Within the Barnier government which has 39 ministers, 16 are economists, 14 went to a business school. Is this unprecedented proportion a sign of confusion between the public and private spheres, or even a privatization of the State?
Never before has a government included so many economists and business school graduates. Of the 39 ministers and state secretaries in the Barnier government, 16 belong to the first category and 14 to the second. It was Luc Rouban, researcher at CEVIPOF (the Sciences Po Research Center) who highlighted this phenomenon by comparing the composition of the new government (41% economists, 36% business school graduates) to the Fillon governments (23% economists, 6% business school graduates) and Philippe (respectively 21% and 13%).
If we analysis all governments, from the second Philippe government going back to the Jospin government, this contrast is even more marked. Over this period, the predominant routes of the ministers were law and political science (32%), Sciences Po Paris (30%) and the ENA (19%). Economics and management sciences represented only 10% of profiles and business schools 9%. With 41% economists and 36% business school graduates, the Barnier government therefore stands out for a notable increase in these profiles. How can we explain and interpret such an evolution?
A development driven by Emmanuel Macron?
From the start of his political and especially presidential adventure, Emmanuel Macron will appear as a “politician manager” and display a pro-business positioning which will materialize through the promotion of start-ups or the establishment of taxation. promoting financial investment.
In addition to a hyper-presidentialization that can give the image of a “big boss” ruling over his company, his mandates will be marked by practices inspired by the business world: organization of team-building seminarsrecourse to consulting firms private, setting aside people who do not achieve their objectives.
The increased presence of graduates of economic studies and business schools in the government seems to fit naturally into this Macronist philosophy assimilating the management of the State to that of a business. But then, why did this development not occur sooner, when Emmanuel Macron has been in power since 2017?
The influence of Michel Barnier
Despite an image as a servant of the State and representative of the senior civil service, Michel Barnier has a more managerial profile than his reputation suggests. It is like this graduated from ESCP Business School (Paris), one of the three most prestigious French business schools. In view of his training and research on this subjecthe may have been naturally inclined to choose profiles close to his own when putting together his government team.
The presence of these profiles also echoes his political label as a member of the Republicans and the significant weight of the right within this new government. On average, the proportion of business school graduates is 3 times more important within governments on the right than in those on the left (12% on the right and 4.2% on the left for all governments from 2000 to 2020).
(Already more than 120,000 newsletter subscriptions The Conversation. And you ? Subscribe today to better understand the world’s biggest issues.)
A deeper historical trend
But beyond the influence of macronism or the profile of Michel Barnier, the “sociological” balance of the new government is also part of a deeper historical trend, and in the current economic context.
Since the 1980s and the emergence of New Public Management (“new public management”), numerous reforms inspired by the managerial culture of the private sector have been applied to public organizations, including in France. Their goal? Improve the efficiency of structures responsible for missions of general interest, such as hospitals or schools, by assigning them performance objectives. Despite limits and sometimes mixed resultsthis strategy went hand in hand with increased control of the financial balances and economic performance of public services. The increase in profiles from training related to economics and management symbolizes the gradual advent of this approach.
In the case of Michel Barnier’s government, which itself advocates the strengthening of a culture of evaluation in administrationthis presence is probably accentuated by the urgency of budget and deficit problems that France is currently facing.
The growing value of private training
Beyond these elements, the composition of the Barnier government also reflects an evolution in the perception of public and private training in France.
If we take the case of business schools, their presence in international rankings, such as that of Financial Timesincreased the visibility of the most prestigious of them. At the same time, the image of Sciences Po Paris was tarnished by governance problems and internal tensions while the reviews which the ENA was the subject of led, under the leadership of Emmanuel Macron, to its replacement by an institute dedicated to public service.
Examples ofArnaud Montebourg and of Marlene Schiappastudents in business school after their ministerial functions, as well as the choice of ministers, notably of National Education as Pap Ndiaye or Amélie Oudéa-Casterato enroll their children in the private sector, also reinforced this impression.
From this point of view, the sociology of the Barnier government reflects the valorization by current political personnel of private “excellence” sectors to the detriment of public training and universities.
The question of relations between the private sector and public services
Does this development signify “the disappearance of a certain culture of the State” as the political scientist Luc Rouban fears? According to him, the increase in economist and business school type profiles shows that the State and political action are being “privatized”. State action loses its specificity vis-à-vis private action to the extent that public services and private companies tend to be managed in the same way. He sees a cultural change and fears that public authorities will now concentrate on their sovereign missions and leave aside their social mission. If the question remains asked, this shift in any case raises questions the evolution of relationships between public services and the private sector In France.
On the one hand, financial difficulties and the lack of resources allocated to public authorities push for the taking of individual initiatives and open the door to the intervention of “private” actors within the framework of missions formerly carried out by the state.
On the other hand, businesses are increasingly called upon to play a role in the proper functioning of society, as evidenced by the rise of concepts of stakeholdersof corporate social responsibility ormission-driven companies.
Given the intensity of current social and environmental challenges, the public/private rapprochement and cooperation therefore seem necessary. But they often suffer from poor knowledge and limited understanding of the public sector by certain actors in the private sector and by certain people in the public sector vis-à-vis the private sector. Preconceptions and biases ideological associated with each of the two spheres often constitute obstacles to their cooperation. This question will remain strategic well beyond the mandates of Emmanuel Macron, Michel Barnier and the composition of the next governments.
