(a) "The studies in Comparative Public Administration (CPA) got momentum in 1980's and 1990's with a new objective and orientation than its previous counterparts." Critically examine. (20 marks)

(b) "In explaining the 'development', Weidner made a d

Question

(a) "The studies in Comparative Public Administration (CPA) got momentum in 1980's and 1990's with a new objective and orientation than its previous counterparts." Critically examine. (20 marks)

(b) "In explaining the 'development', Weidner made a distinction between change in the output and change in the system itself; and warned that what is growth from one point of view may decline from another." Comment. (15 marks)

(c) "Zero-based budgeting (ZBB) is based on programme efficiency rather than budget history." In the light of this, examine the advantages of ZBB over traditional budget. (15 marks)

UPSC Answer Check · Accepted Answer

The directive 'critically examine' for part (a) demands balanced analysis with evidence; parts (b) and (c) require 'comment' and 'examine' respectively. Allocate approximately 40% word/time to part (a) given its 20 marks, and roughly 30% each to parts (b) and (c). Structure: brief composite introduction → part-wise treatment with clear sub-headings → integrated conclusion synthesizing all three themes.
- Part (a): Contrast 1950s-70s CPA (Riggs' structural-functionalism, ecology focus, Western bias) with 1980s-90s shift (post-bureaucratic paradigm, NPM influences, governance focus, comparative local government, privatization studies)
- Part (a): Identify specific 1980s-90s developments—rise of New Public Management, comparative performance measurement, shift from institution-building to results-oriented administration, inclusion of developing country experiences
- Part (b): Explain Weidner's output vs. system distinction—output change as quantitative growth (GDP, production) vs. system change as qualitative transformation (institutional capacity, administrative modernization)
- Part (b): Illustrate Weidner's warning with examples where economic growth coexists with administrative decay or where modernization disrupts traditional social structures (e.g., Green Revolution's uneven development)
- Part (c): Contrast ZBB's zero-base justification with traditional incremental budgeting's base-plus-adjustment approach; emphasize decision packages and ranking by cost-benefit
- Part (c): Detail ZBB advantages—elimination of obsolete programmes, resource reallocation to priority sectors, explicit trade-offs, enhanced accountability; cite limitations (time-consuming, requires skilled manpower)

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Concept correctness	20%	10	Precisely distinguishes 1980s-90s CPA's governance orientation from earlier ecological/structural focus; accurately captures Weidner's dual-change framework and ZBB's zero-base methodology without conflating with PPBS or performance budgeting	Identifies basic shifts in CPA timeline and mentions Weidner's distinction, but conflates ZBB with incremental budgeting or offers superficial treatment of development paradoxes	Misidentifies CPA phases (e.g., confuses 1960s with 1980s developments), misunderstands Weidner's system/output distinction as simply economic vs. social, or describes ZBB as merely 'cutting waste'
Theoretical anchor	20%	10	Cites Riggs' prismatic/sala model for early CPA; references Hood's NPM framework, Kettl's governance theory for 1980s-90s shift; connects Weidner to development administration theory; names Pyhrr as ZBB originator with decision-package methodology	Mentions Riggs and NPM generally without specific theoretical frameworks; notes Weidner's development administration contribution; identifies ZBB creator but lacks methodological detail	No theoretical references or misattributes theories (e.g., attributes ZBB to Wildavsky, confuses Weidner with Riggs)
Indian administrative examples	20%	10	For CPA: cites India's experience with LAMP studies, district administration comparisons; for Weidner: applies to India's Green Revolution paradox (output gain, system strain) or SEZ-induced displacement; for ZBB: references aborted 1986 ZBB experiment, performance budgeting evolution, or state-level outcome budgeting	Generic mention of Indian administration without specific application to CPA phases, Weidner's framework, or budgeting reforms; or only one part has Indian illustration	No Indian examples or irrelevant/inaccurate references (e.g., claiming ZBB is fully implemented in India)
Reform / policy angle	20%	10	Critically evaluates how 1980s-90s CPA informed India's liberalization-era administrative reforms; assesses Weidner's warning relevance for contemporary development (SDG trade-offs); analyzes why ZBB failed in India (capacity constraints) versus outcome budget's partial success	Describes reforms without critical evaluation; notes ZBB's practical difficulties without systemic analysis; limited connection between theoretical frameworks and actual policy outcomes	No reform discussion or purely descriptive treatment without critical assessment; ignores why ZBB remained theoretical in Indian context
Conclusion & forward look	20%	10	Synthesizes all three parts—shows how CPA's governance turn, Weidner's systemic perspective, and ZBB's efficiency logic together inform contemporary administrative reform; proposes integrated framework for developmental administration with realistic budgeting	Separate conclusions for each part without synthesis; or generic conclusion on need for good governance without specific linkage to question themes	Missing conclusion, or conclusion merely restates points without integration or forward-looking element

Q6

Directive word: Critically examine

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

Key points expected

Evaluation rubric

Practice this exact question

More from Public Administration 2023 Paper I