Advertisement

Governance and Administration in South Asia

  • O. P. Dwivedi
Chapter
  • 81 Downloads
Part of the International Political Economy Series book series (IPES)

Abstract

Mapping the political and administrative history of South Asia since independence over a period of fifty years is indeed a difficult exercise. At the time of independence, the divided old British India was faced overnight with the movement of millions of refugees, perhaps the largest exodus of people at any one time anywhere on the earth. This posed the problem not only of relief and rehabilitation, but also of welding the various communities divided by language, culture, religion, caste and creed into the working cohesion of two single yet separate unions. There was an immediate confrontation between them in October 1947 that only added to the perennial problems of economic disaster, inflation and food shortage. Each one of the problems not only had implications for politics and policy, but also for administration. This indeed was a monumental task for the two nations. These problems put the inherited and emergent administrative structure and governing process to a severe test.1 Over the years, there have been changes in administrative institutions, structures, styles and cultures in post-independence India and Pakistan, the two major countries of the region; however, administrative development has been an uneven process which can be best understood only in the context of the totality of this region’s politico-administrative environment.

Keywords

Political Leader Good Governance Administrative System Government Employee South Asian Country 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes and References

  1. 1.
    For a historical perspective, see, O.P. Dwivedi and R.B. Jain, India’s Administrative State (New Delhi: Gitanjali Publishing House, 1985);Google Scholar
  2. and O.P. Dwivedi, R.B. Jain and B.D. Dua, ‘Imperial Legacy, Bureaucracy, and Administrative Changes: India 1947–1987’, Public Administration and Development, vol. 9 (1989), pp. 253–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 2.
    For a discussion on various models of development, see O.P. Dwivedi and Keith M. Henderson, ‘Development Alternatives: Alternative Administration’, Indian Journal of Public Administration, vol. 42, no. 1 (January–March 1996), pp. 16–31.Google Scholar
  4. 3.
    Mahbub ul Haq, Human Development in South Asia 1997 (Karachi, Pakistan: Oxford University Press, 1997), p. 3.Google Scholar
  5. 4.
    Ibid., p. 8.Google Scholar
  6. 5.
  7. 6.
    Ibid., p. 103.Google Scholar
  8. 7.
    Bruce Lawrence, Defenders of God (San Francisco, Cal.: Harper & Row, 1989), p. 98.Google Scholar
  9. 8.
    Richard P. Taub, Bureaucrats Under Stress (Berkeley, Cal.: University of California Press, 1969), p. 161.Google Scholar
  10. 9.
    O.P. Dwivedi and R.B. Jain, India’s Administrative State (New Delhi: Gitanjali Publishing House, 1985), pp. 16–17.Google Scholar
  11. 10.
    The World Bank, The World Development Report (Washington D.C.: The World Bank, 1997), p. 86.Google Scholar
  12. 11.
    B.S. Wijeweera, ‘Policy Developments and Administrative Changes in Sri Lanka: 1948–1987’, Public Administration and Development, vol. 9, no. 3 (June–August 1987), p. 297.Google Scholar
  13. 12.
    R.C.S. Sarkar, ‘Role of Government Departments in the Legislative Process’, Journal of Constitutional and Parliamentary Studies, vol. 2 (1968), p. 1.Google Scholar
  14. 13.
    O.P. Dwivedi and R.B. Jain, ‘Bureaucratic Morality in India’, International Political Science Review, vol. 9, no. 3 (1988), pp. 205–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 14.
    O.P. Dwivedi and R.B. Jain, India’s Administrative State, op. cit., pp. 122–3.Google Scholar
  16. 15.
    R.B. Jain and O.P. Dwivedi, ‘Administrative Culture and Bureaucratic Values in India’, Indian Journal of Public Administration, vol. 36, no. 3 (July–September 1990), p. 444.Google Scholar
  17. 16.
    Jai Narain, ‘Political Corruption: Reversal of Gandhian Legacy’, The Tribune (Chandigarh), 30 November 1996.Google Scholar
  18. 17.
    India, Report of the Committee on Prevention of Corruption. K. Santhanam, chair (New Delhi: Ministry of Home affairs, 1964), p. 13.Google Scholar
  19. 18.
    Mukut Shah, ‘Good Governance: Time for Another Freedom Struggle’, The Tribune (Chandigarh), 21 April 1997.Google Scholar
  20. 19.
    Nasir Islam, ‘Colonial Legacy, Administrative Reform and Politics: Pakistan 1947–1987’, Public Administration and Development, vol. 9, no. 3 (July–September 1989), p. 282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 20.
    ‘De-criminalising Polity’, Editorial, The Tribune (Chandigarh), 22 August 1997, p. 8.Google Scholar
  22. 21.
    World Development Report (1997), op. cit., p. 165 (emphasis in the text).Google Scholar
  23. 22.
    Ibid., p. 105.Google Scholar
  24. 23.
    Ibid., p. 106 (emphasis in the text).Google Scholar
  25. 24.
    For further details, see Keith M. Henderson, ‘Internationalization and Indigenization’, in A. Farazmand (ed.), Handbook of Comparative and Development Administration (New York: Marcel Dekkar, 1999).Google Scholar
  26. 25.
    O.P. Dwivedi, India’s Environmental Policies, Programmes and Stewardship (London: Macmillan, 1997), p. 224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© O. P. Dwivedi 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • O. P. Dwivedi

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations