Defining the Scope of Public Administration
.png "scope of public administration")
Given by - Burrell & Morgan
Public Administration has been defined by various theories according to the perception of the role Public Administration plays in a society within a political system.
For example - Ordway Tead defines Public Administration as "Public Administration is a moral act and the administrator is a moral agent".
Administration is not only serving the goods and services but also it is concerned with the manner it is being served, i.e., quality of the service.
The Public organisations are based on the constitutional values like -
- Equality - an equal distribution
- Equity - distribution according to needs
- Rule of law - It includes two components
- Equality before law, i.e., to treat everyone equal in front of law
- Equal protection of law - It states that people in equal circumstances are treated equally (i.e., it inherently states that people in unequal circumstances can be treated unequally).
- Note - Equal protection of law includes a fair/positive discrimination or affirmative actions. It also justifies the socially conscious policies like reservation, subsidies, etc
- Public Interest - The primary task of the Public Administration is to serve Public interest.
- Justice
- Protection of vulnerable, etc
Public Interest - Public interest is a highly qualitative, subjective and abstract concept, i.e., it is totally non-rational (not irrational).
Philosophies of Public interest
- Intuitionism
- Perfectionism
- Utilitarianism
- Theory of Justice
☆ Intuitionism
Administrator → can best judge what is best in public interest
i.e., it provides discretionary powers to the Administration (which may lead to misuse).
Also it's a kind of heuristic learning (trial and error) and is based on the experiences and intentions of the administrators.
Intuitionism
This principle believes that the administrator is the best person to judge what is the Public interest.
This principle provides discretion to the administrators while making decisions and implementing policies.
Its biggest limitation is that it assumes that the administrator is capable of making moral and ethical decisions. Inspite of best training and qualification, the discretion may result in misuse of authority either as -
- Malfeasance (wrong intention)
- Misfeasance (mis-interpretation/ lack of knowledge)
- Over feasance (overstepping the jurisdiction, For ex - CBI vs State Police)
It is also based on heuristic learning, i.e., trial and error method which might result in different experiences for different administrators. This might obstruct the public interest as decisions would be taken on case-to-case basis (i.e., decisions are circumstantial).
☆ Perfectionism
Perfectionism believes that the public interest is best served by serving the interests of those who are capable as they are the one who can be the torch bearer for societal development.
The perception that certain people are capable whereas others may not be is based on facts as well as assumptions.
For example - The Indian caste system or the hereditary nature of monarchy or racial discrimination, etc. are based on the perception that they are capable.
Perfectionism tends to be elitist in nature.
For example - The Indian bureaucracy influenced by the British administrative system in its formative years was dominated by the people from the higher caste and from a particular institutional background.
The perfectionism would justify the absence of socially conscious policies like reservation, affirmative actions, subsidies, etc.
☆ Utilitarianism (given by Jeremy Bentham & John Stuart Mill)
It believes in the maximum benefit/happiness for the maximum number of people in a given situation.
It is one of the most pragmatic way as far as the limited resources are concerned but inspite of its benefits, it pre-assumes that certain sections of the society can be safely excluded from the public interest.
It seems to be majoritarian in approach.
(Maximum benefits/happiness to the maximum people also includes least disturbance to the least people)
Two models of Utilitarianism -
- Act Utilitarianism
- Rule Utilitarianism
Drawbacks of Utilitarianism concept of Public interest
- It justifies the benefit of majority at the cost of minorities.
- It justifies the absence of motivation towards inclusion of all as it is inherent in in the philosophy itself that everyone can't be benefitted.
- Sometimes maximum benefit/happiness may lead to minimum benefit to everyone as the resources are limited.
☆ Theory of Justice (given by John Rawls)
Utilitarianism → equality
Theory of Justice → equity
It is based on pareto optimality of distribution, i.e., promotion to one will not affect the others.
Veil of ignorance - By being ignorant, we can more objectively consider how societies should operate.
Principle of veil of ignorance includes -
- Liberty principle - The social contract should try to ensure that everyone enjoys the maximum liberty possible without intruding up on the freedom of others.
- Difference principle - The social contract should guarantee that everyone should have an equal opportunity to prosper.
Theory of Justice
The concept of theory of justice is based on the idea that justice as fairness, i.e., the public interest can be best served when the distribution of resources, opportunities, benefits, etc is done in such a manner that the benefit to one section does not result in the loss to the other sections.
This can be done by creating deliberate disparities (positive discrimination, not exploitation) in such a way that the section which is promoted benefits whereas the section which loses must not feel the pinch of losing.
For example - The taxation structure (which is progressive and fixed)
The distribution under the justice must be pareto optimal, i.e., the most rational distribution between two opposing values, traded off in such a manner that they achieve equilibrium.
(Problem with India - Huge population → rational distribution is very difficult)
Question for practice
Is it possible to define public interest? If so what are the possible philosophies of public interest and how they act as a guide to the government decision making?
.webp "public interest")
The Public interest is usually defined as the welfare or well being of the public (citizen). Since, the concept public itself is abstract in nature, the term public interest is also highly qualitative, subjective and abstract.
Various philosophies that have been put forwarded to define the Public interest are as follows -
- Intuitionism - It believes in the discretionary power of the administrator while formulating and implementing policies.
- Perfectionism - It believes in serving the interest of capables as they can be the flag bearers for societal development.
- Utilitarianism - It believes in providing the maximum benefits to the maximum number of people. Thus, it can justify the benefit of majority at the cost of minorities.
- Justice Approach - It believes in the equitable distribution of resources based on the pareto optimality of distribution, i.e., most rational distribution.
The ultimate objective of any government policy is to achieve public interest. So, identification of public interest constitutes one to the basis of formulation of any policy.
Since, the public consists of a huge diverse population with diverse need, it becomes practically impossible to frame a policy which gives the optimal happiness/benefit to everyone. Thus, the state according to its socio-economical political condition takes decisions or formulates its policies.
For example - In a democratic country like India which has a huge and diverse population with social and economical inequalities, the government takes decision taking into consideration the inclusion and protection of weaker sections of the society, i.e., it is guided by the philosophy of Theory of justice whereas in some case government also takes action in such a way that it creates maximum benefits with least disturbance, i.e., guided by the principle of utilitarianism. One such example is Construction of dam.
Thus, it can be said that the public interest acts as a guide to the government in decision making as well as implementing it.
Question for practice
Perfectionism may justify the absence of socially conscious policies. Explain.
Perfectionism believes in securing the interests of capables as they can be seen as the torch bearer of societal development. It tends to be the elitest in nature.
In perfectionism, it is believed that the one who is getting the benefit will pass it to another who have not got the benefit.
Various policies and act like reservations, subsidies, etc tend towards the inclusion of vulnerable in societal development which is against the philosophy of perfectionism. Perfectionism believes in trickle down process, i.e., benefit served at the top (or to the capables) would percolate down to the bottom strata of the society. Thus, it does not require such social conscious policies.
Hence, the trickle down perception of the Perfectionism justifies the absence of socially conscious policies. But there are some disadvantages associated with the Perfectionism -
- It may lead to the exploitation.
- It may increases the social inequality.
- It may obstruct the inclusive growth.
Question for practice
Compare to Utilitarianism, Justice seems to be a more pragmatic approach to public interest. Give your view.
Utilitarianism believes in providing the maximum benefit/happiness to the maximum number of people whereas the justice approach of public interest believes in the pareto-optimal distribution of resources.
Differences between Utilitarianism and Justice approach of public interest -
- Utilitarianism believes in the benefit of majority whereas justice approach believes in the optimal benefit of all.
- Utilitarianism believes in equal distribution whereas justice believes in equitable distribution of resources.
- Utilitarianism justifies the benefit of majority at the cost of minority whereas the justice tends to achieve the equilibrium, i.e., benefit of one would not affect others.
- Utilitarianism may lead to the exploitation of minorities whereas justice approach promotes inclusion of minorities.
- Utilitarianism seems to be majoritarian in approach and sometimes the maximum benefit to everyone may lead to minimum benefit to everyone whereas the justice approach tries to achieve equilibrium where everyone will get benefitted as per their socio-economic condition.
Thus, it is clear from the above points that the Utilitarianism may lead to exploitation of minorities and vulnerable as it benefits the majority at the cost of minorities whereas the justice approach tends to promote these minorities and vulnerables and leads to inclusive development.
Thus, theory of justice seems to be more pragmatic approach to public interest.
Previous Article - New perspectives in Public Administration
Next Article - Views of Indian Philosophers on Public Interest
Notes on other subjects
Optional Notes
Note - This is my Vision IAS Notes (Vision IAS Class Notes) and Ashutosh Pandey Sir's Public Administration Class notes. I've also added some of the information on my own.
Hope! It will help you to achieve your dream of getting selected in Civil Services Examination 👍
.png&description=Defining the Scope of Public Administration & Public Interest ){kind=link}
0 Comments