Many years ago, when I was studying administrative law, I was surprised by the synthesis capacity of the author of the textbook we used when he declared: “public administration works with indifferent efficiency”. This expression has always accompanied me and, even today, it is useful to characterize the advantages and disadvantages of the bureaucratic functioning of public administrations. The advantages come from the homogeneity with which, by regulation, everyone must be treated. Any attempt at personalization in the provision of a public service implies a dangerous deviation into the marshy terrain of discretion. The key would be to treat everyone with the same indifference. The disadvantages are obvious, since precisely the entire end of the twentieth century and the beginning of the twenty-first have been marked by the link between the quality of a service and the degree to which this service adapts, adapts to the particularities of a person or a group.
The demand for recognition of the diversity of each person is today a flag that is almost at the same level as the demand for equality. And precisely, what is becoming more and more annoying every day is the confusion, clearly made in the functioning of public administrations, between equality and homogeneity. Recognizing and trying to take into account diversity is not the same as treating people unequally. And in fact, it is becoming increasingly evident that social inequalities condemn us to live in greater homogeneity. The more resources you have, the more you have the opportunity to see your specificities and prejudices recognized. Just consider the diversity of stores, services and products available in the most residential areas of cities and the reduced and limited offer that occurs in low-income neighborhoods. Class differences are increasingly translated into differences in the availability of services and consumer products.
