Public Administration 2022 Paper I 50 marks 150 words Compulsory Explain

Q5

Answer the following in about 150 words each : 10×5=50 (a) Development Administration 'embraces the array of new functions assumed by the developing countries'. Explain. 10 (b) Policy evaluation contributes fundamentally to sound public governance. Discuss. 10 (c) Weber's construct of bureaucracy has served a great heuristic purpose in furthering research in the field of Comparative Public Administration. Do you agree with the statement ? Give reasons. 10 (d) Standards are the foundation which do not replace regulations but complement them. Comment. 10 (e) 'Outcome budgeting addresses the weaknesses of performance budgeting.' Elaborate. 10

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

निम्नलिखित में से प्रत्येक का लगभग 150 शब्दों में उत्तर दीजिए : 10×5=50 (a) विकास प्रशासन 'विकासशील देशों द्वारा ग्रहण किए गए नवीन कार्यों को अपनाता है'। व्याख्या कीजिए । 10 (b) नीति मूल्यांकन सुदृढ़ लोक शासन में आधारभूत योगदान देता है। विवेचना कीजिए । 10 (c) वेबर की नौकरशाही निर्मिति ने तुलनात्मक लोक प्रशासन के क्षेत्र में शोध को आगे बढ़ाने में एक महान स्वानुभविक उद्देश्य के रूप में सेवा दी है । क्या आप इस कथन से सहमत हैं ? तर्क दीजिए । 10 (d) मानक वे आधार हैं जो विनियमों का स्थान तो नहीं लेते किन्तु उनके पूरक हैं । टिप्पणी कीजिए । 10 (e) 'परिणामोन्मुखी बजटन निष्पादन बजटन की कमजोरियों का समाधान करता है ।' विस्तार कीजिए । 10

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2022 Public Administration questions

Directive word: Explain

This question asks you to explain. 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 question demands explanatory and discursive responses across five sub-parts, each carrying 10 marks with ~150 words. Allocate roughly equal time (~20%) to each sub-part given equal weightage. For (a), explain the expanded functional scope of development administration; for (b), discuss the governance-evaluation linkage; for (c), critically examine Weber's heuristic value; for (d), comment on standards-regulations complementarity; for (e), elaborate outcome budgeting's superiority. Structure each response with definition, theoretical grounding, and contemporary relevance.

Key points expected

  • (a) Development Administration: distinguishes between traditional administration (maintenance) and development administration (change-oriented); cites Weidner/Riggs on goal-attainment functions; mentions new functions like planning, mobilization, institution-building, and social change
  • (b) Policy Evaluation: explains feedback loop, accountability mechanism, and evidence-based governance; cites Stufflebeam's CIPP or Patton's utilization-focused evaluation; links to SDG monitoring and outcome assessment
  • (c) Weber's Bureaucracy: acknowledges ideal-type construct enabling cross-national comparison; cites Ferrel Heady's Comparative Public Administration; mentions subsequent critiques (Riggs' prismatic model, administrative ecology)
  • (d) Standards-Regulations: distinguishes mandatory regulations from voluntary/technical standards; cites BIS, ISO certification, and regulatory impact assessment; explains flexibility and innovation promotion
  • (e) Outcome Budgeting: contrasts with performance budgeting's output focus; explains result-based framework; cites India's Outcome Budget 2005-06 and PMG (Performance Management Group) initiatives

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Concept correctness20%10Precisely defines development administration's functional expansion (a), distinguishes policy evaluation types (b), captures Weber's ideal-type methodology (c), clarifies standards vs. regulations hierarchy (d), and contrasts outcome vs. performance budgeting (e) without conflationBroadly identifies concepts but mixes up development administration with development management, conflates evaluation with monitoring, presents Weber descriptively without methodological significance, or treats standards as synonymous with regulationsMisidentifies core concepts, describes development administration as mere economic development, confuses outcome budgeting with zero-based budgeting, or fundamentally misunderstands Weber's heuristic purpose
Theoretical anchor20%10Cites Weidner/Riggs on development administration (a), Stufflebeam/Patton/Wholey on evaluation theory (b), Heady/Farmer on comparative methodology (c), ISO/BIS frameworks (d), and Schick/OECD budgeting evolution (e); demonstrates theoretical lineageMentions some theorists without clear linkage to arguments, drops names without context, or uses generic references without specificity to the sub-part's theoretical demandsNo theoretical references, or completely misplaced citations (e.g., citing Fayol for development administration, or Weber for policy evaluation)
Indian administrative examples20%10For (a) cites NITI Aayog or district planning; (b) mentions NITI's Aspirational Districts evaluation; (c) references Indian administrative reforms post-LPG; (d) cites BIS standards, FSSAI regulations; (e) details India's Outcome Budget 2005-06, PMG, or SDG India IndexGeneric mention of Indian context without specific schemes, or examples that partially fit but lack precision (e.g., mentioning MGNREGA without outcome budgeting linkage)No Indian examples, or irrelevant examples (e.g., citing British civil service reforms for Indian development administration)
Reform / policy angle20%10Links (a) to SDG localization and cooperative federalism; (b) to evidence-based policymaking and social audit; (c) to post-Weberian New Public Management and governance reforms; (d) to ease of doing business and regulatory sandbox; (e) to result-based financing and PM-SHRI outcome metricsAcknowledges reforms superficially without mechanism explanation, or lists reforms without connecting to the specific sub-part's analytical demandsNo reform dimension, or anachronistic/irrelevant reform references that demonstrate poor understanding of contemporary administrative priorities
Conclusion & forward look20%10Each sub-part concludes with synthesis: (a) development administration's continuing relevance in volatile contexts; (b) evaluation's role in democratic deepening; (c) Weber's enduring methodological legacy despite post-colonial critiques; (d) standards as adaptive governance tools; (e) outcome budgeting's integration with SDGs and digital public infrastructureSummarizes points without forward-looking element, or provides generic conclusions interchangeable across sub-partsAbrupt endings, no conclusion, or conclusions that contradict the body of the answer; missing conclusions in multiple sub-parts

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 2022 Paper I