Public Administration Optional by Neeraj Kumar

Model Answer

Question #1. What is “Neo Localism”. Do you think same concept can be used by the State Government and local Government to enhance the quality of governance? Analyse.

Approach:

• Explain Neo Localism.
• Analyse the idea suggested by the question-its feasibility, positives, and challenges
• Conclusion

New localism emerged from an increasing understanding of the limitations of centrally-driven policy implementation. It involved an acceptance that local problems could not be solved by standardized approaches imposed from above, and that local agencies needed space to adapt and innovate within the policy framework.

New localism emphasizes the devolution of managerial power over political power. Because of the failure of old localism the new localism emerged. Old localism had only resulted in the politicization of development process at the local level. New localism differs from the ‘old localism’ in two important senses. First, it accepts the role of central government in driving change at the local level, second, it does not center on the role of the local authority, but takes a wider view of the locality that includes communities and other public service organizations such as health and polices services. It has provided for a better networking arrangement through the various agencies operating in a local area.

An effective new localism when combined with a realised practice of public engagement and participation lays the foundations for a new form of networked community governance. This form of governance goes beyond traditional public administration and new public management-inspired forms of local governance to provide a focus for both integrated service and programme delivery and the capacity to engage and involve a large number of stakeholders in influencing policy.

New Localism can be characterised as a strategy aimed at devolving power and resources away from central control and towards front-line managers, local democratic structures and local consumers and communities, within an agreed framework of national minimum standards and policy priorities. In short it represent a practical response to a significant practical challenge: how to manage a substantial variety of state service provision and interventions in a world that defies the application of simple rule-driven solutions and where the recipient of the service has to be actively engaged the intervention is going to work. Building a road or providing electricity is a task that requires of level of state capacity in building a better environment for citizens. Creating the conditions for a damaged child or community to achieve their potential requires a rather different and more subtle capacity.

The case for New Localism rests on three grounds. First it is a realistic response to the complexity of modern governance. Second it meets the need for a more engaging form of democracy appropriate to the 21st century. Third New Localism enables the dimensions of trust, empathy and social capital to be fostered and as such encourages civil renewal. The case New Localism against rests around concerns about local decision-making either failing in some way or leading to more inequitable outcomes.

New Localism was intended to indicate a cautious devolution of power to the local level in an attempt to better implement policies and programmes. New localism emerged from an increased understanding of the limitations of centrally-driven policy implementation. An effective new localism, when combined with a realized practice of public engagement and participation, lays the foundations for a new form of networked community governance.

The objective of new localism is depoliticization and making the development process more professional at the local level. New localism emphasizes transferring power of policy formulation to the state government and local self-government institution should be responsible to implement the policy. New localism emphasis on strong coordination between the state government and local government bodies. Examples are Bhagidaari System in DELHI, Khanavali in Mumbai, Smart cities AMRUT, Shyama Prasad Mukherji Rurban Mission, community policing etc.

The problems and challenges faced by mankind are global in nature but they have to be dealt at the local level. Participation management of the local level can only provide an effective solution to the challenges of administration at the local level.

Question #2. “Politics is about Policy and Public Policy is about politics”. Elucidate.

Approach:

• Establish the relationship how both influence each other.
• Elucidate about process, actors involved.
• Conclude.

Politics is a means to serve the society. It emphasises upon the particular agenda which is reflective of the manner in which the different section of society is served. Politics is about giving an expression to political ideology and public policy is a means to channelize the political ideology.

Public policy is the outcome of the political system. Political executives constitutes and important part of this system and indulge in deliberations and discussions to frame policy for overcoming the problems of the society. Policy making is a complex task and involves negotiations and bargaining among several conflicting views and values and reaching on a best possible agreement for the larger public interest.

There are involvement of myriad individuals, groups and interest groups in the policy making process. The administrators at the top level of management are invariably linked with this process due to their experience and sometimes due to incapacities of political executive. These administrators have often their interests and values which they try to get enacted in the policy making.

Public policy making involves analysing the need of people, articulating the interest of people, and giving an expression to this interest. The manner in which policy is formed depends on the kind of political system existing in the society. They define the overall boundary within which government has to operate.

Policy making involves various state and non-state actors. The political philosophy of the country defines the relation between the two and also the manner in which each has exhibit their influence in policy making.

At another level, the political leaders like MP’s, MLA’s representing different sections of people also have their influence in policy deliberation. Most of the vested interest groups of workers, farmers, and industrialist have these political leaders lobbying for their interest with the political executives and administrators authorized for policy making.

The political executives themselves represent different people and have their own personal value preferences which they want to promote.

In the developing countries, policy making in democratic society involves greater participation of the people. The focus is on removal of poverty, inequality and bringing in overall socio economic development of people. The political institutions of these societies coordinate to achieve these goals through right set of policies.

In developed countries, focus is on economic empowerment of people, increasing the standard of living of people and hence policies formed aim at achieving them. The reason is, in a developed society political system is well established and the objective is maintaining the harmony in the society.

Therefore public policy making in a particular society depend on the political institution established in a society.

Thus essentially what we see is that there is a different group representing different values, often contradicting, trying to promote their views, which is exactly what politics is all about. Taking forward the views and concerns of people by their representatives putting them before the Govt. for action. Hence policy making is in the end as rightly said as an output of the political system representing the decisions and actions of the government.