Comparative Public Administration - UPSC PDF Download

• Comparative Public Administration, a subfield of administrative studies, has gained significant attention over the past four decades. The interest in this field grew rapidly after World War II, particularly with the emergence of new nations in Asia and Africa. Essentially, Comparative Public Administration involves studying the administrative systems of different countries across the globe.
• This area of study has extensive implications and can range from narrowly focused research to more comprehensive analysis. To better understand the concept of Comparative Public Administration, it is helpful to explore the various types of studies conducted by scholars in this field. In this unit, we will delve into the meaning, scope, and nature of Comparative Public Administration, as well as discuss its various conceptual approaches.

In comparative public administrative studies, the primary unit of analysis is an administrative system. This means that the focus can be on the entire administrative system or on its various components. Essentially, the subject matter of comparison can include one or more of the following aspects:

• The environment in which the administrative system operates.
• The entire administrative system.
• The formal structure of the administrative system, which can involve examining hierarchical patterns, division of labor, specialization, authority and responsibility networks, decentralization, delegation, control mechanisms, procedures, and more.
• The informal organizational patterns present within an administrative setup, which may include the nature of human groups, relationships among individuals, motivational systems, morale status, informal communication patterns, and leadership styles.
• The roles played by individuals within the system.
• The interaction between the personalities of individuals and the organizational system itself.
• The policy and decision-making systems within the organization that connect its various components.
• The communication system, which also includes the feedback mechanism.
• The overall performance of the administrative system.

From this discussion, it is evident that an administrative system is a complex entity with multiple layers of functionality. A comparative analysis aims to highlight these intricacies and provide a deeper understanding of the system's inner workings.

Levels of Analysis

Comparative administrative studies can be categorized into three levels of analysis: macro, middle-range, and micro. Each level focuses on different aspects and scopes of administrative systems, allowing for a comprehensive understanding of various systems in different contexts.

• Macro-level studies: These studies involve the comparison of entire administrative systems within their specific ecological contexts. An example of a macro study would be a comparison of the administrative systems in India and Great Britain. This type of study is comprehensive, looking at the relationship between an administrative system and its external environment. While macro-level studies are relatively rare, they are still possible and provide valuable insights into the functioning of different administrative systems.
• Middle-range studies: These studies focus on specific parts of an administrative system that are significant in size and scope. Examples of middle-range studies could include comparing the structure of higher bureaucracy in two or more countries, examining agricultural administration in different nations, or analyzing local governments across various countries. Middle-range studies provide a more targeted approach to understanding specific aspects of administrative systems and how they function across different settings.
• Micro-level studies: These studies involve the comparison of individual organizations within different contexts. A micro study might analyze a small part of an administrative system, such as the recruitment or training processes in two or more administrative organizations. Micro-level studies are more feasible to conduct and have been the focus of many scholars in public administration.

In contemporary comparative public administration, all three types of studies coexist, providing a wide range of perspectives and insights into the functioning of administrative systems. The scope of comparative administrative studies is vast, encompassing various types of analyses that contribute to the overall understanding of public administration systems in different settings.

The Range of Comparative Studies

• Inter-institutional analysis refers to the comparison of two or more administrative systems, such as comparing the structure and workings of different government ministries. This type of analysis can involve comparing entire organizations or specific parts of them. Intra-national analysis, on the other hand, involves comparing various administrative systems functioning within a single country, such as comparing district administration in different states or provinces.
• Cross-national analysis is a comparative examination of two or more administrative systems in different countries. This could involve comparing the recruitment processes of civil servants in various nations, for example. Cross-cultural analysis takes this a step further by comparing administrative systems in countries with distinctly different cultural, political, or economic backgrounds. This can involve comparing socialist and capitalist systems or developed and developing nations.
• Cross-temporal analysis involves comparing administrative systems across different time periods. For example, one might compare the administrative systems of ancient Rome with modern Italy, or the practices during the reigns of different historical leaders. This type of analysis can be combined with other types, such as being inter-institutional, intra-national, cross-national, or cross-cultural.
• Comparative Public Administration is a study that seeks to make rigorous cross-cultural comparisons of the structures and processes involved in administering public affairs. This field of study aims to develop and test theories of public administration that can apply to diverse cultures in various national settings. While exactness in cross-temporal studies can be challenging due to differences in historical sources, broad conclusions can still be drawn from existing data to better understand the evolution and functioning of administrative systems.

Nature of Comparative Administrative Studies

• Some scholars believe that comparison is an inherent part of any social analysis and whenever we examine any social problem or issue, we cannot do so without employing the comparative approach. Famous social scientist, Durkheim, subscribed to this approach.
• Further, Eisenstad believes that there is no distinction between comparative research and general social research, for the methods of the two are similar. On the other hand, there are other scholars who believe that comparative inquiry has special focus and techniques.
• Before the Second World War, there were; several studies on comparative politics and administration but such studies were primarily descriptive and normative. Fred Riggs, the foremost scholar of Comparative Administration had observed that there were three trends which were noticeable in the comparative study of Public Administration. These were :
• (i) "normative" to "empirical", (ii) "ideographic" to nomothetic” and (iii) "non-ecological" to "ecological". We shall-now-briefly refer to these trends.

• Traditional studies of Public Administration were heavily influenced by the classical approach, emphasizing "good administration" based on certain ideal principles. They focused on efficiency and economy as the main goals of all administrative systems, often using Western democratic models as the standard for all other systems. However, as developing countries emerged and communist systems gained success, it became clear that a limited, culture-bound normative approach was not sufficient for studying Public Administration.
• The behavioral approach highlighted the value of studying facts and reality in a significant manner, leading to comparative studies of Public Administration after World War II that placed greater importance on examining the administrative "reality" in different countries and cultures. These studies aimed to understand the structural patterns and behaviors of administrative systems, rather than prescribing what was good for each system.
• Two important trends have influenced the character of some administrative studies in the past two decades. First is the concept of Development Administration, which focuses on the goal-orientation of administrative systems and is fundamentally a normative concept. This concept considers reality as the basis for goal-orientation and has helped evolve a synthesis between normative and empirical elements of analysis in Comparative Public Administration.
• The second movement is the New Public Administration, which emphasizes the idealistic goals to be achieved by administrative systems and tries to bridge the gap between the "is" and "should" aspects of Public Administration. This movement marked the "post-behavioral" trend in the late sixties, profoundly impacting most administrative analysis.
• Comparative Public Administration studies have also shifted from an ideographic approach, which focuses on unique cases, to a nomothetic approach that seeks to develop generalizations and theories based on the analysis of regularities in administrative systems' behavior. This shift has led to more rigorous comparisons between nations and systems in order to generate hypotheses and theories.
• Another change in Comparative Public Administration studies is the increasing emphasis on the ecological approach, which examines the relationship between administrative systems and their environments. Earlier studies often mentioned the environment only casually, making it difficult to identify the sources of differences among various administrative systems. Contemporary studies, however, increasingly focus on analyzing the impact of the environment on Public Administration as well as the influence of the administrative system on the environment.

In conclusion, there have been significant changes in the study of Comparative Public Administration, moving from normative to empirical, ideographic to nomothetic, and non-ecological to ecological approaches. These shifts have led to a more comprehensive understanding of administrative systems across different nations and cultures, contributing to the development of theories and generalizations in the field.

Scope of Comparative Public Administration

• The scope of Public Administration has increased enormously during the twentieth century. 
• The importance of Public Administration has grown substantially with the success of the Russian Revolution* increased role of state during and after the Second World War, measures of welfare adopted in most of the countries and growth of a large number of developing countries. Today, Public Administration influences almost all aspects? of human life. Even in a capitalist country like the USA, the role of government has expanded in an effective manner. The net result of this increased role of state or government has been that a large number of specialised branches of Public Administration have come upon the scene.
• Some of these branches are economic administration, social administration, educational administration, health administration, transport administration, space administration, etc. Besides, there are areas such as state administration, urban administration, rural administration, financial administration and personnel administration which have become integral parts of the vocabulary of government. Therefore, when we compare administrative systems existing in various nations or cultures, we can compare either the . whole of the administrative systems or some important parts of such systems.
• Today, we find a number of studies on comparative educational administration, comparative health administration, comparative economic administration, comparative social administration , and other related areas. Further, there are a very large number of publications on comparative urban administration and comparative rural administration. It becomes* clear that the scope of Comparative Public Administration is as vast as that of its mother discipline, viz. Public Administration. Anything that is ‘administrative’ can be compared.
• While discussing the scope of Comparative Public Administration, not only the specialised branches of administration have to be taken into account. Further it also needs to be stressed once again that comparative studies can be conducted at macro, middle-range and micro levels. These studies can be inter-institutional, cross-national, cross-cultural and cross-temporal.
• Here an interesting question arises: what do we include under the rubric of "nature" of Comparative Administration and what do we put under the heading of "scope" of Comparative Administration?The best advice that can be given to students of Public' Administration is that to attempt a neat distinction between the 'nature' and 'scope' of comparative Public Administration may no! be a very useful effort. These two aspects are overlapping and have common stress on the types, levels, and range of comparative studies.

Now a brief reference to the significance of Comparative Public Administration is in order.

Significance of Comparative Public Administration

• The importance of the study of Comparative Public Administration is well accepted today. There are two factors that make comparative studies significant. The first factor relates to the academic study of Public Administration. It is believed that through Comparative Public Administration hypotheses, generalisations, models and theories can be constructed which can collectively help in the scientific study of Public Administration. The old orthodoxy of principles of administration is not considered valid anymore and therefore now it is believed that generalisations 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 may be mentioned that way back in 1947, a very eminent political scientist, Robert Dahl had observed that a science of Public Administration cannot be conceived of without adopting a comparative approach.
• The study of Comparative Public Administration also contributes to a greater understanding of the individual characteristics of administrative-systems functioning in different nations and cultures. Besides, comparative studies also help in explaining factors responsible for cross-national and cross-cultural similarities as well as differences in the administrative systems.
• The second important function of Comparative Public Administration relates to its relevance to the empirical world. Through a study of Comparative Public Administration, administrators, policy makers and academicians can examine causes for the success or failure of particular administrative structures and patterns in different environmental settings. It is interesting to find out through comparative analysis as to which important environmental factors help in the promotion of administrative effectiveness and which administrative structures function appropriately and successfully in what type of environmental settings, Lastly, an administrator or policy maker can, through comparative studies of Public Administration, have greater insight into the process and strategies of administrative reforms. He can look at the structures of administrative reforms adopted by various nations and examine those strategies and methods which can be helpful in his own country. In other words, through Comparative Public Administration, we learn about the administrative practices followed in various nations and then we can endeavour to adopt those practices which can fit in our own nations and systems.
• The importance of Comparative Public Administration lies in its academic utility in terms of scientific and systematic study of Public Administration and in enjoying the knowledge about other administrative systems so that appropriate administrative reforms and changes can be brought about in different nations.

Conceptual Approaches In Comparative Public Administration

Comparative Public Administration involves a variety of approaches, models, and theories that have emerged, particularly after World War II. These have largely been adapted from comparative anthropology, sociology, and politics. Some key approaches include:

• Bureaucratic Approach: Max Weber's ideal-type bureaucratic model is one of the most influential approaches. It emphasizes structural characteristics such as hierarchy, specialization, role-specificity, recruitment by merit, promotion by seniority-cum-merit, career development, training, discipline, and separation between personal and official means. The focus is on rationality and efficiency. Despite limitations, Weber's model is still considered useful for analyzing bureaucracies of developed countries.
• Behavioral Approach: This approach emphasizes facts, rigorous scientific methods of data collection and analysis, quantification, experimentation, testing, verification, and an interdisciplinary orientation. It focuses on the analysis of human behavior in administrative settings.
• General Systems Approach: This approach views an administrative system as a subsystem of society, examining the interlinkages among various parts of the administrative system, such as formal organization, informal organization, roles, and individuals. It also analyzes the dynamic interactions between the administrative system and its external environment.
• Ecological Approach: Popularized by Fred Riggs, this approach examines the interactions between an administrative system and its external environment, focusing on the impact of political, economic, social, and cultural systems on the structure and behavior of the administrative system and vice versa.
• Structural-Functional Approach: This approach, drawn mainly from anthropology and sociology, defines a structure as a pattern of behavior that has become a standard feature of a social system. A function refers to the impact of one structure on another and the interrelationships among various structures. Riggs has successfully applied the ecological and structural-functional approaches in his analysis of societies and their administrative systems, developing the typologies of "agraria-transitia-industria" systems and "fused-prismatic diffracted" societies.

Riggs' prismatic-sala model has dominated Comparative Public Administration for the past thirty years, despite criticisms and inherent methodological limitations. A prismatic society is characterized by a growing degree of structural differentiation without an equal degree of integration (coordination). This integration lag is reflected in all aspects of the functioning of a prismatic society, including heterogeneity, formalism, and overlapping, with dimensions such as poly-communalism, poly-normativism, bazaar-canteen model, authority versus control, and nepotism.

Development Approach

• The Development Administration approach is a well-established concept within Comparative Public Administration, which has been extensively discussed in various studies. This approach emphasizes the features of a dynamic administrative system, such as goal-orientedness, change orientation, progressiveness, innovation, participation, and responsiveness.
• In addition to the Development Administration approach, there are several lesser-known comparative administrative analysis methods. For instance, John Dorsey's "information-energy" model and Martin Landau's decision-making model have been utilized for comparative studies. However, these models have not achieved the same level of comprehensiveness and acceptance as Weber's bureaucratic model, Riggs' prismatic model, and the Development Administration concept.
• It seems that the experimentation phase of model-building in Comparative Public Administration has lost some of its vigor. Nonetheless, the interest in studying various administrative patterns remains strong within the academic field of Public Administration. As a result, it is expected that new aspects of Comparative Public Administration will continue to emerge and evolve in the future.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Comparative Public Administration plays a crucial role in understanding the complexities and intricacies of administrative systems across different nations and cultures. With various approaches like bureaucratic, behavioral, general systems, ecological, structural-functional, and development, scholars and practitioners can analyze and compare administrative systems at various levels. By doing so, they can gain insights into effective administrative practices, enabling them to bring about appropriate reforms and changes in their respective nations. Despite challenges and criticisms, the field of Comparative Public Administration continues to evolve and contribute to the scientific study and practical application of public administration in our increasingly interconnected world.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) of Comparative Public Administration

What is Comparative Public Administration?

What are the levels of analysis in Comparative Public Administration?