(Online Course) Pub Ad for IAS Mains: Chapter: 7 Comparative Public Administration - Comparative Pub-Ad & Globlization(Paper -1)

Role of Comparative Public Administration in the context of Globalization

CPA is a development to which has come up by contradicting the orthodox Public Administration on many account but precisely by criticizing orthodox Public Administration as culturally bound.
Limited cultural area related to the western culture. Comparative Public Administration is basically a study of Public Administration from cross-cultural, cross-national, cross-temporal perspective this does not mean that comparison was not there prior to that.
Comparison as phenomenon was present prior to this 1950s. 60s also

EVOLUTION OF CPA & SIGNIFICANCE

Two stages:

1. Pre-World War
2. Post World War

Comparison has been there right from the beginning of this discipline.
Wilson’s article is reformist in nature. Comparison between American & European systems
Wilson referred to as first comparatives. Comparison also there in the ideas of E. frend American v/s European.

• Senate report 1888
• Cockery Cockrell Report 1892.
• Economy – efficiency Report 1912 (Government of USA)

Comparison was done in these Reports. L.D. WHITE’s publication “Introduction to the study of Public Administration” Willoughby’s publication ‘principles of Administration”

Principle era

Did lack comparison.
There were some impacts which were comparative in nature. In terms of impact, it affected Administration across the world. (America, Russia, Europe, Japan etc.). Though the theory itself did not contain comparison.

Human Relation/Humanistic era:

No comparison. These were certain characteristics reasons in Pre-World War era which hindered comparison across the boundaries:
(i) Paucity of finance.
(ii) Advanced tools & techniques not available with Public Administration
(iii) Independent Administrative systems were limited other than the western systems.
(iv) Information regarding other Administration systems were hardly available.

REASONS WHICH GAVE RISE TO CPA IN POST-WORLD WAR PERIOD:

1. There can not be a science of Administration without comparison.
   As James coleman says, “you can not establish science of Administration if you are not comparing”.
   
   • R. Dahl
   • Roy Macridis
   • Nimrod Raphael
   • Paul Apple by
   • Waldo, Robert Jackson etc.

   Robert Dahl –
    “There can be science of human/French/American Administration but there can not be science of Public Administration without comparison” If the principle of Public Administration has to be universal there has to be comparison.
   It science of Administration has to be universal it should be broad historical in perspective.
   Roy Macridis says that science of Administration has to be based on cross cultural cross national studies.
   Robert Jackson:
   In Public Administration it is difficult to establish Universal principles of administration (because of values of normative aspects) yet it is because these are patterns of Administration in the background of patterns of culture, worth seeking.
   Patterns of Administration depends on the patterns of culture. People of a certain category generally behave in a certain manner, due to difference in ecology. The cultural components make an individual behave in a particular way.
   Principle derived in the background of single cultural context can not be treated as universal. So, comparison between different patterns of culture with respect to different patterns of administration is indispensable.
    

2. During 1940s behavioural science became very influential.
   Sophisticated tools and techniques of social investigation which provided basis for cross-cultural studies.
    

3. Period of decolonization.
   
   Period of cold–war politics.
   Communists and hegemony it led the western block to initiate assistance to these newly independent countries to moves out of their maladies. Inherent motive was to contain communism. U.N. also started certain assistance programme. Entire assistance programme faced lot of problem due to back of knowledge of the administration systems of these newly independent systems.
   They started funding studies to study these systems. Independent studies also came up in the context of non-western system. They also helped in understanding culture and system of these non-western systems.

IMPORTANT LANDMARKS IN CPA:

1. comparative political group was set up by American political science society.
   Theorists: N. Weiner, Weidner, Lucian Pye, La Palambara etc. These scholars were under overall patronage of Political Science.
2. Comparative Administrative Group (CAG),
   Set up in 1963 under the chairmanship of F.Riggs. Came out with huge number of concepts, methods vocabulary, theories, principles etc. During this period, it remained very vibrant and came out with number of studies. Number of scholars like, Michael crozier, Robert Presths, Delany, Riggs etc. undertook studies in different parts of the world Number of Indian theorists.
   Kuldip Mathur, C.P. Bhambri, O.P. Dwivedi etc. study also took into account impact of environmental and ecological perspective in Public Administration which became much more critical.
   It faced a road block in the initial years of 1970s. Because of number of reasons comparative Approach in Public Administration declined.

CAUSE OF DECLINE:

1. It was highly theory oriented and fact oriented.
   Under the effect of behaviouralism it was highly theory oriented and fact oriented. The very strength became the cause of its nemesis. Less pragmatic in terms of its theory it lost sight of the reality. The evidence to this was failure of America in Vietnamese war. So, not useful in helping the fund provider.
2. Post behavioural development & 2nd generational behaviouralism which favoured a more action oriented or value oriented approach
3. Pre – paradigmatic.
   One of the emphasis with which CPA came up was to build a Grand theory. To build a single paradigm through which every problem is addressed. End of 60’s & early 70’s Heady, caiden. (These theorists said failure of Public Administration to reach that paradigmatic stage is the cause of decline of CPA.
   CPA was pre-paradigmatic and poly paradigmatic that is why could not reach to that paradigmatic level. Thomas Kuhn relating to any problem, first of all it is identified. Efforts how to solve that. Number of view points come up relating to the problem competing viewpoints.
   Competing viewpoints interact with each other in terms of dialogue, mutual criticism and acceptance. In the due course it will synthesize into an acceptable viewpoint.
   That is why it is pre-paradigmatic as well as poly–paradigmatic to reach the paradigmatic stage. But CPA never reach this paradigmatic stage. Because of this comparative Administrative Group was disbanded.
   It was included within another bigger group “Section on International and comparative Administration” (SICA).

  Go Back To Main Page