650 likes | 808 Views
PIA 2000. Introduction to Public Affairs. “Contemporary Models” of Governance and Socio-Economic Change. Week 3. Overview. Political Models The Public Sector and the Economy The European Model, North Atlantic Unity and Japan The Debates Over Development: Africa, Asia and Latin America
E N D
PIA 2000 Introduction to Public Affairs
“Contemporary Models” of Governance and Socio-Economic Change Week 3
Overview • Political Models • The Public Sector and the Economy • The European Model, North Atlantic Unity and Japan • The Debates Over Development: Africa, Asia and Latin America • Comparative Methodology Issues
Political Models • Separation of Powers • Parliamentary System • Mixed Systems of Government • One Party or No Party Systems
Separation of Powers • “Presidential System” U.S. Mexico Philippines Many Latin American Countries
Parliamentary System: Cabinet or Fused Government United Kingdom Scandinavia Central Europe India Former British Colonies
The French Hybrid- The Mixed Presidential Model France French Colonies Weak Hybrids with a Ceremonial President
One Party States: “Democratic Centralism” Communist or Leninist States Afro-Marxist Fascist “No Party Regimes” Weak Party Systems
2. The Public Sector and the Economy • Free Market • Mixed or Social Democratic • Socialist Industrialization • Autarcky with Rural Mobilization • Corporate/ Fascist
The Public Sector and the Economy Reminder: Karl Marx- The Other German- Source of ideas about the developmental state. Marx as a Social Scientist not an Ideologue. The contemporary of Max Weber
Karl Marx: Another Five Minutes a.. Original Marxian views- State as the instrument of the ruling classes b. The dialectic and Historical Materialism c. Model: (John Armstrong- The Conservative Marxist) -Thesis -Antithesis -Synthesis
Dialectic ThesisAntithesis Synthesis
Class Conflict: Four Epochs Slavery Feudalism Capitalism Socialism e. Functionaries as the petty bourgeoisie f. Communism- state and the bureaucracy whither away
Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov(Lenin)(April 221870 – January 21, 1924)
Command Economy- Revised by Lenin and Keynes • Under socialism, government, the bureaucracy should manage the economy • The development of an elaborate national planning system • Keynes- Failure of market
Command Economy • The debate: Keynesianism and European Socialism (the Rose)- How much is this part of Command Economy Framework? (Guy Peters) • Development Administration: Command Economics in the Third World? (Heady, Riggs vs. Vincent and Eleanor Ostrom)
3. The European Model, North Atlantic Unity and Japan • Focus on the State Economic System • Collectivist vs. Individualist Approach • Europe vs. Anglo-Saxon • Debates about Groups: Competitive vs. Cooperative (Corporatist)
Debate over the Economy 1. The International Contemporary State: Continental Europe vs. the U.S. or the U.K. 2. Adam Smith, "the hidden hand" and Classical Economics- An Anglo-Saxon View esp. USA 3. Eastern Europe and Former Soviet Union: Command Economy (whole or part)
Continental Europe • Counter-influence of St. Simonism- an interventionist view (See John Armstrong). • “the era of abundance could be attained certainly and quickly. The guaranteed means were applications of science and technology to unrestricted mastery of nature.” Count de Saint-Simon 1760-1825
Social Democracy • The Rose • Socialism and the Rise of Labor in Europe • The Second International • All European Countries have a Social Democratic Party (The Second International)
American Activism vs. European Socialism (U.S. Social Democratic Party)
Unification of the North Atlantic- 1930s-1970s- The Primacy of Keynesianism 1. Monetary Policy 2. Fiscal Policy 3. Wage and Price controls
The Functions of Government under Keynesian Control 1. Traditional- police and law and order 2. National Defense 3. Social Services- Education and Health and Welfare 4. Resource Mobilization
The Functions of Government under Keynesian Control- Continued 6. Economic Growth generation: From Roosevelt and the New Deal to Kennedy and Johnson, The Great Society 6. LDCs and Modernization Theory: Agraria vs. Industria (Turner and Holm) 7.The challenge of Public Choice, rationalism and the University of Chicago School: Neo-Orthodoxy- less influence outside of the Anglo-Saxon world
4. The Debates Over Development: Africa, Asia and Latin America • Colonial Heritage • Political Nationalization • Adapt Keynesianism • Anti-Private Sector: Pariah Groups, White Settlers, Chinese, Indians, Lebanese-Arabs (The Jews in Europe Debates)
The Development Model • Modernization Theory • State as Development Manager • Industrialization vs. Rural Development • The Take Off Point: Capital Accumulation
Breaktime Ten Minute Break
Chalmers JohnsonAuthor of the Week (Japan and Economic Development)
Prologue: Two Views of Government: • "There are several ways in which the government has influenced the structure of Japan's special institutions."[1] • "What is lawful and therefore is unlawful, depends on the culture and the country in question."[2] [1] Chalmers Johnson, MITI and the Japanese Miracle (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1982), p. 14. [2] Robert Klitgaard, Controlling Corruption (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988), p. 3.
Japan and Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI) • Asian Model • Corporatist- Inter-meshing of state and Private Sector • Management (not Political) Focus • Growth and Export • Model for Asian Tigers
Ministry of International Trade and Industry Block 10, Government Offices Complex, Jalan Duta,50622 KL, MalaysiaTel no: 603-6203 3022Fax no: 603-6201 2337Email:webmiti@miti.gov.my
Comparative Methodology Issues • Impact of the “Third World Model” • Soft State Problem • Weak Private Sector Problem • Debates about Governance and Authoritarianism
Fred Warren Riggs, 90, University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, professor emeritus of political science, passed away on February 9, 2008
Riggs Life Professor Riggs was born in Kuling, China on July 3, 1917, the son of agricultural missionary parents Charles H. and Grace (Frederick) Riggs. He attended Nanking University, 1934-35.
Comparative Public Administration Issues a. The politics-administration dichotomy b. Environmental and cultural factors are important. Ecology as an issue c. Bureaucracy as a Negative? Keep government out of people's lives
ISSUES d. Comparative as a method- structural-functionalist e. Systemic influence on the individual- role definition, socialization and development of organizations vs. institutions
Development Administration: C.A.G.- Focus on comparative and development administration. Bad reputation • Foundations and CAG- chalets in Italy to discuss administrative and political development • USAID and Universities- 3 out of every 4 dollars never left the U.S. Now .93 never leaves. • Post-Vietnam and Iran • Ferrel Heady, Founder of • SICA, 1916-2006
CAG Contined • NIPAs, staff colleges and IDMs spring up all over Africa and Asia • After 1975/80- Foundations pulled the plug • CAG End of Ford grant, 1974 • Post-Vietnam syndrome: Withdrawals, Ayatollas, now nine-one-one • End of Development as a consensus Northern Tier goal
THEORY: Civil Society vs. State DEBATES John D. Montgomery vs. Milton Esman
End of Macro-Approach 1.The Macro Approach: No Longer In Vogue (except with Ferrel Heady) a. Systems building from Almond to Riggs b. Almond's functions and Easton's black boxes c. Theme- Look at common functions- focus on INSIDE processes of executive government