Representative bureaucracy and unconscious bias: Exploring the unconscious dimension of active representation
| Published date | 01 March 2018 |
| Date | 01 March 2018 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12376 |
| Author | Sadiya Akram |
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Representative bureaucracy and unconscious bias:
Exploring the unconscious dimension of active
representation
Sadiya Akram
School of Politics and International Relations,
Queen Mary University of London,
London, UK
Correspondence
Sadiya Akram, School of Politics and
International Relations, Queen Mary
University of London, London E4 1NS, UK.
Email: s.akram@qmul.ac.uk
Representative bureaucracy theory explores the effects of repre-
sentation on bureaucracies, but less attention has been paid to
date as to how agents represent values or interests. Addressing
this omission, this article highlights the unconscious dimension of
active representation and, more specifically, the role of uncon-
scious bias in representation. Unconscious bias has received lim-
ited attention to date in public administration, but has clear
relevance for understanding how representation occurs at the indi-
vidual level. This article proposes a framework for understanding
unconscious bias. Drawing on Bourdieu's habitus, but making
explicit its unconscious dimension, I argue that unconscious bias
enhances our understanding of how active representation occurs
in bureaucracies today. The article applies these insights to the
case of unconscious gender bias as found in the Australian Public
Service (APS) and concludes by exploring the methodological chal-
lenges involved in building a research agenda into tackling
unconscious bias.
1|INTRODUCTION
Scholars of public administration have long been concerned with the representative aspects of bureaucracies
(Kingsley 1944; Pitkin 1967; Mosher 1968/1982; Krislov 1974).
1
Ever since Kingsley's (1944) observation that the
‘middle-class state’perpetuated its own values in administrations by recruiting only those who ‘have been educated
according to the traditional pattern of the ruling class’(1944, p. 151), the representation of minorities in bureaucra-
cies has continued to be a pressing issue.
Mosher's (1968/1982) distinctions of active and passive representation have helped to further thinking on this
issue. While Kingsley was more concerned with the consequences of poor representation, and with social groups
1
It should be noted that other notable discussions of representation exist, but which are not the focus here. Primary amongst these
is Birch (1964).
DOI: 10.1111/padm.12376
Public Administration. 2018;96:119–133. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/padm © 2017 John Wiley & Sons Ltd 119
To continue reading
Request your trial