TY - JOUR
T1 - The “illusion” of administrative sovereignty in developing countries
T2 - A historical institutionalism perspective on administrative sovereignty in Ghana
AU - Ohemeng, Frank L.K.
AU - Foli, Rosina K.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 Public Administration Theory Network.
PY - 2022
Y1 - 2022
N2 - The emergence of transnational administrations and their influence on domestic affairs of countries have led to the questioning of the notion of administrative sovereignty. Yet, the question of whether countries have this sovereignty and how it should be understood is to be fully resolved and the debate continues unabated. In this paper, we contribute to this debate by focusing on whether countries from the developing south, are and can be administratively sovereign and to what extent can they be considered as such. Have developing countries ever been administratively sovereign? To what extent are these states administratively sovereign, if any? In short, how free are the authorities in these countries in organizing their own administrative apparatuses in policy development and service delivery? What can historical institutionalism teach us about the issue of administrative sovereignty? Following the continuum in the understanding of administrative sovereignty and using a desk review and organizing the evidence through historical institutionalism as a concept, the Ghanaian case shows limited administrative sovereignty.
AB - The emergence of transnational administrations and their influence on domestic affairs of countries have led to the questioning of the notion of administrative sovereignty. Yet, the question of whether countries have this sovereignty and how it should be understood is to be fully resolved and the debate continues unabated. In this paper, we contribute to this debate by focusing on whether countries from the developing south, are and can be administratively sovereign and to what extent can they be considered as such. Have developing countries ever been administratively sovereign? To what extent are these states administratively sovereign, if any? In short, how free are the authorities in these countries in organizing their own administrative apparatuses in policy development and service delivery? What can historical institutionalism teach us about the issue of administrative sovereignty? Following the continuum in the understanding of administrative sovereignty and using a desk review and organizing the evidence through historical institutionalism as a concept, the Ghanaian case shows limited administrative sovereignty.
KW - Administrative sovereignty
KW - Ghana
KW - bureaucratic capacity
KW - developing countries
KW - historical institutionalism
KW - sovereignty
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85141372336&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/10841806.2022.2138193
DO - 10.1080/10841806.2022.2138193
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85141372336
SN - 1084-1806
VL - 44
SP - 298
EP - 320
JO - Administrative Theory and Praxis
JF - Administrative Theory and Praxis
IS - 4
ER -