Changing Profile Of Development Administration
The concept of development administration is a post-World War II phenomenon. Its emergence is closely linked to the emergence of the post-colonial new Third World countries. At the outset, we should remember that the goals and content of development administration have been changing since its beginning in the 1950s.
In the 1950s development administration was inaugurated with its foremost emphasis on économic growth and increase in production to raise peoples standard of living
In the beginning, it was to be state-led development and conceived in technical terms mas Bhattacharya points out that the nature of the state- the power structure that is reported not considered a problem them. By the later 1960s and early 1970s, it was realized that economic development took place un failed to remove poverty, unemployment and social inequity. It failed to improve substances the quality of life of the general masses. It gave birth to imbalances and other hardships. the gulf between the rich and the poor in the Third World countries, and also between the developed and developing nations widened. The development turned out to be anti-human and eco destructive. It was also realized that development has been unnecessarily technicised and dehumanized. Thus development administration showed unmistakable signs of failure in many respects.
Hence, in the later 1970s and 1980s, there was a paradigm shift in development administration – from growth-centric to a people-centred approach. The goal of development administration came to be redefined as growth with social justice that has to be secured with peoples participation. Its goals are the elimination of poverty, unemployment, inequality, oppressive social structure, etc. besides such issues as gender equality, child development and other situation-specific problems have secured a place on the agenda items of development. The concept of development has become more encompassing and humanistic.
Development is now to take care of total human being who has his social and ethical dimensions. A broad-based concept ‘development embraces both moral and material components. In the context of the preceding discussion, we should remember that in the 1950s and 1960s centralist development theories dominated the scene. The centralist approach is also known as top-down vision. This so-called development from above has meant deprivation for below. People at the grassroots level are more and more marginalized and rendered poor by such development plans. Therefore, later in the 1970s certain changes involved more field orientation and people’s participation in development. But the concept of top-generated and top-directed development remained the same.
The above changes in the profile of development administration have been aptly stated by Robert Chambers in the following words. In the 1950s development blueprints were drawn up from an ‘aeroplane perspective. In the 1970s the field-oriented, participatory approach prompted a ‘helicopter’ vision, and the experts sitting in the low flying craft could now claim to have a more accurate perception of their target population.
They could even land anywhere amongst the people below to enquire about their views. But the change from ‘aeroplane’ to ‘helicopter’ did not essentially change the top-down vision of reality, In both cases, the experts thought that “they knew better than the underdeveloped’ populations living down below”. This means development is what the centre visions and plans This type of development plan could not solve the complex and widespread socio-economic problems of most developing countries.
It is in the above context that development from below assumes much importance. Development from below is recognized as a development from within. This is what Robert Chambers has. called the idea of ‘reversals’. Development to be real must be people-centred. This necessitates the reversal of the tendency towards concentrating power in impersonal and unaccountable institutions. For development to be locally meaningful, power needs to be returned to the people and communities through the creation of member accountable institutions and strengthening of local resources control and ownership.
Decentralisation is thus considered indispensable for the management of local resources like forests, wetlands and biodiversity in general. Thus in the 1990’s the concept of environment-friendly development has assumed significance. In this context, the concept of ‘sustainable development advanced by the Brundtland Report on 1987 has secured an important place on the agenda of development administration. Sustainable development is a development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Sustainable development requires that mother earth should not be plundered in the name of development. Pollution must be controlled; forests must be preserved; wildlife must be protected the promoted. Thus sustainable development is environment friendly and sensitive to the needs of future generations. It makes development both people-friendly and eco-friendly. Today development is being in holistic terms.
Implications Of Sustainable Development
The term sustainable development has the following implications :
1. Development of certain country should be done in the light of the present necessities with proper attention of the needs of future generations. The earth’s ecosystem, its bio-diversity must be understood and its sanctity must not be vitiated.
2. This view militates against the practice of bringing about haphazard growth without caring about the protection of the environment. It rejects the traditional view that economic development is a necessity, while environmental protection is a luxury.
3. It discards the idea of development at any cost. Instead, it desires no development at the cost of environmental protection. In this way, it integrates the case of development with the interest of the great society of human beings and the entire world having diverse types of life in flora and fauna. Thus development and the environment should coexist. It also implies that no state is an island unto itself and, as such, no state can have its development without concerning the effects on other states.
Check out these notes on Essentials And Implications Of Public Policy.