New Public Service Approach-Fadia and Fadia

The New Public Management has championed a vision of public managers as the entrepreneurs of a new,leaner,and increasingly privatized government,emulating not only the practices but also the values of business.

• Proponents of the New Public Management have developed their arguments largely through contrasts with the old public administration.
• In this comparison,the new public administration ofcourse will always win.
• In this better contrast is with what we call the 'New Public Service'.a movement built on work in course theory.
• The concept of the New Public Service emphasis the primary role of the public servant is to help citizens,articulate them and meet their shared interests rather than  to attempt to control or steer society.

• Public administration in the 21st century is undergoing dramatic change,especially in advanced economies,but also in many parts of developing world. Globalization and the pluralization of services provision are the driving forces behind these changes.
• Policy Problems faced by governments are increasingly complex,wicked and global ,rather than simple,linear and national in focus.
• And yet the prevailing paradigms through which public sector reform are designed and implemented are relatively static and do not fully encompass the significance or implications of these wider changes.
• While public sector reforms in the developing world are influenced by policy experiments and organisational practices originating in OECD countries,they tend to operate within the traditional Public Administration paradigm.
• Consequently,there is often a discrepancy between the thrust of public sector reform efforts in developing country contexts and wider shifts in the nature of governance and contemporary approaches to public management grounded in OECD experiences.

MODELS OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND APPROACHES TO PUBLIC SECTOR REFORM

• There are numerous studies of public administration and public sector reforms in advanced industrialized countries.
• Models of Public administration in developing countries have generally drawn on experiences in advanced countries and public sector reforms have often mirrored reform initiatives originating in OECD countries.
• Several frameworks have been developed to classify and analyse different approaches to Public administration and public sector reforms in advanced industrialized countries.
• Most of these focus on the transition from the old public administration to the New Public Management.

• Each of these approaches to public administration is associated with a distinct philosophy and conceptual framework,the traditional approach to public administration is predicated on a to down and elitist approach,in which public officials are instilled with values of hierarchy independence, and integrity,and are insulated from politicians and citizens.the focus in this approach is on struggle and organisational efficiency,epitomized by command and control and underpinned by a clear public sector ethos.

• In contrast,The New public Management approach is based on public choice theory and the principal agent approach in which public officials will be motivated  to serve by virtue of a commitment to the public interest and will respond to citizens expectations of a healthy and responsive public service.

The Old Public Administration:

influenced by the ideas of Max Weber,the prevailing approach to public administration for much of the 20th century drew on model of bureaucracy based on the twin principles of hierarchy and meritocracy.It was initially introduced as part of wide ranging bureaucratic reforms in the United Kingdom and Prussia in late 19th century to overcome patrimonial systems of administration where patronage and favoritism dominated government decisions and public appointments.This approach had a number of distinctive features.It relied on centralized control,set rules and guidelines,separated policy making from implementation and employed a hierarchical organisational structure.The watchwords were efficiency and effectiveness in the management of budgetary and human resources.

The key features of this model are -

• A separation between politics and elected politicians on the one hand and administration and appointed administrators on the other.
• Administration is continuous,predictable and rule governed.
• Administration  is continuous,predictable and rule governed.
• Administrators are appointed on the basis of qualification,and are trained professionals.
• There is a functional division of labor,and a hierarchy of tasks and people;
• Resources belong to the organisation,not to the individuals who work in it;
• Public servants serve public rather than private interest.

• This "command and control" approach to Public-Administration was the reference point for bureaucratic systems introduced around the world under colonial rule and then after independence in most commonwealth countries.
• Other countries introduced variants of this model ,primarily drawing on French and Japanese experience,where political factors influence public appointments under a centralized bureaucratic model.
• This approach worked well in a  number of countries,notably in Singapore where the post Independence political leadership built a high quality and efficient civil service along these lines.

A similar approach was followed in China in the context of a one party state.But many post-colonial states experienced a decline in the quality of governance and the effectiveness of public administration in subsequent years as neo-patrimonial pressure asserted themselves and state resources and public appointments were subject to the personal influence of political leaders and their followers.

The New Public Management

The new Public management refers to a series of novel approaches to Public Administration and management that emerged in number of OECD countries in the 1980s. The NPM model arose in reaction to limitations of the old Public administration in adjusting to the demands of a competitive market economy.While cost containment was a key driver in the adoption of NPm approaches,injecting principles of competition and private sector management lay at the heart of the NPM approach.The key elements of the NPM can be summarized below-

• An attention to lessons from private sector management 
• the growth both of hands on management in its own right and not as an offshoot of professionalism,and of "arm's length" organisation where policy implementation is organizationally distanced from the policy makers(as opposed to the interpersonal distancing of the policy /administration split;
• A focus upon entrepreneurial leadership within public service organisations
• An emphasis on input and output control and evaluation and on performance management and audit
• The disaggreagtion of public services to their most basic units and a focus on their cost management and
• The growth of use of markets ,competition and contracts for resource allocation and service delivery within public services.

The NPM approach took root in the UK,New-Zealand ,the USA and Scandinavian from the mid 1980s. Its theoretical foundations lay in public choice and principal agent theory which claim that individual self interest drives bureaucratic behaviour. Competition ,delegation ,performance and responsiveness offer yardsticks to regulate bureaucratic behaviour and generate improved outcomes. NPM resulted in significant changes in the public sector ethos and approach,especially the cultivation of new management practices,marketisation and contracting out of core services to private companies and non profit organisations and the creation of "arm's length" executive agencies responsible and accountable for implementation.A Greater focus on management by results replaced a public sector orientation governed by inputs and outputs,while management increasingly pervaded the public sector.
NP M approaches were also adopted by number of non-OECD countries,often as part of public sector reform programmes supported by international aid agencies,but their influence was uneven.Despite claims of universality,few governments in developing countries implemented wholesale NPM reforms,but some experimented with creating executive agencies,citizens charters and performance management models.

Prominent examples include the semi autonomous tax agencies in Africa and Asia,several of which generated impressive results in terms of revenue targets and reducing corruption.Contracting out service delivery results in terms of revenue targets and reducing corruption.Contracting out service delivery to private and not for profit providers in health ,education and water and sanitation became fairly widespread but implementation was patchy and results were mixed because of problems of regulatory capacity,quality and access,leading to a complex and fragmented mosaic of service provision.

In practice NPM reforms in developing countries were adopted very selectively,often alongside organisational structure embodying the old public administration. Commentators questioned the appropriateness of NPM reforms in the context of weak capacity and political support,emphasizing the existence of supportive institutional and political conditions as a condition for successes,and of building core public sector capacity as the priority for public management reforms.


McCourt in 2013 highlighted the use of citizens charters in India,introduced in 1997 in the context of an action plan for effective and responsive government,as one example of an NPM reform designed to improve government responsiveness. By 2001,68 citizens charters had been formulated by Indian central government agencies and 318 at sub-national level.As reported  by McCourt,"they were posted on government websites and were open to public scrutiny.But the implementation floundered in the face of a series of problems,including the perception that the initiative was seen as coming from the top with minimal consultation ,employees affected received little training or orientation ,staff transfers disrupted implementation,the charter concept was not properly understood by clients,and some charter service norms wee either too lax or too tight." Similar concerns bedeviled the citizens charter movement in the UK,which also ran into criticism on account of perceptions that they were management driven and did not reflect the priorities

New Public Governance

In the face of the conceptual and practical problems encountered with the old Public administration and the New Public Management approaches number of theorists have developed fresh conceptualization of public management that depart from earlier schema.
These approaches don't yet form a coherent paradigm and they have different frames of reference,but some commonalities can be identified that set them apart from earlier traditions and provide the basis for a coherent alternative.

The New Public Governance(NPG) approach proposed by Osborne and Gabler adopts a very different starting point from the two earlier public management traditions.In contrast with the emphasis on bureaucratic hierarchy and administrative interest as the defining feature of the old public administration and the managerial discretion and contractual mechanism associated with NPM,the NPG approach places citizens rather than government at the centre of its frame of reference. In a similar vein Bourgon calls for a New Public administration theory that is grounded in the concepts of citizenship and the public interest ,expressed as they shared interests of citizens rather than as the aggregation of individual interests determined by elected officials or market preferences .The centrality of citizens as co-producers and the delivery of services fundamentally distinguishes the New Public Governance approach from both the starlit approach associated with the old public administration and market based NPM approaches,rather than simply proposing a new form of public administration.


NPG incorporates a number of features of this emerging literature :the state is both plural in that public service delivery is undertaken by multiple inter dependent actors and pluralist in that multiple processes and inputs shape policy making.In this respect Bourgon highlighted the fragmentation of policy space with the emergence of multiple actors and jurisdictions along side growing inter dependence  between actors operating at local,national and global levels.Government is treated  as just one actor alongside others engaged in policy deliberation and service delivery and is no longer assumed to be the sole of predominant force shaping public policy and implementation.According to Denhardt and Denhardt "the policies that guide society are the outcomes of a complex  set of interactions involving multiple groups and multiple interest ultimately combining in fascinating and unpredictable ways.

The NPG approach emphasizes inter organisational relationships and the governance of processes in which trust,relational capital and relational contracts serve as the core governance mechanisms,rather than organisational form and function\.In this respect NPG runs counter to conventional approaches to public administration,which tend to emphasizes intraorganisational processess within the domain of government as distinct form inter organisational processess between government and private and non-profit actors.

In Practice there are several distinct strands of thinking that constitute the NPG approach ,each differing in the emphasis they give to core governance mechanisms. Until now the contextual frame of reference for this set of approaches has been the United States of America and a few group of approaches has wider application in providing a stronger foundation and conceptual reference point for public sector reform in developing countries than earlier models.

The New Public Service:

In Janet and Robert Denhardts 2003 book The New Public Service, the authors offer a synthesis of the ideas that are opposed to the New Public Management presented by Osborne and Gaebler. Their model for governance builds upon and expands the traditional role of the public administrator, which they call the Old Public Administration, and contrasts with the New Public Management. Following the structure of Reinventing Government, the Denhardts divide their argument into seven principles. These are:

• Serve citizens, not customers
• Seek the public interest
• Value citizenship over entrepreneurship
• Think strategically, act democratically (In comparison to Osborne and Gaebler, Denhardt and Denhardt assert that there is a difference between thinking strategically and entrepreneurial government.)
• Recognize that accountability is not simple
• Serve rather than steer (This involves listening to the real needs of the people and the community, not just responding in the manner that a business would to a customer.)
• Value people, not just productivity(Reich 1988, 123-24, quoted in D&D 96)

Here, the role of the public administrator is much more complex. He or she cannot simply act as a manager in the business sense by performing cost-benefit analysis. As Denhardt and Denhardt explain, In the NPS, the public administrator is not the lone arbiter of the public interest. Rather, the public administrator is seen as a key actor within a larger system of governance including citizens, groups, elected representatives, as well as other institutions the role of government becomes one of assuring that the public interest predominates (p.81). They go on to further articulate this point with a quote:

The public manager's job is not only, or simply, to make policy choices and implement them. It is also to participate in a system of democratic governance in which public values are continuously rearticulated and recreated.


Denhardt and Denhardt assign quite a bit of responsibility to the public administrator, and at the same time stress the importance of public participation and community decision-making. The exact allocation of responsibility and power is unclear. Osborne and Gaebler are much more explicit on the relationship between government administration and its citizens, because they use the customer service model from business. The administrative role is further streamlined by moving as many choices as possible out of the political arena by converting those policy alternatives into market choices.

The Public Service Approach-Mohit Bhattacharya

• Public Administration as a discipline has been experiencing currently an unusual uncertainty about approaches to the study of administration.
•  Historically,there have been shifting stances from Taylorism to system theory via behavior and other process theories via behavior  such as those on decision making,leadership,coordination and communication and so on so forth.
• The uniqueness of current turmoil lies in raising 'fundamental' questions about the role of the state itself under the bewildering pressures coming from within and without the state.(eg globalization).

The two discipline-shaking approaches,in this context are
a)reinventing government approach of Osborne and Gaebler and
b)New Public Management Approach of Neo-liberal school of thought.

• The first thought has sought to reorient government studies from the point of view of core competence of government which has been termed as'steering' rather than 'rowing '.
• By contrast,the second approach has been focused on the downsisting of government (from the point of view of scope)and on enhanced management competence using

1.  Information technology,
2. Introducing Critical performance Appraisal and 
3. Allowing the 'market'to function in its designated sphere.

• The neo liberal philosophy as the critics points out,has functioned to the detriment of larger 'public interest',affecting particularly the poor and the marginalized.

• The other consequence of downsizing has been to the central position of government as the core regulator of society.

• There have been many reactions to the 'neo-liberal'approach to government,more importantly ,it has been suggested that the neo-liberal view,by apotheosizing(elevate) 'market' has failed to appreciate the crtical role of public institutions-the government-in the maintenance and development of society.

• In their path breaking publication entitled'The New Public Service:Serving not Steering'(M.E.Sharpe,2002)(Denhadt and Denhardt have succinctly put the central role of government as 'service'.Government' as they forcefully argue,'shouldn't be run like a business,it should be run like democratic.'

• Public interest and democratic citizenship are democratic hallmark of government.
• As the sense of service and community would be having better self estimation of dignity and self respect.
• They would in fact be reconnected with the citizens.
• As the public servants would be inviting citizens to participate in the governance process,their will emerge a new culture of co-governance  with the administration and citizens working together for the common good for the society.
• This new attitude and new involvement -co-governance is what Denhardt and Denhardt call the new public service.
• As it had been observed.'Administrators are realizing that they have much to gain by 'listening' to the public rather than 'telling' and by 'serving' rather than 'steering'.
• At the invitation of public servants,even their urging.ordinary citizens are once again becoming engaged in the governance process.
• Citizens and public officials are working together to define and to address common problems in a cooperative and mutually beneficial way."

• What Denhardt and Denhardt describe is more an expectation -a normative stand-in order to sensitize us to the democracy-diminishing trend inherent in the neo-liberal philosophy with its accent on 'market' and deemphaiss on 'government'.
• It is a timely waning and an appropriate cautionary note against the trendy 'down-sizing'movement in public administration.

1(k)NPS=NPM+NPA

1(k)NPS Approach

Denhart & Denhart wrote a book in 2002 entitled the "New Public Service-serving not steering" This book prompted the theme/argument that steering idea of NPM had an inherent limitation because it tends to give the government a detached role which is not the best way to ensure and promote the public interest. The other model that was almost parallel to NPS was public governance model by Werner Jam.

NPS refutes NPM eliticism

NPS is more inclined towards -Public service/Public governance-Good Governance

Thus, These two Models ie..Public Governance model and Public Service Model originated around the same time and captured this thematic shift from public management to public service and eventually laid the foundation for Good Governance Concept.


Extension Of NPM-  

• Governing Network-Gold Smith and Eggers
• Government by Hire-Paul C.Light
• Flattening Government by-Carolyn Hill

FLATTENING GOVERNMENT -CAROLYN HILL

• Denhart and Den-hart argued that the steering /facilitative role may end up facilitating the few rather than masses. 
• Thus they further argued that NPS is a perspective which is against the marginalization of government and its role and against the marginalization of the common citizen.

• In fact, Denhart and Denhart suggested that NPS model reminds the NPA theme of the late 1960s because it had certain core ideas which are closer to NPA namely-

•  A significant role for government and core concern for common citizen rather than paying affluent /elite class.

However, Nicholas Henry himself chooses to bunch NPS model within broad NPM theme where it still has some similarity with NPM namely

a) using the private/business approach in public sector

b)Pro-efficiency concerns in public administration and

c)Pro-citizen/customer orientation 

Denhart and Denhart pointed out that if the government is reduced to just a marginal player then its a democracy diminishing trend because it tends to reduce the voice of a common man in the administrative process and create a government more inclined for classes, not masses.

As a result , NPS model recommended as under

a)A philosophy of serving rather than steering ie..not just private dominated institutional pluralism but a bigger role of government so as to ensure public Interest.

This role of government which was de-emphasized earlier by NPM was re-Emphasized by NPS model.

b)Recommendation to listening to the public rather than telling to public ie..promotion of the concept of co-governance and the concept of ethics in an administration where people would be involved and there concerns considered at foremost top priority.
Thus despite a re-emphasis to the government role, it doesn't recommend or tolerate reversal to unitary bureaucratic and slow performing administration.

Globalisation

Globalization refers to a process by which an inward-looking economy converts itself into the outward-looking economy so as to
a)integrate better with international markets
b)learn from international experiences
c)compete internationally so as to give itself advantage of global integration.

In this context, it would be visualized an inward economy will have features

• self-sufficiency
• protection to domestic industries
• barrier to others
• production for self-market

Outward economy features-

• interdependency/integration
• global competition favoured
• production is for others as well as part from the self

IMPACT OF GLOBALISATION ON ADMINISTRATION

It creates prerequisite for International competition. By very nature, globalization needs to integrate and competition among economy. The feature of International competition necessitates a focus on certain pre-requisite which public administration in any country would now require to adopt ie.

prerequisite for

• cost control
• productivity consciousness
• technological upgradation
• adaptation on international best practices

In other words, the global economy and the operation of interconnected government not only facilitates international competition and comparison but also bring public administration in any country under public scrutiny ie...in the light of international people compare and demand an administration which is conscious of cost, quality, speed, user-friendliness, and other best practices.

In other words, the global economy and the operation of interconnected government not only facilitate international comparison but also bring public administration in any country under public scrutiny ie..in the light of international comparison -people compare and demand an administration which is conscious of cost, quality, speed, user-friendliness and other best practices.

Impact of globalisation

• One of the major offshoots of globalization is the IT and specifically the internet. It has opened up an enormous opportunity for administrative improvement through information dissemination through inner transparency
• convenience
• accessibility
• the speed of service delivery 
• citizenship participation in the various process through the various interface like G2C and C2G.

Administrative Agencies and government department are increasingly adopting e-gov theme in a big way to improve various parameters like speed, transparency, accountability and participation.

Challenges Caused by Globalization

Challenges of context sensitivity -the biggest challenges of public administration caused by globalization are the threat created by the possibility of global administrative mono-culture ie..the possibility that a single model or limited setup theories may start getting propagated as a universally applicable model.

In other words, there are tendencies of
1)Forcible imposition of western or USA centric ideas
2)blind aping or mindless imports by local administrative planner /experts in the borrowing countries.



Further, it has already been debated that the multilateral aid agency like World Bank often propagates in the form of aid conditionality either to promote their commercial interest or to propagate their ideology.

a)
In this context Christopher Hood as observed as under
"Even the global village is culturally plural and not homogeneous meaning thereby that the world under the impact of globalisation may have become compact as a village but culturally it's heterogeneous.

Thus, the main challenge is"How to think globally and act locally"
In other words, the challenge is how to apply global learning to suit the contextual requirements.

b)Challenge of cultural globalisation-globalisation has brought a focus on specialised tasks for the administration which earlier as never seen a core part of the administration but now a crucial part of bad. These specialised administrative tasks of the global world

• global security and war against terrorism
• law and order challenges because of increasing crime rate including cybercrime
• environmental concerns ie..global warming
• Health issues especially in the light of global pandemic
• the issue of gender sensitivity

These issues bring to the forefront the requirement of global networking and corporation among different government and administration. Further, the administration of one country needs to develop greater negotiations and collaborative skills to achieve twin objective of guarding national interests by contributing to national interests.

c)Challenges of global Accountability-

Its now being increasingly observed that in the globalised world. Justice and accountability have become a major concern. It has been noted there is the tendency of global criticism whereby some block of powerful countries tend to dominate the world order and world forum.

Its argued that quite often the voice of third world countries are often suppressed and their economic and developmental issues are sidelined.

In this context-

Joseph Stiglitz has noted

"Globalization can promote development but can create poverty. Global justice and accountability become major issues because there exists the possibility of global governance without global government"

It also needs to be seen that inbuilt within the challenges of globalisation are the challenges of liberalisation and privatisation. As a result Pbad in any nation has to be accordingly reinvented, re-engineered, pluralised, networked and fine-tuned.

E governance

Answer Writing Instructions

GG-Sarma And Sadhna And Handwritten Notes

Governance And Good Governance

• The term Governance as it was initially perceived under NPM perspective as 1990s was often described as-

"Governance refers to using not just government institutional mechanics and government coercive power, rather its use of plural institution mechanism and plural actors and facilitative powers rather than coercive power.

                      Quantity                                          Quality

Thus an initial understanding of governance had a two fold focus
1)Plural Actors instead of single Actor or institution
2)Quality of regulation or power Authority rather than Quantity

However later it was noted that this interpretation of governance was narrow, it was argued that term governance is not "a neutral term" rather its value ladden concept having a inbulit positive connotation as in good governance.
(ie.. the word good goes without saying whenever the word governance is used)

It was argued that institution pluralism and reduced government control and regulation by themseves are no guarantee for Good Governance and may not be sufficient description of GG.

As a result , the description of governance or GG was refined to capture goal orientation of governance or GG was refined to capture goal orientation of governance rather than instrumentality orientation of governance.

In other words GG started being described in terms of certain standard of function which will ensure and promote stated goal of society, also described that ultimate goal of any government or administration is to seek widest possible inclusion of population and under this perspective importance of question whether government has dominant or significant or shared /insignificant role becomes de-emphasized or less relevant.

In other words , Good Governance concept was initially viewed in late 1980s and whole 90s as almost a parallel of NPM. However , later it was broadened and more mature connotation somewhat like similar to NPS is now seen speically in developing countries.


Thus, for a common man the term governance or GG is more a question of whether he gets what he can validly aspire for as a citizen of the country whether government felicitates him , getting it through other means is largely irrelevant to him.

Good Governance

GG in terms of its ideal explanation refers to a well performing and qualitative improvement administrative system which can contribute to administrative goal of society.

It cannot be narrowly interpreted to mean exclusive GG ie.. GG for few rather it has to be for masses. 

In this context one way to describe the broad connotation of GG is through the tripod of market , government and civil society.

Where civil society demands GG from both.

Thus, the idea is that civil society can and should demand GG from both the government and market.
Thus ideally GG is a concept which should give the right to citizen to demand efficiency and quality from both the actors.(Government and non government).

World Bank -Concept of GG

The concept of GG owes its origin to World Bank which defined the term in 1992 as under-

"GG is the manner in which the power is exercised in arrangement of country's economy and social resources for development "






GG concept given by world bank in backdrop of studies conducted in Saharan region of Africa in 1920s , its main conclusion was economic reforms in those countries are failing because of their failure of administrative institution .

In other words it was concluded that inefficient administrative system or poor governance are reasons behind the economic backwardness or failure of economic reforms.

WB also argued that economic developmental aid would not serve much purpose in bringing out reforms unless untill there is good administartion.

In 1992 world bank published a report entittled government and development in which GG was described as central requirement for creating and sustaining an environment reforms and development.

In this report three aspects of GG are identified-

1)The form of political regime ie..whether military regime or parliament or dictatorial government.

2)Processs by which authority is exercised ie whether its centralized process where government being dominant player or whether its decentralized or democratic or shared process.

3)Capacity of government in designing , formulating and implementing policies.


The further Analysis of these three central aspects led to an expectation of inbuilt essentials or features of GG.


i)Political Accountability of government- iee govt in power is accountable to people or not . Suggestion here is that a democratically elected government is likely to be more respinsible and accountable to people rather than dictatorial or totalitarian  regime.

ii)Independent Judiciary ie well established legal framework of development where there is operation of Rule of Law and indepnedent Judiciary to ensure three things-

• a)Protection of Human rights
• b)Social studies
• c)Fair Functioning of market (its becuase Judiciary shouldn't be pro govt, if an occasion arises where govt is involved in dispute)

iii)Sound Administrative system which can lead to efficiency and effectiveness , it requires that bureaucracy should be fast , accountable and transparent (FAT) (N. vittal)

iv)Policy environment which favors poverty reduction and economic growth.It requires sound macroeconomics and fiscal and financial policies and also prioritization of government expenditure. It also includes evolving a framework for government business corporation.

v)A pro poor emphais in public spending ie protecting vulnerbale through a safety net which is at same time affordable to home countries.

vi)Adequate investment in people and creating social capital. This can be done through investment in basic health , infrastructure and education. Manrega etc

vii)Freedom of information and expression to people -RTI-so that they can play a role in formulation , monitoring , evaluation of government policies and program.

viii)protection of environment so as to ensure growth and development doesn't cause sustainable environment degradation.

The world bank observed as under in its concluding remark in the report "Citizens need to demand Good Governance and their ability to do so has been enhanced by literacy , education and employment opportunities, therefore government needs to be responsive to these demands"

Criticism of World Bank concept of GG

1.The word good in GG is not standard ie the concept of GG or administrative reforms is subjective and context specific idea rather than an objective and universal idea.

2.As a result a single set of prescription cannot be used as a one best model for International standard.

Practice of GG, moreover, the inherent ideas in GG like democratisation , openness of maerket economy , protection of Human rights or government market corporation are all subject issues where the relativeness is more significant than absoluteness.

Thus , to prescribe a global mono culture in the name of GG is always goin to be insensitive to contextual complexities.

3.Hidden Agenda /Politics of GG-

has been argued specially by Anti development proponents or people subscribing anti development thesis that behind GG and its prescription in form of aid conditions there is hidden agenda of western nations . They argue World bank prescription is governed by selfish motivation of propagation of western ideology and western economy and commercial interests.

In this context, A.leftwich observed  that development assistance to third world countries in post cold war era is guided by politics of GG meaning thereby that WB and western donor countries insist in a market friendly economical environment in the aid recipient countries .

Thus, he argued that there is hidden motive of self interest behind such charity.

3.It suffers from  Typical donor mentality , it has been argued by critics that donor typically has mentality of "i will donate money and then i will tell you how to spend or best use this money in your best interest".

Thus, its being crticised that donor can never be in position to correctly appreciate the precise requirement and priority of reciepient and its recommendation would always stands to be 

-Theoritical

-Utopian

-Monoculture and ven biased towards self interest.

Thus, the donor should understand that the moment he donated its recipient's money and reciepient should use the money as per his requirement rather than as per donor suggestion thus GG in form of all the conditionality isn't a great idea.

4.Wrong Focus-It has been argued by another form of critics. WB concerns has focussed on instrumentation rather than the goals, In this context George Fredicson has noted as under "GG is more a prescription of doing things rightly rather than doing right things"

In this context Fredison again noted that GG reflects anti-govt., anti bureaucratic and anti democratic sentiments meaning thereby he is suggesting that GG is similar to NPM which de-emphasis government and over-emphasises market and LPG with result that the status of and the trust in democratically elected government in home countries gets diluted and eroded.

Thus, World Bank concepts of Good Governance and its strong prescription in form of aid conditionality has been viewed with lot of skepticism mainly cause it has heavy doses of market orientation and tends to create a culture where government role gets marginalized.

Reconciliation

From above discussion it can be seen that concept of GG can be perceived in two ways-

1)In a relatively narrow way in the form of WB prescription of GG which is often seen as a NPM like Market friendly concept.

2)In a relatively broader way where GG is interpreted as ethical model of administartive improvement which is people friendly,this interpretation is closer to concept of NPS , public governance . 

Thus the concept of GG as we know today can be understood correctly only when the context in which its being used is clear, if its being used in World Bank sense theory , its often narrowly interpreted but when used in simple engineering terminology then its representative of government which is good ie..efficient in terms of indicators which people value like transparency , accountability , empowerment , service , ethics etc.

Application of concept of GG in some developed and developing countries

AFter strong emphassis GG received in 1992 and coinciding with reengineering and reinventing model of administration.

Many countries applied their idea of administration.

Experience of some countries are summarised below

CANADA-

Ist stage reform -

• in 1995 canada decided to go for major surgery where role and size , reinventing government , comprehensive audit of all government agency were carried out with certain question aiming of goal of GG like -

a)Whether this govt agency work in public interest.

b)is there something which government should do or can the private player do it.

c)It this function is retained with government , can it be performed more efficiently

• As a result, canadian administration did eliminate 72 government department and agencies and 47 others for restructured and commericalisation.

• Moreover, Government function were divided in two categories namely core and non core functions where non core function were either devolved to local government or transferred to private players through outsourcing , contracting or complete privatisation

IInd Stage Reforms-

• In 1997 canadian Administration went for large scale civil service reform and e-governance in a massive way so that collectively these reforms too can offer significant capacity enhancement for GG.

IIIrd stage Reform-

• Further  im year 2000 canada adopted a plan for renewal of public service wherein the two central ideas of making the civil servant more duty conscious by creating code of ethics and to fecilitate citizen empowerment , account and Good governance.

NewZeaLand

• Newzealand was one of front runner in implementing OECD model of NPM doctorine.
• Under this model Newzealnd went for services of reforms between late 1980s and 90s namely slimming the state wherein big percent of state activity were outsourced.

• Privatisation-Through which a good share of public sector ownership was privatised reforming the state by creating market friendly or commercial logic whereever possible .

• As a result user pay charges were introduced in almost all government services through 1990s in a gradual manner even the basic sectors like health and education started the system of partially user charge.

• In addition, Newzealand model of GG had two special features which could be of great significance to developing countries.

• Special social impact unit(SSIU) was set up in Newzealand administration as a government agency for corporation with community including NGOz and CSOs so that activities which have non commerical interests can be best peroformed and coordinated.

• Newzealand government relied on hybrid model of GG under which efficiency and ethics can be combined.
• for ex-In many socially relvent functions , public funding was retained but operation and service mechanics were kept outsourced.

Developing Nations

Phillipines

Phillipines has develpoed  very effective model  of GG called MARAKINA model/way of GG under it various reforms in field of urban governance and city.

Administration have been created by merging the reinventing , re-enginnering and NPS suggestions.


The key reforms were as under 
a) The Marakina city government extensively used ICT so as to make government more accesible and more prompt for example-Marakina municipal administration SMS based governance redressal mechanism pertaining to any civic amentities or civil service.

b)It focused on performance standard in administration  stand in administration by creating a system wherein for every PSU or a public agancies , cash inflows and cash outflows would be trapped and emphasis would be on resources genration rather than spending.

c)It created a model for co-option and partnership wherin all stakeholder like NGOs , CSOs , private players would be involved in projects like low cost housing , traffic management , city sanitation etc.

INDIA

1.In India attempts at decentralisation were made when 73rd and 74th Amedments Act was enacted with aim of giving grass root, level democratic participation to people and to create and strengthen a participative democracy for rural and urban local governance.

2.In 1996-7 , major attention was given to concept of GG with the then PM calling for conference of chief secretary of all states in 1996.This conference emphasised and maintenance of GG

a)Introduction of citizen charter as mechanism through which citizens would be entittled to improve quality of government services and interaction in terms of speed , accountability etc.

b)Participative program implementation under which consumer organisation and citizen groups like RWAs (Resident welfare Association), SHGs would be collaborated in administrative decision making.

c)Emphasis on periodic scrutiny of administrative peformance of administartive performance through mechanic like PAC(Public account committe) , CAG etc.


3.Later in 1997, PM called a conference of CMs of all states and 4 themes of GG were highlighted

i)To make administration accountable and citizen friendly 
ii)Promote and ensure transparency and felicitate right to info
iii)Taking measures to eradicate corruption from government services
iv)Focus on human resources management and better motivation as incentive for GG.

4.10 FYP was major landmark in context of GG in India because it identified GG as a single most important factor for achieving plan objective .
This plan emphasized following aspects of GG.

a)citizen empowerment through decentralisation
b)People participation in government programmer
c)Civil service Reforms
d)Promoting Transparency

e)Harnessing use of IT for Admin

f)Improved access to formal justice system to everyone

g)Rationalization of govt schemes to involve multilevel administartion to implement central schemes through state governments, PRIs, local bodies

5.The most important thrust for GG came in 2005 in formation of RTI .However since then various steps have been taken like creating a portal of people participation (M.Gov.in)

Apart from it there have been enhancement in perception of accounatbility through SC judgement on right to reject which makes it mandatory to have NOTA button.

Recently , PMs campaign for give it up is also stepped in right direction and is aimed at established , upbringing equity.

New Synthessis in Public Administration

NPM -driven by a combination of economic, social, political and technological factors

New public management (NPM), management techniques and practices drawn mainly from the private sector, is increasingly seen as a global phenomenon. 
NPM reforms shift the emphasis from traditional public administration to public management.

 Key elements include various forms of 

• decentralizing management within public services (e.g., the creation of autonomous agencies and devolution of budgets and financial control), 
• increasing use of markets and competition in the provision of public services (e.g., contracting out and other market-type mechanisms), and
•  increasing emphasis on performance, outputs and customer orientation.

NPM reforms have been driven by a combination of economic, social, political and technological factors. 

• A common feature of countries going down the NPM route has been the experience of economic and fiscal crises, which triggered the quest for efficiency and for ways to cut the cost of delivering public services. The crisis of the welfare state led to questions about the role and institutional character of the state. 

• In the case of most developing countries, reforms in public administration and management have been driven more by external pressures and have taken place in the context of structural adjustment programmes.

•  Other drivers of NPM-type reforms include the ascendancy of neoliberal ideas from the late 1970s, the development of information technology, and the growth and use of international management consultants as advisors on reforms.

•  Additional factors, in the case of developing countries, include lending conditionalities and the increasing emphasis on good governance.

• Until recently, NPM was largely seen as a developed country, particularly Anglo-Saxon, phenomenon. 

• The 1990s have, however, seen applications of variants of NPM techniques and practices in some developing and transitional economies. 

• Elements discussed in this paper include management decentralization within public services, downsizing, performance contracting, contracting out and user charges. 

• These are being applied in crisis states, but not in a very comprehensive and consistent manner.

• Downsizing and user fees have been most widely introduced, especially in Africa, and have been closely associated with structural adjustment programmes. 

• Autonomous agencies within the public sector are being created in some countries. 

• Examples include autonomous hospitals in Ghana, Zimbabwe and Sri Lanka, as well as the hiving-off of the customs and excise, and internal revenue departments to form executive agencies in Ghana and Uganda. 

• Performance contracting and contracting out have become common policy options in a number of crisis states.

•  The latter has been adopted as an instrument to reform state-owned enterprises (SOEs), granting SOE managers more operational freedom while holding them accountable for the performance of the enterprises through a system of rewards and sanctions. 

• Performance contracts are used across a number of sectors including utilities, transport, telecommunications and agriculture (e.g., in Ghana, Bolivia, Senegal and India).

•  Contracting out is increasingly being adopted in the delivery of public services including urban services (e.g., solid waste management), ancillary health services such as cleaning, laundry and catering (e.g., in Zimbabwe), and road maintenance.

• While the adoption of these NPM practices seems to have been beneficial in some cases (e.g., cost savings in contracting out road maintenance in some African countries and in Brazil), there are both potential for and real limitations to applying some elements in crisis states.

•  The limited experience of NPM in such states suggests that there are institutional and other problems whose persistence may be binding constraints on implementation. 

• The capacity concerns include the ability to manage a network of contracts, the development of monitoring and reporting systems, and the difficult governance and institutional environment which may constrain implementation capacity.

• While the new public management approach may not be a panacea for the problems of the public sector in crisis states, a careful and selective adaptation of some elements to selected sectors may be beneficial.

NPM-Summary Slides

New Public Management-CN

Origin 
Theoretical Base
Impact/approach/criticism
Conclusion

Npm =Summation of set of Notions 

"NPM is a term which describes a broad set of notions which collectively contain recommendation in a more professional manner"

Thus its not a single monolith philosophy rather its a collection of many themes and subthemes which collectively seek to impart a improved performance and efficiency to government administrative machinery"

         

Borins has given a listing of key faetures of NPM perspective which are common to all the interelated themes which collectively makes up the NPM philosphy

• Maintaining an open mind towards private sector as an effective provider of Public service
• Appreciating the virtue of competition 
• providung high quality service with citizen value
• Increasin the autonomy of public managers
• rewarding organisation and individuals in basis of performance target(Neo Taylorism)

ORIGIN

NPM as an idea pose its origin to rampant widespread dissatisfaction about traditional model of PA which had big and powerful government presence.

The flaws of traditional public administartion was exposed specially in 1970s late with problems like 

severe resource constraint

fiscal deficit 

High borrowing 

BoP crisis

The genral dissatisfaction was about the inefficiency with which the bureaucratic administartion operated and the major reason for that was above mentioned economic failure.

Infact in early 1980s an early perspective to NPM emerged in the form of Thatcherism and Reagonsims because Margrat Thatcher in 1979 and Ronald Reagon in 1980s started and recommended Public management as reformed public administartion.

Thatcher and Reagon argued that in pulic management perspective of government functioning is the one having privatisation as a dominant theme.

 It was advisable because with strong link between sound public management and strong economic performance.

• Oversized Bureaucratic style of government administartion is less effective 
• Thus initially the theme of public management was simply a theme of privatisation
•  and it was a response to the oversized and over bureaucratized model

therefore the argument was through privatisation economic performance of public organisation can be enchanced and public interest can also be fulfilled 

Later on the models and themes which made up the NPM philosphy of 1990s were much more broad rather than just the idea of privatisation

Infact the term NPM was coined and Popularised by OECD bloc which is block of 34 High income countries which accepts principles of free market economics.

• 1990s

• Reengineering

• Reinventing

• OECD

• PCT

• CT

OECD doctoringe of NPM were crystallised from early to mid 1990s and the two important contributors of these doctorine were Christopherhood and Walter Kickett.

Infact its believed that it was christopher hood who used the term NPM for first time.

Although Arithemetic ideas and arguments of NPM were already being talked about in one or other form ever since 1980s

Theoretical foundation/Base

Although the NPM perspective crystallised only during 1960s but foundation for same was laid in 1980s in form of many theories and explanation which exposed the limitation of traditional modes of public administration .

The  various theories like

•  Critical theory
• PCT
• Transaction cost theory of Oliver Williamson
• Neo-Taylorism

All contributed to form the theoretical base for NPM

In the light of these theories the concept of NPM developed and popularised by various approaches mainly three approaches

APPROACHES OF NPM

Three Approaches or three models

a)Reinventing Model 1992
b)Reenginnering Model 1993
c)OECD Model 1995

Reinventing Model 1992

David Osborne and Ted Gabler wrote a path breaking in 1992 named "Reinventing Government-How the entrepreneurial spirit is transforming the public sector"

This Book suggested a 10 point programme for reinventing govt on the public sector administrative functioning as entrepreneurial government:



1)Competition Oriented-Promote competition between diverse providers of  goods and services,this also meant that government would enagage in steering rather than rolling.

2)Community owned government-empower citizens and communities by reducing bureaucratic over control over them. This would involve taking certain services and regulation out of control of Bureaucracy.

3)Performance oriented government-ie governmental agencies and department should focus on output and not the input  ie it should become result oriented .

4)Mission driven ie govt should deal mission which should guide their performance rather the  rules guiding them.

5)Customer Driven- ie an approach which redefine citizens as customer. In other words it offers choices to the users of Public administration.(Institutional Pluralism)

6)Preventive focus-ie govt functioning should be anticipatory and should be aimed at prevention rather than cure.

7)Enterprise Government-it will put energy into earning money rather than spending money and would attempt at genrating resources.

8)decentralised functioning ie the authority control of bureaucratic functioning is dispersed and governmet should adopt participatory philosphy.

9)The government should prefer market mechanism rather than bureaucratic mechanism .

10)Catalystic government ie the government which just not provide public service rather than catalysing the provisions of public services by promoting other sectors like private and voluntary in action in order to solve community problems.


The reinventing model went on to become hugely paradigm of modern public administration.

Almost immediately after the propagation of this model the american government initiated reform movement in 1993 called National performance review at the initiative of then vice president ALGORE.

Accordingly sweeping administrative reforms as suggested by reinventing model were carried out in United States and soon other nations also followed it. Infact International funding agencies like World Bank and Multilateral programmer like UNDP started recommending the reinventing government ideas , every developing country receiving financial aid and substance.

Osborn and Gabler on their part were coninced that their model and NPM philosophy was a best remedy for the probelem faced by Public administration .

In their book they noted 

"We are lucky to be in public management at a time when truth has been disvovered " Suggesting thereby that NPM was a truth and everything else was a wrong way of conducting Public administration"

RE-ENGINEERING MODEL

Hammer and Champy wrote another popular book of seminal importance in 1993

"Reengineering the cooperation"-A manifesto for business revolution

This book sought to give revolutionary ideas about streamlining and reforming any organisation whether private or public Business process reengineering )BPR.

The reenginering is defined in this book as fundamental rethinking and radical redesigning of process


in an organisation, so as to acheive higher performance in terms of quality , speed , services and cost.

BPR-Rethinking and Redesigning-of process to performance -Quality , speed , services cost.

The features or the propositions of the reenginnering model are as under

1.Process are designed to suit the organisation and not the vice versa.

2.Different stages of process should be performed in their natural order so as to have ease and speed for the client and also cost saving for organisation.

3.simple tasks should be combined into multi functional jobs so that repetition of work is avoided and size of bureaucracy can also be trimmed.

4. Work should be performed where its done in best way ie...many process can be outsourced, if they are performed better outside.

(Infact this is a commonlaity between reinventing and reenginnering model)

5.It should be used optimally for redesigning the work system

6.Flexibility in process ie..even if a process is once established as efficient and cost effective , their should be open mindedness about reviewing it and following a flexible dynamisn rather than rigid staticness about the process.

The re-engineering suggestions found great acceptance across the board from private as well as public organisation.

In public organisation they were often adapted under a related mechanism called O&M (Organisation and Methods) and work study.

OECD MODEL

Various OECD docorines of NOM were in circulation right from 1980s but the crystallisation of NPM concept happened around the wrold around mid 1990s , especially in the form of efforts by two thinkers specially Cristopherhood and Walter Kickert.

Within OECD countries , UK , Newzeland , canada, Norway and Iceland were the prominent and most active in terms of creating NPM Model .

ChristopherHood used the term NPM in 1991 to describe the performance model in PUblic organisation which would emphasize E3.

He argued for professional management in public org using private sector style of management.

The OECD definition of NPM was crystallised by Kickert as under -

"NPM is a new paardigm of public management with certain characteristics trends involving internal and external countries of new public administration"

Its basically today's public administration.

The 8 characteristic trend of NPM are 

1.Strengthening the steering function (encouraging competition)

2.Devolving authority the steering function

3.Ensuring Performance and accountability 

4.Improving Human Resource Management

5.Optimising the potential of Info Tech

6.Developing competition and choice

7,Improving the quality of government regulation

8.Providing a responsible public service.

Apart from these three model there have been some terms and models whoch essentially retraits same broad themes.

LAN ROSENBLOOMS MARKET BASED PUBAD MODEL-

which is absolutely similar to reinventing government

PAULIN -GOVT BY SEMI AUTONOMOUS AGENCIES-

which similar to both reinventing and reengineering model

IMPACT

• The NPM Perspective became very popular by mid 1990s and was touted as best solution for public administration.

• Infact ChristopherHood used an ecpression "Best public management for all seasons"

• In 1999 GENDRON & COOPER called NPM as "One best Way"

• The success of NPM led to focus on various administrative reforms and improvement which would be termed as direct impact or outcome of NPM perspective.

1. Delivery of high quality service with citizen value 

In this context , its argued that two major development or outcomes from NPM have been 

• citizens are reconceptualised as active customers rather than passive recipient of government services
• performance targets started being set for and on behalf of citizens or customers.These performance targets have come to be specified in form of rights of interacting citizens.

When he interacts with the government agancies . These rights went on to be crystallized as citizen charter ie a charter of rights which a citizen can accept in form of performance speed and efficiency.

These performance targets in form of citizen charter due to be noted conspicuously in every govt office so that everybody is aware of it.

Citizen Charter-Statement of commitment of providing services to the citizen within a specified time quality of service example- the time taken in getting a passport or a ration card or election card etc

2.The NPM movement also led to increasing operational efficiency of public managers and also provided flexibility to them.-

so that they can take entrepreneurial decisions rather than waiting for hierarchical approval for every business which causes delay and lead to missed opportunity for the government for the government and harassment for public.

In this context , very popular observation was made by Christopher Hood "let managers manage" meaning thereby that even public administrators  ought to be treated as managers  and should be given the operational autonomy and flexibility.

This concept led to the idea of creation of "Hands on Managers" iee the managers who actually operates at the cutting edge level and can take non stop decsion so as to minimise harassment or inconvenience to public.

3.The New Focus in "Management Support Service " was created

a) Public personnel management (PPM) as human support whereby managerial capacities would be enhanced through better personnel policies pertaining to training , motivation, leadership , communication etc.

b)Technological support-in form of optimised used of iCt so as to enhanced speed , convenience , transparency ,accessibility etc

4.Receptiveness to competition-

As a result of NPM , the government world over became more a more receptive in privatisation and competition .

Thus overall, the NPM perspective created a focus on privatization dominated institutional pluralism and private style of government operations in the form of leaner but more efficient government.

CRITICISM OF NPM PERSPECTIVE-

NPM philosophy found broad based acceptance across across government and across experts.

However it also come in for sharp criticism on account of following-

• Its unacceptable and debatable theoretical base
• unacceptable and debatable content
• un-dear functioning mechanism

1.

• At the very basis of NPM these are certain theories like theory of state failure , critical theory /Public choice theory etc and These theories are not free or not without flaws. As a result what they recommended namely private dominated institution pluralism is also not free from debate.
• In other words the negatives of these theories  is also not free from debate.
• In other words the negatives of these theories also applies to NPM as well.
• NPM-playing class

2.

• The content of NPM perspective which revolves around competition , choice , market orientation  and entrepreneurial government has been criticized as narrow and unidirectional.
• These approach interprets government -citozen relationship in the conomic sense alone and therefore ethical and social issues are ignored to a large extent.
• critics have argued that NPM recommends unethical adoption of private managemnet policies into global services and therefore ends up disguising private interest as public interest.

• NPM has also been criticized for promoting corporate elitism and consultancy.

3.

• It has been argued that functional mechanism of NPM has been left unspelt and unclarified specially in light of cultural hetrogeneity.

• In other words , when NPM doctorines or reinventing solutions are being used in various countries , some countries neither have the clarity nor the institutional base to implement the NPM models, yet these models are recommended and even imposed on these countries.

SOME MAIN CRITICS OF NPM

ROBERT HUGHES-

He gave a comprehensive crticism of NPM in 2003 along four lines-

1.The Economic logic is flawed ie..the state society relationship doesn't work on just economic logic , NPM ignores the complexity of socio-economic reality and therefore ends up operating for only classes having capacity to pay.

2.The pubad similarity is challenged. He argued that private organisation have single static goal ie..profit maximisation whereas government have dynamic , multiple and humane goals , therefore NPM logic doesn't work fully.

3.Reduced accountability -

the moment government adopts steering function or 3rd party governance public accountability will come in question because there is no guarantee that private player will assume public accountability.

As a result there is always a danger that profits are passed onto the players but accountability remains with government.

4.Unclear Specification-

• The three important terms used by NPM namely efficiency, public interest and customer orientation are unclearly spelt and can be interpreted differently...

• ex-efficiency whether its economic efficiency or socio economic efficiency.

• Public interest is the interest of paying public or genral public

• Customer orientation or service quality is quality of single service or service as a broad philosophy.

• In other words he argued that NPM is under winning the government role which can never be marginalised.

P.DONLEAVY (2006)

• He proclaimed that NPM is dead. He argued that its dead because post NPM paradigm have been developed around the theme of digital era governance.

• He argued that digitisation or OCT or joint up government , government can exercise effective controls and even in digital era the government cannpt be marginalised as done by NPM.

GIDDENS 

He gave the model called "3rd way thinking ie a model different from simply privatisation or a traditional model which works on hierarchy.