It is very common to confuse the administrations, referred to as “public,” with what is properly “the public.” The appropriation of “the public” by the administration, which leads to the term “public administration,” is not only a conceptual mistake that dates back to history but also induces serious errors in the development of strategies and policies implemented in various territories.
The term “public” originates from Aristotle, referring to “polis” or city, and meant everything that belongs to the polis or city—what belongs to all citizens.
The current use of the term, identifying public administration with “the public,” often leads us to contrast the public sector with the private sector, as if they were two opposing entities. The former is seen as representing a supposed general interest that must be demonstrated in specific situations, while the private sector is portrayed as pursuing profit-driven interests, forgetting the public service dimension of private activities and especially those of the non-profit sector.
The public dimension of non-profit entities is crucial not only for the provision of social, educational, and cultural services but also for reinvesting their profits into matters of citizen interest, helping to channel civic engagement toward voluntary activities.
However, the most important aspect is that this view conceals the essential role that the administration must play in a democracy: ensuring that civil society functions and that the general interest is genuinely a shared interest. In other words, rather than speaking of public administration, we should speak of the administration as a servant of what is public.
(Photo by snowing from freepik)
PhD in Sociology and PhD in History. Currently, he is pursuing a PhD in Philosophy at Ramon Llull University.
Director of Estrategies de Qualitat Urbana, S.L. President of the Foundation Ciudadanía y Buen Gobierno, and a founding member and coordinator of AERYC.