Comparative Public Administration

Comparative Public Administration (CPA) is the first major development in the post-war evolution of public administration. It aims at the development of a more scientific public administration by building and strengthening theory in public administration. Its objective has been ‘to hasten the emergence of a universally valid body of knowledge concerning administrative behaviour- to contribute to a genuine and generic discipline of public administration.

Comparative public administration stands for cross-cultural and cross-national public administration. It has two basic motivational concerns:

1)      Theory building

2)      Administration problems of the developing countries. 

In 1887, in his famous article, ‘The study of administration’ Woodrow Wilson stressed the need for comparative studies of administration. However the traditional literature was primarily descriptive rather than analytic or problem oriented. It was essentially non-comparative.

Robert Dahl and Dwight Waldo pointed out that cultural factors could make public administration in one nation different from that in another. As Dahl explained, “The comparative aspects of public administration have largely been ignored and as long as the the study of public administration is not comparative, claim for a ‘science of administration’ sounds hollow.”

Post World War II period pose some serious challenges to the social sciences in general and public administration in particular. Major developments of this period are success of independence movements in the erstwhile colonies of western powers. Resultantly many third world countries in Latin America, South Asia, Africa and elsewhere regained independence. Spread of socialism over half of the world was the cause of worry for western capitalist nations. They were now under pressure to deliver fruits of development in the third world in a bid to pull them in their block. Earlier thinking in public administration was ethnocentric in the sense that it was studied by westerners to understand their societies only. Societies in newly independent states were not in position to apply studies from western societies in toto in their countries. In this context need was felt to understand public administration in non –Western nations from comparative perspective. Scholars emphasized the need to study politico-administrative institutions in their social settings. Its origin can be traced to the 1952 conference of public administration held at Princeton. The establishment of Comparative Administrative Group (CAG) in 1960 with the help of Ford Foundation was a milestone in the annals of public administration.

Meaning, Nature and Significance:

The study of CPA contributes to a greater understanding of the individual characteristics of administrative systems functioning in different nations and cultures.

Robert H. Jackson defined CPA as “that facet of the study of public administration which is concerned with making rigorous cross-cultural comparisons of the structures and processes involved in the activity of administering public affairs.”

Nature:

Comparative Public Administration deals with administrative organizations or systems pertaining with different cultures and settings whose similar or dissimilar features or characteristics are studies and compared in order to find out “causes” or “reasons” for efficient or effective performance or behaviour of administrators, civil servants or bureaucrats.

This comparison can be cross-national, namely –the comparison of municipal administration in Ceylon and India. Intra-national like the comparison of Rajasthan and U.P. Secretariat, it can be cross-cultural such as the comparison of budget administration of Nepal and Russia and cross-temporal, such as the comparison of administration of Chandra Gupta Maurya and Akbar.

Trends:

Fred W. Riggs in his article Trends in the Comparative Study of Public Administration identified three trends which are outline below:

•        I.           From normative to empirical orientation
•     II.            From idiographic to nomothetic orientation; and
•  III.            From non-ecological to ecological orientation.

In the first trend, the attempt is to study administration not as a normative science, which deals with what out to be, but as an empirical science dealing with what is,

In the second trend, while the idiographic approach concentrates on the unique case of a single agency or country, the nomothetic approach seeks generalizations, laws and hypotheses that assert regularities of behaviour and correlation with variables.

The third trend is a shift in focus from the examination of administration as an isolated non-ecological activity to the examination of administration as a part of the larger administrative system or ecology.

Comparative administrative studies have been conducted at macro, middle-range and micro levels.

·         Macro Studies focus on the comparisons of whole administrative systems in their proper ecological contexts. For example India and U.S.A. Here the relationship between an administrative system and its external environment are highlighted.

·         Middle range studies focus specific aspects of administrative system. For instance, a comparison of local government in different countries. 

·         Micro study relates to an analysis of a part of an administrative system, such as the recruitment or training in two or more administrative organizations.

Comparative Public Administration approaches the question of administrative development to direct socio economic change in cross-cultural context.  It pays attention to the ecological and developmental aspects of public administration in comparative context.

Comparative public administration addresses the questions of modernization and developmental diversity in different systems. While dealing with these concerns it refers to ecology, goal orientation, developmental and cross-cultural perspectives. From ecological perspective it studies the interaction between the administrative systems and their environment. It attempts to analyze the unique goals of particular cultures in relation to their administrative systems. It explore developmental dimension through comparing the linkages of administrative systems with the question of modernization. Lastly it pursues broad comparison among administrative systems of Western and no-Western countries.

Scope:

1.      Comparative public administration deals with the comparison of administrative systems, structures, organization, functions and methods of all types of public authority engaged in administration, whether national, regional or local and whether executive or advisory. It also deals with the comparison of the Functions of administrative authorities including executive, legislature and judicial functions.

2.      A comparative study of various forms of control over administration.

3.      A comparative study of personnel administration and its problems.

4.      Comparative study of functional administration such as Educational administration, Social administration.

5.      Comparative foreign administration.

In short, applied administration has to be studied on comparative basis, country-wise, department or function- wise, governmental level- wise, historically and internationally.

Significance of Comparative Public Administration:

Comparative Public Administration significantly contributed to the field of public administration from both academic as well as practical manner.

·         Generalizations relating to administrative structures and behaviour emerging out of comparative studies in different nations and cultures can help in formulating theoretical constructs which can provide a scientific basis to the study of public administration.

·         It contributes to a greater understanding of the individual characteristics of administrative systems functioning in different nations and cultures. It also help in explaining factors responsible for cross-national and cross-cultural similarities as well as difference in the administrative systems.

·         It helps administrators, policy makers, and academicians to examine causes for the success or failure of particular administrative structures and patterns in different environmental settings.

·         It introduces us about the administrative practices followed in various nations so we can adopt those practices which can fit in our own nations and system.

Importantly it has academic utility in terms of scientific and systematic study of public administration and in improving the knowledge about other administrative systems so that appropriate administrative reforms and changes can be brought about in different nations.