A review of public administration research in Hong Kong and Macau, 1999-2009

This study reviews the quality and character of public administration research in Hong Kong and Macau that were published during 1999-2009. It shows that public administration studies in the two city-states have contrasting differences in terms of research focuses, author profiles, methodological rigor and theoretical contributions to knowledge growth about the field. In general, studies of Hong Kong are more engaged in testing and building theories, more rigorous in the methodologies employed, more comparative in nature, and have received in far better funding support than studies of Macau. Nonetheless a significant portion of studies in both city-states is descriptive and relies on review of secondary resources as the main research method. In this regard more exploratory and explanatory studies that consider new ideas and build theories, and more studies utilizing qualitative and advanced quantitative methods are needed to advance the quality of research in the field.