Z Skweyiya: Commonwealth Association of Public Administration and
Management (CAPAM) Seminar

18 April 2007

The President of CAPAM, Minister Fraser-Moleketi
Fellow government ministers
Members of the Diplomatic Corp
Members of the Board of CAPAM
Distinguished guests
Ladies and gentlemen

The fact that it is common cause among students and practitioners of public
administration in our country, that the interaction between academics and
practitioners has not yet sufficiently taken root 13 years into our new
democracy makes imperative a reflexive meditation on the deployment of
expertise and political judgment in the domain of public administration. I take
it as a given that both academics who study public administration and
practitioners who make and implement public policy, are all involved in the
deployment of expertise and political judgment.

It is possible that the conclusion "that the interaction between academics
and practitioners has not sufficiently taken root" is partly based upon the
fact of a relatively slow pace of social transformation, because a strong case
can be made that far reaching public service transformation has occurred over
the past 15 years. Alternatively, it is possible that this conclusion is being
reached because of the counterproductive logics that the disjuncture between
research, policy and practice make possible.

Whatever the assumptions or assertions, they have to be tested against the
backdrop of the lived experience of all the pertinent public policy actors in
South Africa and against the backdrop of the programmatic interventions
generated by CAPAM's trajectory more generally.

Chairperson, allow me to start this address with general reflects on the
issues of expertise and political judgment in public administration. The
Rapporteur's summary report on the 2006 Biennial CAPAM conference mentions
seven fields in which these issues of expertise and political judgment manifest
and play themselves out:

1. The primacy given to particular values and the associated regime of
fundamental rights
2. The question of whether marginal or fundamental structural reforms are being
undertaken
3. The calibre of leadership over time
4. The extent of the service delivery deficits and requisite capabilities
5. The existence of an enabling platform of partnerships and cross-government
collaborations
6. The efficacy of indigenous solutions
7. The distribution of benefits in the interim and final outcomes.

The common features and peculiarities of public administration in the South
African context have to be specified at least in terms of these seven fields.
In each of these seven fields different kinds of expertise are brought to bear
and different kinds of political judgments are being made on a continuous
basis. The background papers prepared for this seminar detail how both
academics and practitioners have all been involved in making assessments and
decisions about the exercise of expertise and political judgment in public
administration in our country. It is of credit to our country that over the
past 13 years only a few academics or practitioners have adopted an aloof
stance to these matters.

Most of us have been engaged and active participants who have gotten our
hands dirty. We have variously adopted open or closed systems approaches
depending upon our tolerance for ambiguity and dissonance. We have speculated
about the dynamics of particular situations with varying degrees of insight; we
have or have not had the luxury of being able to assess available information
with due diligence and we have variously chosen optimal or sub-optimal paths.
The question is thus not whether academics are foxes and practitioners
hedgehogs. The question is who, when required, has had the ability to change
back and forth between these two frames of mind?

I recommend the insightful and thought provoking text 'Expert Political
Judgment: How Good Is It? How Can We Know?' by Philip Tetlock for anyone
interested in further exploring the ramifications of the different frames of
minds of foxes and hedgehogs. The book has, for instance, interesting chapters
on radical scepticism, on whether "foxes are more willing than hedgehogs to
entertain self-subversive scenarios," and on the limits of objectivity and
accountability.

Given South Africa's history and the complexity and magnitude of the
processes of public service transformation that we have initiated, it is highly
probable that we have made some mistakes and missed some opportunities. We have
to be able to openly assess and make judgment calls about these matters if we
want to improve the interface between academics and practitioners. My reading
of the two background papers prepared for this seminar is that they start to
tip toe as soon they approach making these judgment calls.

They do, however, canvass all the pertinent issues and interrogate various
efforts made to enhance the interface between academics and practitioners. They
have therefore set the stage for critical, robust and constructive engagement.
Instances of 'friendly fire' are an occupational hazard but this should not
deter us from debating the bold measures that are necessary in our second
decade of democracy.

Our discussion of the interface between academics and practitioners must
bear in mind that the transformation of the public service was informed by a
clear and decisive political mandate and implemented in a transparent manner.
Despite this mandate, the transformation of our public service was also a
product of a negotiated political transition.

It was informed by the imperative to be inclusive and harness all available
resources. This year's 8 January Statement by the African National Congress
(ANC) reaffirms this imperative and calls for forging a strong, coherent and
united front across all strata and classes within society to defeat racism,
sexism, poverty, unemployment and inequality.

In this regard, the pertinent watch words in the 8 January 2007 statement
are "not to be timid about acknowledging and celebrating the important strides
we have made, nor shy away from critically examining our record."

The first big question that we therefore have to deal with is the following:
How, with which tools and on the basis of which criteria should we calibrate
the expert performance and political judgment of academics and practitioners as
they interact in the domain of public administration in the South African
context?

This leads to a second fundamental question: How relevant are the
competencies of the various professionals in academia and the public service
and what needs to be done to substantially enhance these competencies? The
answer to part of this question was provided by my colleague the Minister for
Public Service and Administration in her briefing to the media in February this
year on behalf of the Governance and Administration Cluster.

She highlighted the fact that the Cabinet had recently approved the
reconstitution of the South African Management Development Institute (SAMDI) as
a Public Service Academy with a brief to revamp the content of the training
provided to public servants. Government's Programme of Action for 2007,
underlines the fact that the organisation and capacity of the State is going to
be a priority concern in the years leading up to 2009.

The Public Service Academy is one side of the coin and has to be seen in the
context of the gradual re-alignment of the university sector towards the social
and economic needs of the country. It is common because that education and
skills are a binding constraint to accelerate and share economic growth and the
state of affairs in key professions in the country is a matter of serious
concern. The 2006 Accelerated and Shared Growth Initiative of South Africa
(AsgiSA) Annual Report notes, for instance, that the town and regional planning
profession is in a state of disarray.

The Joint Initiative on Priority Skills Acquisition (JIPSA) is accordingly
attending to the issue of the role and status of town and regional planners;
the competencies required in this profession; the registration of these
professionals and the role and functioning of institutions like the Planning
Council. With respect to architects, engineers and artisans the issue is not so
much one of professional organisation as it is insufficient local supply to
meet local demand.

With respect to the human and social science disciplines and the public
management professions in our country, there are a number of common
concerns:

1. Are these disciplines and professions being funded adequately given the
magnitude of the task of social transformation confronting our country?
2. Are we making sufficient investment in creating and retaining the next
generation of African researchers?
3. Is the research that is being conducted relevant and applicable? In other
words, does this research inform policy making and does this research get
translated into improvements in the service delivery practices of the public
service?

I know that formulating the latter question in this manner suggests an
instrumental relationship between the use of policy research findings and
decision making processes. Beyond these instrumental relationships, often times
it is the conceptual relationships between research, policy, and practice that
are more important. It is easy to underestimate the extent to which social
science research influences the knowledge, understandings and attitudes of
policy makers and practitioners. In addition, the commissioning and conducting
of research is sometimes done solely for tactical purposes to defer the taking
of action or as a way of ensuring the involvement of stakeholders.

Examining the relationship between academics and practitioners only in terms
of knowledge generation and information sharing is only a small part of the
story. The relationships also have to be examined in terms of the values,
identities, ideologies and institutions that frame and channel the actions of
the various actors. In the South African context, this perspective was used in
preparing the publication 'A Nation in the Making: A Discussion Document on
Macro-Social Trends in South Africa.' The discussion document covers a wide
range of topics all of which are underpinned by a concern about engendering
social integration and cohesion.

Interestingly, the discussion document notes with concern "the tendency to
devalue both in terms of social status and social rewards some of the
professions that deal with the moulding of social values, particularly pedagogy
and the teaching profession from primary to tertiary level; writing; research
in the social sciences and other such pursuits." This section of the discussion
document concludes by noting that: "Much work still needs to be done for the
nation to use its own prism to define itself."

The Macro-Social Report also examines the issue of the extent and vibrancy
of the social networks in our country. The report notes that "participation in
civil society activities is relatively high and in broad terms, South African
society manifests a high level of socio-political consciousness." The social
value of these levels of active participation in civil society activities and
the associated levels of socio-political consciousness is diminished if they
are confined to our geographic borders.

In this context it is heartening to see that the elections that will breathe
life into Article 22 of the Constitutive Act of the African Union will commence
in June this year. Article 22 establishes the Economic, Social and Cultural
Council (ECOSOCC) of the African Union as an advisory organ composed of
different social and professional groups of the Member States of the Union.
These election processes, which will run from June to December this year, will
result in the election of 130 representatives of civil society organisations
from across our continent to the ECOSOCC General Assembly.

We need to always bear in mind that the aim of the Constitutive Act of the
AU is to create a people-driven and community-based partnership between
governments and all segments of civil society, particularly women, youth and
the private sector in order to strengthen cohesion and solidarity among African
people. The academic community and their professional associations in our
country must play their rightful role in ensuring that this goal is reached. A
representative and vibrant ECOSOCC General Assembly is an important first
milestone in attaining this goal.

Chairperson, I can see that some people in the audience are beginning to
shift uncomfortably in their seats. I take it that this is because I have so
far discussed public administration from a positivist and empirical
perspective. I will not prolong their discomfort.

It is important that I highlight the point that drawing on discursive
analysis and participatory deliberative practices, the empiricist approach to
policy analysis is increasingly being challenge. There are many areas of public
administration including the social construction of policy problems, the role
of interpretation and narrative analysis in policy enquiry, and the dialectics
of policy argumentation; that benefit from a consideration of vital issues like
ideas, language, discourse, advocacy coalitions, social meanings and multiple
realities.

For the participants in this seminar who appreciate the value of examining
the academic practitioner interface in public administration from this
perspective, I recommend the use of the text 'Reframing Public Policy:
Discursive Politics and Deliberative Practices,' by Frank Fischer as the
platform for your discussions.

All things considered, I am convinced that this seminar on the academic
practitioner interface in public administration is an important contribution at
two programmatic levels. It speaks to the vital issue of the organisation and
capacity of the State in the South African context; and it speaks to the issue
of the vibrancy of the Economic, Social and Cultural Council of the African
Union at another level.

Any one of these reasons by itself would have made it an honour to be
invited to participate in this seminar.

I thank you.

Issued by: Department of Social Development
18 April 2007