Do No Harm: A Foundational Moral Framework for Public Administration

ABSTRACT Do no harm (DNH) represents a foundational moral framework for public administration ethics. Prohibitive moral principles, rather than aspirational values, provide a more coherent and operational basis for ethical public service—even when confronting demands for proactive intervention. Bernard Gert's theory of common morality reveals how rationality and impartiality underpin moral rules designed to prevent fundamental harms, while acknowledging challenges of defining and ranking competing harms. This approach mirrors the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights, which constrain governmental action to protect individual rights. We further develop the DNH framework by examining free speech issues in higher education and extend its relevance to other controversial policy settings through a comparative ethical analysis that illustrates how institutions can navigate between harmful action and harmful inaction. DNH offers morally grounded guidance for ethical decision‐making amid democratic tensions and political pressures.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Public Administration Review
Published
2025-10-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.70038
Primary Topic
Public Policy and Administration Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Do No Harm: A Foundational Moral Framework for Public Administration

Darin Crawford Gates, Travis B. Ruddle, David K. Hart
Public Administration Review
Public Policy and Administration Research
article

Do No Harm: A Foundational Moral Framework for Public Administration

Darin Crawford Gates, Travis B. Ruddle, David K. Hart
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Do no harm (DNH) represents a foundational moral framework for public administration ethics. Prohibitive moral principles, rather than aspirational values, provide a more coherent and operational basis for ethical public service—even when confronting demands for proactive intervention. Bernard Gert's theory of common morality reveals how rationality and impartiality underpin moral rules designed to prevent fundamental harms, while acknowledging challenges of defining and ranking competing harms. This approach mirrors the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights, which constrain governmental action to protect individual rights. We further develop the DNH framework by examining free speech issues in higher education and extend its relevance to other controversial policy settings through a comparative ethical analysis that illustrates how institutions can navigate between harmful action and harmful inaction. DNH offers morally grounded guidance for ethical decision‐making amid democratic tensions and political pressures.

Public Administration ReviewVol. 85(6)
Brigham Young University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 66%
Public Policy and Administration Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.