Evolution of Public Administration as a social science:

The study of Public Administration, as Peter Self points out, ‘developed as an offshoot of political science or Public Law.’ Emergence of Public Administration as a separate study of as a social science is of very recent origin.

Woodraw Wilson, in his celebrated essay “The Study of Public Administration” published in 1887 laid the foundation of the science of public administration.  In this essay he defined the problems and character of public administration in a modern democratic society.

Phases: Avasthi and Maheshwari have classified Public Administration into major five phases.

Phase	Period	Dominant Theme
I	1887-1926	Politics-Administration Dichotomy
II	1927-1937	Principles of Public Administration – An independent discipline
III	1938-1947	Era of Challenge- Behavioural challenge
IV	1948-1970	Crisis of Identity
V	1971 onwards	Public Policy Perspective

1) Politics-Administration Dichotomy- (1887-1926)

The evolution of Public administration as a specialized field of study falls into a number of critical stages. The first stage can be called as the era of Politics –Administration Dichotomy. The stage began with the publication of Woodraw Wilson’s essay ‘The Study of Administration’ in the Political Science quarterly in1887. Hence Wilson is also regarded as the father of PA. He was the originator of politics – administration dichotomy. 

He argued that politics is concerned with policy making while administration is concerned with the implementation of policy decisions. Administrative questions are not political questions. His basic argument was that ‘it is getting harder to run a constitution than it is to frame one.’ According to him Administration is the most obvious part of government.  It is government in action. It is the most visible side of the government. It was gradually accepted that though administration operates in the political context it is distinct from politics. There is a need of an efficient administration for the rational implementation of goals.  He also argued for the science of administration.

The wilsonian line of line of thought was further continued by Frank. J. Goodnow in his book ‘Politics and Administration’ published in 1900. He made a technical distinction between politics and administration.  Politics concerns with the expression of the will of the state while administration concerns with its execution.

 In 1914, the American Political Science Association recognized Public Administration as an important sub-area of Political Science and the objective of the study was to preparing ‘specialists for governmental positions’.  The subject began to gain increasing recognition in the American University.

                In 1926, the first text-book on the subject was published namely,  “Introduction to the study of Public Administration” by L.D.White.  He also emphasized that politics and administration are to be kept separate but at the same time visualized involvement of administration in policy matters and through policy with politics.  Efficiency and economy were the watch words of Public Administration then.

2) Principles of Administration: 1927-1937           

            During this stage, the scholars believed that there certain principles of administration which could be discovered and applied to increase the efficiency and economy of Public Administration. This phase began with the publication of W.F. Willoughby’s “Principles of Public Administration” in 1927.  He tried to establish the discipline of Public Administration as an independent social science.  This period witnessed publication of a number of important works, on Public Administration.

1.      Creative Experience (1924) -Mary Parker Follett.

2.      Industrial and General Management (1916)-Henri Fayol

3.      Principles of Organisation (1939) -Mooney and Reiley

4.      Papers on the Science of Administration ( 1937)-Gulick and Urwick

            This stage in the evolution of PA reached its zenith with the appearance of Gulick and Urwick’s Papers on the Science of Administration in 1937. The central theme of this phase was the Principles of Administration.  It was believed that it is the task of the scholars to discover universal principles and to promote their application.  Gulick and Urwick called these principles – POSDCORB.  During this period Public Administration commanded a high degree of respectability and its theories were in great demand in both business and government. This period is regarded as the golden years of ‘Principles’ in the history of Public Administration.

3) Era of Challenge and Behaviouralism- 1938-1947

            The main theme of this stage was the advocacy of human relations and Behavioural Approach. Bothe defining pillars of Public Administration were challenged. It was argued that administration cannot be separated from politics because of its political nature and political role. In other word Politics –Administration dichotomy was rejected. Similarly principle of administration were challenged and criticised on the ground that they lack validity and universal relevancy.

            The Hawthorne studies (1924-32) conducted under the leadership of Elton Mayo shook the foundations of the principles approach to organizational analysis by demonstrating the role of informal organisations in determining efficiency.

Important Publications of this stage were:

1) Functions of the Executive by Chester Barnard (1938)

2) Proverbs of Administration by Herbert Simon (1946)

3) The Science of Public Administration: Three Problems by Robert Dahl (1947)

            Simon was the harshest critic of the principles of administration and described them as proverbs. He focused upon decision making. He advocated an empirical and Behavioural approach to the study of PA. Robert Dahl emphasized the environmental effects on administrative behaviour. He believed that PA cannot escape the effects of national psychology, and social, political and cultural environment in which it developes. He suggested cross- cultural or comparative studies.

4) Crisis of Identity- 1948-1970

            With the rejection of politics-administration dichotomy and principles of administration in the earlier stage, Public Administration suffered from crisis of identity. Consequently scholars in this phase reacted in two ways:

1) Some of them returned to the fold of Political Science. John Gaus in his article entitled  Trends in the theory of Public Administration (1950) developed a thesis that a theory of PA means in our times a theory of Politics also. Rosco Martin in his 1952 article called for continued dominion of political science over PA.

2) Some others moved towards administrative science. They argued that administration is administration irrespective of its setting. They founded the Journal of Administrative Science Quarterly in 1956. The major work influenced by this perspective is Organisation (1958) by March and Simon.

Various developments took place during this phase of the evolution of Public Administration. They are:

1) Rise of New Human Relations Movement advocated by Chris Argyris, McGregor, Rensis Linkert, Warren Bennis and Others.

2) Growth of Comparative Public Administration

3) Ecological Approach by Fred Riggs

4) Conceptualization of Development Administration by Edward Weidner and Riggs

5) Emergence of New Public Administration

6) Advocacy of Public Choice Approach by Vincent Ostrom and others.

7) Rise of Critical Perspective of PA.

5) Public Policy Perspective- 1971 onwards

            Despite the uncertainty in the earlier period PA registered great progress in the seventies.  It has attracted scholars from various disciplines and thus became truly inter-disciplinary in its nature. It focused its attention on the dynamics of administration and management sciences. The main theme in the final stage of evolution is the concern for Public Policy Analysis. It is showing interest in the related fields of policy-science, political economy, policy-making, policy analysis and so on.

According to Robert T. Golembiewski the public policy approach is built upon two basic themes- 1) The interpenetration of politics –administration at all levels and 2) the programmatic character of all administration.