prepare land for a private developer's shopping mall and in turn receiving a share of the developer's profits. This is an instance of a public-private partnership. Another example is building a municipal facility with additional space that can be leased out to private sector businesses (a municipal leasing scheme) creating nontax income that can be used to pay off the original cost of the municipal facility. Other examples of public economic entrepreneurship include the following: user fees (charging individual users for the cost of the public service consumed), developer fees (charging developers for the public costs associated with housing or business development such as roads and schools), privatization (letting the private sector take over a previously publicly provided service such as garbage collection), load shedding (ceasing to provide a service such as a city library), creation of public enterprises (such as a city harbor), and selling a public service to another entity (such as providing fire protection services to another city for a fee). These activities are supported by budgetary processes that give project managers greater control and reward saving. Public entrepreneurship outside of the United States most often refers to public enterprise development.
A second type of entrepreneurial public administration described in the literature is political or policy entrepreneurship. Eugene Lewis and Jameson Doig have used the term "public entrepreneurship" to refer to leaders in the political arena who have developed new agencies or created new policy directions, such as J. Edgar Hoover's creation of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Gifford Pinchot's formation of the U.S. Forest Service. Political entrepreneurs are skillful at setting public agendas, creating new agencies, and implementing new policy directions.
Some democratic theorists have argued that the philosophy of entrepreneurial public administration as well as some of the techniques of the entrepreneurial management style conflict with democratic values such as public accountability and citizen input. Autonomy and risk taking (even calculated risk taking) with public funds by public managers are causes for serious concern. Indeed, not all public entrepreneurial activities have been successful. In the 1980s, the City of San Jose, California lost millions of dollars through failed arbitrage investments. The City of St. Petersburg, Florida, built a baseball stadium that as of yet has failed to attract a major league team. The plans that public entrepreneurs have and their strong determination to carry them out, sometimes in secrecy for competitive reasons, is also of concern to democratic theorists. The tenets of democratic theory require that public managers be held readily accountable and that the public has a right to meaningful input into the plans and actions of its public leaders and managers.
Entrepreneurial public administration's emphasis on economic rationality and market mechanisms-as well as problems with public accountability and citizen input-has resulted in criticism of entrepreneurship as an inappropriate model for a democratic public administration. Supporters, however, argue that the failures of traditional bureaucratic public administration and the public's desire for high service levels, coupled with their reluctance to pay for these services, makes entrepreneurial public administration attractive even if there are democratic concerns (which they propose can be mitigated) and a less than 100 percent success rate.
CARL J. BELLONE
Bellone, Carl, and George Frederick Goerl, 1992. "Reconciling Public Entrepreneurship and Democracy". Public Administration Review, vol. 52 (March-April): 130-134.
Doig, Jameson W., and Erwin C. Hargrove, eds., 1990. Leadership and Innovation Entrepreneurs in Government. Abridged ed. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Lewis, Eugene, 1984. Public Entrepreneurship. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Moore, Barbara H., ed., 1983. The Entrepreneur in Local Government. Washington, DC: International City Management Association.
Osborne, David, and Ted Gaebler, 1992. Reinventing Government. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE. Concerns over the harmful effects of environmental hazards; in particular, attempts to address disparities in the distribution of these harmful effects and possible benefits.
Environmental justice has implications for both domestic and international environmental policies. It is germane to administrative and policy issues in an array of policy areas, including health and health care, economic development, food production and distribution, and international trade. Addressing disparities in the distribution of environmental hazards requires the creation of numerous new public policies and international agreements and changes in many others. New administrative practices, procedures, and structures may also be required.
The focus of environmental justice is not, however, just on the distribution of environmental hazards. Also of concern is the process for decisionmaking in the environmental arena. One of the principal assertions made by advocates of environmental justice is that decisionmaking involving the location of environmental hazards has been exclusive. The result has led to a disproportionately negative impact on low-income and minority communities.