Evolution of PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

AN INTRODUCTION
The historical evolution of Public Administration as a field of inquiry can be studied in three traditions - Absolutist, Liberal Democratic and Marxian, in the evolution of Public Administration. This analytical frame will provide a broad perspective on the developments in Public Administration considered in  terms of the impulses Ideological or otherwise behind them. There are diverse traditions in the practice and theory of Public Administration because of differences in not only the history, culture and levels of development at various societies but also the impulses shaping them at different times. 
What are we going to learn here:

1. the importance of the study of the evolution.
2. different traditions of academic inquiry in Public Administration; and
3. the different phases in the growth of the study of Public Administration( which is a part of Liberal Democratic tradition of academic inquiry ).

1. Importance of THE EVOLUTION OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Evolution refers to gradual unfolding of development of things in the course of time. When the past, present and future are considered in terms-of a continuum, the study of the past or of history becomes all the more significant, The past not only foreshadows the present but also serves as its matrix. 

History is an unending dialogue between the past and the present -E.H.Carr.

Thus, we can say the study of history has a contemporary relevance. In order to understand the present status of the subject and the the critical issues therein, we may look into the past which may bear the genesis. 

The study of different phases and traditions in the evolution of Public Administration may also help in applying the 'lessons' or the indicators of the past to the consideration of the development of the subject in the present. Broadly, the study of evolution fulfills both theoretical and pragmatic purposes. From the theoretical point of view it helps to locate the subject in a broader frame of reference and from the practical point of view it facilitates the use of the knowledge of the past-to further-the development of the subject in the present.

2.1 Different traditions of academic inquiry - ABSOLUTIST TRADITION
The absolutist tradition antedates the other two Liberal Democratic and Marxian. Absolutist tradition refers to administrative traditions of absolute monarchical regimes. Kautilya's Arthasastra is the most important work on Public Administration in ancient India. Our discussion will be focused on the Indian tradition, because of two reasons: 

1. lack of information on the absolutist administrative traditions of other Asian societies. 
2. the students of administration should be acquainted with their own traditions in the field of Public Administration. 

Who was Kautilya? 

Also Chanakya and Vishnugupta, he was the Prime Minister of Chandragupta Maurya,(322-298 B.C.). 

Let's learn more about Kautilya's treatise known as Arthasastra .

1) An ancient Indian text-book of practical politics. 

2) It ranks in importance with Manusmriti and Kamasastra and forms a triad with them in dealing with the three imperative of the social philosophy of that time- Dharma(Manusmriti), Kama(Kamasastra) and Artha. 

3) According to Kautilya, the Science Polity is a combination of Economic (Vittasastra) and Science of Government/Statecraft(Dandanjthi). Thus, his treatise adopts the political economy approach to the.understanding of the problems of governance. 

"Arthasastra is an exceptionally able dissertation both on the aims of 'Jhe State as well as on practical means by which these aims can be achieved" - H.V.R Iyengar

4)  Discusses three aspects of the science of Public Administration - 

• the principle of Public Administration, 
• the machinery of Government and 
• the management of personnel. 

[ Note :  1. The principles of administration are not explicitly dealt with in Arthasastra but are implied by the functions of the monarch, ministers etc detailed in it.  2. The machinery of Government as described in the Arthasastrla is mainly related to the monarch, his relations with ministers, etc. 3. The problems of higher level personnel receive greater attention than the lower level functionaries in Arthasastra ]

5) According to Kautilya, an administrator can adopt the art of Public Administration only if he is conversant with the science of Public Administration.
6) He emphasized the principles of authority, obedience and discipline as being central to the administration of the state. He considered principles like division of work, hierarchy and coordination important to the mechanism of internal organisation. 
7) Kautilya is, perhaps, the earliest known thinker to recognize the importance of statistics in administration. 
8) Kautilya made a systematic study of the society and did not blindly accept the current views based on faith and tradition. Kautilya laid down four distinct sources of law- 

• sacred scriptures, 
• the rules laid down in Arthasastra, 
• customs and 
• edicts of kings.  

Each of these he considers more authoritative than the one preceding it.  
9)  Arthasastra is secular in its tenor and puts politics in command over religion.
10) The King should maintain the stability of the State and increase his power and material resources by policy or subterfuge(deceit). 

"Kautilya was honest and stated frankly what today is hidden under dubious veil of secrecy" - H.V.R. Iyengar 

11) Kautilya's 'Ideal State' was -

• something like a modem Welfare State under an all powerful ruler
• to provide for the maintenance of children, women, the old, the infirm and the disabled
• to run agricultural farms, help the artisans, and exploit the forest wealth and mineral resources for the benefit of the people at large.

12) Arthasastra centers on the king:

• His orders are unquestionable. 
• His interests are supreme. 
• He is the source of authority for all institutions. 

It should be noted that the traditions of Public Administration as established by Arthasastra are significant for its emphasis on the Science of Public Administration and systematic analysis of the art of governance.
2.2 Different traditions of academic inquiry - LIBERAL DEMOCRATIC TRADITION (7 phases of evolution)
Woodrow Wilson's essay, The Study of Administration (1887) is regarded as the origins of Public Administration as a separate area of inquiry. It was the beginning of systematic investigation into the field of Public Administration. Since then the study of the subject  has been evolving continuously. For understanding the evolution of the subject in the broad paradigm of Liberal Democracy, seven(7) phases are identified (3. the different phases in the growth of the study of Public Administration): 

A. Politics-Administration Dichotomy Approach
Woodrow Wilson, the father of modem Public Administration, considered politics and administration as separate processes and attempted to conceptually distinguish between the two areas of study.

"Politics has to do with policies or expressions of state while administration has to do with the execution of these policies"- Frank Godnow, another exponent of the dichotomy approach

This distinction is made between -

• Policy making  as the realm of politics and
• Policy execution as the realm of Public Administration 

Further, they are differentiated on the basis of their institutional locations: 

• The location of politics is identified with the legislature and Ministers (the higher echelons of government) 
• The location of administration on the other hand is identified with the executive arm of government-the bureaucracy. 

It was argued that the processes of administration have a certain regularity and concreteness about them, which can be successfully investigated.Thus it is possible to develop a science of Administration.

B. Structural Approach
In order to evolve a value-free 'Science of Management', the idea of Politics-Administration was reinforced. Politics as practiced by the politicians was considered irrelevant. At this stage, the "Public" aspect was almost ignored and shifted its focus on Economy and Efficiency for handling the 'business' of administration.

The questions of 'value' were not  considered important to the new science of Administration. 

Thus, the administrative practitioners and business schools joined hands to emphasis the mechanistic aspect of management unaffected by the political bias and failings of human beings. Principles of management were worked out as ready made aids to practitioners. 

Structure is a device through which human beings working in an organisation are assigned tasks and related to one another. 

The structural approach believed that the effective functioning of the organisation depends upon the structure that a group of human beings build and operate. 

Criticism:  the ambiguity of its principles, absence of scientific validity and its mechanistic approach to human problems.

C. Human Relations Approach

The Hawthome experiments pioneered a movement which came to be known as the Human Relations Approach to management influences widely in the post-war period. It drew attention to : 

• the formation and effect of work groups , 
• the force of informal organisation in the formal setup, 
• the phenomena of leadership and 
• conflicts and cooperation among groups in the organisational setting. 

The limitations of the machine concept of organisation in 'Scientific Management' thought was brought up by the Human Relations Approach. With the help of the social and psychological factors of work situation, it draws the importance of the "human side of the enterprise". The Social psychologist has extended the concern of human relationists by bringing in additional knowledge about the sensitivity to human components.

The main objectives/aims of this approach are to bring: 

1.  greater organisational productivity or effectiveness, and 
2.  greater home happiness and increased self-realization.

Eminent advocates/writers of this approach are Abraham Maslow, Douglas McGregor, Rensis Likert and Chris Argyris. 

Criticism of the human relations approach for: 

1. Manipulative orientation - It is alleged that the aim of the movement is to manipulate the man in organisation to achieve higher productivity. 
2. Ignoring the institutional and social system variable in understanding the organisation.

D. Behavioral Approach
[Human behavior of Decision-Making - derived from the logic and psychology of human choice] Administrative Behavior of Herbert Simon criticized the Older Public Administration/Classical Thoughts and sets forth the needs for Scientific Analysis in Public Administration.

About the classical 'Principles', Simon said that they were "no more than proverbs". Simon rejected the politics-administration dichotomy and brought in the perspective of logical positivism for the study of policy-making and the relation of means and ends. 

Administrative Behavior borrowed the perspectives and methodology of behavioralism in Psychology and Social Psychology for the enforcement of Scientific rigor in Public Administration. Simon insisted, "decision making is the heart of Administration" and that if any theory is involved then, the vocabulary of Administrative Theory must be derived from the logic and psychology of human choice".

The substantive focus was on "Decision-Making" - Administrative Behavior

His approach is an alternative to the classical approach, thus broaden the scope of the subject by relating it to Psychology, Sociology, Economics and Political Science. In the development of the 'discipline' he identified two mutually supportive streams of thought:

1. in the development of a pure science of administration which called for a good grounding in social psychology; and
2. in the development of a broad range of values and in working out prescriptions for public policy. 

In Simon's view, the second(2) approach was analytically far-ranging which would assimilate the whole of Political Science and Economics and Sociology as well as Public Administration. 

Thus due to the second approach, Public Administration might lose its identity, he feared. But he favored the co-existence of both the streams of thought for the growth and development of the discipline. 
E. Development Approach
Emergence of the 'third world' and irrelevance of Western Organization Theories in developing countries let to the ecological approach to the study of administration to meet the needs of the particular region/state(ecology). Thus giving rise to Comparative Public Administration and Development Administration.

"The study of Public Administration inevitably must become a much more broadly based discipline, resting not on a narrowly defined knowledge of techniques and processes, but rather extending to the varying historical, sociological, economic and other conditioning factors" - Robert Dahl

Thus his statement led various efforts in the study of Public Administration in the developing countries in a bid to "establishing proposition as about administrative behavior which transcend national boundaries". 

F. Public Policy Approach
As the Politics-Administration Dichotomy was rejected and the Public Policy approach provides the criteria of a close nexus between politics and administration and then gain momentum due to increasing government welfare programmes. Thus, the study of Public Administration has also been influenced by the public policy perspective.

The Social-Sciences' general concern for social engineering has resulted in the laying of emphasis on public policy.

Though the study is gaining the social relevance at this stage, but as a descriptive study, its boundaries become blurred due to rejection of the dichotomy.To many Public Administration Analysts, the discipline has gained in vigor and rigor, but it has suffered a crisis of identity with diversification and strength.

G. Political Economic Approach
Political Science was/is getting closer to Economics in the interest of greater theoretical coherence and better policy guidance. Various experiments with the application of economic methods and models to political problems (conducted by Economist Anthony Downs and Gordon Tullock) led to adoption of Economics in Public Administration which is a branch of Political Science). Thus it led to the development of Political Economic Approach to the analysis of Administrative Problems. Thus the scope of the discipline seems to be broadening while the question of identity remains unanswered.


A CHART INDICATING THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN VARIOUS APPROACHES 

Politics-Administration Dichotomy Approach	Structural Approach	Human Relations Approach	Behavioral Approach
1) Politics and administration are distinct	1) A Value-Free Science of Management	1) Emphasis on Human side of the Enterprise	1) Deals with the "inside" human being with a focus on his values and rationality
2) Politics is concerned with Policy making, Administration with execution of Policy	2) Focus is on Economy and Efficiency	2) Bring out the Limitation of the machine concept of organization	2) Decision-Making is concerned to be the heart of the administration
3) Location of the politics is the legislature and the Cabinet; location of administration is the Executive arm of the Government	3) "Public" aspect of Public Administration was dropped	3) Emphasis on the social and psychological factors of work situation	3) Widen the scope of the subject by relating it to psychology, sociology etc.
4) A Value-free science of Management	4) Emphasis on the Structure	4) Deals with the relationship among the people working in organization

Development  Approach	Public Policy Approach	Political Economy Approach
1) Emphasis on the study of the developmental aspect of the administration	1) Emphasis on Public policy	1) Emphasis on the application of economic methods and models of political problem
2) Emphasis on historical, socio-economic, political factors which condition development.	2) With the formulation and implementation of welfare programmes, policy study assumes greater significance.	2) Emphasis on the Public Administration's closer inter-relationship and interaction with politico-economic policies

2.3 Different traditions of academic inquiry - MARXIAN TRADITIONS 

The October Revolution of 1917 generated debate among the Marxists on the role of bureaucracy in Russia. But the Marxist interest in the bureaucracy organisation and management became pronounced only in the decade following the Second World War and developed in a number of directions. 

What is the classical Marxist view of bureaucracy?

Although Marx has not paid much attention to the concept of bureaucracy, his ideas on bureaucracy figure mainly in his wok, The 18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte. His ideas about bureaucracy can be understood when considered within the general framework of his theory of class conflict, the crisis of capitalism and the emergence of communism. 

In the context of class struggle :  Marx regards bureaucracy as an instrument of the dominant ruling class, promoting its particular interests, its existence and development thus have a transient and parasitic character. 

The abolition of the classes would lead the State and its bureaucracy 'wither away', according to Marx. [The "withering away" of the bureaucracy would mean its gradual absorption into the society as a whole ]. It can be noted that, according to him, Bureaucracy is an oppressive structure and its functions would be taken over by the members of the society themselves.

The administrative tasks(without Exploitative character) would mean administration of things and not of people. - philosophic stance of Marx

This has had a great influence on his followers as well as on his critics. The October Revolution,of 1917 in Russia and the establishment of socialist government in many countries of the world in subsequent years led to experimentation with Marxian ideas. But, there has been a proliferation of bureaucracy in the Socialist world and a growing tendency to apply Western management techniques. 

Lenin viewed the strengthening of the centralized bureaucracy in Post-Revolutionary Russia as an indication of the immaturity of socialism and the inadequate development of forces of production. 

Lenin like Marx considered it a transitional phenomenon. 

Criticism: Emergence of the bureaucracy as a "New Class", i.e. a newly emerged class in Soviet Union and other socialist countries ruling in the name of proletariat. 

Some of the scholars are Stewart Clegg and David Dunkerly, Nicos Mouzelis, Braveman etc.  It is indisputable that Marxian studies of bureaucracy, its organisation and management have added a new dimension of the study of Public Administration and helped to develop it. Indeed, the Marxian traditions have placed the study of Public Administration in the wider-perspective of social transformation.