Professional Documents
Culture Documents
A Global Threat 7
Complex 7
Article
Abstract
Ethical issues arising from public administration are quite complex and difficult. Using a monistic
normative ethical approach to these issues may not be very helpful. Thus James Svaras three-pronged
approach to public administration ethics is proposed in order to show its plausibility. The case of
Dr Stockman in Henrik Ibsens play An Enemy of the People is examined as a way of demonstrating the
significance of Svaras model.
Keywords
Civil servants, ethical analysis, public administration, Svaras ethical problem-solving model to public
administration ethics, whistle-blowing
Introduction
This article highlights James Svaras problem-solving model in public administration ethics. The case of
Dr Stockman in Henrik Ibsens play An Enemy of the People will be examined in order to demonstrate
how Svaras model can work in a situation of similar nature as in Ibsens play and whether the same
model is plausible to adopt in public administration ethics in general. Specifically, the article will be
guided by the question: If one were in Dr Stockmans position as the towns medical officer (that is, a
civil servant), what would one do and why? Svaras ethical problem-solving model to moral issues in
public administration is three-pronged in the sense that it employs the three major theories of Western
normative ethics, namely: deontology (principle- or duty-based ethics), consequentialism and virtue
ethics. Aside from the fact that there are many reasons for moral behaviour as Williams (2011, pp. 910)
suggests, the application of a single normative ethical theory, according to Svara, may not be sufficient
in solving complex ethical issues in public administration. Moral issues arising in politics, including
public administration, could become messy so that it blurs the distinction between our moral ideals and
what is practical and realistic (Coady, 2008). For Svara, ethical issues in public administration could be
best addressed if the three standard theories of Western normative ethics are viewed as complementing
each other. Ethical theories, Martin (2001, p. 36) argues, should not be viewed as competing foundational principles; rather, they should be construed as alternative ways of systematizing our view of
morality and as general frameworks for organizing moral reflection and for developing moral
arguments.
Ryan C. Urbano, Chair, Department of Philosophy & Religious Studies, University of San Carlos, Philippines.
India Quarterly, 66, 2 (2010): 133149
E-mail: ryanurbano59@yahoo.com
Downloaded from jhv.sagepub.com by guest on October 14, 2015
Ryan C. Urbano
The article will first give a synopsis of Ibsens play before it will analyze and apply Svaras
(2007, p. 108) ethical problem-solving model to Dr Stockmans case.
10
Ryan C. Urbano
the towns tourism industry. Perhaps spending a lot of tax-payers money for the rehabilitation of
the baths would be worthwhile after all, rather than losing their primary means of income. So, if
Dr Stockman will not disclose the truth to the public, he and the town will endanger the health of the
tourists. As a doctor, he has pledged to uphold his professions oath of protecting people from sickness.
He also thinks that it is his duty as a civil servant to inform the public, through proper channels, about
the true condition of the baths. But he was forewarned by the Mayor that he will be dismissed from his
office if he fails to recant his position.
Analysis
Determining Dr Stockmans duty in the situation above considering the obligations and responsibilities
of his position and his professional role
As a medical officer of the municipal baths, Dr Stockmans main obligation is to demonstrate his loyalty
to the town as an organization. He has the duty to promote public interest, display a commitment to
serve, commit to procedural fairness, exercise fiduciary responsibility, uphold the law, support the
democratic process and be responsive to the policy goals of political superiors while fairly examining
all policy options and exercising leadership appropriate to position (Svara, 2007, p. 28). He must
know what the organization and his political superiors expect him to do in terms of his responsibility
and accountability in the exercise of his role as a municipal medical officer. His primary duty is to
obey and defer to the judgment and decisions of his political superiors. As the Mayor in Ibsens play
says: The individual has to learn to subordinate himself to the wholeor, I should say, to those
authorities charged with the common good (Ibsen, 1970, p. 127). So, one of Dr Stockmans duties as a
civil servant is to promote public health in terms of maintaining the cleanliness and sanitation of the
baths. Connected to this duty is his obligation to protect the health of the tourists who use the baths. He
also has the duty to observe and uphold the economic goals and established policies of the town. And if
necessary, make recommendations (in terms of policies and research) he deems important as a steward
of public resources for the proper maintenance of the baths as well as how best to protect the health of
the tourists.
Dr Stockmans professional duty is basically defined by his profession as a medical doctor. And his
primary duty in this professional capacity is to render service to anyone who needs medical attention and
to protect them from illness. Svara noted that there are situations wherein there is a tension between
ones duty as a public administrator and ones duty as a professional (Svara, 2007, p. 111). In the case
under examination, this tension is seen in Dr Stockmans duty as a public administrator to uphold the
economic goals of the town concerning the baths as an income-generating venture and obedience to
the legitimate orders of his superiors, on one hand, and in his duty as a doctor which is to protect the
tourists whose health is jeopardised by the contaminated baths, on the other hand. But if Dr Stockman
does not do something to protect the health of the tourists which could lead to grave illness or even death,
he would be held morally responsible and his conscience cannot tolerate this. And granting that he
discloses to the public that the baths are contaminated, the Mayor will dismiss him from his job and his
family will suffer as a consequence.
Although a public administrators obligations to the organization and to his political superiors are
very important because of his accountability to the public (or fiduciary responsibility), these obligations
Journal of Human Values, 20, 1 (2014): 717
Downloaded from jhv.sagepub.com by guest on October 14, 2015
12
Ryan C. Urbano
Principle based
Dr Stockman must not only approach his situation from the perspective of virtue ethics. He must also
consider the ethical and political principles applicable to his case. So one important principle he has to
apply to his situation is democracy. In a democracy one needs to respect the opinions of others. So in the
case of Dr Stockman, though he has moral and political convictions, he must also consider the decisions
of his political superiors as well as of his fellow members in the committee of the municipal baths.
He must not take matters solely into his own hands. As a civil servant, he has to uphold the law of the
town as a political organization, particularly existing policies concerning the municipal baths.
Another principle he has to observe is the principle of truth-telling. In Dr Stockmans case, he has to
apply this principle by informing his political superiors and the public of the true condition of the baths.
He must also defend the principle of the sanctity of life by warning the public of the danger posed by the
polluted baths.
Consequence based
Analysing the cost and benefit of Dr Stockmans options in the situation is another important element in
his decision-making process. His main duty is to promote public interest. How this duty can be effectively
carried out requires not only the moral quality of his character (virtue) as a public servant and his ability
to apply fundamental ethical and political principles but also the foresight to examine the results of his
decisions or choices. He needs, for example, to consider the impact of his decisions to the organization,
political superiors, businessmen, workers and to his own family. Equal consideration of the stakeholders
interests is required by his duty to promote the public good.
At this point, it is important to note that ethical analysis is useful for reminding a civil servant of the
broad constraints on his search for alternatives. They often do not consistently point to a single right
thing to do. Hence the next stage is necessary.
List of options
Looking at Dr Stockmans present predicament yields three possible options. Either (a) he follows the
appropriate procedure of resolving a problem set in place by the town as an organization and defers to
the judgment of his political superior (that is, the Mayor); (b) he informs the public about the contaminated baths (blow the whistle); or (c) he resigns from his position, discloses the information to the
public as an ordinary citizen and looks for employment elsewhere. Option (c) is actually a variant of
option (b). Dr Stockman, after whistle-blowing, will either resign straightaway or wait and see whether
he would be fired or forced to resign. Moreover, option (a) and option (b/c) could be seen as not mutually
exclusive; they can be considered sequentially, that is, b/c is an option if option (a) fails to work.
Decision
Choosing the best alternative
Option (a) is tenable but Dr Stockman risks endangering the health of the tourists, although no such risk
occurs if option (a) works or results in a satisfactory solution to the problem. Option (b) is too costly on
his part because of the Mayors stern warning that he will lose his job. And this could be a reason why
Dr Stockman should first try option (a). Besides, whistle-blowing in his case will no longer work because
Journal of Human Values, 20, 1 (2014): 717
Downloaded from jhv.sagepub.com by guest on October 14, 2015
As a public servant, part of Dr Stockmans duty is not only to uphold the law and the policy goals of
his organization but also to improve on the law through the governmental process; for example, by
conducting research on needs and by policy recommendations (Svara, 2007, p. 25). His commitment to
public service implies that he must persist and persevere in order to carry out the tasks entrusted to him
by his superiors as well as by the public.
It would have been prudent for Dr Stockman to first report the information to his political superior
and recommend proposals to remedy the problem. As a civil servant, it is his duty to respect democratic
procedure, faithfully fulfil the policies and goals of the organization and to show honesty in the
identification of needs and problems pertaining to his specific role. This is option (a) as described above.
Providing a reasoned justification for the decision
As already mentioned, option (a) is the best alternative for Dr Stockman. It would have been wise for him
to first resolve the problem internally in order not to cause panic to the public which could lead to protests
and demands detrimental to a democratic order. This is also the prudent thing to do because it spares him
from the risk of losing his job. Subscribing to the proper method of troubleshooting a problem required by
the organizational set-up does not violate the principle of truth-telling or denying the public of their right to
information. This is so because the political authority, which represents the people in a democratic society
and which is directly accountable to them, has been informed. In other words, the people are indirectly
informed when the individuals whom they have chosen to represent them have been informed. After all,
political authority derived its mandate to rule from the people themselves. So here, the apparent conflict
between the duty to respect the democratic process and political authority on the one hand and the duty to
respect the right of the public to be informed on the other hand are reconciled and are both upheld.
Although Dr Stockman is accountable to the people as a public official, he is also accountable to the
organization and political authority he serves. Though he may be convinced that he has the moral duty
to inform and alert the public of the danger posed by the contaminated baths, he also has the duty to
support democratic procedure in place in the organization. Dr Stockmans responsibility as a public
administrator is inextricably linked to institutions and processes of democracy. John Burke calls
this notion of responsibility procedurally grounded conception of responsibility (Burke, 1994, p. 468).
Journal of Human Values, 20, 1 (2014): 717
Downloaded from jhv.sagepub.com by guest on October 14, 2015
14
Ryan C. Urbano
So Dr Stockman needs to go through the difficult route of democratic process in getting his moral
predicament resolved before he attempts to opt for extra-organizational means of realizing his moral
conviction or belief. As Svara (2007, p. 25) argues:
The ethical obligation to uphold the law requires that one subjugate ones personal beliefs (i.e. ones sense
of morality) to discharge the duties of the office. Furthermore, it is a violation of administrative ethics to
substitute ones own view of morality for law and policy. The administrator can seek to change the policy
through appropriate channels and methods within his or her organization, but if these efforts are not successful
he or she must accept the established policy. If one cannot subjugate their personal morals to the law,
however, he or she should change positions or leave administrative office to seek to change the policy as a citizen
through the political process. He or she should not ignore the law nor try to covertly undermine it.
Arguably, Dr Stockmans effort to follow the democratic process was not good enough. He did not
really fully exhaust the available channels or methods within the organization. His reaction to the
Mayors disagreement to his plan was somehow excessive because he immediately exposed the defect
of the baths to the community. Part of his obligation as administrator is to encourage his political
superiors to fulfil their responsibilities (Svara, 2007, p. 43). He should have known that there was still
time to find ways to influence his superiors because the summer season when tourists visit is still distant.
A better solution to the problem could have been achieved had he reconsidered the ways to make his
proposal agreeable to his political superior. So when the mayor expressed his objections to Dr Stockmans
report and his unwillingness to have it presented to the baths committee, it was advisable and prudent for
Dr Stockman to consider agreeing with the mayor and then revising his report to adjust to the objections.
Dr Stockman should have thought that civil servants, in the words of Svara, are not sole practitioners
who set up their own practice. They operate within an authority structure, they work with others to
advance organisational mission, and they have a responsibility to make the organization as strong,
effective, and ethical as possible (Svara, 2007, p. 5). Though the mayor warned him not to disclose the
information, he could have sought the opinion of the other members of the committee of the municipal
baths. These members also have the right to be informed of the real condition of the baths. Perhaps, his
proposals, with the backing of the committee members, will be considered or at least an agreement could
be reached without compromising all the interests of the stakeholders. By disclosing the information to
the public without giving the committee a chance to review and decide on the issue could be construed
as Dr Stockmans imposition of his own judgment over the judgment of the committee. Failing to seek
the opinion of these members perhaps indicate a lack of deliberation and prudence on his part as a public
administrator. In fact the committee should be informed because withholding information from them is
tantamount to undermining their authority and this will weaken their power as a policy-making or
implementing body that oversees the operation of the municipal baths.
It was also improper for the mayor to instruct Dr Stockman to withhold his report from the committee.
And Dr Stockman himself could have firmly, but nicely, reminded the mayor of this procedural
requirement. By doing so, the mayor might have been much less reluctant to follow this requirement if
he (Dr Stockman) has agreed to revise the report to consider the mayors objections.
When Dr Stockman claimed that what he did was in the name of public interest, this does not imply
that he has untrammelled discretion to do as he deems right. Indeed he has the authority and the expertise
in handling the situation being a medical officer of the municipal baths, but he also needs to consider the
political, economic and social implications of his decisions. As to the political, economic and social
Journal of Human Values, 20, 1 (2014): 717
Downloaded from jhv.sagepub.com by guest on October 14, 2015
16
Ryan C. Urbano
Based on this assumption, Dr Stockman should have restrained himself or exercised self-control
before making a drastic move in disclosing the information to the public. His intention may be considered
laudable in the sense that he is honest, but possessing this virtue is not sufficient. As Svara (2007, p. 52)
says, the truly virtuous administrator may be good but not know how to do good, not know which way
to be good among alternatives, and not know how to distinguish being good as a private person and as
an administrator. Moreover, Svara pointed out in his triangle approach to ethics that if one is convinced
that he already has the virtue, there is a tendency to overlook the real meaning of public interest, disregard
political authority and organizational goals and policies and ignore consequences that benefit the public.
Over-reliance on the virtue approach leads to self-righteousness and makes one complacent. One may be
so convinced that one is already virtuous that he thinks that his decision is already right to the point of
disregarding the opinion of others. Dr Stockmans behaviour seems to exhibit this tendency because of
his assertiveness and combativeness in relating to political authority and in the manner he fulfils his
moral beliefs and convictions. Dr Stockman was so confident of his service to the community and so
enamoured with his ideals of truth and freedom that he somehow ignored the negative consequences of
his decision, especially those that might befall his family. He should have heeded Aslaksens advice in
the play: I always make every effort for moderation. Because moderation is a citizens chief virtue
in my opinion, anyway (Ibsen, 1970, p. 145). Elsewhere, Aslaksen also said: Proceed in moderation,
or youll never get anywhere. You can trust my word on that, because Ive gleaned my experience in the
school of life (Ibsen, 1970, p. 146).
Monitoring and evaluation of results. Making adjustments if necessary
Suppose Dr Stockman failed to convince and change the opinion of his political superior regarding the
baths after exhausting all the available internal mechanisms (or going through the democratic procedure),
then the next best option for him is to stay in office and fight the issue from within. He could have blown
the whistle with more care. In this way, he keeps his job and thereby secures his familys interests. In the
play, Dr Stockman blew the whistle prematurely and this was very costly on his part.
The next option is to resign and seek a solution to the problem concerning the baths as a private
citizen. This is option (c) as previously described. I think the value of the sanctity of human life and the
duty to protect others (the tourists) from harm is too important a value to be sacrificed in exchange for
economic benefit. Though the town and its people depend so much on the baths for a living, the value of
human life is of paramount importance. Undoubtedly, human life has priority over economic value. In
the end, ethical decision-making in public administration is a matter of balancing public values, and on
this regard, public administrators are left on their own to ultimately decide which public value or values
should prevail when these values conflict with one another (see Yates, 1981, p. 38). In promoting public
interest, public administrators are required to maintain the delicate balance of accountability and
independence, responsiveness and neutrality, and deference and assertiveness in their relationship to
political superiors (Svara, 2007, p. 45).
Conclusion
In pointing out the relevance of Svaras problem-solving model to public administration ethics using
Ibsens play An Enemy of the People, two main stages for discussion have been laid down. First, there is
the stage of working within the system by exhausting formal channels in solving issues in public
Journal of Human Values, 20, 1 (2014): 717
Downloaded from jhv.sagepub.com by guest on October 14, 2015