Introduction
The Minnowbrook Conferences are landmark events in the history of Public Administration. They were held to reflect on the state of the discipline and to redefine its purpose in changing social, political, and economic contexts. These conferences, held in the United States, were instrumental in developing new theories, particularly New Public Administration (NPA), and they emphasized relevance, values, social equity, and democratic citizenship. Three major conferences were held—Minnowbrook I (1968), Minnowbrook II (1988), and Minnowbrook III (2008)—but here we focus on the first two.
Minnowbrook I Conference (1968)
Minnowbrook I was organized in 1968 by Dwight Waldo at Syracuse University. It brought together young scholars and practitioners who were concerned about the discipline’s lack of responsiveness to the major social issues of the time—civil rights, poverty, Vietnam War, and inequality.
Key Features:
- Emphasis on Relevance: Public administration should address real-life social problems and not remain a purely technical discipline.
- Focus on Values: Unlike traditional approaches that emphasized neutrality and efficiency, Minnowbrook I highlighted the importance of values, ethics, and morality in public service.
- Social Equity: The conference stressed the need for administrative systems to promote fairness and justice, especially for disadvantaged groups.
- Citizen Participation: Advocated for participatory governance and involvement of citizens in policy-making and implementation.
Criticisms:
- Some critics argued that it was too idealistic and lacked practical applicability.
- It focused mostly on American issues, ignoring global perspectives.
Minnowbrook II Conference (1988)
Twenty years after the first, Minnowbrook II was held to reassess the field’s progress. Organized by George Frederickson, it included scholars from diverse backgrounds and focused on globalization, technology, and managerialism.
Key Features:
- Review of NPA: It evaluated the impact of New Public Administration and concluded that it had brought significant positive change but needed more institutionalization.
- Recognition of Globalization: Minnowbrook II acknowledged that public administration could no longer be studied in isolation from international issues and global interdependence.
- Use of Technology: Highlighted the growing role of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) in administrative systems.
- Managerialism: Discussed the rise of New Public Management (NPM) and its focus on efficiency, effectiveness, and results.
Criticisms:
- Some participants felt it moved too far from the normative values stressed in Minnowbrook I.
- There was concern about the dominance of managerial approaches over democratic and equity concerns.
Comparative Analysis
| Aspect | Minnowbrook I (1968) | Minnowbrook II (1988) |
|---|---|---|
| Context | Social unrest, civil rights movement, Vietnam War | Globalization, technology boom, neoliberalism |
| Main Focus | Relevance, equity, citizen participation | Managerial efficiency, global interdependence |
| Approach | Value-driven and people-centric | Balanced between values and efficiency |
Conclusion
Both Minnowbrook I and II contributed significantly to the evolution of Public Administration. While Minnowbrook I laid the foundation for a value-based, socially responsible discipline, Minnowbrook II adapted it to the realities of globalization and technological change. Together, they emphasized that public administration must evolve continuously to remain relevant, effective, and democratic in addressing the complex issues of governance.