Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
The advent of neo-liberalism, characterized by privatization, deregulation, and a reduced role of the state, has fundamentally altered the landscape of Public Administration globally. Traditionally, public administration relied heavily on internal accountability mechanisms – a hierarchical structure of control, departmental audits, and established rules and procedures. However, with the rise of neo-liberal policies from the 1990s onwards, there has been a discernible shift towards greater emphasis on external accountability mechanisms, driven by demands for transparency, responsiveness, and citizen participation. This change reflects a broader trend of questioning the efficacy of bureaucratic control and seeking alternative means of ensuring good governance.
The Rise of Neo-Liberalism and its Impact on Public Administration
Neo-liberalism, as a political-economic philosophy, advocates for minimal state intervention in the economy and emphasizes market forces. This ideology profoundly impacted Public Administration by promoting principles like ‘New Public Management’ (NPM). NPM focused on efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and customer orientation, often leading to decentralization and contracting out of public services.
Internal vs. External Accountability: A Comparative Analysis
Internal Accountability traditionally involved mechanisms within the administrative structure itself. These included:
- Hierarchical Control: Superior officers overseeing the work of subordinates.
- Departmental Audits: Regular checks on financial and operational performance.
- Rules and Regulations: Strict adherence to established procedures.
- Central Vigilance Commission (CVC): Established in 1964, initially focused on investigating corruption within central government.
However, neo-liberal reforms often weakened these mechanisms. Decentralization reduced hierarchical control, contracting out diminished direct oversight, and a focus on ‘performance’ sometimes led to compromises on procedural rigor.
External Accountability, on the other hand, involves scrutiny from outside the administrative structure. Key mechanisms include:
- Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005: Empowered citizens to access information held by public authorities.
- Citizen Charters: Documents outlining service standards and citizen entitlements.
- Social Audits: Independent assessments of public programs by citizens.
- Media Scrutiny: Investigative journalism and public reporting on government actions.
- Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) & NGOs: Monitoring government performance and advocating for citizen rights.
- Parliamentary Committees: Examining government policies and expenditure.
Reasons for the Shift
- Loss of Trust in Bureaucracy: Perceptions of corruption, inefficiency, and lack of responsiveness eroded public trust in traditional bureaucratic structures.
- Demand for Transparency: Increased awareness among citizens and pressure from civil society groups demanded greater transparency in government operations.
- Globalization and International Pressure: International organizations like the World Bank and IMF often advocated for greater accountability as a condition for loans and aid.
- Technological Advancements: The internet and social media facilitated greater access to information and enabled citizens to monitor government actions more effectively.
Examples Illustrating the Shift
Consider the implementation of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), 2005. While internal audits exist, the effectiveness of MGNREGA’s accountability is significantly enhanced by social audits conducted by local communities, media reports highlighting irregularities, and the scrutiny of civil society organizations. Similarly, the Aadhaar program, despite internal oversight, faced intense public and judicial scrutiny regarding data privacy and security, demonstrating the power of external accountability.
| Accountability Mechanism | Internal | External |
|---|---|---|
| Focus | Bureaucratic Control | Citizen Empowerment & Transparency |
| Actors | Hierarchical superiors, Audit departments | Citizens, Media, NGOs, Parliament |
| Tools | Rules, Regulations, Audits | RTI, Social Audits, Public Hearings |
Conclusion
The shift from internal to external accountability in neo-liberal Public Administration is a complex phenomenon with both advantages and disadvantages. While external accountability enhances transparency and responsiveness, it can also lead to increased bureaucratic burden, ‘accountability without responsibility’, and potential for political interference. A balanced approach, combining robust internal controls with effective external scrutiny, is crucial for ensuring good governance and maintaining public trust. Strengthening both mechanisms, rather than prioritizing one over the other, is essential for a truly accountable and effective Public Administration.
Answer Length
This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.