Public Management and Administration - Owen E.hughes

226 Public Management and Administration
different models of economic development followed in Tanzania, India,
Pakistan or the Pacific, the familiar precepts of a Weberian system were to be
found.
Development administration largely faded as a specialty within public
administration in the mid-1970s as its theories and assumptions came under
attack (Turner and Hulme, 1997, pp. 12–17). This occurred well before the rise
of new public management in the West. A similar kind of demise had befallen its
allied discipline, development economics (Krugman, 1995). There were intellectual
problems in trying to carve out a separate specialty and at times the arguments
between different theorists seemed to ignore the fact that there were real
problems in the administration of developing countries.
Problems of the administrative model
The traditional model of administration did not serve developing countries particularly
well. Features which worked in the West, notably political neutrality and
incorruptibility, were not followed in the Third World and the bureaucracy, while
maintaining the appearance and institutions of traditional bureaucracy, served
particular elite, ethnic or religious interests. Above all, it served itself. While
there is some argument about the model of public choice as applied to the
bureaucracy in the West, in the developing world it could scarcely be denied
that bureaucrats looked after their own interests first. Also, it was rare that the
performance of public services was evaluated in a systematic way and there
were manifest problems of accountability with no-one taking the responsibility
for negative outcomes.
How much of the problem can be attributed to the bureaucratic model itself?
It could be argued that what was happening was not the problem of the model,
but was due to its precepts being perverted, as exemplified by the problem of
corruption. While this is possible, it is more the case that the flaws in the model
were exacerbated in developing countries. It was always a naïve to think that
bureaucrats would be impersonal, neutral arbiters and not involved in either
politics or looking after themselves. The problems could be argued about in
developed countries; in developing countries their effects could be seen in corruption
and other forms of self-enrichment. While not unknown in developed
countries, problems of corruption were worse in developing ones. As Huque
argues (1996, p. 23):
Public administration itself is susceptible to corruption since officials exercise a substantial
amount of power. There are possibilities for acquiring improper benefits by interpreting
or bending rules in favour of certain groups or individuals. All governments seek
to have in place a number of safeguards for deterring and dealing with corruption within
administrative agencies. At the same time, public administration has to develop ways and
means to prevent and detect corruption in other sections of society. Much of the benefit
of rapid economic growth or a stable political order may be lost in the growing tide of
corruption.