Governance without Guarantees: Reflexive Practice in Times of Administrative Uncertainty

This paper examines how normative concepts can be made empirically productive in public administration research, using the case of reflexivity in governance. While reflexivity has been widely invoked in governance literature, it is often treated ambiguously, either as a loosely defined ideal or as a managerial technique, without fully engaging its normative or empirical implications. This paper argues that reflexivity should be theorised as both a normative orientation and an empirically contestable practice. We begin by revisiting Lash’s (2003) foundational account of reflexivity in second modernity, where governance actors must find rather than follow rules in non-linear, destabilised systems. This conceptualisation highlights a shift for civil servants from procedural neutrality to normative judgement under uncertainty. We then trace how this conceptual understanding has informed empirical public administration research. Frameworks such as reflexive governance and learning-based evaluation have attempted to embed reflexivity into administrative practice, particularly in fields characterised by wicked problems. However, their normative assumptions often remain implicit, while their application faces limits in environments marked by polarisation, norm plurality, and democratic backsliding. These tensions highlight the need for a more explicit and integrated engagement between normative and empirical perspectives. We argue that reflexivity should be understood not only as a governance strategy for navigating complexity, but also as a concept with normative implications for the role of the civil service. In contexts where liberal-democratic institutions are under pressure, civil servants increasingly face situations that require them to engage with competing values and exercise judgement beyond strict rule adherence. Rather than relying solely on the Weberian ideal of neutrality, we suggest that public officials must also cultivate a professional orientation toward democratic purpose and public value. Drawing on literature in civil service ethics and transition governance, we consider how such forms of value-sensitive judgement can be supported institutionally without abandoning core principles of legality, accountability, or impartiality. Finally, the paper argues that the cross-fertilisation between public administration and sustainability transitions offers an opportunity to build more realistic, politically grounded models of reflexive governance. The transition field brings conceptual depth and experience with reflexive frameworks, while public administration contributes insights into bureaucratic behaviour, institutional design, and democratic accountability. Together, these perspectives can support a more balanced and operationalisable understanding of reflexivity, one that retains its transformative promise while remaining attentive to political agency, institutional friction, and real-world constraints.