All over the world, many people who live in urban areas find themselves
in an arduous social situation. In the third world, people in
overcrowded metropolitan areas have a problem in maintaining even the
slightest standards of living. But also richer parts of the world, the
United States, Europe and the far-East, show growing social inequalities
in their cities. And social problems are not confined to the large
metropolitan areas: impoverishment, long-term unemployment, social
isolation, and the dependency on welfare programs pops up in
medium-sized cities and even in smaller communities. At the same time,
these cities are confronted with a growing bureaucratic conglomerate
which is increasingly inapt to fight social degeneration. The
catastrophe seems to be total: how to deal at once with declining social
conditions and bureaucratic inadequacy? Two American authors, Osborne
and Plastrik (1997), claim to have found the answer: just banish
bureaucracy. The liberating accomplishments of the free market will
elevate ordinary citizens and force lazy, incompetent bureaucrats to do
their work properly. If they succeed, they survive. Otherwise, these
agencies will vanish. They illustrate their arguments with the American
city of 'Uphill Battle' which stopped its decline by reinventing
government. Strict performance measures, allotting financial controls
and incentives to the citizens, and improving accountability have saved
the city. We should, however, be very careful in taking such measures so
far that they banish bureaucracy. It is far from obvious that simply
banishing bureaucracy indeed will help people in poor social situations.
