Entering office in January 2025, President Trump set about dismantling the federal civil service and appointing partisan officials instead. This was not an isolated event. Throughout the world there have been claims and concerns about democratic erosion (Bermeo 2016; V-Dem 2023). According to many indicators, the third wave of democracy petered out early in the century and a global democratic recession is underway.

Despite the prominence of the issue and growth in academic literature, the relationship with public administration has been under analysed (see: Bauer et al. 2021; Lotta et al. 2024).  Public administration involves the design, delivery and evaluation of public policies at the local and national (but also supranational) level. The quality of public services, economic prosperity as well as human well being are all dependent on the quality of public administration.  Policies can often be designed and implemented with professionalism, the use of expertise and citizen input. But they can also encounter problems of corruption, inefficiency and inequality.  The potential erosion of democratic standards and norms could potentially weaken and erode public administration quality worldwide – causing citizens with poorer experiences a result.  However, public bodies may have also proven to be a barrier to democratic erosion.

This special issue will consider all questions on the relationship between democratic quality and public administration, including, but not limited to:

• Conceptual papers:
  • What is the conceptual relationship between democratic quality, public administration quality, technocracy and populism?
• Causal empirical papers:
  • How has democratic backsliding effected public administration, public services and principles of good governance?
  • To what extent has poor public administration been a driver of democratic backsliding?
• National case studies:
  • What strategies have political leaders and would be autocrats used to erode professionalism in public bodies?
  • How have populist political parties behaved in office? 
  • Have the civil service and public officials acted as accelerants of backsliding? Or have they acted as protectors of democracy, democratic standards and election  quality?  What have their responses been to attempt of democratic erosion?

Special Issue Contents

Comparative Papers

• ‘Democracy, Public Administration and Democratic Backsliding’, Toby S. James (University of East Anglia, UK) (open access)
• ‘Merit and impartiality in public administration: the effect of democratic backsliding through participation and contestation’ David Ibañez and Ricardo A. Bello-Gómez (Rutgers University, USA)
• ‘Expert knowledge and policymaking in authoritarian contexts: a systematic review’ Caroline Schlaufer (University of Bern, Switzerland) and Tatiana Chalaya (University of Bremen, Germany)

Evidence from Africa

1. ‘The Wilting Jasmine: The Erosion of Public Administration and Democratic Backsliding in Tunisia’, Michael J. Schumacher (Loyola University Chicago, USA) and Addison K. Emig (Vanderbilt University, USA).
2. ‘Democratic Backsliding and Public Administration: The Experience of Ghana,‘ Emmanuel Yeboah-Assiamah, Philip Asare Baidoo and Kwame Asamoah (University of Ghana, Ghana)
3. ‘Democratic Backsliding through Bureaucratic Capture: State Power and Institutional Mimicry in Nigeria’ Omonye Omoigberale (University of Babcock, Nigeria).

Evidence from the Americas

• ‘Resisting the tide: the role of organizational routines in mitigating policy dismantling’, Fernando Nieto-Morales (El Colegio de México, Mexico) and Guillermo M. Cejudo (CIDE, Mexico City, Mexico)
• ‘Narratives of Democratic Backsliding: Media Coverage of Illiberal Administrative Policies’, Luis David Ramirez Benitez, (University of Illinois Chicago College of Urban Planning and Public Affairs, USA)
• ‘Eroding Democracy and Public Administration Capacities Through Overstretching the Armed Forces. Evidence of the Federal Police Dismantling in Mexico’ Gerardo Bonilla-Alguera (Instituto Mora, Mexico), Daira Arana-Aguilar (Tecnológico de Monterrey, Mexico) and Sergio Padilla-Oñate (University of Guadalajara, Mexico)
• ‘Bureaucrats’ Willingness to Resist Democratic Backsliding: An Experimental Study in the Brazilian Federal Government,‘ José Renato Fragoso Lobo, Maiara Marinho, Alketa Peci and João V. Guedes-Neto (Brazilian School of Public and Business Administration, Fundação Getúlio Vargas, Brazil).
• Presidential Threats and Bureaucrats’ Support for Democracy in Brazil, Celeste Beesley (Brigham Young University, USA), Darren Hawkins (Brigham Young University, USA), Mona Lyne (University of Missouri – Kansas, USA), Scott Morgenstern (University of Pittsburgh), Daniel Nielson (University of Texas at Austin).
• Democratic backsliding in Honduras and MACCIH´s effects (2016-2021)‘ Miguel Gomis (Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Colombia).

Evidence from Asia

• ‘A Coalitional Perspective on Democratic Backsliding: Elite Coalitions and the Bureaucracy in Turkey’ Dr. Mehmet Kerem Coban (SOAS, University of London & Kadir Has University, Istanbul), Prof. Kutsal Yesilkagit (Leiden University), Dr. Ozsel Beleli (University College London)
• ‘Democratic backsliding and public administration in Pakistan’s hybrid regime: a balance of power approach’ Sameen A. Mohsin Ali (University of Birmingham, UK)
• ‘Populism, public administration and democratic backsliding: The Indian experience’ St. Xavier’s College (Autonomous), Kolkata, India
• ‘From people’s champion to power consolidator: Examining Jokowi’s role in Indonesia’s democratic backsliding’ Martin Petlach and Veronika Říčanová (Mendel University, Czech Republic).
• Public Administration under Competitive Authoritarianism: Impact of Democratic Backsliding on Public Administration in Sri Lanka’, Ramesh Ramasamy; Ranjith Dickwella; Mohammad Meeran Ijhas (University of Peradeniya, Sri Lanka)
• ‘Administrative Resilience and Democratic Backsliding in Crisis Governance: Comparative Lessons from Wuhan and Shanghai during COVID-19’, Jie Xiao (South China University of Technology, China), Wenzheng Li (Shandong University, China) and Jian Xu (South China University of Technology, China)

Evidence from Europe

• ‘The (worst) laws of the land: The concept of legislative basket cases, legislative backsliding and public administration in Central-Eastern Europe’, Rebeka Kiss (Centre for Social Sciences, Budapest, Hungary) and Miklós Sebők (Ludovika University of Public Service, Budapest, Hungary)
• ‘Understanding de-institutionalisation in a democracy: media perspectives on the legitimacy of the state committees in Finland, 1960–1994‘ Kati Katajisto and Johanna Rainio-Niemi (University of Helsinki, Finland).
• ‘Eroded Decisiveness of Public Administration? The Political Use of Law and Legal Knowledge After Democratic Backsliding – Case of Poland’ Dr Sonia Horonziak (Institute of Public Affairs, University of Warsaw, Poland), Dr Marcin Kaim (Polish Academy of Sciences – Scientific Centre in Vienna, Austria)
• ‘Democratic Backsliding and Public Administration: The Experience of UK’ Sean Kippin (Stirling University, UK)
• ‘Democratic Backsliding: Populism and Independent Regulatory Authorities in Italy During the Conte and Meloni Governments’ Paola Coletti (Universitas Mercatorum, Italy)

Bibliography

Bauer, Michael W, B Guy Peters, Jon Pierre, Kutsal Yesilkagit, and Stefan Becker. 2021. Democratic backsliding and public administration: How populists in government transform state bureaucracies (Cambridge University Press).

Bermeo, Nancy. 2016. ‘On democratic backsliding’, Journal of Democracy, 27: 5-19.

Lotta, Gabriela Spanghero, Barbara Piotrowska, and Nadine Raaphorst. 2024. “Introduction “street-level bureaucracy, populism, and democratic backsliding”.”  Governance 37 (S1):5-19. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12906.

V-Dem. 2023. “Democracy Report 2023: Defiance in the Face of Autocratization.” Gothenburg: V-Dem Institute.