PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

Let us define public administration in where we can get a grasp of its function and nature. Public
Administration was referred to as a task that the government is engage. Planning, drafting, and carrying
out policies aimed at fostering and bolstering civil society constitute public administration. When
developing and implementing public policy programs, officials in the field of public administration
examine and assess all aspects, particularly budgets. The practice of public administration is as old as our
prehistoric civilization. However, as a separate discipline it cannot lay claim to a lengthy past. You may
trace the beginnings and development of public administration as a unique subject. Nearly no published
resources on the art and science of public administration existed before 1887 the administration. An
essay authored by a professor marked a significant turning point in the history of public administration.
Woodrow Wilson, a young and energetic leader who became emblematic in the development of public
administration. Public administration is a contemporary discipline since it is a subject of methodical and
scientific research. It is one of the most recent social sciences.

Public administration as a branch of political science occupies an intriguing space. Even as

governments all around the world turn more to public administration to address issues with public
performance and citizen confidence, it still finds it difficult to define its place within the field. Public
administration has a rich theory and an even richer tradition analyzing what is truly public about
government management, and this is the piece most prominently missing from the public reform
debate. It has a deep understanding of the tensions between policy making and administration. It has a
sense of the subtle influences that shape a public organization’s e environment debate. It is aware of the
conflicts that exist between administration and policymaking. It is aware of the subtle factors that affect
how a public organization operates.

In a nutshell, public administration is aware that administrative procedure and organizational

structure are important. In short, public administration is at its best at explaining (and shaping) the
management of public programs, in a direction determined by public organizations, in the public
interest.

PARADIGMS OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

The paradigms—or how the field has "seen itself" in the past and present—have helped public
administration develop as an intellectual and professional field. For many years, public administration
would be a significant tenet of political science. The philosophical foundation of public administration
was laid in the streets as well as in Woodrow Wilson's seminal article. Numerous public administration
researchers have tried to organize and regularize the concepts and theories of this discipline in an effort
to free it from the current identity crisis it is experiencing. The current book is a study of public
administration theories and paradigms, and the authors tried to examine how public administration has
evolved from its conception to the present. In this regard, the ideas and theories of public management
have been divided into three paradigms: the traditional paradigm of public administration, the new
paradigm of public management, and finally the new paradigm of good governance. It should be
emphasized that the paradigms in this typology emerged gradually starting in the 1990s in chronological
order, and that once they underwent change, new paradigms took their place.

Paradigm 1: The Politics/Administration Dichotomy, 1900-1926

This marks the beginning of the public's transformation in the discipline of administration. The
main argument made during this phase was in favor of keeping politics separate generally known as the
"politics-administration dichotomy," separates politics from administration. This phase started with the
Study of Administration by Woodrow Wilson was published in the political science quarterly in 1887. This
essay served as the basis for a distinct, independent, and methodical study of public administration,
therefore Wilson considers himself to be the "Father of Public Administration." The key assumption and
strategy during this epistemological period were the idea to separate politics and the administration
functions of government as a strategy for promoting efficiency and effectiveness. The period also
believed that administration of the public sector was different from administration in the private sector.
During this period, it was believed that as a strategy for promoting efficiency. There needed to be a
distinguishing line between efficiency and effectiveness in the operation of government in between
those playing the political game and those who were accused with administrative business. It was
thought that implementing administrative practice would help to improve government, 2011:6 (Cox,
Buck, & Morgan). The emphasis placed by in this phase was Woodrow Wilson and Goodnow on the
importance of keeping politics and government separate the most significant. Goodnow and the other
members of the public administration professionals emphasize that public administration should center
in the bureaucracy of the government. The conceptual support for this locus-centered theory the
industry's definition and one that would wax growingly challenging for academics and professionals
similar, they became known as the administration/politics dichotomy.

By connecting it to a parallel value/fact dichotomy, Paradigm 1 ultimately strengthened the idea

of a distinct politics/administration split. As a result, everything that the executive branch's public
administrations examined was given the legitimacy and coloration of being in some way "factual" and
"scientific," while the study of public policy and related topics was left to political scientists. Today's
political science departments reflect the division of analytical territory that occurred during this locus-
oriented stage: public administrations are responsible for teaching organization theory, budgeting, and
personnel, while political scientists are responsible for teaching almost everything else.

Paradigm 2: The Principles of Administration, 1927-1937

The Principle of Administration is the main theme of the second era in the history of public
administration. The prevailing idea during this time was that there are some "principles" of
administration, and it is the responsibility of the scholars to identify them and encourage their use. The
release of W.F. marked the beginning of this era. Principles of Public Administration by Willoughby
(1927). The book's title is highly evocative and accurately conveys the discipline's new direction. The
most significant publications published during this time period were "Creative Experience" by Mary
Parker Follet, "Industrial and General Management" by Henry Fayol, and "Principles of Organization" by
Mooney and Reiley.

For their administrative expertise, public administrations were highly sought after in the 1930s
and the first few years of the 1940s by both industry and the government. As a result, the field's primary
area of expertise—administrative principles—waxed while its geographic location received little serious
consideration. Since principles were principles and administration were administration, the locus of
public administration was, in fact, everywhere. The emergence of scientism marked the second stage.
This time was affected by Quantification and objectivity are two important scientific principles. The
primary goals of these scientific components were to eliminate misconceptions and prejudices In by
trying to find "hard data" that could be quantified and presented, human thought in an impartial and
logical way.
 In summary, the history of public administration's golden age of principles was from 1927 to
1937. Additionally, during this time public administration enjoyed a high level of respectability and its
services were highly sought after in both government and politics.

Paradigm 3 : Public Administration as Political Science, 1950-1970

Public administration experienced an identity crisis because of the rejection of the politics-
administration divide and administrative principles. As a result, there were two responses from public
administration researchers. Some of them joined political science—the mother science—again. However,
political scientists did not support them. A theory of public administration "means in our time a theory
of politics also," wrote John Gaus in his article Trends in the Theory of Public Administration (1950), and
Rosco Martin argued for the continuation of political science's "dominance over public administration" in
his article from 1952. (ii) Other authors shifted toward administrative science. They claimed that
regardless of the context, administration is administration. In 1956, they established the Journal of
Administrative Science Quarterly. Organizations (1958) by March and Simon and Behavioral Theory of
the Firm (1963) by Cyert and March are the two important publications that have been inspired by this
viewpoint. March's Handbook of Organizations from 1965 and J.D.'s Organizations on Action from 1967,
Thompson. Public administration, however, lost its unique character and distinction in both scenarios
(i.e., either toward political science or administrative science), and it was forced to meld with the more
general discipline.

Various developments took place during this phase of the evolution of public administration.
They are :

1. Rise of New Human Relations Approach advocated by Chris Argyris, Douglas McGregor,
Rensis Likert, Warren Bennis, and others
2. Growth of Comparative public Administration
3. Advocacy of Ecological Approach to the study of public administration by F.W.Riggs
4. Conceptualization of Development Administration by Edward Weidner, F.W.Riggs, and
others
5. Crystallisation of the concept of Administrative Development by F.W.Riggs
6. Emergence of New Public Administration
7. Advocacy of Public Choice Approach by Vincent Ostrom, and others
8. Rise of Critical Perspective of public administration.

Paradigm 4 : Public Administration as Administrative Science, 1956-1970

Some public administrations started looking for an alternative, in part because of the
"undisguised contempt" that was demonstrated in a number of political science departments. The
administrative science option, which includes organization theory and management science, is a viable
alternative for a significant number of scholars in public administration even though Paradigm 4 roughly
coincided with Paradigm 3 in time and has never received the widespread support that political science
has from public administration as a paradigm (although its appeal is growing).

Administrative science serves as a paradigm but does not offer a locus. It provides methods that
call for specialty and knowledge, but it is not specified in what institutional environment such knowledge
should be used. Administration is administration wherever it is found, similar to Paradigm 2, and
concentration is preferred over locus. In the middle of the 1960s, public administrationists like Keith M.
Henderson contended that organization theory was or ought to be the main area of study for public
administration. The field of administrative science known as "organization development" also started to
rapidly advance in the 1960s.

The Emerging Paradigm5 : Public Administration As Public Administration, 1970-?

Despite the uncertainty and turmoil of the preceding period, public administration during period
1971-91 registered progress and entered the seventies with an enriched vision. Public administration
attracted within its fold scholars from various disciplines and thus was becoming truly interdisciplinary in
its nature. Indeed, of all the social sciences , it is public administration which is most interdisciplinary; it
is also drawing heavily on the management science. Public administration has come closer to policy
science and related areas and has been showing ample concern for issues in the field. Less progress has
been made in defining the field's locus or what public affairs and "prescribing for public policy" should
include in terms that are pertinent to public administration specialists. However, the discipline does
seem to be focusing on a few core social characteristics that are specific to well developed nations as its
correct center. Although the selection of these phenomena by public administration specialists may have
been somewhat arbitrary, they do have some things in common, including the fact that they have
stimulated interdisciplinary interest in universities, call for the synthesis of intellectual abilities, and tend
to focus on issues related to urban life, organizational administration, the interface between technology
and human values, or, in other words, public affairs.

Institutionalizing Paradigm 5 : Toward Curricular Autonomy

The expansion of technology, communication, the global economy, and most crucially, the power
and responsibility of government, have caused enormous changes in many areas and prompted an
examination of the corporate and government sectors. With the release of "Reinventing Government" in
1992, these developments had an impact on the dynamics of government, promoting its entrepreneurial
development. The roles of government were reconstructed by Osborne and Gaebler. They asserted that
various radical changes can be seen as a result of the emergence of entrepreneurial governments,
including improvements in public management by performance, budget cuts, the decentralization of
government, and contracting out in certain areas. Decentralization, de-bureaucratization, and
democratization of government were therefore prioritized, with a strong focus on the interests of the
populace.

The 1990s also saw a shift from government to governance through the creation of laws,
policies, organizations, institutions, cooperative arrangements, and agreements that control citizens and
provide public benefits; government was institutionalized and governance was institutionalized and
networked (Henry, 2002). In order to help developing nations achieve their developmental goals, the
World Bank adopted a new tool of good governance that was based on neo-liberalism. In a 1989 World
Bank report on Sub-Saharan Africa, the idea of "good governance" was first introduced. The report gave
the idea a clear definition.

It took into account four key context factors, including (a) public sector management; (b)
responsibility; (c) legislative framework for development; and (d) information and transparency. Certain
developmental programs that included components like Good Governance and democratization were
given a boost by the political and economic progress in the West in the 1990s. The use of aid to support
and foster competitive, market-friendly economies is the first of the three major elements of
governance, according to Adrian Lefiwich (2008); the other two are support for democracy and moral
leadership.

Conclusion

When it comes to the future of public administration, we can see that all of the administrative
paradigms have strengthened not only its present possibilities but also given it a higher quality of
evolution. In today's public administration, two theories coexist. The first theory is supported by its
autonomy as a field of study, and the second theory is supported by its primary goal of developing and
enacting social change and social welfare. Since neither of these hypotheses makes sense without the
other, they support one another.

The ideal fusion of theory and practice is what public administration aspires to. Its goal has been
greatly defined by the encouragement of greater understanding of the government and its emphasis on
interaction with society. To strengthen its domain, it will need to instill a distinct kind of professional
education and training to equip public administrators to operate across sectors and governance domains
with a variety of organizations and individual actors. The field of public administration is now more
specialized than it was in prior eras due to these emerging changes in governance. Even while
governance is changing across political institutions, philosophical perspectives, cultural norms, and
citizenry, specialization does not necessarily imply increased democratization.

While some of these political and administrative systems are evolving successfully, many of them
are calling for more active citizen engagement and participation. It is obvious that, despite the fact that
governance has gotten more deeply rooted, diverse, and complicated, it has also diverged from the long-
established norms ingrained in the western approach to democratic government. Additionally, these
changes will undoubtedly call for increased research and dialogue between academics and
administrators. Additionally, it will have a significant impact on how public administration will be taught
in the future. Future public administration conferences like Minnowbrook IV will face a number of fresh
issues to consider.

References

Basheka, B. (2019). THE PARADIGMS OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION RE-EXAMINED: A REFLECTION

Tompkins, Jeff, March 21, 2023. What Is Public Administration? Skills, Degrees And Careers

Ugyel, L. (2016). Paradigms of Public Administration. In: Paradigms and Public Sector Reform. Palgrave
Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-40280-2_2

Salarzehi, H., & Ebrahimpour, H. (2012). Paradigms of Public Administration: From Traditional Public
Administration to Good Governance. Journal of Public Administration, 4(9), 43-62. doi:
10.22059/jipa.2012.28723

Kettl, D. THE FUTURE OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

Nicholas Henry, (2012). Paradigms of Public Administration

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
Sagar Mahavidyalay, (2021). Evolution And Development Of Public Administration