law Economics and Organization, 3, 243–277.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCubbins, M. D., Noll, R. G., & Weingast, B. R. (1989). Structure and process, politics and policy: Administrative arrangements and the political control of agencies. Virginia Law Review, 75, 431–482.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCubbins, M. D., & Schwartz, T. (1984). Congressional oversight overlooked: Police patrols versus fire alarms. American Journal of Political Science, 28, 165–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meier, K. J. (1975). Representative bureaucracy: An empirical analysis. American Political Science Review, 69, 526–542.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meier, K. J. (1984). Teachers, students, and discrimination: The policy impact of black representation. The Journal of Politics, 46, 252–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meier, K. J. (1993). Latinos and representative bureaucracy: Testing the Thompson and Henderson hypotheses. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 3, 393–414.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meier, K. J., & Bohte, J. (2001). Structure and discretion: Missing links in representative bureaucracy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 11, 455–470.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meier, K. J., & Bohte, J. (2007). Politics and the bureaucracy: Policymaking in the fourth branch of government (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meier, K. J., & Bohte, J. (2011). Structure and discretion: The missing link in representative bureaucracy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 11, 455–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meier, K. J., & Nicholson-Crotty, J. (2006). Gender, representative bureaucracy, and law enforcement: The case of sexual assault. Public Administration Review, 66, 850–860.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meier, K. J., & Nigro, L. G. (1976). Representative bureaucracy and policy preferences: A study in the attitudes of federal executives. Public Administration Review, 36, 458–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meier, K. J., & O’Toole, L. J. (2006). Bureaucracy in a democratic state: A governance perspective. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meier, K. J., & Stewart, J., Jr. (1992). The impact of representative bureaucracies: Educational systems and public policies. American Review of Public Administration, 22, 157–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meier, K. J., Wrinkle, R. D., & Polinard, J. L. (1999). Representative bureaucracy and distributional equity: Addressing the hard question. Journal of Politics, 61, 1025–1039.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H. (1983). Power in and around organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moe, T. M. (1982). Regulatory performance and presidential administration. American Journal of Political Science, 26, 197–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moe, T. M. (1985). Control and feedback in economic regulation: The case of the NLRB. American Political Science Review, 79, 1094–1116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrell, R., Jewkes, R., & Lindegger, G. (2012). Hegemonic masculinity/masculinities in South Africa: Culture, power, and gender politics. Men and Masculinities, 15, 11–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mosher, F. C. (1982). Democracy and the public service. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naff, K. (1998). Progress toward achieving a representative federal bureaucracy: The impact of supervisors and their beliefs. Public Personnel Review, 27, 135–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naff, K., & Capers, K. J. (2014). The complexity of descriptive representation and bureaucracy: The case of South Africa. International Public Management Journal, 17, 515–539.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ndletyana, M. (2008). Affirmative action in the public service. In A. Habib & K. Bentley (Eds.), Racial redress and citizenship in South Africa. Cape Town: Human Sciences Research Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ng, C. W., & Chiu, W. (2001). Managing equal opportunities for women: Sorting the friends from the foes. Human Resource Management Journal, 11, 75–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicholson-Crotty, S., Nicholson-Crotty, J., & Fernandez, S. (2017). Will more black cops matter? Officer race and police-involved homicides of black citizens. Public Administration Review, 77, 206–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pitts, D. W. (2005). Diversity, representation, and performance: Evidence about race and ethnicity in public organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15, 615–631.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pitts, D. W., & Jarry, E. (2007). Ethnic diversity and organizational performance: Assessing diversity effects at the managerial and street levels. International Public Management Journal, 10, 233–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pitts, D. W., & Wise, L. R. (2010). Workforce diversity in the new millennium: Prospects for research. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 30, 44–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Price, D. K. (1965). The scientific estate. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pugh, D. L. (1989). Professionalism in public administration: Problems, perspectives, and the role of ASPA. Public Administration Review, 49, 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qin, J., Muenjohn, N., & Chhetri, P. (2013). A review of diversity conceptualizations: Variety, trends, and a framework. Human Resource Development Review, 13, 133–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rabkin, J. (1989). Judicial compulsions: How public law distorts public policy. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riccucci, N. M., Van Ryzin, G. G., & Lavena, C. F. (2014). Representative bureaucracy in policing: Does it increase perceived legitimacy? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24, 537–551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riccucci, N. M., Van Ryzin, G. G., & Li, H. (2015). Representative bureaucracy and the willingness to coproduce: An experimental study. Public Administration Review, 76, 121–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rocha, R. R., & Hawes, D. P. (2009). Racial diversity, representative bureaucracy, and equity in multiracial school districts. Social Science Quarterly, 90, 326–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romzek, B. S., & Dubnick, M. J. (1987). Accountability in the public sector: Lessons from the challenger tragedy. Public Administration Review, 47, 227–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romzek, B. S., & Hendricks, J. S. (1982). Organizational involvement and representative bureaucracy: Can we have it both ways? American Political Science Review, 76, 75–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbloom, D., & Featherstonhaugh, J. (1977). Representation in the federal service: A comparison of blacks and whites. Social Science Quarterly, 57, 874–883.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbloom, D. H., Kravchuk, R. S., & Clerkin, R. M. (2015). Public administration: Understanding management, politics, and law in the public sector (8th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. R., & Davis, G. F. (2006). Organizations and organizing: Rational, natural and open systems perspectives. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seekings, J., & Nattrass, N. (2016). Poverty, politics and policy in South Africa: Why has poverty persisted after apartheid? Johannesburg: Jacana.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selden, S. C. (1997). The promise of representative bureaucracy: Diversity and responsiveness in a government agency. Armonk, NY: ME Sharpe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selden, S. C., Brudney, J. F., & Kellough, J. E. (1998). Bureaucracy as a representative institution: Toward a reconciliation of bureaucratic government and democratic theory. American Journal of Political Science, 42, 717–744.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, M. (1984). Who guards the guardians? Judicial control of administration. Athens: University of Georgia Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1964). On the concept of organizational goal. Administrative Science Quarterly, 9, 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1997). Administrative behavior (4th ed.). New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, C. R., & Fernandez, S. (2010). Equity in federal contracting: Examining the link between minority representation and federal procurement decisions. Public Administration Review, 70, 87–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sowa, J., & Selden, S. C. (2003). Administrative discretion and active representation: An expansion of the theory of representative bureaucracy. Public Administration Review, 63, 700–710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence, D. A. (1999). Agency discretion and the dynamics of procedural reform. Public Administration Review, 59, 425–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Subramaniam, V. (1967). Representative bureaucracy: A reassessment. American Political Science Review, 61, 1010–1019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terry, L. D. (1990). Leadership in the administrative state: The concept of administrative conservatorship. Administration and Society, 21, 395–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Theobald, N. A., & Haider-Markel, D. P. (2008). Race, bureaucracy, and symbolic representation: Interactions between citizens and police. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19, 409–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thielemann, G. S., & Stewart, J., Jr. (1996). A demand-side perspective on the importance of representative bureaucracy: AIDS, ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation. Public Administration Review, 56, 168–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in action: Social science bases of administrative theory. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, F. J. (1976). Minority groups in public bureaucracies: Are passive and active representation linked? Administration and Society, 8, 201–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, L. (1995). A history of South Africa (Rev. ed.). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Knippenberg, D., & Schippers, M. C. (2007). Work group diversity. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 515–541.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Riper, P. P. (1958). The history of the U.S. civil service. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webber, S. S., & Donahue, L. M. (2001). Impact of highly and less job-related diversity on work group cohesion and performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Management, 27, 141–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weingast, B. R., & Moran, M. J. (1983). Bureaucratic discretion or congressional control? Regulatory policymaking by the Federal Trade Commission. Journal of Political Economy, 91, 65–800.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weisinger, J. Y., Borges-Méndez, R., & Milofsky, C. (2016). Diversity in the nonprofit and voluntary sector. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 45, 3S–27S.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkins, V. M., & Keiser, L. R. (2006). Linking passive and active representation by gender: The case of child support agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16, 87–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkins, V. M., & Williams, B. (2008). Black or blue: Racial profiling and representative bureaucracy. Public Administration Review, 68, 654–664.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkins, V. M., & Williams, B. M. (2009). Representing blue: Representative bureaucracy and racial profiling in the Latino community. Administration and Society, 40, 775–798.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, K. Y., & O’Reilly III, C. A. (1998). A review of 40 years of research. Research in Organizational Behavior, 20, 77–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, W. (1887). The study of administration. Political Science Quarterly, 2, 197–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, B. D. (1988). Principals, bureaucrats, and responsiveness in clean air enforcements. American Political Science Review, 82, 213–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, B. D., & Waterman, R. W. (1991). The dynamics of political control of the bureaucracy. American Political Science Review, 85, 801–828.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, B. D., & Waterman, R. W. (1994). Bureaucratic dynamics: The role of bureaucracy in a democracy. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Values Survey Association. (2018). World Values Survey, Wave 6 (2010–2014). http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Indiana University Bloomington, Bloomington, IN, USA

    Sergio Fernandez

Authors
  1. Sergio Fernandez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sergio Fernandez .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Fernandez, S. (2020). The Theory of Representative Bureaucracy. In: Representative Bureaucracy and Performance. Executive Politics and Governance. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32134-5_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation