six - Civil servants and policy analysis in central government

Summary

Contrary to the US (since Lasswell, 1951) and Canada (Dobuzinskisk et al, 2007), French policy analysis has not emerged as a coherent body of knowledge, methods and tools designed for improving administrative processes. This noninstitutionalisation of policy analysis can seem paradoxical in a country where specific schools (grandes écoles de service public) are dedicated to civil service training. Indeed, the existence of powerful Grands Corps (the most prestigious status groups within the civil service), which have long possessed a monopoly over the production of knowledge on and for policies, and the historical strength of Grandes Écoles, as alternatives to universities, have most certainly contributed to keep academics at a distance from the bureaucratic field. Therefore, administrative knowledge of policies has been little formalised and theorised: rather than a discipline, it consists more of practical skills and know-how that are transmitted between civil servants, either in schools or on the job, and mobilised by the latter in their everyday work inside departments. Thus, considering the relationship between civil servants and policy analysis implies going beyond the nominalist pitfall that would restrict policy analysis to knowledge and practice that is labelled as such. Rather, this chapter will define policy analysis broadly as the legitimate knowledge on and for policies produced and mobilised by civil servants.

Similarly, a comprehensive definition of the civil service has been chosen. The definition of the civil service (haute fonction publique) is indeed complicated, since higher public administration is a very segmented space, across two main dimensions: the professional one symbolised by the existence of a great variety of corps (each of them having a specific professional jurisdiction), and the organisational one embodied by vertical-hierarchical (for example, junior or senior positions), as well as horizontal-sectoral divisions (for example, between ministers or directorates). Therefore, it would be reductionist to limit our study to the famous Grands Corps, especially as change in civil servants’ relationship to governing knowledge and tools has often been initiated from the civil service margins, either by heterodox members of the Grands Corps, or even by hierarchically or territorially less prestigious groups (middle-rank civil servants, local officials or non-permanent staff).