Abstracts
Résumé
Plusieurs études relèvent une diversification des méthodes en Administration publique contemporaine. Cette étude fait un état des lieux systématique et comparé, sur une décennie, des méthodes de recherche publiées dans deux revues nationales en administration publique. Les recherches publiées en Administration publique au Canada, ainsi qu’en Australie, semblent en décalage sur la communauté mondiale en Administration publique au plan méthodologique. Notre revue systématique révèle toutefois peu de différences entre les deux revues : les entrevues et analyses qualitatives de contenu sont courantes dans les deux échantillons, mais les techniques quantitatives utilisées demeurent élémentaires. Il s’agit d’une particularité qui n’est pas partagée avec la recherche en science politique canadienne.
Mots-clés :
- Méthodologie,
- revue systématique,
- administration publique,
- Canada
Abstract
Several studies reveal a diversification of methods in contemporaneous Public Administration. This study takes systematic stock of and compares the research methods used over one decade of published research in two national journals in Public Administration. Research papers published in Canada, as well as in Australia, have apparently not followed methodological developments in the wider Public Administration community. Our systematic review revealed minor differences between these two communities : interviews and qualitative content analysis are popular in both samples, whereas quantitative methods remain basic. This particularity is not shared by Canadian political science research.
Keywords:
- Methodology,
- systematic review,
- public administration,
- Canada
Appendices
Bibliographie
- Adcock, R., et Collier, D. (2011). A shared standard for qualitative and quantitative research. American political science review, 95(3), 529-546.
- Andrews, R. et Boyne, G. (2010). Better public services: the moral purpose of public management research ? Public management review, 12(3), 307-321.
- Béland, F. et Blais, A. (1989). Quantitative methods and contemporary sociology in francophone Quebec. Canadian review of sociology and anthropology, 26(3), 533–556.
- Borins, S. (2003). From research to practice : a survey of public administration scholars in Canada. Canadian public administration, 46(2), 243-256.
- Bowman, J. S. et Hajjar, S. G. (1978). English-language journals in public administration: an analysis. Public administration, 56(2), 203-226.
- Candler, G. G. (2014). The study of public administration in India, the Philippines, Canada and Australia: the universal struggle against epistemic colonization, and toward critical assimilation. Revista de administração pública, 48(5), 1073-1093.
- Cepiku, D. (2011). Two ships passing in the night? Practice and academia in public management. Public money & management, 31(2), 131-138.
- Charbonneau, É., Bernier, L. et Bautista-Beauchesne, N. (2018). Punching below its weight: Canadian public administration scholarship on the world stage. Canadian Public Administration/Administration publique du Canada, 61(3), 361-384.
- Clark, I., Eisen, B. et Pal, L. A. (2015). Curriculum comparison tables. The Atlas of public policy and management: an online database of pedagogy and advice. Toronto, Ontario : University of Toronto. http://portal.publicpolicy.utoronto.ca/en/MPPMPAPrograms/CurriculumComparisonTables/Pages/default.aspx
- Cornut, J. et Larivière, V. (2012). Docteurs et doctorants en science politique au Québec (1997-2010). Politique et Sociétés, 31(3), 67-86.
- Cozzetto, D. A. (1994). Quantitative research in public administration: a need to address some serious methodological problems. Administration & society, 26(3), 337-343.
- Daigneault, P.-M., Jacob, S. et Ouimet, M. (2012). Using systematic review methods within a Ph.D. Dissertation in political science: Challenges and lessons learned from practice. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 17(3), 267-283.
- Dion, M. L. et Stephenson, L. B. (2017). Planning for the future: methodology training in Canadian universities. Canadian journal of political science, 50(1), 281-294.
- Doberstein, C. (2017). An emerging experimental approach to public administration research in Canada. Canadian public administration, 60(1), 135-139.
- Fitzpatrick, J., Goggin, M., Heikkila, T., Klingner, D., Machado, J. et Martell, C. (2011). A new look at comparative public administration: trends in research and an agenda for the future. Public administration review, 71(6), 821-830.
- Gerring, J. et Cojocaru, L. (2016). Selecting cases for intensive analysis: a diversity of goals and methods. Sociological methods & research, 45(3), 392-423.
- Gill, J. et Meier, K. J. (2000). Public administration research and practice: a methodological manifesto. Journal of public administration research and theory, 10(1), 157-199.
- Godbout, J.-F. (2017). Les cinquante ans de la Revue canadienne de science politique : le bilinguisme en déclin ? Revue canadienne de science politique, 50(1), 3-11.
- Goertz, G. et Mahoney, J. (2012). A Tale of two cultures : qualitative and quantitative research in the social sciences. Princeton, NJ : Princeton University Press.
- Gow, J. I. et Seymour Wilson, V. (2014). Speaking what truth to whom? The uneasy relationship between practitioner and academic knowledge in public administration. Canadian Public Administration, 57(1), 118-137
- Groeneveld, S., Tummers, L., Bronkhorst, B., Ashikali, T. et van Thiel, S. (2015). Quantitative methods in public administration: their use and development through time. International public management journal, 18(1), 61-86.
- Gulrajani, N. et Moloney, K. (2012). Globalizing public administration: today’s research and tomorrow’s agenda. Public administration review, 72(1), 78-86.
- Hamermesh, D. S. (2007). Replication in economics. Canadian journal of economics, 40(3), 715-733.
- Henderson, K. M. (2009). Parallel universes: Canadian and U.S. public administration study. Canadian public administration, 52(2), 271-290.
- Héroux-Legault, M. (2017). The evolution of methodological techniques in the Canadian journal of political science. Canadian journal of political science, 50(1), 121-142.
- Hood, C. (2011). It’s public administration, Rod, but maybe not as we know it: British public administration in the 2000s. Public administration 89(1), 128-139.
- Kernaghan, W.D. K. (1968). An overview of public administration in Canada today. Canadian public administration, 11(3), 291-308.
- Lewis-Beck, M. S. et Bélanger, É. (2015). Quantitative methods in political science: research in France and the United States. French politics, 13(2), 175-184.
- Mansbridge, J. (2014). What is political science for? Perspectives on politics, 12(1), 8-17.
- Meier, K. J. (2015). Proverbs and the evolution of public administration. Public administration review, 75(1), 15-24.
- Mezias, S. J. et Regnier, M. O. (2007). Walking the walk as well as talking the talk: replication and the normal science paradigm in strategic management research. Strategic organization, 5(3), 283-296.
- Milward, B., Jensen, L., Roberts, A., Dussauge-Laguna, M. I., Junjan, V., Torenvlied, R., … Durant, R. F. (2016). Is public management neglecting the State? Governance, 29(3), 311-334.
- Moynihan, D. P. (2008). Public management in North America: 1998-2008. Public management review, 10(4), 481-492.
- Montpetit, É., Blais, A. et Foucault, M. (2008). What does it take for a Canadian political scientist to be cited? Social science quarterly, 89(3), 802-816.
- Montpetit, É., Rothmayr Allison, C. et Engeli, I. (2016). Has Simeon’s vision prevailed among Canadian policy scholars? Canadian journal of political science, 49(4), 763-785.
- Ospina, S. M., Esteve, M. et Lee, S. (2018). Assessing qualitative studies in public administration research. Public administration review, 78(4), 763-785.
- Perry, J. L. et Kraemer, K. L. (1986). Research methodology in the “Public administration review” 1975-1984. Public administration review, 46(3), 215-226.
- Petticrew, M. et Roberts, H. (2003). Evidence, hierarchies, and typologies: horses for courses. Journal of epidemiology & community health, 57(7), 527-529.
- Platt, J. (2006). How distinctive are Canadian research methods? Canadian review of sociology, 43(2), 205-231.
- Raadschelders, J. C. N. et Lee, K.-H. (2011). Trends in the study of public administration: empirical and qualitative observations from public administration review, 2000–2009. Public administration review, 71(1), 19-33.
- Raimondo, E., et Newcomer, K. E. (2017). Mixed-methods inquiry in public administration: The interaction of theory, methodology, and praxis. Review of public personnel administration, 37(2), 183-201.
- Riccucci, N. M. (2010). Public administration: traditions of inquiry and philosophies of knowledge. Washington, DC : Georgetown University Press.
- Trampusch, C. et Palier, B. (2016). Between X and Y : how process tracing contributes to opening the black box of causality. New political economy, 21(5), 437-454.
- Weller, N. et Barnes, J. (2014). Finding pathways: mixed-method research for studying causal mechanisms. Cambridge, UK : Cambridge University Press.
- Williams, T. et Gemperle, S. M. (2017). Sequence will tell! Integrating yemporality into set-theoretic multi-method research combining comparative process tracing and qualitative comparative analysis. International journal of social research methodology, 20(2), 121-135.
- Wright, B. E., Manigault, L. J. et Black, T. R. (2004). Quantitative research measurement in public administration: an assessment of journal publications. Administration & society, 35(6), 747-764.
10.7202/1014960ar