Changing profile of DA

Diffusion Theory (early 1950s)

Basic needs approach (early 1970s and mid 80s)
Entitlement approach (early 80s)
Reinventing model (Osborn and Gaebler)
Trust building (early 2000s)
o 2007, Vienna conf on reinventing govt
o Most important thing is to build peoples trust in govt
Anti-development thesis (mid 70s onwards)

Current Status of CPA

Take photocopy from Divya

Riggs model is based on two approaches

Parsons variables
Structural functional approach

Parsons variables adopted by Riggs

Agraria
Ascriptive
Particularistic
Fused

Transitia
Attainment
Selective
Poly-functional

Industria
Achievement
Universalitic
Specific

Ecology and administration

Heady
o Concentric circles
o (Inner-outer) Political social cultural economic

Topic 1: CPA
What

What is its meaning and scope?

What are the approaches within CPA?
What has been the contribution of various thinkers?
Distinct Features
Does CPA have a universal theory?
Difference from non-comparative approach?
Themes in CPA
Literary map of CPA

Why?

Why did it evolve?

Why is it needed? What purpose it serves?

How?

How did it evolve? Chronologically and conceptually & what is its

current status?

Critical Evaluation

Limitations
What is its significance in the present day world?
How has it helped make the field of public administration more complete?
How has it changed the field?
Has it contributed to the erosion of other methods or is it complementary
to other methods? Or Are other approaches redundant now?
Where is it best to employ a comparative approach and where not to?
CPA started with no paradigm of its own and developed none. Peter
Savage.
Is there a comprehensive science of CPA? <Refer: Universality of CPA>
Is CPA behavioural?
Relationship between CPA and policy process
Study of CPA has given rise to problems of methodological concerns and
conceptual focus.
Has CPA been a neutral field?

What? :Meaning and scope

Meaning
o Robert Jackson: CPA is concerned with making rigorous crosscultural comparisons of the structures and processes involved in the
activity of administering public affairs.

o So, CPA is cross cultural and cross national.

o Hallmark: Commitment to comparison as a tool of analysis
Is it only about developing countries?
o No. It includes both developed and developing countries
o It compares different institutions in different countries in relation to
their diverse environmental settings.
Scope
o Micro level: cross-institutional studies in a single country ->
ideographic studies
o Macro level: extends to structural and functional aspects of
administration of common variables in the nations across the world
o Cross temporal in dimension
o Includes various comparative theories and models such as the
bureaucratic model and ecological model
CPA is a caution against administrative monocultures.
CPA attempts at cross-cultural administrative theories through twin
process of theory testing and theory building.
The empirical approach to CPA is an extension of the open systems
theory of organisation where the very idea of one best prescription is
questioned and instead of one best, the most fitting is attempted to be
discovered in view of actual reality prevailing.

Dimensions of CPA
Cross cultural (eg. Developed vs Developing nations)
Cross National (eg USA vs India)
Cross temporal (eg India pre independence vs India post independence)
Supra national (eg ASEAN vs SAARC)
Sub national (eg UP vs Kerala)
What: Approaches in CPA
Universalistic Approach: seeks to find commonalities among public
bureaucracies in various countries in the world by conceptual means
o Webers bureaucratic model
o Wilsons transfer of administrative practices model
Importance of historic and comparative studies
Need to use cultural filtering lens
Ecological Approach
o General systems approach
o Development oriented approach
What: Contributions of various thinkers
Weber
o Compared different bureaucracies
o Provided the theory of domination which catalysed further
comparative research
o Concept of field bureaucracy (?)
What: distinct features
1. Relatively young sub-field
2. Competing and diverse approaches

3. Emphasis on normative considerations could be seen side by side with

empirical analyses
4. Dominated by American scholars
5. Two motivational concerns: theory building and administrative problems of
the developing countries
What?: Universal theory?
Heady says that universal theory of CPA remains elusive because
o Difficult to identify the boundaries of the admin system
o Implementation networks in countries vary
o Constantly changing admin system
o Has to be understood in ecological context
o It has been behavioural
Themes in CPA
Search for theory
o Compare different areas or systems
o Compare different times
o Compare different systems at the same time or inter-temporal
Comparative not the same as international
Urge for practical application
What: difference from non-comparative approach
Pub Ad is generally culture bound. It has evolved in UK and USA and hence
its theories reflect the realities of those places. CPA goes beyond this
boundary to provide a contextual understanding of administration
PA has been practitioner oriented while CPA has attempted to build theory
and seek knowledge for knowledge sake. <Mohit Bhattacharya>.
Comment.
o Knowledge for knowledge sake is related to the functioning of CAG.
CAG was very academic in its pursuit and focused more on theory
building rather than studying the actual working of PA in different
countries. So it was not application oriented. This academic
inclination of CAG ultimately led to the withdrawal of Ford
Foundation from the sponsorship
CPA facilitates reducing the egocentric and ethnocentric tendencies by
emphasising that PA needs to understand and respect the differences

The Why?
Why did it evolve?
1. Emergence of newly independent nations
2. Extension of US technical assistance to developing world
3. Exposure to new administrative systems
4. Revisionist movement in academia
5. Behavioural and inter-disciplinary approaches in PA
6. Development of other disciplines sociology, anthro
7. Financial assistance by FF
8. Globalisation

All the above can be summed in two points

Need for comparision as a pre-requisite for the development of a science

of public administration
Need for comparison in the interest of practical governance and
knowledge of facts

Purpose of CPA
Theory building in PA. Develop universally valid body of knowledge
Answer common problems
Identify similarities and differences
Explain factors responsible for differences
Examine cause for success and failures. Identify the best practices.
Important for administrative reforms

The How
How did it evolve?
Historical perspective

Woodrow Wilson 1887

Post second world war necessitated the development
1895-1920: Weber carried out the most important comparative research
o Developed the core concept of bureaucracy as part of a
comparative typology of the forms of domination: tradition,
charisma and legal rationality
1930s: Finer and Friedrich had major comparative studies of bureaucracies
1947: Robert Dahl
o As long as the study of public administration is not comparative,
claims for a science of public administration sounds rather hollow.
Comment.
o Science of PA is atleast worthy of seeking even if not fully
achievable
o classical science of administration had faced objections from
scholars like Dahl because it was parochial in the absence of testing
in a variety of ecological context
o Therefore he had termed such science as hollow.
o CPA seeks to have a thorough testing before administrative
principles & models are prescribed as universal or adoptable best
practices.
1952: Conference on administration at Princeton University
1960s: CPA as a new intellectual endeavour
Comparative Administration Group
By 1960s CPA received three kinds of stimulus
o Intellectual stimulus
o Policy stimulus

Independence of new countries development goal

Institutional stimulus
CAG in ASPA

Conceptual Perspective

Traditional (Pre WW 2)
Modern (Post WW 2)

Table 1

Scope

Relation to
environment
Methodology

Traditional
Formalistic and narrow in
coverage. Confined to
Euro-American
experiences
Non-ecological (also,
normative and
ideographic)
Merely juxtaposing the
description of a number of
similar administrative
institutions
Merely configurative as it
stresses the characteristics
of admin systems of
individual countries

Modern
Wider in coverage. Covers
both developed and
developing countries
Ecological (also empirical
and nomothetic)
Commitment to
comparison as a method
of study
Makes generalisations
transcending national
boundaries

CAG

Contribution to PA through
o Organised various seminars
o Sponsored research
o Adopted area approach ( 4 territories, 7 subjects)
o Journal of CA
Actual contribution to PA
o Widened the horizons of PA
o Made PA more interdisciplinary
o Made PA more logical and systematic by studying ecology
o Stimulated interest in development administration
o Provided the institutional arrangement at the apex level
o

Current status of CPA

3rd Minnowbrook conference has one important thrust of revival of CPA

As already seen, CPA underwent a sharp decline in early 70s after enjoying
its peak period in mid to late 60s so much so that in 1973 CAG was
disbanded as a full fledged committee of ASPA and was merged into the
international committee of ASPA

Thus it suffered serious erosion in terms of its status, power and scope of
activities. It was now renamed as Section on International & Comparative
Administration (SICA) and although on paper it continued to have the
same mandate namely to lead and coordinate CPA researches, its scope
of activities was significantly narrower.
Infact for next two decades or so, it remained virtually defunct, dried of
funds, having no clarity about its plan of action
However, revival efforts have been ongoing from time to time, initially
they were sporadic but from mid 1990s onwards, there is a discernable
resurgence in field of CPA
1990s: Osborne and Gaebler Reinventing model opened doors again for
CPA
Revival efforts
o In 1981, one of the significant revival efforts was made by Charles
Goodsell who recommended two new approaches to comparative
analysis which were more and more significant in contemporary
world namely supranational comparision and ecology & subnational
comparisions
o In the late 1980s, another such effort was made by John Jun who
argued for revival of comparative studies by studying organisational
changes and organisational development
He emphasised the utility of institutional comparisions
This created a very significant shift in focus of CPA namely
shift from theory building to institution building
It adopted an approach whereby through comparisions
institutional reforms and capacity building would be yield
Thus this approach was much more practical and application
oriented and gave CPA a newfound legitimacy and
justification
o Ferrel Heady argued for continuation of CPA because he was
convinced that CPA has attractive new opportunities.
These new opportunities hinted here can be related to
international and intra-national comparisons which could be
of the nature of ones suggested by Gudsell and Jun
o A major landmark came in form of Osborne and Gaeblers 1992
study which gave the concept of reinventing government
This became a major paradigm not only for NPM and reforms
perspective in PA but also became a paradigm around which
CPA was to be revived.
It created a thrust for comparative reforms.
The idea was that through comparisons, lessons can be learnt
regarding reinventing the role, size and structure of govt &
re-engineering the processes of administrative service
delivery
This again carried forward the application oriented
momentum in CPA & consolidated the institution building &
reforms initiatives

The current theme of CPA is towards institution and capacity

building through comparisons and reinventing and re-engineering
through comparisons
Very recently, 3rd MB conference in Sept 2008, has reiterated
significance of CPA & has recommended its revival along the theme
of comparative reforms rather than grand theory building.

Critical Evaluation
Table 2

Advantages
1. Comparing administrative
systems in different contexts ->
develop commonality in public
administration.
2. Can reveal the distinctive
characteristics of a system
3. Identify similarities and
differences
4. Shows relation of admin to the
environment
5. Helps identify what makes a
system work?
6. Explain difference in the
behaviour of bureaucrats
7. Practicing administrators can get
aid from such studies
8. Improve our knowledge of other
countrys institutions so that it
could be adopted

Shortcomings
Prescriptive but not applied in nature

Grand theories of CPA (like Riggs

model) are not useful to the
administrative practitioners
CPA scholars have not framed their
theories in testable terms
Failure to draw its boundaries and set
the rules as a field of study

Significance in the present context

Gives better conceptual grasp of PA
Needed more in the present world
o Globalisation
o Need for administrative harmony between nations
o Greater economic interaction
o Greater cultural interaction
o External agencies implementing programmes. Like the WB.
Can help in these spheres
o Best recruitment method at different levels of administration
o Implementation of certain common programmes that many
governments across the world undertake. Eg. Vaccination
programmes or sanitation programmes
o Improve the capacities and performance
o Identify the best pattern of organisation that can be used for tasks
of routine nature

o
o
o

Can identify ways to reduce bureaucratic power, especially in

developing countries
Lessen the tensions between the politicians and bureaucrats by
identifying the middle path
Better policy making

Impact of CPA on PA
Provides a macro picture
Has made the field more empirical
Shift from how organisations should be to what they actually are
Extensive use of the systems approach
As a post-behavioural analysis it made the discipline more complete in its
scope

Practical Impact of CPA

Scandinavian institution of ombudsman adopted worldwide
Impact on administration of development programmes
Impact on Indian Administration
o
Neutrality of CPA
Not always been a neutral academic field
Overt and covert biases in favour of the administrative models of Western
developed democracies
Led to a lop sided view of administrative realities
Neglect of the study of strengths of pre-bureaucratic social control of
community life in many third world countries
But this is changing now
With the ecological approach, an attempt is being made to study admin
within a context and assess its rationality based on that
Some traditional aspects of PA in underdeveloped societies (like
community management of biodiversity is being applauded as scientific,
rational and resource-conserving

CPA started with no paradigm of its own and developed none. Peter
Savage.
CPA tested some pre-existing paradigms (dichotomy, Webers bureaucracy
etc)
What Savage is suggesting is that CPA did not have its own theory and
was actually working with some pre-existing theoretical paradigms
This is correct because to begin with, CPAs only emphasis was on theory
testing and for that it utilized some pre-existing & widely used theories
namely Webers ideal type bureaucracy, politics administration dichotomy
theory

The main idea was to discover their applicability, functionality &

disfunctionality in specific context.
However, it would be an exaggeration and unfair to CAG to say that it did
not even develop any new paradigm
Infact many new models were developed which sought to give insight into
the features of underdeveloped societies in contrast with transitional and
developed societies
The most noteworthy in this context are the agraria industria models and
the fused prismatic society models given by FW Riggs
Infact, the prismatic sala model or salacracy given by Riggs is highly
valued & appreciated for giving an insightful analysis of the constraints
which administrative system encounters under a transitional ecology of a
developing society

What are the issues of contention in CPA?

Topic 2: Ecology and Administration

What?

Contrasts with the universalistic theory

Signifies the interconnections between an administrative system and its
environment social, political, cultural and environment
Public bureaucracies show great diversity because of variations in their
environmental settings
CPA scholars who used the concept of ecology
J M Guas
Ferrel Heady
Riggs

J M Guas
First person to talk about use of ecology in PA
1940s, he drew upon the works of a number of sociologists who had shown
importance of ecology in understanding social institutions and processes
Guas argued that PA is influenced by surrounding factors namely historic,
sociological and political factors
Identified six ecological factors that influence PA systems
o People
o Place
o Physical technology
o Social technology
o Personality and aspirations of people
o Catastrophies
Heady
Concentric circles model of ecology

Economic, cultual etc

Social
Political
Administrati
ve system

He argued that different components or elements of ecology affect the

administrative system differently
He used ecology as a set of concentric circles with the argument that the
innermost circle covering the administrative sub-set will have the biggest
and strongest influence on administration
According to him the political features lying in ecology are the strongest
because political setup sets the tone of administrative functioning

Riggs
Riggs wanted to describe how different ecologies can have different
structural-functional features
He observed that if ecological considerations are helpful in understanding
ones own administrative system, then they must be doubly useful in
carrying out comparisons
Based his theory on Parsons Structural Functional approach and Pattern
Variables
o Which 3structures perform which functions
o With what effectiveness or lack of it
Thus interaction between admin sys and ecology in above two manners

Topic 3: Riggs

Sala is like a multi-functional room

Riggs: CPA is to be empirical, nomothetic and ecological that is, to put crudely,
factual and scientific, abstracted and generalizable, systematic and nonparochial

Agraria-Industria Classification

Based on three of the pattern variables suggested by Parsons

o Ascription behaviroual pattern vs Achievement behavioural patter
o Particularistic BP vs Universal BP
o Fused Functioning vs Specific functioning
Ascription: grant status to someone based on birth and inheritance rather
than on personal characteristic and merit
Achievement: status or benefits being granted two people purely on merit
and not on reasons like family lineage, religion, region, caste etc
Particularistic: which favour a narrow base for taking social decisions
rather than a generalised or universal
o Inward looking decision making dominated & motivated by
particular or private interest
Universalistic: Outward looking decision making wherein collective interest
of society guides DM & pub institutions behave in the wider interests of
the entire class of stakeholders
Fused: various functions or responsibilities are being simultaneously
performed by a single structure or institution
Specific: social structures and administrative institutions which perform
very specific and demarcated function

Table 3

AGRARIA
Ascriptive
Particularistic
Fused

TRANSITIA
Attainment
Selective
Poly-functional

INDUSTRIA
Achievement
Universalistic
Specific

Prismatic Sala Model

Based on the Parsonian structural functional approach.

What does it do?
o Examines how PA is performed by different types of social structures
How?
o Administrative sub-system is placed within the framework of a
larger system (environment)

Table 4

Kind of overlap
Interest group overlap
Pricing overlap

Part of which component

of ecology
Socio-political
Economic

Termed by Riggs as
Clects/Polycommunalism
Bazaar-Canteen

Norms Overlap

Socio-Cultural

Power/Control overlap

Politico-Administrative

Polynormativism
(normlessness)
Unbalanced Polity
(usurpative)

Prerequisites for integration

Penetration
Participation

Nepotism

Polynormativism

Prismatic

Overlapping

Poly
communalism
or clects

Hetrogeneity

Bazaar
Canteen

Formalism

Authority vs
control

Criticisms

Presents only a one way ecological interface

o Overlooks how the administrative system influences the ecology
Western Bias
o Diffractive societies have positives and hence the desirable state
o Prismatic societies have negatives and hence undesirable
o Prismatic features always bad
o One should not that overlapping and heterogeneity are not always
bad
It is a status quoist model
o Describes diffracted societies as end state <but development is an
ongoing process>
o Objections have been raised to Riggs suggestion that low and
slow differentiation, with an equitable integration is more
desirable than a fast & big differentiation with prospects of
malintegration
o No measuring rod or a scale by which societies can actually be
identified as prismatic or diffracted

Significance

The theory of prismatic society has influenced theorising in development

administration
In many countries, enclave development has been promoted through
introduction of micro-institutions to push through development within the
framework of under-developments