Public Administration 2021 Paper I 50 marks Examine

Q6

(a) Emphasis on cost control and reducing public expenditure has diverted the focus of government budgets from the basic objectives of reallocation of resources, bringing economic stability and promoting social equity. Examine. (20 marks) (b) In modern context, Riggsian terms have not altogether disappeared, but have emerged in different forms with newer meanings. Discuss. (15 marks) (c) A striking feature of economic development is an apparent symbiotic evolution of strong States and strong market economies. Analyze. (15 marks)

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

(a) लागत नियंत्रण और सार्वजनिक व्यय कटौती की प्रमुखता से सरकारी बजट का ध्यान संसाधनों के पुनः आवंटन, आर्थिक स्थिरता लाने और सामाजिक समानता संवर्धन के मूल उद्देश्यों से हट गया है। परीक्षण कीजिए। (20 अंक) (b) आधुनिक संदर्भ में, रिग्सियन शब्दावली पूर्ण रूप से लुप्त नहीं हुई है बल्कि नए अर्थों के साथ विभिन्न रूपों में उभरी है। विवेचना कीजिए। (15 अंक) (c) आर्थिक विकास की एक महत्वपूर्ण विशेषता सुदृढ़ राज्यों एवं सुदृढ़ बाजार अर्थव्यवस्थाओं का एक स्पष्ट सहजीवी उद्भव है। विश्लेषण कीजिए। (15 अंक)

Directive word: Examine

This question asks you to examine. The directive word signals the depth of analysis expected, the structure of your answer, and the weight of evidence you must bring.

See our UPSC directive words guide for a full breakdown of how to respond to each command word.

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

The directive 'examine' for part (a) requires critical analysis with evidence, while 'discuss' for (b) and 'analyze' for (c) demand balanced exposition and systematic breakdown respectively. Allocate approximately 40% of time/words to part (a) given its 20 marks, and roughly 30% each to parts (b) and (c). Structure with a brief integrated introduction, three distinct sections for each sub-part with clear sub-headings, and a synthesizing conclusion that connects fiscal prudence, administrative ecology, and state-market dynamics.

Key points expected

  • Part (a): Budgetary functions (reallocation, stabilization, distribution) vs. fiscal consolidation; Musgrave's three functions; New Public Management's efficiency focus; tension between austerity and welfare
  • Part (a): Evidence of reduced capital expenditure, social sector cuts; counter-argument that fiscal discipline enables long-term stability; Indian context—FRBM targets vs. welfare schemes like MGNREGA, PM-KISAN
  • Part (b): Riggs' fused-prismatic-diffracted model; contemporary manifestations—eformalism, neopatrimonialism, hybrid regimes; digital governance as new 'prismatic' feature; applicability to Indian administration
  • Part (c): State-market symbiosis—developmental state theory, embedded autonomy (Evans); East Asian model; India's evolving relationship—liberalization with regulatory expansion
  • Part (c): Strong state enabling market institutions vs. market strengthening state capacity; public-private partnerships, regulatory capitalism; challenges of regulatory capture

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Concept correctness20%10Precisely distinguishes budgetary functions (allocation, distribution, stabilization) per Musgrave/Buchanan; accurately interprets Riggsian concepts and their contemporary adaptations; correctly applies state-market theories (developmental state, embedded autonomy) without conflating neoliberalism with state withdrawalIdentifies basic budget functions and Riggsian terms but with imprecise definitions; mixes up prismatic/diffracted characteristics; conflates strong state with big government or market-friendly with weak stateFundamental errors—treats budget only as accounting exercise; misrepresents Riggs as obsolete; describes state-market as zero-sum; confuses fiscal deficit with public expenditure
Theoretical anchor20%10Integrates multiple theoretical frameworks: for (a) Keynesian vs. Chicago school fiscal perspectives, Stiglitz's market failures; for (b) Riggs' ecological theory, Eisenstadt's neopatrimonialism, Hyden's economy of affection; for (c) Evans' embedded autonomy, Polanyi's double movement, Amartya Sen's capability approach linking state and marketMentions Musgrave and Riggs superficially; cites one theorist per part without synthesis; limited engagement with competing theoretical perspectivesNo theoretical framework; relies on commonsense assertions; misattributes theories or cites irrelevant thinkers (e.g., Weber for Riggsian analysis without adaptation)
Indian administrative examples20%10Rich, specific illustrations: for (a) FRBM Act amendments, 15th Finance Commission recommendations, capital vs. revenue expenditure trends, specific welfare cuts/restorations; for (b) digital India as prismatic formalism, Aadhaar's hybrid nature, administrative corruption patterns; for (c) SEZ experience, GST Council as state-market institution, PLI schemes, regulatory bodies (SEBI, TRAI) evolutionGeneric references to 'Indian bureaucracy' or 'liberalization'; mentions schemes without specificity; no data or institutional detailNo Indian examples; or irrelevant examples (foreign cases only); factually wrong references (e.g., attributing FRBM to wrong year, confusing Finance Commissions)
Reform / policy angle20%10Critically evaluates reform trajectories: for (a) outcome budgeting, PFMS, performance-linked incentives vs. input control; for (b) administrative reforms addressing formalism—lateral entry, e-governance integrity; for (c) competitive federalism, regulatory state building, balancing strategic autonomy with global integration; proposes feasible alternativesLists reforms without critical assessment; accepts official narratives uncritically; no connection between identified problems and reform solutionsNo reform discussion; or purely normative wish-list without administrative feasibility; opposes all austerity or all state intervention without nuance
Conclusion & forward look20%10Synthesizes three parts into coherent argument about 21st century administrative state—fiscal prudence need not contradict equity if institutional capacity is built; Riggsian insights remain relevant for hybrid governance; strong states and markets co-evolve through democratic deepening; forward-looking on green budgeting, digital governance ethics, cooperative federalismSummarizes each part separately without integration; generic conclusion on 'balanced approach'; no future orientationNo conclusion; or abrupt ending; contradicts own arguments; purely rhetorical closing without substantive connection to question

Practice this exact question

Write your answer, then get a detailed evaluation from our AI trained on UPSC's answer-writing standards. Free first evaluation — no signup needed to start.

Evaluate my answer →

More from Public Administration 2021 Paper I