XII.2 Concept of Development Administration

2️⃣ Development Administration — concept

• 📖 Definition: the branch of PA concerned with administering development programmes and building the capacity to achieve planned socio-economic change (popularised by Riggs, Weidner, George Gant, 1950s–60s).
• Features:
  • goal- & change-oriented (not status-quo);
  • innovative & flexible;
  • client/citizen-oriented;
  • result- & time-bound (projects);
  • participative;
  • committed to nation-building & transformation.
• Contrast with traditional/regulatory administration: traditional PA maintains law & order & collects revenue (control); development administration promotes change & growth (facilitation).

🧠 Memory hook: traditional PA = "maintain"; development administration = "transform."

Deeper understanding — planned change needs capable institutions

Development administration emerged around the challenges of planned transformation, especially in newly independent and developing states. Its concern with change distinguishes its emphasis, but does not make law, routine administration or financial control unnecessary.

Two connected tasks: administering development programmes and strengthening the administration required to sustain them. A project unit can deliver a short-term output while leaving the permanent organisation no more capable.

Original features explained: goal orientation specifies intended change; participation incorporates local knowledge; flexibility permits learning; coordination aligns sectors; results orientation examines outcomes; accountability ensures that “development” does not excuse arbitrary power.

Illustrative programme: improving maternal health requires facilities, trained staff, supplies, referral systems, community access and dependable finance. Building clinics alone cannot accomplish the objective.

Capacity lens: UNDP's assessment approach examines capabilities and institutional conditions, rather than reducing capacity-building to training workshops. UNDP capacity-assessment methodology.

Criticism: a top-down modernisation blueprint can underestimate politics, culture, environmental limits and citizens' priorities. Adaptive implementation should remain tied to clear public objectives and lawful review.

Practice conclusion: developmental ambition must be matched by institutions that can learn, coordinate and maintain services beyond the initial project.