CHAPTER THREE
3.1 THE ECOLOGY OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
3.1.1 The Public Administrative Ecology of the More Developed Nations
The administrative sub-systems of some countries in Western Europe, North America, Scandinavia, Asia, and many others, are those that fall into the category of the more developed countries. They are usually characterized by political systems that are relatively stable and mature with fully developed bureaucracies that are large-scale, complex and instrumental
77
(Sharkansky, 1978) with a clear understanding of their functions as policy implementers. They are also highly professional with a corresponding high level of task specialization. This in Riggs’
(1963) view made them highly differentiated political systems consisting of political structures in which control is exercised in conformity with laid down patterns. Countries like Canada, Britain and Australia are notable examples of societies in which the public administration is divorced from partisan considerations (Etzioni-Halevy, 1983; Dwivedi and Jain, 1985).
Sharkansky (1978) provided insights into the nature of environments of public administration found in the developed and developing societies. She presented them as composites comprised of certain generalizable characteristics. For the developed countries, these characteristics include that they formulate the rules and define the targets which the administrative structures implement. Political and administrative decision making roles are clearly defined, are made according to secular standards of rationality and are the concerns of politicians and administrators respectively to the exclusion of the traditional elites. Modern technology is applied to virtually all bureaucratic and public administrative functions to be performed. Role assignments and change of leadership are legitimate, according to prescribed and orderly procedures and the personal achievements of the individuals than according to family status or social class thus encouraging a universal system of achievement orientation that leaves little or no room for favouritism, nepotism, etc.
Government activity that extends over a wide range of public and personal affairs encourages an appreciable level of political socialization evidenced by popular interest and involvement in public affairs and effective mobilization for participation in decision making and executing processes. Transparency and accountability are virtues that are upheld in these societies. Their governmental units are functional, systematic and structurally developed such
78
that they have the capacity to adjust to social or economic change and acquire new capabilities to meet with new demands. Also, the occupants of political or governmental leadership positions are widely viewed as legitimate holders of the positions and leadership changes occur according to prescribed and orderly procedures. Roles are assigned according to the personal achievements of individuals rather than according to family status or social class (Sharkansky, 1978).
Polinaidu (2004) saw the developed societies, especially of the West, as characterized by egalitarianism and democratic cultures that encourage the development of degrees of equality among the administrative decision-makers. Within these societies, the public administration is influenced by the advancements and developments in science and technology in the handling of complex problems that may demand complex solutions in the management of human affairs.
Also, most of the highly developed and widespread infrastructure are owned and managed by private organizations. As such, the pragmatic, production-oriented public administrators play a limited roleofregulating the private sector to promote accelerated development and ensure effective and efficient social service delivery (Polinaidu, 2004). The administrative roles are also highly specialized and differentiated such that spheres of competence are well defined and hierarchical relationships are clearly understood. Though the bureaucracy does not operate as an autonomous unit but rather responds to external controls from legitimate political authorities, it may tend towards self-direction in achieving its objectives if the need arises. However, the public administrators will normally not run afoul of the laws because of the realities of the consequences of such actions (Polinaidu, 2004).
Public administration in developed countries is largely guided by duly spelt out administrative procedures and codes of conduct which prescribe their ethics and responsibilities.
The policy makers are politicians with a clear understanding of what is expected of them and the
79
roles they are expected to play in contributing their own quota to the development of their societies. The distinction of roles between the administrative and political class presents a situation of near-impossibility of the occurrence of the overlap that exists in Riggs Prismatic society. Most modern, contemporary and advanced societies are heterogeneous in nature reflecting the dynamics of society brought on by the influence of globalization, political and socio-economic developmental activities.
However, unlike in the developing societies, each activity and responsibility occupies clear boundaries that fall within the purviews of both the administrative and the political classes so that the one does not exact any undue influence on the workings of the other. Also within these advanced societies, traditional institutions rarely exist unlike in the developing societies.
Where they do, like in the United States, Canada, Australia, etc., where there are Native American and Aboriginal groups, they are given their own responsibilities, have their representatives and understand the boundaries within which they must function and relate to the higher level formal governments. They rarely or do not exert any influence on the workings of the political and administrative structures that are saddled with the day to day running and maintenance of the affairs of government.