(a) “Liberalization, Privatization and Globalization (LPG) successfully resolved the structural crisis of the welfare state with emphasis on market efficiency, undermining the social equity goals essential to public service.” Explain. (20 marks)

(b)

Question

(a) “Liberalization, Privatization and Globalization (LPG) successfully resolved the structural crisis of the welfare state with emphasis on market efficiency, undermining the social equity goals essential to public service.” Explain. (20 marks)

(b) Critically analyse the differences between Ferrel Heady’s focus on administrative structures and Fred Riggs’s ecological ‘Prismatic’ model. Which one of these frameworks provides a more effective tool for the study of developing nations ? Examine. (15 marks)

(c) New communication technology has not only enabled more robust public engagement with the government, but also serves as a new means of internal organizational teamwork. Discuss. (15 marks)

UPSC Answer Check · Accepted Answer

(a) LPG, the Welfare State Crisis and Social Equity
The assertion that Liberalization, Privatization, and Globalization (LPG) successfully resolved the structural crisis of the welfare state by prioritizing market efficiency, while simultaneously undermining the social equity goals essential to public service, reflects a profound shift in administrative philosophy. The "structural crisis" refers to the fiscal crisis of the welfare state, identified by J. O'Connor (1973), where escalating social expenditures outran revenues; together with the "overload" thesis of Crozier, Huntington and Watanuki (The Crisis of Democracy, 1975) and Habermas's "legitimation crisis", this framed the stagflation of the 1970s as a crisis of the welfare state. In response, the Washington Consensus (John Williamson, 1989) and New Public Management (NPM), with Osborne and Gaebler's call for government to "steer rather than row" (1992), prioritized economy, efficiency, and effectiveness. In India, where the "crisis" was less a mature welfare state's overload than the 1991 balance-of-payments and fiscal crisis, the 1991 New Industrial Policy, disinvestment, and the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA, 1999) shifted the state toward market efficiency, and growth did expand the fiscal space later used for welfare.

However, the word "successfully" is contestable; the crisis was often displaced rather than resolved. The shift toward market efficiency undermined social equity, a pillar of public administration championed by H. George Frederickson and the New Public Administration movement (Minnowbrook, 1968). The move from universalism to targeting and the introduction of user charges eroded the welfare mandate. Consequently, a counter-movement emerged: New Public Service (Denhardt and Denhardt, 2000) and New Public Governance (Osborne, 2006) reasserted the need for equity. In India, this was institutionalized through rights-based legislation such as the Right to Information (RTI), MGNREGA (2005; now succeeded by the VB-G RAM G Act, 2025), RTE (2009), and NFSA (2013), which sought to restore the social equity goals essential to public service. The later "new welfarism" of Direct Benefit Transfer through the JAM trinity, PM-KISAN (2019) and free foodgrains under PMGKAY (extended for five years from January 2024) combines market-era efficiency tools with equity goals, suggesting that efficiency and equity need not be a zero-sum choice.

(b) Heady's Structural Approach versus Riggs's Prismatic Model
Ferrel Heady and Fred Riggs offer distinct frameworks for comparative administration. Heady’s structural-institutional approach, detailed in Public Administration: A Comparative Perspective (1966), takes the bureaucracy itself as the unit of comparison and classifies developing polities by regime type (traditional-autocratic, bureaucratic-elite, polyarchal-competitive, dominant-party semi-competitive, dominant-party mobilisation and communist-totalitarian). He identifies five common features of administration in developing countries: it is imitative rather than indigenous; deficient in skilled manpower; oriented to non-production goals such as status; marked by a widespread discrepancy between form and reality; and enjoys substantial operational autonomy. In contrast, Fred Riggs’s ecological approach, presented in Administration in Developing Countries: The Theory of Prismatic Society (1964), analyzes society as a whole. Riggs categorizes societies into fused, prismatic, and diffracted. For developing nations, he identifies the "prismatic" stage, characterized by heterogeneity, formalism, and overlapping. His model uses specific terminology like the "sala" (administrative sub-system), "bazaar-canteen" (economic model), and "poly-normativism" to explain how traditional and modern norms coexist.

Riggs's model has its critics - its jargon, a static and somewhat negative portrayal of developing societies, and the implicit assumption that the Western "diffracted" model is the goal. Still, Riggs’s framework is a more effective tool for studying developing nations because it explains why transplanted Western structures misfire in local contexts. While Heady provides a useful classification of administrative patterns, Riggs’s ecological model captures the unique "prismatic" nature of these societies, where formal rules often coexist with informal practices. Riggs’s model is superior for understanding the transition from agraria to industria, as it accounts for the "overlapping" of functions that Heady’s structural focus might miss. Therefore, for a deep understanding of the administrative environment in the developing world, Riggs’s ecological perspective is more comprehensive, while Heady's structural comparison remains the more practical, testable tool; the best analysis combines Heady's focus on bureaucracy with Riggs's attention to its social ecology.

(c) Communication Technology: Public Engagement and Internal Teamwork
New communication technology has fundamentally transformed public administration by enhancing both external public engagement and internal organizational teamwork. Externally, e-governance has facilitated "e-democracy" and "e-services." Platforms like MyGov (2014), the UMANG app (2017) and CPGRAMS allow for robust citizen participation, open data portals (data.gov.in, 2012) promote transparency, and the Bhashini AI platform makes services available in Indian languages. This aligns with Jane Fountain’s concept of the "Virtual State" (2001) and Dunleavy et al.’s "Digital-Era Governance" (2006), which emphasize the integration of technology into public service delivery.

Internally, technology serves as a medium for organizational teamwork. The e-Office system has streamlined electronic file movement, reducing bureaucratic delays. Platforms like PRAGATI (2015) use video-conferencing for real-time review of infrastructure projects, the government's own messaging app Sandes and the Government e-Marketplace (GeM) connect officials across departments, the PM Gati Shakti National Master Plan (2021) gives ministries a shared GIS platform for infrastructure planning, and Mission Karmayogi and iGOT (2020) provide a digital platform for civil service training and collaboration. These tools enhance coordination and "steering" capabilities within the government.

However, a critical assessment is necessary. The "digital divide" can lead to exclusion errors, and "consultation" via digital means does not always translate into "influence." Furthermore, concerns regarding privacy and surveillance, after the Puttaswamy (2017) recognition of privacy as a fundamental right, have led to the enactment of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, with rules notified in November 2025. Ultimately, while technology provides the tools for better engagement and teamwork, its success depends on administrative capacity and culture rather than the tools alone.

(a) “Liberalization, Privatization and Globalization (LPG) successfully resolved the structural crisis of the welfare state with…

Model answer

How this answer will be evaluated

Evaluation rubric

Must cover

Loses marks

Earns more

Extra mark

Must cover

Loses marks

Earns more

Extra mark

Must cover

Loses marks

Earns more

Extra mark

Structure that answers it

Where marks are lost

Practice this exact question

More from Public Administration 2026 Paper I