New Public Management has actually been a transitory state in evolution from traditional Public Administration to what is here called New Public Governance. Examine.

Evolutionary Trajectory of Public Administration

The journey from Traditional Public Administration to New Public Governance can be understood as a response to changing societal demands, technological advancements, and evolving philosophical underpinnings of the state's role.

Traditional Public Administration (TPA)

This model, heavily influenced by Max Weber's bureaucracy, emphasized a clear distinction between politics and administration, with a focus on hierarchical control, rule-bound operations, and an apolitical civil service. Its primary goal was efficiency and accountability through adherence to established procedures.

• Key Characteristics: Hierarchy, rules and regulations, impersonality, specialization, permanence, and a focus on inputs and processes.
• Citizen Role: Subjects or passive recipients of services.
• Example: Colonial administration in India, characterized by a rigid, rule-bound system.

New Public Management (NPM): The Transitory Phase

Emerging in the late 1970s and 1980s, NPM sought to make the public sector more "businesslike" by importing private sector management techniques. It aimed to address the perceived inefficiencies and unresponsiveness of traditional bureaucracy. NPM advocated for decentralization, market-oriented reforms, and a focus on performance and output.

Characteristics of NPM

NPM introduced a set of principles that fundamentally challenged the tenets of TPA:

• Managerialism: Granting public managers greater autonomy and discretion, akin to private sector executives, with an emphasis on professional management.
• Marketization and Competition: Introducing quasi-market structures, competition, contracting out services (privatization), and public-private partnerships (PPPs) to enhance efficiency and reduce costs.
• Performance Measurement: Focusing on explicit standards, clear performance targets, output controls, and result-oriented budgeting. Citizens were often viewed as "customers."
• Decentralization: Disaggregating large, monolithic public sector entities into smaller, more manageable units and pushing decision-making closer to the point of service delivery.
• Cost-cutting and Efficiency: Prioritizing value for money, increased efficiency, and financial control.

NPM served as a bridge by retaining the emphasis on efficiency and accountability (albeit shifting from process to results) from TPA, while introducing market-driven approaches that were alien to traditional bureaucracy. It laid the groundwork for a more flexible, disaggregated, and externally focused public sector.

New Public Governance (NPG): Beyond Managerialism

While NPM brought significant changes, its narrow focus on efficiency, market mechanisms, and treating citizens as mere customers led to criticisms regarding its impact on democratic values, equity, and the complexity of public problems. NPG emerged as a response, recognizing the pluralistic nature of modern governance and emphasizing collaboration, networks, and citizen engagement.

Characteristics of NPG

NPG moves beyond the state-centric or market-centric views to a more inclusive, network-centric approach:

• Collaborative Governance: Emphasizes partnerships and networks involving government, non-profit organizations, the private sector, and civil society in policy formulation and service delivery.
• Citizen-Centricity and Participation: Citizens are seen as active co-producers of public value, not just customers. There is a greater emphasis on citizen engagement, voice, and empowerment.
• Holistic and Value-Centered: Focuses on promoting the larger common good, democratic citizenship, public interest, and ethical considerations, moving beyond a sole emphasis on economic efficiency.
• Complexity and Hybridity: Recognizes the complex, interconnected nature of public problems that cannot be solved by a single actor or sector. It acknowledges the prevalence of hybrid governance forms.
• Trust and Legitimacy: Building trust among various stakeholders and enhancing the legitimacy of governance processes through transparency and participation.

NPM as a Transitory State: An Examination

The assertion that NPM was a transitory state holds significant weight because:

• Shift from Monolithic State: NPM successfully broke down the monolithic, hierarchical state structure of TPA, introducing concepts like decentralization and quasi-markets. This fragmentation, while aiming for efficiency, also highlighted the need for new coordination mechanisms.
• Incomplete Solution: NPM's market-based reforms were not a complete solution for complex public problems. Issues like social equity, public accountability beyond contractual terms, and the intrinsic value of public service were often sidelined.
• Paved Way for Networked Governance: By disaggregating units and promoting contracting, NPM inadvertently created a more fragmented service delivery landscape. This fragmentation necessitated a move towards network governance and collaboration (NPG) to ensure coherence and address cross-cutting issues.
• Customer vs. Citizen: The "citizen as customer" metaphor in NPM proved insufficient. Citizens are rights-bearers with a stake in democratic processes, not just consumers. This realization pushed towards NPG's emphasis on participation and co-production.
• Limitations of Pure Managerialism: The assumption that public sector operations can be entirely managed like private businesses proved problematic due to the unique normative and political context of public service. NPG re-emphasizes the distinct values of public service.

Comparative Analysis: TPA, NPM, and NPG

Feature	Traditional Public Administration (TPA)	New Public Management (NPM)	New Public Governance (NPG)
Core Logic	Bureaucracy, Hierarchy, Rules	Market, Managerialism, Efficiency	Networks, Collaboration, Public Value
View of Citizen	Subject / Passive Recipient	Customer	Citizen / Co-producer / Stakeholder
Role of State	Provider, Regulator, Controller	Steers, Enabler, Entrepreneurial	Facilitator, Partner, Orchestrator
Focus	Inputs, Processes, Accountability for Rules	Outputs, Outcomes, Efficiency, Value for Money	Public Value, Collaboration, Inclusivity, Legitimacy
Organizational Structure	Hierarchical, Centralized	Decentralized, Disaggregated, Agency-based	Networked, Collaborative, Hybrid
Accountability	To political masters, through rules	To customers, through performance targets	Multi-faceted, to stakeholders, through trust and shared responsibility

Current Relevance in India

India's administrative reforms reflect elements of all three paradigms, indicating a gradual, often hybridized, transition. While a strong bureaucratic core (TPA legacy) persists, initiatives like e-governance, performance-based appraisals (NPM elements), and decentralized planning through Panchayati Raj (NPG elements) are evident.

• Digital India (2015): Embraces technology for efficient service delivery, reflecting NPM's drive for efficiency and NPG's emphasis on citizen engagement through digital platforms (e.g., MyGov, UMANG).
• Mission Karmayogi (2020): Aims at capacity building for civil servants to make them more "future-ready" and citizen-centric, moving beyond mere rule-following towards a more managerial and value-driven approach.
• 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments: These constitutional reforms for Panchayati Raj Institutions and Urban Local Bodies exemplify decentralization and citizen participation, aligning with NPG principles of local governance and community involvement.
• Citizen Charters: Introduced to ensure time-bound service delivery and grievance redressal, reflecting NPM's customer focus but also pushing towards NPG's accountability to citizens.

The Indian context demonstrates that the evolution is not a clean break but a blending, with NPM acting as a necessary, albeit temporary, re-orientation before the more complex, multi-actor vision of NPG could take root.