NOUN Comparative Public Administration PDF

NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA (NOUN) COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION COURSE CODE: PAD 784 COURSE WRITER: DR ABUBAKAR FARUK CONTENT EDITOR: PROF. CHUKS MADUABUM PROGRAMME COORDINATOR: DR DAVID C. NWOGBO HEAD, DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION: DR YEMISI I. OGUNLELA DEAN OF THE FACULTY OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCES:DR TIMOTHY ISHOLA COURSE CONTENTS PAGES Course content/outline----------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Introduction -----------------------------------------------------------------------------2 What you will learn in this Course -------------------------------------------------- 3 Course Aims ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3 Course Objectives---------------------------------------------------------------------- 4 Working through this Course -------------------------------------------------------- 5 Course Materials ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 6 Study Units ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6 Assignment Files----------------------------------------------------------------------- 8 Presentation Schedule------------------------------------------------------------------8 Assessment ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 Tutor-Marked Assignment------------------------------------------------------------ 9 Final Examination and Grading------------------------------------------------------ 10 Course Marking Scheme-------------------------------------------------------------- 11 Course overview----------------------------------------------------------------------- 11 How to Get the Most from this Course--------------------------------------------- 14 Facilitators/Tutors and Tutorials----------------------------------------------------- 17 Contact your tutor if------------------------------------------------------------------- 17 Main course----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18 1|Page INTRODUCTION The course Comparative Public Administration is specifically developed for students offering Post Graduate Diploma (PGD) in Public Administration in the National Open University of Nigeria (NOUN), Distance learning, though it can be utilized by other students at both undergraduate and master‘s level. The course is designed in a way as to provide students, especially those that are new in the field (Public Administration) with the opportunity to acquire the basic knowledge and understanding of the evolution, concepts and use of models and approaches in Comparative Public Administration, as related to both developed and developing countries, Anglophone and Francophone systems of administration and specifically the nature of bureaucratic organizations within the context of Nigeria as related to other countries (Senegal) of the world. It will assist students with the basic skills of applying these concepts and approaches in making comparative studies by determining why one system or the other is successful in a particular setting but not the other (due to different in ecology), hence, this will pave way vis-a-vis the roles that you perform as an administrator to identifying a particular approach or system that can be adopted or adapted in the public sector settings, especially Nigeria, that is, after weighing the extent for the suitability of same. Furthermore, this course guide will provide you (students) with the necessary information about the course contents and the referencing materials you will need to further and enrich your study. It is designed in a way that it will assist you (students) to get the best of the course by enabling you (students) to think systematically and broadly about the principles underlying the issues of bureaucratic organizations. However, the guide also provides some guidance on the way to approach your tutor-marked assignments (TMAs). Finally but not the 2|Page least, the course guide is informative about what the course is all about and how you can work your way through these materials. It suggests some general guidelines for the amount of time you are likely to spend on each unit of the course in order to complete your study without any hitches. WHAT YOU WILL LEARN IN THIS COURSE This course entitled ―Comparative Public Administration‖ (PAD 784) introduces you to the brief evolutionary trends with consideration of the factors that contributed to its development as a field of study under the broader field of Public Administration, it also features the conceptual clarifications, nature, approaches etc. as related to public administration (Bureaucracy) as it is practised elsewhere, that is, in both developed and developing systems, Anglophone and Francophone etc. COURSE AIM The main aim of the course is to give you a vivid understanding of the origin of Comparative Public Administration, Definitions and meaning of comparative public administration, approaches and how they can be applied in everyday administrative activities. It also aims to help you (students) to further your skills and competences in the public sector management that is, after studying the systems of administration in different settings in the world, especially developed and developing countries. You can also apply the principles to your job as policy makers, top management of public organizations in both the private and public enterprises respectively. COURSE OBJECTIVES 3|Page To achieve the aims highlighted above, the course sets specific objectives. These are designed in a way that each unit has specific objectives. The unit objectives are always included at the beginning of each unit; advisably, you should read them before you start working through the unit in order to have insight or an idea of what the unit set to achieve. The objectives will serve as the benchmark or referral baseline to determine or measure your understanding of the sub-topics of the respective units. Therefore, you should always refer back to the unit objectives after completing a study of every unit. In doing so, make sure that you follow the provided instructions in the respective unit. However, below are the broken down objectives of the course as a whole. By meeting these objectives, you should have achieved the aims of the course as a whole. Thus, on successful completion of the course, you should be able to: (1) Explore and explain the evolutionary trends and meaning of comparative public Administration; (2) Identify and appreciate the contributions of Riggs to Comparative Public Administration Studies; (3) Outline the rationales or significance of Comparative Public Administration; (4) Describe the scope and forms of Comparative Public Administration; (5) Understand and argue for the uses of models and approaches in comparative public Administration study; (6) Describe the cross-cultural, bureaucratic, case study, institutional, structural- functional and Prismatic Sala Models in Comparative Studies; 4|Page (7) Understand and examine the concept of Bureaucracy and civil service; (8) Highlight in general perspective the nature of administration in developed and developing countries; (9) Compare the system of Administration in developed and developing Anglophone and Francophone with specific reference to Britain and France, Nigeria and Senegal; (10) Finally, identify and examine the role of bureaucracy in nation-building and the problems and prospects of bureaucracy especially in developing countries WORKING THROUGH THIS COURSE To complete this course, you are required to read the study units, read recommended text books and read other materials provided by the National Open University of Nigeria (NOUN). Each unit contains self-assessment exercises, and at a point in the course, you are required to submit assignments for assessment purposes. At the end of the course, there is a final examination. However, the course should take you about 16 - 17 weeks in total to complete. Below you will find the constituent components of the course, that includes what you have to do, and how you should allocate your time to each unit in order to successfully complete your study of the course. COURSE MATERIALS The major components of the course material are as follows: (a) Course Guide (b) Course Study Units 5|Page (c) References/Further Readings (d) Assignment (e) Presentation Schedule STUDY UNITS The course material which is divided into three (3) modules is constituted by study units that make up a module. These modules and units are as follows: MODULE 1: EVOLUTION, NATURE AND MEANING OF COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Unit 1: Brief Historical Development of Comparative Public Administration Unit 2: Concept of Comparative Public Administration Unit 3: Riggs’ Contribution to Comparative Public Administration studies Unit 4: Rationales for Comparative Public Administration Studies Unit 5: Scopes and forms of Comparative Public Administration Studies Unit 6: Comparison between Public Administration and Comparative Public Administration MODULE 2: MODELS AND APPROACHES TO COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Unit 1: Uses of Models and Approaches in Comparative Public Administration Studies Unit 2: Cross-cultural Approach to Comparative public administration Studies Unit 3: Bureaucratic Approach to Comparative public administration Studies 6|Page Unit 4: Case studies Approach to Comparative public administration Studies Unit 5: Institutional Approach to Comparative public administration Studies Unit 6: Structural-functional Approach to Comparative public administration Studies Unit 7: Prismatic Model and Comparative Public Administration MODULE 3: NATURE/SYSTEMS OF ADMINISTRATION IN DEVELOPED AND DEVELOPING COUNTRIES Unit 1: Concept of Bureaucracy Unit 2: Nature of Administration/Bureaucracy in Developed Countries Unit 3: Nature of Administration/Bureaucracy in Developing Countries Unit 4: Systems of Administration in Developed Anglophone and Francophone Countries (Britain and France) Unit 5: Systems of Administration in Developing Anglophone and Francophone Countries (Nigeria and Senegal) Unit 6: Problems and Prospects of Bureaucracy on Nation Building From the foregoing modules, it should be noted that the first module dwells into the discussion by first tracing the emergence or origin of Comparative Public Administration as a sub-field of Public Administration, subsequent discussions feature the conceptual clarification of the concept and the nature of Comparative Public Administration. The second Module focuses on the use of Models and Approaches in Comparative Public Administration studies with emphasis in explaining the cross-cultural 7|Page approach, bureaucratic, case study, institutional, systems/structural-functional and discussion on Prismatic cum Prismatic Sala model. The last module attempts analysis on the nature or systems of administration in developed and developing countries with further focus on the developed Anglophone and Francophone and developing Anglophone and Francophone countries respectively. Finally, attempt will be made in looking at bureaucracy and nation building as well as the prospects of bureaucracy especially in developing societies. ASSIGNMENT FILES There are 19 assignments in this course. The nineteen-course assignment which cover all the topics in the course material are there to guide you to have proper understanding and grasp of the course. PRESENTATION SCHEDULE The presentation schedule included in your course materials gives you the important date for the completion of tutor- marked assignments and attending tutorials. Remember, you are required to submit all your assignments latest by the due date and timely submission of assignment is pre-requisite. ASSESSMENT There are three aspects to the assessment of this course: first is the self-assessment test or exercise; the second is tutor-marked assignments; and third, is a written examination. 8|Page In tackling the assignments, you are advised to be sincere in attempting the exercises; you are expected to apply information, knowledge and techniques gathered during the course. The assignments must be submitted to your tutor for formal assessment in accordance with the deadlines stated in the Presentation Schedule and the Assignment File. At the end of the course, you will need to sit for afinal written examination of ‗three hours‘ duration. This examination will also count for 70% of your total course mark. TUTOR-MARKED ASSIGNMENT (TMA) There are nineteen-marked assignments in this course. You only need to submit five of the nineteen assignments. You are encouraged, however, to submit all nineteen assignments in which case the highest five of the 19 Assignments will carry equal mark with all the assignments covering 30% of your total course mark. Assignment questions for the units in this course are contained in the Assignment File. You will be able to complete your assignment from the information and materials contained in your reading, references and study units. However, it is desirable to demonstrate that you have read and researched more widely than the required minimum. Using other references will give you a broader view point and may provide a deeper understanding of the subject. When you have completed each assignment, send it together with a TMA (tutor- marked assignment) to your tutor. Make sure that each assignment reaches your tutor on or before the deadline given in the Presentation Schedule and Assignment 9|Page File. If for any reason, yon cannot complete your work on time, contact your tutor before the assignment is due to discuss the possibility of an extension. Extensions will not be granted after the due date unless there are exceptional circumstances. FINAL EXAMINATION AND GRADING The final examination for PAD 784 will be of three hours‘ duration and have a value of 70% of the total course grade. The examination will consist of questions, which reflect the types of self-testing, practice exercise and tutor-marked problems you have previously encountered. All areas of the course will be assessed. The work you submit to your tutor for assessment will count as the other 30% of your total course mark. Spend the time between finishing the last unit and sitting for the examination to revise the entire course work. You might find it useful to review the self- assessment tests, tutor-marked assignments and comments on them before the examination. The final examination covers information from all parts of the course. COURSE MARKING SCHEME Total Course Marking Scheme ASSESSMENT MARKS Assignments 1-19 Nineteen assignments, with best five carrying 6 marks each = 5 x 6 marks= 30% of the entire course marks 10 | P a g e Final Examination 70% of overall course marks Total 100% of course marks COURSE OVERVIEW (ACTIVITY) This table brings together the units, the number of weeks you should take to complete them and the assignments that follow them. Unit Title of Work Weeks Assignment Activity Course Guide Module 1 1 Brief Historical Development of 1 Assignment:Trace the origin of ComparativePublic Administration Comparative Public Administration and briefly discuss any six factors responsible for it development as a specialized field of study 2 Concept of Comparative Public 1 Assignment :Discuss the concept of Administration comparative public administration 3 Riggs Contribution to Comparative 1 Assignment: Discuss the Public Administration contributions of Riggs to the Comparative Public Administration studies 4 Rationale for Comparative Public 1 Assignment :Critically discuss the Administration rationale for the comparative public administration studies 11 | P a g e 5 Scope and forms of Comparative 1 Assignment :Identify and briefly but Public Administration critically discuss the level of analysis and different forms of comparative public administration studies you are familiar with 6 Comparison between Public 1 Assignment: Comparative public Administration and Comparative Public Administration administration differs in significant ways from traditional public administration. Expatiate Module 2 1 Uses of Models and Approaches in 1 Assignment:Briefly define a model and critically Comparative Public Administration discuss the uses and common attributes of model in comparative public administration studies 2 Cross-cultural Approach to Comparative 1 Assignment :Discuss the cross-cultural approach Studies to comparative public administration study 3 Bureaucratic Approach to Comparative 1 Assignment :Describe the Weber‘s bureaucratic Studies approach to the comparative public administration studies 4 Case Study Approach to Comparative 1 Assignment:Critically explain the use of case Studies study approach in comparative public administration studies 5 Institutional Approach to Comparative 1 Assignment :Briefly but critically discuss the Studies institutional approach to the study of comparative public administration 6 Systems/Structural functional Approach 1 Assignment: What do you understand by the to Comparative Studies structural approach? 12 | P a g e 7 Prismatic Model and Comparative Public 1 Assignment :Use the elements of Prismatic sala Administration model to explain the nature of administration in Nigeria Module 3 1 Concept of Bureaucracy 1 Assignment: What is Bureaucracy? Discuss any five features of bureaucracy with relevant examples 2 1 Assignment :Critically describe the nature of administration in developed countries Natureof Administration in Developed Countries 3 Nature of Administration in 1 Assignment :Explain the cluster of common Developing countries administrative patterns typical of administration in developing countries identified by Heady 4 System of Administration in 1 Assignment: Compare the administrative system Developed Anglophone and Francophone (Britain and France) of Britain and France on the basis of the following Countries criteria: recruitment, training and promotion 5 Systems of Administration in 1 Assignment: Compare the system of Developing Anglophone and bureaucracy/administration between Nigeria and Francophone countries (Nigeria and Senegal Senegal) 6 Problems and Prospects of 1 Assignment: Critically discuss the role of Bureaucracy in Nation Building bureaucracy in nation building. What are the prospects of bureaucracy in developing countries? Total 19 19 13 | P a g e HOW TO GET THE MOST FROM THIS COURSE In distance learning (Open University), the study units replace the university lecturer. This is one of the great advantages of distance learning. You can read and work through the designed study materials at your own convenient pace, and at a time and place that suits you best. Think of it as reading the lecture that a lecturer might set you some reading to do, the study unit will tell you when to read your other materials. Just as a lecturer might give you an in-class exercise, your study units provide exercises for you to do at appropriate points. Each of the study units follows a common format. The first item is an introduction of the subject matter of the unit, and how a particular unit is integrated with the other units and the course as a whole. Next is a set of learning objectives. These objectives let you know what you should be able to do by the time you have completed the unit. You should use theseobjectives to guide your study. When you have finished the unit, you must go back and cheek whether you have achieved the objectives. If you make a habit of doing this, you will significantly improve your chances of passing the course. The main body of the unit guides you through the required reading from other sources. This will usually be either from a Reading Section or some other sources. Self-tests are interspersed throughout the end of units. Working through these tests will help you to achieve the objectives of the unit and prepare you for the assignments and the examination. You should do each self-assessment test as you come to it in the study unit. There will also be numerous examples given in the study units, work through these when you come to them too. 14 | P a g e The following constitute the practical strategies for working through the course. If you run into any trouble, call your tutor. Remember that your tutor's job is to help you. When you need help, do not hesitate to call and ask your tutor to provide any assistant he/she could offer. (1) Please read this course guide carefully and thoroughly. (2) Organize a study schedule. Refer to the course overview for more details. Note the time you are expected to spend on each unit and how the assignments relate to the units. Important information e.g. details of your tutorials, and the date of the first day of the semester will be made available. You need to gather all this information in one place, such as your diary or a wall calendar. Whatever method you choose to use, you should decide on and write in your own dates for working on each unit. (3) Once you have created you own study schedule, do everything you can to stick to it. One of the major reasons that students fail is that they get behind with their coursework. If you get into difficulties with your schedule, please let your tutor know before it is too late for help. (4) Turn to the respective units and read the introduction and the objectives for each of the units. (5) Assemble the study materials. Information about what you need for a unit is given in the ‗Overview‘ at the beginning of each unit. You will always need both the study unit you are working on and one of your references, on your desk at the same time. 15 | P a g e (6) Work through the unit. The content of the unit itself has been arranged to provide a sequence for you to follow. As you work through the units, you will be instructed to read sections from your other sources. Use the unit to guide your reading. (7) Before the relevant due date, check your Assignment File and make sure you attend to the next required assignment. Keep in mind that you will learn a lot by doing the assignments effectively. The assignmentshave been designed to help you meet the objectives of the course and, therefore, will help you pass the exam. Submit all assignments not later than the due date. (8) Review of the objectives for each study unit confirms that you have achieved them. If you find ambiguity in any of the objectives, review the study material or consult your tutor. (9) When you are confident that you have achieved a unit's objectives, you can then start perusing the next unit. Proceed unit by unit through the course and try to face your study so that you keep yourself on schedule. (10) When you have submitted an assignment to your tutor for marking, do not wait for its return before starting on the next unit. Keep to your schedule. When the assignment is returned, pay particular attention to your tutor's comments, especially on the tutor-marked assignment form. Consult your tutor as soon as possible if you have any questions or difficulty. (11) After completing the last unit (Unit 19), review the course and prepare yourself for the final examination. Check that you have achieved the unit objectives (listed at the beginning of each unit) and the course objectives (listed in the Course Guide). 16 | P a g e FACILITATORS/TUTORS AND TUTORIALS There are some hours of tutorials provided in support of this course. You will be notified of the dates, times and location of these tutorials, together with the names and phone numbers of your tutor, as soon as you are allocated a tutorial group. Your tutor will mark and comment on your assignments, keep a close watch on your progress and on any difficulties you might encounter and provide assistance to you during the course- You must mail your tutor-marked assignments to your tutor well before the due date (at least two working days are required). They will be marked by your tutor and returned to you as soon as possible. Do not hesitate to contact your tutor by telephone, e-mail, or discussion board if you need help. The following might be circumstances in which you would find help necessary. CONTACT YOUR TUTOR IF:  You do not understand any part of the study units or the assigned readings.  You have difficulty with the self-test or exercise.  You have a question or problem with an assignment with your tutor's comment on an assignment or with the grading of an assignment You should try your best to attend the tutorials. This is the only chance to have face-to-face contact with your tutor and to ask questions which are answered instantly. You can raise any problem encountered in the course of your study. To gain the maximum benefit from course tutorials, prepare a question list before attending them. You will learn a lot from participating in discussions actively. 17 | P a g e As earlier stated above, this course, PAD 784 (Comparative Public Administration) relates public Administration in public organizations. It makes in- depth analysis of the Comparative Public Administration in developing and developed countries for understanding of the practices and principles governing public Administration. MAIN COURSE MODULE 1: EVOLUTION, NATURE AND MEANING OF COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION PAGE Unit 1: Brief Historical Development of Comparative Public Administration……….. 20 Unit 2: Concept of Comparative Public Administration ……………………………….. 26 Unit 3: Riggs’ Contribution to Comparative Public Administration ………………….. 32 Unit 4: Rationales for Comparative Public Administration Studies…………………… 43 Unit 5: Scopes and forms of Comparative Public Administration Studies…………….. 48 Unit 6: Comparison between Public Administration and Comparative Public Admin.. 54 MODULE 2: MODELS AND APPROACHES TO COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION PAGE Unit 1: Uses of Models and Approaches in Comparative Public Administration Studies...61 Unit 2: Cross-cultural Approach to Comparative Studies……………………………… 67 Unit 3: Bureaucratic Approach to Comparative Studies…………………………………70 Unit 4: Case studies Approach to Comparative Studies………………………………….73 Unit 5: Institutional Approach to Comparative Studies………………………………….79 18 | P a g e Unit 6: Systems/Structural-functional Approach to Comparative Studies…………….. 84 Unit 7: Prismatic Model and Comparative Public Administration…………………….. 90 MODULE 3: NATURE/SYSTEMS OF ADMINISTRATION IN DEVELOPED AND DEVELOPING COUNTRIES Unit 1: Concept of Bureaucracy…………………………………………………………… 98 Unit 2: Nature of Administration/Bureaucracy in Developed Countries……………… 106 Unit 3: Nature of Administration/Bureaucracy in Developing Countries……………... 113 Unit 4: Systems of Administration in Developed Anglophone and Francophone Countries (Britain and France)………………………………………………………………. 121 Unit 5: Systems of Administration in Developing Anglophone and Francophone Countries (Nigeria and Senegal)………………………………………………………………. 132 Unit 6: Problems and Prospects of Bureaucracy on Nation Building………………….. 141 MODULE1: EVOLUTION, MEANING AND NATURE OF COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Unit 1: Brief Historical Development of Comparative Public Administration Unit 2: Concept of Comparative Public Administration Unit 3: Riggs’ Contribution to Comparative Public Administration Unit 4: Rationales for Comparative Public Administration Studies Unit 5: Scopes and forms of Comparative Public Administration Studies 19 | P a g e Unit 6: Comparison between Public Administration and Comparative Public Administration UNIT 1:BRIEF HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Objectives 3.0 Main content 3.1 Trends in the emergence of Comparative Public Administration 3.2 Factors that influenced the development of Comparative Public Administration 4.0 Conclusion 5.0 Summary 6.0 Tutor-Marked Assignments 7.0 References/Further Reading 1.0 INTRODUCTION The emphasis on the shift from the traditional Public administration to comparative Public Administration was heralded after the Second World War because hitherto to that period, literatures on Comparative Public Administration were sketchy. However, in the early writings on the subject, scholars such as L.D White and F.W. Taylor or the human relations movement adopted a ―management‖ approach and their main concern was building a science of administration through the articulation of certain ―Universal‖ principles of administration. It was the turn of events during and after World War II that influenced or changed the state of literature on Comparative Public Administration. Therefore, this unit focuses on the trends in the emergence of Comparative Public Administration and the factors that influenced the development of Comparative Public Administration as a sub-field of public administration. 2.0 OBJECTIVES 20 | P a g e At the end of this unit, student should be able to: (a) Trace the origin and evolutionary trends of comparative public administration (b) Identify the factors that influenced the development or evolution of comparative public administration 3.0 MAIN CONTENT 3.1 Trends in the Emergence of Comparative Public Administration Demand for Relevance Comparative studies have been conducted for centuries, producing broad comparative surveys leading to broad generalizations. Most of these cross-state comparisons have been cross-disciplinary (Deutsch 1987: 7). Perhaps the most prominent early user of such comparisons is Aristotle, who combined the Platonic methods of abstraction with the study of concrete cases. Aristotle sent his assistants around the Mediterranean to collect the constitutions of 128 city-states. The result was Aristotle‘s Politics, a valuable piece of theory which has endured over the centuries, and generating many important cross-disciplinary generalizations (Deutsch 1987: 7). Although students of comparative administration may consider their subject a product of the post WW II era, actually a strong call for a comparative orientation of public administration goes back to much earlier time. Woodrow Wilson‘s famous article often referred to as the first articulation of public administration as a field of study, repeatedly emphasized the comparative approach as the foundation of developing administrative principles. Wilson believed that it is possible, indeed desirable, that we find the regularities and the principles of public administration through comparisons. In 1887, Wilson wrote that ―nowhere else in the whole field of politics, it would seem, can 21 | P a g e we make use of the historical, comparative method more safely than in this province of administration‖ (Wilson in Shafritz and Hyde 1997: 25). Profusion of systematic comparative public administration is a fairly recent activity, imprecisely linked to the downfall of colonialism. Scholars who bridged the interests of administration and politics took the lead in the early phase. In 1953, the American Political Science Association had a committee on comparative administration, before the American Society for Public Administration created the Comparative Administration Group (CAG). During the 1960s, the CAG expanded its activities and attracted over 500 members that included academicians, students, management consultants, and operatives of technical assistance programs to developing countries. Subsequently, the CAG was merged to become the first section of ASPA that subsequently was named Section on International and Comparative Administration (SICA). Fred W. Riggs provided intellectual and organizational leadership to the CAG during its early days. He managed the group, attracted more members, and contributed significant writings that set new directions in comparative studies. Other names that have been prominently involved during the early years of the comparative enterprise include Dwight Waldo, Milton Esman, Ferrel Heady, Frank Sherwood, Ralph Braibanti, John Montgomery, William Siffin, and others. In a report to the annual meeting of ASPA, April 1961, Fred Riggs specified three emerging trends in the comparative study of public administration: (a) a trend from normative toward more empirical approaches, (b) a shift from idiographic (distinct cases) toward nomothetic approaches (studies that seek explicitly to formulate and test propositions), and (c) a shift from predominantly non- ecological to an ecological basis of comparative study (Heady 1962: 2). 22 | P a g e 3.2 Factors that influenced the Development/evolution of Comparative Public Administration From the foregoing analysis on the trends in the emergence of Comparative Public Administration, the specific factors that contributed to the raise and development of comparative public administration were inter alia: (1) The revisionist movement in comparative politics due to dissatisfaction with the traditional approaches. (2) The dissatisfaction with traditional public administration which was culture-bound. (3) Intellectually oriented catalysts, that is, to develop universally relevant theoretical models. (4) Exposure of American scholars and administrators to the new features of the administrative systems of developing countries during the World War II period. (5) The emergence of newly independent Third World countries which attempted to achieve rapid socio-economic development, creating opportunities for scientific investigation. (6) Policy oriented catalysts, that is, to develop the practical knowledge to make policy- formulation and policy-execution more effective. (7) The scientific, technological and theoretical development which have influenced the forms of administrative structures. (8) The extension of American foreign aid programme (both political and economic) to newly emerged developing countries. (9) The rise of behavioural approach in public administration as a reaction to the classical structural approach. However, the behaviour movement in Social Sciences led the students of Public Administration to move away from the traditional legal formal approach and to concentrate on the facts of actual behaviour of human beings in an administrative organization 23 | P a g e (Bhagwan and Bhushan, 2006:58) (10) The Comparative studies in sociology, anthropology and other areas. (11) New scientific, theoretical and technological development that affect the nature of administration SELF-ASSESSMENT EXERCISE Briefly trace the evolution of Comparative Public Administration and identify any five factors that influenced its growth 4.0 CONCLUSION In conclusion, we have to come to terms with the fact that the major shift from the periodical thinking of public administration to comparative approach was stimulated by a number of factors starting with the World War II. During the War, there were post-war military occupations and accelerated technical assistance programmes sponsored by the United Nation, United States and some private foundations like the Ford Foundation. Numerous students/practitioners from the USA at the time participated in the Aid programmes. This offered them the opportunity and exposure to government systems and cultures of other foreign countries (often non-western). The result of this exposure was the stimulation of a sense of ―comparativeness‖ in general, while raising a number of questions about the appropriateness of principles and devices that had been adjudged as good or scientific principles of administration previously. 5.0 SUMMARY In this unit, we have highlighted the trends in the emergence of Comparative Public Administration as an area of interest under the broader field of Public Administration as well as the factors that influenced the emergence of the subject matter which were related 24 | P a g e to the events that took place during and after the Second World War II. Some of the factors include: the revisionist movement in Political Science that saw the need for Comparative study in bureaucracy or administration, the exposure of some Americans on the system of administration in developing countries, the emergence of free or independent states etc. 6.0 TUTOR-MARKED ASSIGNMENTS Q1.Explore the origin of Comparative Public Administration and briefly discuss any six factors responsible for it development as a specialized field of study 7.0 REFERENCES/FURTHER READING Eneanya, A.N. (2010).Comparative Public Administration and Public Policy: Theories and Applications. Lagos: University of Lagos Press Ltd. Heady, F., and S. L. Stokes, eds. (1962). Papers in Comparative Public Administration. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute of Public Administration, University of Michigan. Heady, F. (1979). Public Administration: A Comparative Perspective, 2nd edition. New York: Mariel Dekker. Heady, F. (2001). Public Administration: A Comparative Perspective, 6th ed. New York: Marcel Dekker. UNIT 2: CONCEPT OF COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Objectives 3.0 Main content 3.1 Definition and Meaning of Comparative Public Administration 4.0 Conclusion 5.0 Summary 6.0 Tutor-Marked Assignments 7.0 References/Further Reading 25 | P a g e 1.0 INTRODUCTION Good day everyone. I hope you have appreciated our discussion in unit one above which took us to the history of the subject matter of ―Comparative Public Administration‖ and the factors responsible for the emergence or growth of the area as a specialized sub-field of Public Administration. Having done that, I will now take you through the definitions and meaning of Comparative Public Administration as defined by different scholars and groups. 2.0 OBJECTIVES At the end of this unit, student should be able to: (a) Understand the conceptual and operationalmeaning of Comparative Public Administration 3.0 MAIN CONTENT 3.1 Definition and Meaning of Comparative Public Administration The concept of Comparative public administration has been defined in various ways. It is regarded as a sub-field of Public Administration. According to Comparative Administrative Group (CAG),"Comparative public administration is a theory of public administration applied to the diverse cultures and national settings and the body of factual data by which it can be examined and tested. "In his own view, Jong S. Jun stated that"Comparative public administration has been predominantly cross-cultural or cross- national in orientation." Nimrod Raphaeli defined "Comparative public administrative as a study of public administration on a comparative basis." He traced the origin of comparative public 26 | P a g e administration to the 1952 Conference on Administration held at Princeton University inUSA. He said, "Comparative public administration is a new corner to the community of academic instruction and research. Riggs (1973) noted in his definition, that the term ―Comparative‖ should be used only for empirical, nomothetic and ecological studies. However, Marume (1976) is of the opinion that comparative public administration is that method of the study of public administration which is concerned with making rigorous systematic cross-cultural comparisons of the structures, institutions actions and processes involved in the activity of running the public affairs According to Woodrow Wilson (1887), of ourselves, so long as we know only ourselves, we know nothing. Thus, Comparative public administration (CPA) is the study of administrative institutions, processes, and behaviors across organizational, national, and cultural boundaries. The CPA is a method of investigation and analysis that compares attributes and performance of administrative systems and subsystems as well as individuals or groups in positions of decision making to generate knowledge and enhance understanding of public management. Comparison recognizes similarities and differences and underscores successful practices, thus, expanding options and alternative strategies for improving the performance of public institutions. Comparative Public Administration deals with administrative organizations or systems pertaining with different cultures and settings whose similar or dissimilar features or characteristics are studies and compared in order to find out ―causes‖ or ―reasons‖ for efficient or effective performance or behaviour of administrators, civil servants or bureaucrats. 27 | P a g e This comparison can be cross-national, namely –the comparison of municipal administration in Ceylon and India. Intra-national like the comparison of Rajasthan and U.P. Secretariat, it can be cross-cultural such as the comparison of budget administration of Nepal and Russia and cross-temporal, such as the comparison of administration of Chandra Gupta Maurya and Akbar or comparison of pre-colonial and post-colonial era/period in Nigeria or Africa in general. The context (environment) of public administration consists of various external factors that exert significant influences on management action and behavior through different means and channels. External factors include societal values, legal norms, politics, international-global accords, culture, and the state of the economy. Together, these diverse external factors have considerable impact on public management, stimulating or stifling systemic traits and performance. Consistently, the CPA seeks discovery of patterns and regularities of administrative action and behavior to produce new knowledge and insights and to affirm and refine existing information. The outcome, whether comparative research discovers new knowledge or validates existing information, is that public administration scholars and practitioners are better able to sort out and to adopt most worthy practices. ―Comparison is so central to good analysis that the scientific method is unavoidably comparative‖ (Collier 1991: 7). Similarly, social scientists regard the comparative approach as ―the methodological core of the humanistic and scientific methods‖ (Almond et al. 2000: 33). As a requirement of the scientific investigative process, the comparative approach has frequently been noted and emphasized in public administration literature since Woodrow Wilson‘s famous article in 1887. After many decades, Dahl‘s (1947: 8) widely quoted declaration remains true. 28 | P a g e Namely, as long as the study of public administration is not comparative, ―claims of a science of public administration‖ sound rather hollow. Dahl concluded that the development of an American, British, or French science of public administration is feasible. But he also inquired: can there be ―a science of public administration‖ in the sense of a body of generalized principles, independent of their peculiar national setting? Comparative studies of organizations and institutions also reinforce under- standing of global influences while expanding the domain of intellectual inquiry beyond traditional, parochial tendencies. Therefore, comparative public administration can be regarded as the study of public administration on comparative basis, in order to trace any regularities or otherwise in administrative patterns. It is mainly cross-cultural or cross-national, that is , it is not culture bound. SELF-ASSESSMENT EXERCISE What do you understand by Comparative Public Administration? 4.0 CONCLUSION In conclusion, it is the belief that generalizations relating to administrative structures and behaviour, emerging out of comparative studies in different nations and cultures can help to formulate theoretical constructs, which can provide a scientific basis to the study of public administration which according to Dahl is the only basis of regarding public administration as a science. Therefore, comparative public administration is a major shift from the traditional public administration which is culture-bound. 29 | P a g e 5.0 SUMMARY The unit attempted a conceptual clarification of the subject matter of Comparative public Administration which is defined by different scholars and groups like Comparative Administration Group (CAG) etc. However, Comparative Public administration is the study of public administration across border that paves way for the universal application of a theory in different settings or cultures, it is cross-cultural study of the administration of various countries in the world, it is the shift towards empiricism, nomothetic and ecological studies. 6.0 TUTOR-MARKED ASSIGNMENTS Q1. Discuss the concept of comparative public administration 7.0 REFERENCES/FURTHER READING Almond, G. A., et al. (2000). Comparative Politics Today. 7th ed. New York: Longman. Collier, D. (1991). The comparative method: Two decades of change. In Comparative Political Dynamics. D. A. Rustow and K. P. Erickson, eds. New York: Harper Collins. Dahl, R. A. (1947). The science of public administration: Three problems. Public Administration Review 7 (1): 1–11. Eneanya, A.N. (2010).Comparative Public Administration and Public Policy: Theories and Applications. Lagos: University of Lagos Press Ltd. Heady, F. (1979). Public Administration: A Comparative Perspective, 2nd edition. New York: Mariel Dekker. Marume, S. B. M. ,Jubenkanda, R. R. and Namusi, C. W. (2016). Comparative Public Administration in International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR) ISSN (Online): 2319-7064 30 | P a g e Wilson, W. (1887). The study of administration. In Classics of Public Administration. eds. J. M. Shafritz and A. C. Hyde, 1997, 4th ed. New York: Harcourt Brace College Publications. UNIT 3: RIGGS’ CONTRIBUTION TO COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION STUDIES CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Objectives 3.0 Main content 3.1 Trends in the study of Comparative Public Administration by Riggs 3.2 Ecology and Comparative Public Administration by Riggs 4.0 Conclusion 5.0 Summary 6.0 Tutor-Marked Assignments 7.0 References/Further Reading 1.0 INTRODUCTION Riggs is one of the foremost model-builder in comparative public administration. Ferrel Heady says that Riggs' book Administration in Developing Countries: The Theory of 31 | P a g e Prismatic Society (1964) continues to be probably the most notable single contribution in comparative public administration. Professor Riggs employed three analytical tools to explain his administrative theories. These are ecological approach (ecological perspectives); structural-functional approach; and idea models (model-building). Also Riggs is well known for his contribution in highlighting the trend in the study of comparative public administration. 2.0 OBJECTIVES At the end of this unit, student should be able to: (a) Identify and describe the trends in the study of Comparative Public Administration (b) Understand the nexus between ecology and Comparative Public Administration 3.0 MAIN CONTENT 3.1 Trends in the Study of Comparative Public Administration by Riggs The trends in the study of Comparative Public Administration are related to the handy work of Fred Riggs. Riggs (1973) who was the chairman of Comparative Administration group (CAG) noted in his definition, that the term ―comparative‖ should be used only for empirical, nomothetic and ecological studies. Riggs outlines three trends in the comparative study of Public Administration studies thus: a) Shift from normative approach towards more empirical approaches; b) Shift from ideographic (individualistic) toward nomothetic (universals); and c) Shift from a predominantly non-ecological to an ecological basis for the study of Public Administration. 32 | P a g e (a) Normative to Empirical Traditional studies of Public Administration were very muchinfluenced by the classical approach. These studies emphasized upon 'good administration' which was based on following certain ideal principles (What ought to be). Efficiency and economy were considered to be the primary goals of all administrative systems and there were certain principles of formal organization which helped-in the achievement of these goals, therefore, a few models of administration, primarily of the western democratic world, were considered to be useful for all other administrative systems. As a number of developing countries emerged on the scene and with the success of the communist systems in various form of the world, it became clear that a limited culture-bound normative approach to the study of Public Administration was not adequate. The behavioural approach highlighted the value of studying the facts and reality in significant manner and therefore the comparative studies of Public Administration after the Second World War started assigning greater importance to the study of administrative "reality" existing in differences countries and cultures. These studies were more interested in finding out facts about some patterns and behaviorism of administrative systems rather than in describing as to what was good for each system. In this context, it may be mentioned that two important trends have influenced the character of some administrative studies in the past two decades or so. First, the concept' of Development Administration" which focuses on the goal-orientation of administrative system. Though considers reality as the basis of such goal orientation, the emergence of Development Administration focus inquiry since the early sixties. Comparative Public Administration (encompassing the field of Comparative Development Administration) has evolved a synthesis between the normative and the elements of 33 | P a g e analysis. The second movement that best influenced the nature of Comparative administrative studies against Public Administration which stressed the idealistic goal and to be achieved and system and thus tried to bridge the gap between the "is" and "should" aspects of Public Administration. In the late sixties, the New Public administration marked the "post-behavioural" trend and its impact on most administrative analysis has been propounded.. (b) Ideographic to Nomothetic The words "ideographic" and "nomothetic" have been used by Riggs in specific contexts. An ideographic approach concentrates on unique cases, e.g. a historical event, study of single agency, single country or even a single cultural area. Nomothetic approach, on the other hand seeks to develop generalizations and theories which are based on analysis of regularities of behavior of administrative systems. Thus earlier studies of Comparative Public Administration which were ideographic in character focused on the study of individual nations or institutions and their approach was primarily descriptive. No serious attempt was made to compare various nations and systems. Generally, within a volume on comparative governmental administration, there were separate chapters on different nations, without any attempt to look at the similarities or differences among such nations in terms of their administrative systems. These studies, therefore, were 'comparative' only in name and did not help in the process of theory- building or in developing generalizations concerning the functioning of administrative system in different settings. Nomothetic studies analyze various administrative systems in comparative context in a manner that will help in the generation of hypothesis and theories. The objective of such 34 | P a g e studies is to look at the similarities and differences of various administrative systems existing in different nations and cultures and then draw certain generalizations relating to administrative systems functioning at various levels and in different settings. It may be noted that the emphasis on nomothetic comparatives studies is more noticeable in the United States of America than in Europe or Asia. Presently, a large number of comparative administrative studies are ideographic in character. Even these studies, it must be admitted, contributed to knowledge in Comparative Public Administration. Analysis or theory-building has to be based on facts and description. And therefore, in the present state of comparative administrative studies, a co-existence of ideographic and nomothetic studies may have to be accepted. (c) Non-ecological to Ecological The traditional studies of Comparative Public Administration were mainly non-ecological. These studies mentioned about the environment of administrative system only in a casual manner, There was no serious attempt to examine the relationship between the administrative system and its environment, Thus, it had become very difficult to identify the sources of differences among various administrative systems. However, studies undertaken after the Second World Warhave been specifically looking at similarities and differences among environmental settings prevailing-in different nation and cultures and have been attempting to examine the impact of environment on the administrative system on the other hand theinfluence of the administrative system on the environment. The well-known ecological approach relates to the study of interrelationship between the system and its environment. This approach, popularized by Fred Riggs, has been regarded as an important development in the study of Public Administration. It may be noted that most of the comparative studies of Public administration after the" Second 35 | P a g e World War have been referring to the environment of the administrative systems, but the emphasis is still on analyzing the impact of the environment on Public Administrator. The analysis relating to the influences of the administrative system on the 'environment is still inadequate. Nevertheless, a change in emphasis is noticeable and the ecological orientation is gaining stronger footing in the contemporary comparative administrative analysis. 3.2 Ecology and Comparative Public Administration by Riggs Another contribution of Riggs was in determining the link between ecology and administration especially the emphasis of same in the study of administration, and development of universal principles. F.W Riggs in his book entitled The Ecology of Public Administration (1961) explored the dynamics of interaction between public administration and its external environment. He adopted the structural -functional approach in explaining the administrative systems from ecological perspective. The adoption of this approach in the field of public administration was first suggested in 1955 by Dwight Waldo. Ecological approach studies the dynamics of interaction between administrative system and its environment consisting of political, social, cultural and economic dimensions. It assumes that administrative system is one of the various sub-systems of society and is influenced and in turn, also influences them. The ecological approach in the study of public administration though initiated by J.M. Gaus (1947), Robert A. Dahl (1947), Roscoe Martin (1952), and Riggs remains the foremost exponent of the ecological approach in public administration. In terms of definition, ecology in simple words relates to 'Environment'. And this 36 | P a g e environment includes physical, social and cultural aspects. So, basically we are going to talk about the relationship between administration and the environment it is set in (internal as well as external) and how they affect each other. Environment is the largest system, the rest and others like political systems, administrative systems, etc. are all sub systems who work under it. It influences its sub systems and vice versa. They both have to adjust to each other and also reform and change each other from time to time to stay up to date where the people's wishes drive the policies and the policies bring in development that uplifts the socio-economic status and level of the environment for progress. So they are interdependent and not mutually exclusive of each other. Administration is seen as one of the most significant aspect of any societal arrangement as it makes possible the achievement of governmental function fulfillment. It has been observed that administration of any state happens to be an expression of various unique factors existing in society and is inter dependent over other arrangements in the society that provides the stability of all structure in a society. Various scholars like George Orwell in their writings like 'Shooting an Elephant' books have given case studies of how they have seen practically that the administrative systems in different parts of the world perform differently in order to suit the environment or ecology they are set in. The ecological approach to Public Administration as propagated popularly by Fred W. Riggs who studied administrative systems in different countries (emphasis on developing countries) and why there was a vast amount of disconnect among them while applying the Americanized theories of Public Administration and how they coped up. He found that the main reason for this uniqueness of administrative systems in the world is the environment that they are set in. Each country had a different environment setting and that played a major role in the shaping of the administrative system because without the help and 37 | P a g e approval of its people an administrative system cannot survive and thus it acts according to its environment and in turn it also influences the society with its work and procedures. In The Ecology of Public Administration (1961), Riggs relied on his field experiences in Southeast Asia and the United States in formulating his perspective on public administration in developing countries. The newly independent countries, he recognized, have been faced with the problem of reorganizing and adapting their administrative systems to face the challenges of development. The problem is that administrative concepts and techniques evolved in the context of social, economic, and political conditions of Western countries are not fully valid or applicable in the new contexts. Thus, Riggs concluded that differences in social, cultural, historical, or architectural environments affect the way in which administration is conducted. He refers to all these issues of the contexts as ―the ecology of administration.‖ Governmental setting ―is one of the fundamental determinants of administrative behavior,‖ Riggs pointed out (1961: 4). In his analysis, Riggs consistently emphasized that the comparative approach is indispensable. By comparing societies, ―we begin to discover whether any particular environmental feature is regularly accompanied by some administrative trait‖ (1961: 3). Through comparisons, he contended, we can sort out from numerous Administration of Developing Countries environmental factors those few that have important consequences for the administrative system. Thus, to explain differences between two administrative systems, ―we must look for ecological differences.‖ Overall, the impact of Riggs‘s work is greater in generating debate, even excitement, in the literature and among students of public administration interested in cross-cultural studies. Riggs has been an involved scholar who provided organizational leadership and direction to the early comparative and 38 | P a g e development administration movement. But, his work largely remained at the macro level and too concerned with comprehensive and grand models, a task proved to be elusive or less relevant to the immediate needs of societies and practitioners of management. Despite criticisms of his work such as being too abstract, less relevant to the practitioner, and lacks convincing empirical evidence, Riggs publications are among the most upheld scholarship in comparative and development administration so far. Nevertheless, the focus on administration of developing countries was a departure from the ethnocentric traditional public administration and comparative politics of the post-World War II era. Although the end of colonialism magnified interest in developing countries in general, comparative and development administration had a singular focus that sought to explore the emerging world with far greater enthusiasm than any time before. Stimulated by generous grants from U.S. foundations and government agencies and motivated by financial and other advantages that were available as a result of the feverish competition of the Cold War, scholarship in comparative public administration flourished. Cross-cultural studies were significantly expanded, often in association with other field research activities covering most newly independent countries. The few references listed above are illustration of the intellectual productivity of this period. A particularly significant aspect of this trend is the integration and the institutionalization of comparative and development administration in the educational systems of the United States and the rest of the world. Courses on comparative and development administration became central parts in many graduate programs in public administration and in training activities. Apart from Riggs, the Structural-Functional Approach which was used in respect of explaining the link between ecology and administration was however adopted by Talcott Parsons, Robert Merton, Marion Levy, Gabriel Almond, David Apter, and others. 39 | P a g e According to the Structural-Functional Approach, every society has various structures which perform specific functions. Riggs identified five functions which are performed in each society. They are political, economic, social, symbolic and communicational functions. He stated that, same set of functional requisite apply to an administrative sub- system. Based on the structural-functional approach, F.W. Riggs has constructed two 'ideal models' (theoretical models) to explain the administrative system in a comparative context. These are (i) agraria-industria model; and (ii) fused-prismatic-diffracted model. They are explained in module 2 of this guide. SELF-ASSESSMENT EXCERCISE Outline the trends in the study of Comparative Public Administration by Riggs 4.0 CONCLUSION In conclusion, Riggs has contributed immensely in Comparative Public Administration studiesby consistently emphasizing that the comparative approach is indispensable. By comparing societies, ―we begin to discover whether any particular environmental feature is regularly accompanied by some administrative trait Riggs (1961: 3). However, comparative public administration has to be empirically inclined, nomothetically inclined and based on consideration of the varied environmental factors. 5.0 SUMMARY The unit highlighted the trends in the study of Comparative Public Administration by Riggs and the contribution of Riggs in developing the ecological approach to the study of 40 | P a g e public administration. As earlier stated, the ecological approach to the study of Public Administration was popularly propagated by Fred W. Riggs who studied administrative systems in different countries (with emphasis on developing countries) and why there was a vast amount of disconnect among them. 6.0 TUTOR-MARKED ASSIGNMENTS Q1. Discuss the contributions of Riggs to the Comparative Public Administration studies 7.0 REFERENCES/FURTHER READING Eneanya, A.N. (2010).Comparative Public Administration and Public Policy: Theories and Applications. Lagos: University of Lagos Press Ltd. Heady, F. (1979). Public Administration: A Comparative Perspective, 2ndedition. New York: Mariel Dekker. Marume, S. B. M.,Jubenkanda, R. R. and Namusi, C. W. (2016). Comparative Public Administration in International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR) ISSN (Online): 2319-706 UNIT 4: RATIONALE FOR COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION STUDIES CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Objectives 3.0 Main content 3.1 Significance of Comparative Public Administration 4.0 Conclusion 5.0 Summary 6.0 Tutor-Marked Assignments 7.0 References/Further Reading 1.0 INTRODUCTION Distinguished Ladies and Gentlemen Good day. You will agree with me that comparison 41 | P a g e is essential to our understanding of public administration especially as it is practice in different settings. It has been claimed that one important dimension of science is to compare. In the process of theory building and in the process of interchange of ideas among human beings, comparison is quite imminent. Through comparison a scientific development of knowledge is quite essential or possible. Therefore, in this unit attempt will be made in discussing the rationale or significance of Comparative Public Administration. 2.0 OBJECTIVES At the end of this unit, student should be able to: (a) Understand and appreciate the significance of Comparative Public Administration studies to the students of Comparative Public Administration 3.0 MAIN CONTENT 3.1 Significance of Comparative Public Administration The comparative approach (comparative public administration) has been an important thrust within the field of public administration, committed to human learning and to discovery through comparison. The CPA seeks to advance administrative knowledge by focusing on administrative structures, functions, behaviors, and performance across organizational and cultural boundaries to improve reliability and applicability of administrative concepts and practices. As Bannister (2007: 171) notes, ―The human urge to compare one‘s performance with that of others seems to be an intrinsic part of our psycho- logical make-up.‖ Comparison is more prevalent in our expressions and formal judgments than commonly acknowledged. We often compare performance to previous years, to other people, to other organizations, to cost, to benchmarks, and to similar functions and activities across jurisdictions and across national boundaries. 42 | P a g e The examination of administrative practices of other societies permits us to see a wider range of administrative actions and choices, beyond the horizon of our own experiences. Rephrasing Woodrow Wilson, if we study only ourselves we know only about ourselves and remain isolated in an interconnected world. The CPA scholarship, at various phases of its evolution, devoted much attention to learning about unfamiliar, non-Western countries and their aspirations to transform and to modernize their administrative systems. Comparative research broadens knowledge of conditions conducive to strong or weak administrative performance by focusing on a range of patterns of administrative activities and characteristics of the systems performing them. Much learning is achieved from practices that worked well and from those that did not. Not surprising, therefore, that administrative reform and capacity building are major concerns in the comparative literature. To learn from the best practices is to encourage the recognition and the utilization of the most appropriate organizational structures and processes. In many countries, irrespective of the results of reform plans for improving performance of public organizations, the contents of such plans have largely been based on lessons learned through cross-cultural comparative investigations (Manning and Parison 2004). While explanatory research is essential for the advancement of scholarship, it also benefits practitioners by expanding their horizons of choice and their capacity to observe, learn, and improve performance. However, Ramesh. K. Arora identified the four elements of the contribution of Comparative Public Administration as follows: (1) It has widened the horizons of public administration. 43 | P a g e (2) It has opened the doors of the discipline to all kinds of social scientists. (3) It has made the scope of the field more systematic by studying different administrative systems in their ecological settings. (4) It has stimulated interest on the part of its members in the problems of developing administration. On the other hand, according to T. N Chaturvedi, the various contributions of comparative study in public administration are: (i) It has helped to eliminate the narrowness of ―provincialism‖ and ―regionalism‖. (ii) It has broadened the field of social science research, which was earlier confined to cultural limitations. (iii) It has led to a greater scientific outlook in theory construction. (iv) It has encouraged the process of broadening the field of social analysis. (v) It has played an important role in making the subject of public administration broader, deeper, and useful. (vi) It has brought politics and public administration closer to each other. SELF-ASSESSMENT EXCERCISE As a student of Comparative Public Administration, state four significance of Comparative Public Administration studies 4.0 CONCLUSION In conclusion, through comparison, a scientific development of knowledge is quite essential or possible. According to the political scientist W.A. Welsh "comparison is the basis of concept formation." People assign some characters (term or concept) to things that seem similar to one another. Comparative studies in public administration afford us as 44 | P a g e students, scholars, analysis and practitioner‘s greater understanding of public administration across national boundaries as bureaucrats or administrators of each country have their peculiar characters and behavior different from others in another country. Therefore, among the tasks of comparative public administration is to establish propositions about administrative behaviour which cover different political settings. Generally knowledge of comparative public administration saves scholars and practitioners some embarrassment and surprise when having the advantage to operate beyond their immediate political and cultural environment. 5.0 SUMMARY Comparative public administration is imperative in understanding the patterns and regularities of administration across border which will pave way for determining the similarities and dissimilarities of administrative system in different settings. Therefore, we have outlined the significance of comparative public administration which on general note has widened our horizon in understanding how bureaucracy and government in general operate in different cultural setting and countries. 6.0 TUTOR-MARKED ASSIGNMENTS Q1. Critically discuss the rationale for the comparative public administration studies 7.0 REFERENCES/FURTHER READING Eneanya, A.N. (2010).Comparative Public Administration and Public Policy: Theories and Applications. Lagos: University of Lagos Press Ltd. Heady, F. (1979). Public Administration: A Comparative Perspective, 2nd edition. New York: Mariel Dekker. 45 | P a g e Manning, N., and Parison, N. (2004). International Public Administration Reform: Implications for the Russian Federation. Washington, D.C: The World Bank. Naidu, S.P. (2006).Public Administration, Concepts and Theories. New Delhi: New Age International Publishers. UNIT 5: SCOPE AND FORMS OF COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION STUDIES CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Objectives 3.0 Main content 3.1 Scope and level of analysis of Comparative Public Administration 3.2 Forms/types of Comparative Public Administration studies 4.0 Conclusion 5.0 Summary 6.0 Tutor-Marked Assignments 7.0 References/Further Reading 1.0 INTRODUCTION Good day students of Comparative public administration class. In this unit we are going to focus on the scope and level of analysis of comparative public administration and the different forms or dimensions of comparative public administration studies. 2.0 OBJECTIVES 46 | P a g e At the end of this unit, student should be able to: (a) Describe the scope and level of analysis of Comparative Public Administration (b) Understand the different forms or dimensions of Comparative studies 3.0 MAIN CONTENT 3.1 Scope and level of Analysis of Comparative Public Administration In comparative (public) administrative studies, the unit of analysis (scope) is on administrative system. Therefore, the focus is either on the whole of an administrative system or on its various parts. Briefly, the subject matter of comparison would be one or all of the following phenomena: (i) Environment of the administrative system. (ii) The whole administrative system. (iii) The formal structure of the administrative system with a focus on the pattern of hierarchy, division of work, specialization, authority-responsibility network, decentralization, delegation, control mechanisms, procedures, etc. (iv) The informal organizational patterns existing in an administrative set-up, including the nature of human groups, the relationships among individuals, motivational system, the status of morale, patterns of informal communication and the nature of leadership. (v) The roles of the individuals. (vi)The interaction between the personality of individuals and the organizational system. (vii) The policy and decisional systems of the organization that link its various parts. (viii) The communicational system, which also involves the feedback mechanism. (ix) The performance of an administrative system. You would notice from the foregoing discussion that an administrative system is not as 47 | P a g e simple entity. There are intricacies of its functioning which will be highlighted in any comparative analysis. However, Comparative administrative studies can be conducted at three analytical levels: macro, middle-range and micro. (a) Macro studies: Theses focus on the comparisons of whole administrative systems in their proper ecological contexts. For instance, a macro study would involve a comparison of the administrative systems of India and Great Britain or Nigeria and Senegal. It will comprise detailed analysis of all important aspects and parts of the administrative system of the two nations. It will be comprehensive in its scope. Though the studies of macro level are rare, they are not impossible to be taken up. Generally, the relationship between an administrative system and its external environment is highlighted in the macro level studies. (b) The Middle-range studies: Theses are on certain important parts of an administrative system that are sufficiently large in size and scope of functioning. For instance, a comparison of the structure of higher bureaucracy of two or more nations, comparison of agricultural administration in two or more countries or a comparison of local government in different, countries will form part of middle range studies. For instance, the Nigerian local government system can compare to that of Britain. (c) Micro studies: These relate to comparisons of an individual organization with its counterparts in other settings. A micro study might relate to an analysis of a small part of an administrative system, such as the recruitment or training system in two or more administrative organizations: Micro studies are more feasible to be undertaken and a large number of such studies have been conducted by scholars of Public administration In the 48 | P a g e contemporary Comparative public Administration, all the three types of studies may exist. 3.2 Forms/Types of Comparative Public Administration Studies The types of comparative administrative studies are broadly classified into five.They are: (a)Inter-institutional Analysis Inter-institutional analysis involves a comparison of two or more administrative systems within anorganization. For instance, a comparison of the structure and working of the department of human resource and department accounting such comparisons could involve the whole of an administrative organization or its various parts. (b)Intra national Analysis When an analysis in a comparative perspective is taken up among various administrative systems functioning within a country, it would be an intra-national analysis. For instance comparison of district administration in Northern (Unguja) and South district (Pemba) would be an example of such an analysis. (c)Cross-national Analysis When two or more administrative systems (or their parts) are compared in the settings of different nations, this would be cross-national analysis. For example, comparing the recruitment of higher civil service of China, Thailand and Tanzania will form an example of a cross-national analysis or comparing the promotion of senior public servants in Nigeria, Niger and Senegal. (d)Cross-cultural Analysis 49 | P a g e A cross-national analysis of administrative system involves countries forming part of different "cultures", this would be called a cross-cultural analysis. For instance, comparing the administrative system of the USSR (a socialist state) with the U.S. (a capitalist system) could be termed a cross-cultural analysis. Even a comparison between a developed country (e.g. Britain or France) with a developing country (e.g. Tanzania or Nigeria) or between a developing democratic country (e.g. Philippines) and a developing Communist regime (e.g. Vietnam) will be covered in a cross-cultural comparison. Thus, the word "cultural" in the category "cross-cultural" has a broad connotation and involves an aggregation of distinctive political, economic and socio-cultural traits of a particular system and its environment. (e)Cross Temporal Analysis Such a comparison involves different time-frames for analysis. For instance, a comparison between the administrative system prevailing during ancient Rome and modern Italy or between the administrative practices prevailing during the period of late Abeid Amani Karume and Dr. Sheinor rather pre-colonial and post-colonial era of Africa or specifically Nigeria would fall under the rubric of cross-temporal analysis. A cross-temporal analysis may be inter-institutional, intra-national, and cross-national or cross cultural. For instance, a comparison of the administrative control mechanisms prevailing during the times of late Gaddafi, Alexander, Mkapa and Nasser will be cross national as well as cross-cultural. SELF-ASSESSMENT EXERCISE Outline any three forms of Comparative Public Administration studies 4.0 CONCLUSION From the foregoing, comparative public administration studies could be conducted in 50 | P a g e different analytical bases. It could be macro, middle range or micro analysis. Also, the comparative studies could be in the form of cross-national, cross-cultural etc.Sometimes, researchers are puzzle on the most suitable level analysis to use or on the form of analysis to engage in. Selecting the most fruitful approach for conducting comparative public administration research is inescapably an eclectic process. Students of the field have to be able and willing to choose from several options, but with full knowledge of the objectives as well as the potential and the limitations of each option. No one method will suit all occasions. Case studies, middle-range models, focus on structure and function, or a behavioral orientation—each provides valid techniques and perspectives. What is the appropriate approach depends on the nature of the type of questions and the objective of the study. Therefore, students have to clearly define the level of analysis before engaging of any study. 5.0 SUMMARY In summary, the unit highlighted the scope and level of analysis in comparative public administration studies and the different forms or types of comparative studies which are chosen and applied relative to the objective one intends to achieve. 6.0 TUTOR-MARKED ASSIGNMENTS Q1. Identify and briefly but critically discuss the level of analysis and different forms of comparative public administration studies you are familiar with. 7.0 REFERENCES/FURTHER READING Eneanya, A.N. (2010).Comparative Public Administration and Public Policy: Theories and Applications. Lagos: University of Lagos Press Ltd. Heady, F. (1979). Public Administration: A Comparative Perspective, 2nd edition. New 51 | P a g e York: Mariel Dekker. UNIT 6: COMPARISON BETWEEN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Objectives 3.0 Main content 3.1 Traditional Public Administration 3.2 Comparative Public Administration 3.3 Public Administration and Comparative Public Administration compared 4.0 Conclusion 5.0 Summary 6.0 Tutor-Marked Assignments 7.0 References/Further Reading 1.0 INTRODUCTION 52 | P a g e After the attempt in looking at the different level of analysis and forms of comparative public administration, here, we are going to proceed by comparing the traditional (conventional) public administration with comparative public administration so that we identify the bottom line of differences between the latter and the former.Comparative public administration has been the first visible major development in the past world-war evolution of public administration. It aims at the development of a more systematic and scientific public administration by constructing and enhancing theory in public administration. 2.0 OBJECTIVES At the end of this unit, student should be able to: (a) Describe the Traditional Public Administration (b) Briefly describe Comparative Public Administration (c) Make comparison between Traditional and Comparative Public Administration 3.0 MAIN CONTENT 3.1 Traditional Public Administration In the literal sense of the term administration, it has a Latin origin from ‗ad’ and ‘ministrare’- administrare, meaning to serve. Pfiffner and Presthus define administration as the systematic ordering of affairs and calculated use of resources aimed at making those things which we want to happen and at the same time preventing the occurrence of those events that fail to meet our objectives. Frederick Lane defines administration as organizing and maintaining human and fiscal resources to attain a group‘s goals. 53 | P a g e Piffner and Presthus (1960:3) defined Public administration as the getting the work of government done by coordinating the efforts of the people. ―Public Administration is a broad-ranging and amorphous combination of theory and practice; its purpose is to promote a superior understanding of government and its relationship with the society, it governs, as well as to encourage public policies more responsive to social needs and to institute managerial practices attuned to effectiveness, efficiency and the deeper human requisites of the citizenry‖. However, in more comprehensive way, Nigro and Nigro summarize the meaning of Public Administration thus: (i) A cooperative group effort in a public setting (ii) Covers all three branches of government, that is, executive legislative and judiciary and their interrelationships, (iii) Has important role in the formulation of public policy and thus a part of the political process, (iv) More important than, and also different in significant ways from private administration, and (vi) Closely associated with numerous private group and individuals in providing services to the community. From all the foregoing definitions, it can be deduced that, Public Administration is a cooperative or group activities aimed at achieving predetermined aims and objectives of the government in order to achieve the objectives of public policies. It comprises the interrelationships among the three branches of government, i.e. executive, judiciary and the legislature. In sum, public administration: (i) is the non-political public bureaucracy operating in a political system; 54 | P a g e (ii) deals with the ends of the State, the sovereign will, the public interests and laws; (iii) is the business side of government and as such concerned with policy execution, but it is also concerned with policy-making; (iv) covers all three branches of government, although it tends to be concentrated in the executive branch; (v) provides regulatory and service functions to the people in order to attain good life; (vi) differs significantly from private administration, especially in its emphasis on the public; and (vii) is interdisciplinary in nature as it draws upon other social sciences like political science, economics and sociology. 3.2 Comparative Public Administration As earlier stated, in our previous discussions, Comparative Public Administration, in simple terms, refers to a comparative study of government administrative systems functioning in different countries of the world. The nature of Comparative Administration has vast ramifications and ranges from the narrowest of studies to the broadest of analysis. To understand the meaning of Comparative Public Administration, it would be desirable to look at the types of comparative public administration studies undertaken by scholars in the field. Nimrod Raphaeli has defined Comparative Public Administration as a study of Public administration on a comparative basis. The Comparative Administration 55 | P a g e Group referred to Comparative Public Administration as ―the theory of Public Administration applied to diverse cultures and national setting and the body of factual data, by which it can be examined and tested.‖ Robert Jockson has defined it as the phase of study which is –concerned with making rigorous 'cross-cultural comparisons of the structures and processes involved in the activity of administering public affairs. 3.3 Public Administration and Comparative Public Administration Compared Comparative public administration is different from traditional public administration in two respects: (a) Public administration is 'culture-bound' (ethnocentric) while comparative public administration is 'cross-cultural' in its orientation and thrust. In 1936, L.D. White observed that a principle of administration is as useful a guide to action in the public administration of Russia as of Great Britain, of Iraq as of United States. But later Robert Dahl (in 1947) and Dwight Waldo (in 1948) pointed out that cultural factors could make public administration on one part of the globe quite a different animal from public administration on the other part. (b) Public administration is “practitioner-oriented” and involves the “real world”, whereas comparative public administration attempts to the “theory-building” and “seeks knowledge for the sake of knowledge”. In brief, the comparative public administration has a purely scholarly thrust, as opposed to professional. 56 | P a g e According to Professor Ferrel Heady, the comparative public administration addresses five ―motivating concerns‖ as an intellectual enterprise. These are: (a) The search for theory; (b) The urge for practical application; (c) The incidental contribution of the broader field of comparative politics; (d) The interest of researchers trained in the tradition of administrative law; and (e) The comparative analysis of ongoing problems of public administration. SELF-ASSESSMENT EXERCISE Briefly distinguish between Traditional public administration and comparative public administration 4.0 CONCLUSION The primary goal of the discipline (comparative public administration) is in line with the scientific demand which is ―to build and test propositions about administration, an assumption that is universally shared within the public administration fraternity‖ (Sigelman, 1976: 621-25). It is committed to verifiable generalized statements about public administration across political systems and different environments. It is believed by scholar of comparative public administrative studies that public officials, political advisers, public administrators and the entire political process will perform better if public ad`ministration and its practice can be rooted in developed theoretical and empirical foundation. 57 | P a g e 5.0 SUMMARY In this unit, we have looked at the traditional public administration and comparative public administration. The former can be seen as the one that emphasizes on normative (what ought to be) rather than empiricism (what is). It deals with the study of the cooperative effort of two or more people in other to achieve certain ends.On the other hand, comparative public administration is emphasizing in developing a theory of public administration after taking into cognizance the variation in culture, environment etc. 6.0 TUTOR-MARKED ASSIGNMENTS Q1. Comparative public administration differs in significant ways from traditional public administration. Expatiate 7.0 REFERENCES/FURTHER READING Eneanya, A.N. (2010).Comparative Public Administration and Public Policy: Theories and Applications. Lagos: University of Lagos Press Ltd. Heady, F. (1979).Public Administration: A Comparative Perspective, 2nd edition. New York: Mariel Dekker. Marume, S. B. M. ,Jubenkanda, R. R. and Namusi, C. W. (2016). Comparative Public Administration in International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR) ISSN (Online): 2319-7064 Naidu, S.P. (2006).Public Administration, Concepts and Theories. New Delhi: New Age International Publishers. Sapru, R.K. (2013).Administrative Theories and Management Thought (3rd edition) Delhi: PHI Learning Private Limited. MODULE 2: MODELS AND APPROACHES TO COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 58 | P a g e Unit 1: Uses of Models and Approaches in Comparative Public Administration Studies Unit 2: Cross-cultural Approach to Comparative Studies Unit 3: Bureaucratic Approach to Comparative Studies Unit 4: Case studies Approach to Comparative Studies Unit 5: Institutional Approach to Comparative Studies Unit 6: Systems/Structural-functional Approach to Comparative Studies Unit 7: Prismatic Model and Comparative Public Administration UNIT 1: USES OF MODELS AND APPROACHES IN COMPARATIVE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION STUDIES CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Objectives 3.0 Main content 3.1 Uses of models and approaches in Comparative studies 3.2 Models and Approaches Compared 4.0 Conclusion 5.0 Summary 6.0 Tutor-Marked Assignments 7.0 References/Further Reading 59 | P a g e 1.0 INTRODUCTION Our discussion in this unit will Centre on the concept of model and approaches. Models are to use to organize information and facts that constitute the entire study. Certainly unorganized facts are not going to serve any purpose of research. Research findings are useful only when it fits into our established framework or into our established knowledge. In fact, models are replacing our framework of the study. To some degree models are universal framework of analysis of similar problems under study. Therefore, our attention in this unit is to identify and justify the use of models and approaches in comparative public administration studies and to compare the two. 2.0 OBJECTIVES At the end of this unit, student should be able to: (a) Identify and justify the uses of models and approaches in Comparative studies and identify the common tendencies shared by different models (b) Briefly compare between Models and Approaches 3.0 MAIN CONTENT 3.1 Uses of Models and Approaches in Comparative Studies The word model is treated in this unit as treated by Waldo, to mean simply the conscious effort or attempt to develop and define concepts or cluster of related concepts. It is useful in classifying data, describing reality and hypothesizing about it. We must also distinguish between the term 'model' and 'theory'. In fact, both 60 | P a g e 'model' and 'theory' are used interchangeably. Generally speaking, 'theory' is more sophisticated tool than 'model'. The various models include the Max Weber's bureaucratic model which has the most popular use in comparative study of bureaucracies. Also, the model advanced by Down emphasized the importance of career interests as determinants of administrative process. Riggs‘s 'prismatic-sala' model is an intellectual creativity of the model building clan in comparative public administration, particularly with reference to third world governments. Dorsey's information-energy model, the developmental model and Mathur's, model do represent distinctly different and yet in broad sense intellectually compatible models, each of which has proved to be useful in studying comparative administration. Generally, we may point out that models used in studying public administration share the following tendencies: 1. To study the social, cultural, political and economic factors that influence comparative studies (Ecological Model). 2. To use concepts that characterize public administration as a series of actions or behaviours, involved in meeting changing environmental demands. 3. To conceptualize administrative activity in a system way with particular attention to the goal of political system. 4. To deal implicitly or explicitly with the requisites for effective operation of administrative system. 5. To be presented in such a way as to imply their general relevance for the study of public administration. 61 | P a g e As noted earlier, the very use of models is to organize information and facts that constitute the entire study. Certainly unorganized facts are not going to serve any purpose of research. Research findings are useful only when it fits into our established framework or into our established knowledge. In fact, models are replacing our framework of the study. 6. To some degree models are universal framework of analysis of similar problems under study. 3.2 Models and Approaches Compared There are significant differences between models and approaches. An approach is based primarily on one central concept that is thought to be especially useful in studying basic features of public administration. Models can be thought of as refined and more specific versions of approaches. Within Olle approach different models can be developed. Models are very specific towards a particular study. On the other side, approaches are general in nature. The word model is treated in this guide as treated by Waldo, to mean simply the conscious effort or attempt to develop and define concepts or cluster of related concepts. It is useful in classifying data, describing reality and hypothesising about it. We must also distinguish between the term 'model' and 'theory'. In fact, both 'model' and 'theory' are used interchangeably. Generally speaking, 'theory' is more sophisticated tool than 'model'. However, Herbert Simon, Allen Newell, Waldo and Nimrod Raphaeli used 'model' and 'theory' interchangeably in practice. Models in public administration were first introduced impressively by H

NOUN Comparative Public Administration PDF

Document Details

Tags

Related

Summary

Full Transcript

Upgrade to continue