Modern Public Administration - Development Administration (1950s to 1960s)

1. MODERN PUBLIC
ADMINISTRATION
DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION
(1950s to 1960s)

2. OBJECTIVES:
• To understand the meaning of development
administration.
• To identify its scope and importance.
• To distinguish between traditional administration
and development administration.
• To trace the evolution of development
administration.
• To know the development administration as in
the Philippine context.

3. MEANING OF DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION
• Weidner
• Riggs, Ferrel Heady, Montgomary, Gant, Pai
Panandikar
• is an effort towards planned transformation of
the economy involving not only the sphere of
administration but also formulation of policies
and indeed the society as a whole
• is an effort at the synchronization of changes in
all spheres of development- economic, political,
social and cultural

4. • Harry J. Friedman
– The implementation of programs designed to
bring about modernity
– The changes within the administrative system
which increase its capacity to implement the
programs.

5. • Hahn Beenlee
– involved in managing a government or an agency
so that it acquires an increasing capability to
adapt to and act upon new and continuing social
changes with a view to achieve sustained growth.

6. • Gant
– “that aspect of Public Administration in which
focus of attention is on organizing and
administering public agencies in such a way as to
stimulate and facilitate defined programs of social
and economic progress. It has the purpose of
making change attractive and possible.”

7. • Fred Riggs in his “Frontiers of Development”
– administration of development and the development
of administration.
– proper assessment of resources, proper plan
formulation, evaluation and
implementation, adequate involvement of
people, emphasis on technological change and self-
reliance
– Developed bureaucracy, integrity in
administration, initiative, innovativeness, delegation
of powers, decentralized decision-making etc.

8. SCOPE OF DEVELOPMENT
ADMINISTRATION
• political, social, economic and cultural changes
• Development Administration is Culture-Bound
• Wide Spectrum of Development Programs
• Nation-building and Social-welding
• Planning and Programming
• Development Administration and Ecology
• Development Administration is Organic

9. SIGNIFICANCE OF DEVELOPMENT
ADMINISTRATION
• new perspectives, insights and understanding
• democratic spirit in administration and
includes people’s participation
• politics-administration dichotomy is a myth
• useful construct to explore the dynamics of
change and administration in the developing
countries of the third world

10. TRADITIONAL ADMINISTRATION VS.
DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION
• George Gant, Ferrel Heady
– purpose, structure and organization, attitudes and
behavior, capabilities, techniques and methods.

11. • S.P. Verma and S.K. Sharma

12. EVOLUTION OF DEVELOPMENT
ADMINISTRATION
• 1950s and 1960s after the Second World War
• third world countries
• Alfred Sauvy
– Two power blocs: First World and the Second
World

13. GENESIS OF DEVELOPMENT
ADMINISTRATION: THE 1950s
• Coining the theory of development
administration
• Goswami in 1955
• Nef and Dwivedi (1981)
• Riggs and Weidner

14. ASIA
LATIN AMERICA
AFRICA
“EMERGING NATION”

15. • Classical economists’ view
• Economic Growth Model
• the Instrumental Theory of Administration
• Weber, Gullick, Taylor and others
• Technical Assistance Era
– spent $180 million
– like role-play, Case Method, T-groups
• “management of innovation”

16. • Argued by Esman

17. DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION IN
THE 1960s
• Failure of Technical Assistance Programme in
Public Administration
– Dwight Waldo
• “naïve”
• “a sad waste scarce human resources”

18. • Reasons:

19. • The Contributions of the Comparative
Administration Group (CAG)
– Fred W. Riggs in 1961 by the American Society for
Public Administration
– Ford Foundation
– concentration on the strategies and requisites
– shared the assumption of technical assistance experts
– 100 occasional papers
– innovate many concepts
• Systems Analysis; Patterns Variables; Traditional-Modernity
Dichotomy; Information Theory and Pluralism

20. • The Contribution of Fred W. Riggs
– Criticized the development administration model
by observing GNP increase
– Preferred the physical quality of life indicators and
social and psychological quality of life
– Industria-transitia-agraria formulation
– The ecological approach

21. • The Empirical Approach to Development
Administration
– normative approach to empirical approach
– technical assistance enterprise of the United
Nations and other agencies
– contrast with the normative approach
– Woodrow Wilson, L.D. White, Fayol, Gullick, F. W.
Taylor and others

22. OTHER SIGNIFICANT PEOPLE
• 1955 Herbert Kaufman, Fred W. Riggs and
Walter R. Sharp
• 1957 Chris Argyris and Douglas McGregor
• 1959 Charles A. Lindblom
• 1961 Aaron Wildavsky

23. Herbert Kaufman, Fred W. Riggs and
Walter R. Sharp (1955)
First course on comparative administration
introduced at Yale University. This movement,
which represented a broadening of public
administration to other cultures, began to wane
in later years as American foreign aid programs
were scaled back.

24. Chris Argyris and Douglas McGregor
(1957)
Placed emphasis on social psychology and
research in human relations in achieving a
better fit between the personality of a mature
adult and the requirements of a modern
organization. Argyris developed an open-
system theory of organization, while
McGregor poplarized a humanistic managerial
philosophy.

25. Charles A. Lindblom (1959)
In his influential essay, "The Science of Muddling
Through," Lindblom attacked the rational models
of decision making in government. In reality, the
model did not work; decision makers, therefore,
depend heavily on small, incremental decisions.

26. Aaron Wildavsky
• In an article, "The Political Implications
of Budgetary Reform," Wildavsky developed
the concept of budgetary incrementalism and
its political nature that led to his landmark
work, The Politics of the Budgetary
Process. (1964).

27. Philippine Context

28. DA in the Philippines
• Raul De Guzman, who together with OD Corpuz
(1986)
 “Is there a Philippine PA?”
 associated to foreign aid and western models of
development
 implementation of administrative reform should have
two major dimensions: reforming the structures of the
bureaucracy and reforming the behavior of those in
bureaucracy
• central features of the various long and medium
term Philippine Development Plans

29. REFERENCES:
• “IS THERE A PHILIPPINE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION? OR
BETTER STILL, FOR WHOM IS PHILIPPINE PUBLIC
ADMINISTRATION?” BY:Alex Brillantes, Jr. and Maricel
Fernandez
• http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/third_world_
countries.htm
• http://campus.murraystate.edu/academic/faculty/wros
e/hispa.htm
• http://www.scribd.com/doc/41286368/Development-
Administration

30. END