(Online Course) Pub Ad for IAS Mains: Development Dynamics - Changing Profile of Development Administration (Paper -1)
(Online Course) Public Administration for IAS Mains Exams
Topic: Development Dynamics: Development Dynamics: Changing Profile of Development Administration
Development Administration: 1950’s to 1970’s
The development Administration first got started in 1950’s with President Truman’s point four programme and Colombo Plan. This was a decade of optimism, expectations and establishment of international aid agencies in various industrialized countries. In China, India, and Middle East, South East Asia and West and East Africa, a new wave of expectant peoples strained the emerging neo-classical order while tearing down the remnants of the imperial system. Development had become the dominant issue in developing countries. Development Administration was seen as concerned with the will to mobilize existing and new resources and to cultivate appropriate capabilities to achieve developmental goals. Thus, development administration became an essentially action-oriented, goal-oriented administrative system, geared to realise definite programmatic values. It was supposed to be based on a professionally oriented, technically competent, politically and ideologically neutral bureaucratic machinery.
But by the early 70’s, a rude awakening was noticed concerning the inadequacies of the developmentalist paradigm of public administration to cope with the urgent problems. The crisis of developmental administration in this decade became one of identity and purpose with seemingly devastating effects on the entire field of public administration, in the North as well as the South. Assumptions, methodology and focus became increasingly irrelevant. In fact, after its accelerated growth of the 1960’s, development administration apparently plunged into the depth of an intellectual depression.
By the end of the 1970’s, it was clear that something had gone wrong. The western style of economic progress was obviously not forthcoming; instead, the quality of life in many Third World countries was declining. Moreover, the recession of the later 1970s and early 1980s curbed the enthusiasm of developmental strategists of the West and created doubts in the Third World about the invincibility of the Western wisdom.
The reasons are as follows:
(1) For many years, Western scholars have been unable to include the
non-western contributions to developmental studies.
(2) Ethnocentrism and ignorance in the West have continued to overshadow the
need to appreciate the role of local tradition, culture, religion, and style of
governance.
(3) Infusion of foreign aid has failed to enhance the quality of life or satisfy
basic needs.
Development Administration in the 1980’s
By mid-way through the 70’s the paradigm of development administration was severely in question. Not only was their usefulness in doubt in the third world countries, but an intellectual crisis had set in among the students of development administration in the West.
The New International Economic Order became an important new symbol in the development arena. Its demand for a basic realignment of the world economy, through changes in trade, aid and technological transfer, was appreciated but generally ignored by the richer donor nations. While the World Bank and the International Labour Organisation symbolically endorsed this approach to development, the monumental change in the world system demanded by NIEO did not occur. Recently, another important factor, which has broadened the scope and spectrum of Third World problems, is the withering away of the Eastern European and Soviet Union communist States, and the entry of at last some of them especially in Central Asia, into the realm of the Third World. The Golden Age of the 1950’s had turned into the Age of Pessimism and Disillusion by the 1980’s.
Development Administration in the 1990’s
1980’s brought the collapse of Soviet Union and end of cold wars, making United States the sole super-power. U.S. began to dominate both theory and practice of Public Administration. Modernization was defined as integration into the global economy and development as economic liberalizations privatization and embracing the ‘free market’. Important players in the process of development would be local organizations, NGO’s, and Governments. This process of development also includes environmental management, Human Resources Development, building self-confidence and concentrating on civil society, social institutions and human rights. All these were included in World Bank’s report on good governance. It is defined as an initiative to build pluralistic institutions that could perform functions in much the same manner as western governments. Good Governance also emphasized on privatization and markets as opposed to government intervention in the economy.
Development Administration in the New Millennium (From 2000-Till Now)
There are many actors in process of development during new millennium with civil society organizations, NGO’s playing a pro-active role in process of development is defined in true sense of development with active people participation as the pre-condition for development. The essence of Development Administration now is people’s empowerment. This is expected to be achieved through the following means:
(1) Decentralization of political and administration structures.
(2) More active role to be played by market forces for efficient utilization of
existing resources.
(3) Introduction of transparency and accountability within administrative
systems.
(4) Ensuring basis minimum services to people through various legislations which
force the government to treat them as basic rights of people.
(5) Active role of civil societies and Non Governmental Organizations to provide
unbiased feedback to government on effectiveness of welfare schemes through
social audits.
(6) Self help groups (SHG) to sustain the process of development through active
participation by people themselves.
In the end, the development can be characterized as development for the people by the people and to the people. The New Approach is to cut back the scope of government activities through privatisation, deregulation decentralization, and similar efforts. It means a reduction in the scope, or at least in the rate of growth, and the streamlining of procedures of the centralised administrative apparatus in the public sector.