Public Administration Optional (Meaning, scope, and significance of Public Administration) by Abhishiekh Saxena

Model Answer

Question #1. Philadelphia conference (1967), failed to provide a definition of Public Administration. It nonetheless made significant contribution to build consensus on substantive aspects of discipline. Explain. 10 marks (150 words)

Approach:

• Briefly mention the agenda of the conference and major themes.
• Elaborate on the substantive aspects on which consensus was reached.

In 1967, American Academy of political and social science organized a conference at Philadelphia under the chairmanship of James C. Charlesworth. The conference aimed to discussing the scope, objectives and methods of public administration and how far it was practical instrument of government. The conference did not reach an agreement either on the definition or on its scope. But there emerged a broad consensus on the following points. 

• It is just as difficult to delineate the scope of public administration, as it is to define it.
• The policy-administration dichotomy is erroneous.
• Bureaucracy should be studied structurally and functionally.
• Public administration and business administration training should not be combined.
• Public administration has not been able to deal with societal problems, and as a discipline. It should remain separate from discipline of political science.
• Policy and political considerations are replacing management concern, future administrators should be trained in professional schools, and superior subordinates all should be commodore as co-ordinates.
• Public administration course should emphasis on interdisciplinary approach. 

Question #2. The scope of an administration is dependent upon the scope of the polity within a state. Comment. 15 marks (250 words)

Approach:

• Give a intro about Pol-admin relationship and in general about admin.
• Examine the relationship.—points of fusion and dichotomy and give balanced Conclusion.

Public administration can be defined as the government in action. The everlasting debate of politics- administration dichotomy has been discarded by the modern thinkers, and public administration currently is seen through political prism.

Administration and politics are intertwined such that it is hard to compartmentalize the function of each as separate. Wilson, widely considered as the father of public administration emphasized politics administration dichotomy where the function of administration was the strict implementation of policies formulated by the politicians.

Politics of a country determines the will of state. Thus after coming to power role of political parties are to convert these will into policy and make it implemented. These policies serve as rules and guidances for the administration to be implemented.

Administration of any country is based upon rule of law and wants to be fully effiecient, effective and rational while politics on other hand accomodate diverse interest, conflicting opinions. Accountability of administration to political executives leads towards determining of scope of major part of public policy making by politics.

Administration is involved in policy implementation but an area of friction comes generally into play in which member representing constituency wants to implement policy in certain way and the administrator wants to do it in other way and many a times scope of policy implementation is determined by political members.

However the stark contrast becomes diluted in following features:

• Delegated legislation- the executives are sometimes given free hand in framing policies in the want of quick decision making and lack of expertise.
• Administrative as a staff agency- the bureaucrats are the principle advisors to the politicians as they bring necessary expertise and wide knowledge.
• Conflict between political accountability and administrative discretion in context of their needs and their interests.

The scope of public administration though decided by the politic framework but the due discretion is given to them. The functions are intertwined into each others domain but it should make sure that neither of the two usurps into each other’s territory.

Though scope of administration is being determined by politics and in a democratic country this should be the only case because politics represents the various interests of public and politics is directly accountable to people and administration works only for the public interest. But politics should not determine day to day implementation of those decided public policy, it should be left completely on rational, efficient bureaucracy which is committed to work.