Reconstructing the Foundations of Political Philosophy in the Context of New-Quality Productive Forces: Implications for Public Management and Governance Systems
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54097/d1fqs080Keywords:
New-quality Productivity, Political Philosophy, Public Management, Global Governance, Technological Ethics, Digital EconomyAbstract
In the context of the rapid development of the digital economy and transformative technologies, new-quality productivity, driven by artificial intelligence, big data, and blockchain, is profoundly reshaping socio-economic structures and governance models. This emerging form of productivity not only redefines resource allocation mechanisms but also challenges the foundational assumptions of traditional political philosophy. Classical frameworks, such as liberalism, utilitarianism, and social contract theory, face significant limitations in addressing complex issues related to data privacy, algorithmic bias, and rights distribution, necessitating a theoretical reconstruction to align with the new technological landscape. This study explores the need for reconstructing the philosophical foundations of political systems under new-quality productivity and examines its far-reaching implications for public management and governance frameworks. By analyzing the management models of democratic and centralized systems, the study highlights their respective strengths and weaknesses in managing new-quality productivity. Democratic systems excel in fostering innovation through market-driven mechanisms and societal collaboration but often encounter challenges in coordination and efficiency. In contrast, centralized systems leverage strategic planning and high execution efficiency, yet face potential constraints in innovation and ethical concerns arising from technological centralization. The complementary nature of these systems provides valuable insights into constructing a global governance framework. The study further argues that the global governance system in the digital economy era should emphasize inclusivity and collaboration. By integrating ethical oversight, data sovereignty protection, and multilateral cooperation mechanisms, it is possible to achieve a balance between equity and efficiency in public management. The theoretical contribution of this research lies in advancing interdisciplinary studies between political philosophy and public management, while its practical significance lies in offering policy guidance and solutions to address social inequality, digital divides, and governance challenges in the era of new-quality productivity.
Downloads
References
[1] Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. (2014). The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies. W. W. Norton & Company.
[2] Gandomi, A., & Haider, M. (2015). Beyond the Hype: Big Data Concepts, Methods, and Analytics. International Journal of Information Management, 35(2), 137–144.
[3] Davenport, T. H., & Harris, J. G. (2007). Competing on Analytics: The New Science of Winning. Harvard Business Review Press.
[4] Tapscott, D., & Williams, A. D. (2006). Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything. Portfolio.
[5] Chen, H., Chiang, R. H., & Storey, V. C. (2012). Business Intelligence and Analytics: From Big Data to Big Impact. MIS Quarterly, 36(4), 1165–1188.
[6] Mittelstadt, B. D., Allo, P., Taddeo, M., Wachter, S., & Floridi, L. (2016). The Ethics of Algorithms: Mapping the Debate. Big Data & Society, 3(2), 205395171667967.
[7] Floridi, L. (2013). The Ethics of Information. Oxford University Press.
[8] Zuboff, S. (2019). The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. PublicAffairs.
[9] Crawford, K., & Calo, R. (2016). There Is a Blind Spot in AI Research. Nature, 538(7625), 311–313.
[10] Whittlestone, J., Nyrup, R., Alexandrova, A., & Dihal, K. (2019). Ethical and Societal Implications of Algorithms, Data, and Artificial Intelligence: A Roadmap for Research. Nuffield Foundation.
[11] Helbing, D. (2019). Towards Digital Enlightenment: Essays on the Dark and Light Sides of the Digital Revolution. Springer.
[12] Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S., & Tinkler, J. (2006). New Public Management Is Dead—Long Live Digital-Era Governance. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16(3), 467–494.
[13] Janssen, M., Charalabidis, Y., & Zuiderwijk, A. (2012). Benefits, Adoption Barriers, and Myths of Open Data and Open Government. Information Systems Management, 29(4), 258–268.
[14] Meijer, A., & Bolívar, M. P. R. (2016). Governing the Smart City: A Review of the Literature on Smart Urban Governance. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 82(2), 392–408.
[15] Kitchin, R. (2014). The Data Revolution: Big Data, Open Data, Data Infrastructures and Their Consequences. SAGE Publications.
[16] Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Bloomberg, L. (2014). Public Value Governance: Moving Beyond Traditional Public Administration and the New Public Management. Public Administration Review, 74(4), 445–456.
[17] Schroeck, M., Shockley, R., Smart, J., Romero-Morales, D., & Tufano, P. (2012). Analytics: The Real-World Use of Big Data. IBM Institute for Business Value.
[18] Kankanhalli, A., Zuiderwijk, A., & Tayi, G. K. (2017). Open Innovation in the Public Sector: A Research Agenda. Government Information Quarterly, 34(1), 84–89.
[19] Janssen, M., Wimmer, M. A., & Deljoo, A. (Eds.). (2015). Policy Practice and Digital Science: Integrating Complex Systems, Social Simulation and Public Administration in Policy Research. Springer.
[20] Florini, A., & Sovacool, B. K. (2009). Who Governs Energy? The Challenges Facing Global Energy Governance. Energy Policy, 37(12), 5239–5248.
[21] Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. (2011). Race Against the Machine: How the Digital Revolution Is Accelerating Innovation, Driving Productivity, and Irreversibly Transforming Employment and the Economy. Digital Frontier Press.
[22] Frey, C. B., & Osborne, M. A. (2017). The Future of Employment: How Susceptible Are Jobs to Computerisation? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 114, 254–280.
[23] Acemoglu, D., & Restrepo, P. (2018). Artificial Intelligence, Automation, and Work. Econometrics Laboratory Working Paper.
[24] Wang, F.-Y. (2010). The Emergence of Intelligent Enterprises: From CPS to CPSS. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 25(4), 85–88.
[25] Kitchin, R. (2014). Big Data, New Epistemologies, and Paradigm Shifts. Big Data & Society, 1(1), 1–12.
[26] Tapscott, D. (2014). Blockchain Revolution: How the Technology Behind Bitcoin Is Changing Money, Business, and the World. Portfolio.
[27] Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Harvard University Press.
[28] Sandel, M. J. (2010). Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do?. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
[29] Habermas, J. (1984). The Theory of Communicative Action, Volume 1: Reason and the Rationalization of Society. Beacon Press.
[30] Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge University Press.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Academic Journal of Management and Social Sciences
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
