Origin of Development Administration
As to the exact origin of development administration scholars of different parts of the world
differ. But this difference of opinion for the present purpose is not important. The general
consensus in this regard is that in the 1950s of the last century large number of states of Asia and
Africa attained political freedom. Within a very short time of freedom these new states felt that
arrangements for rapid progress in the development sector are to be made and all-out efforts are
to be started. These states were of opinion that mere collection of materials was not enough; the
utilisation of materials requires special management and modern administrative system (Duke &
Etim, 2019).
Here lies the necessity of an improved system of administration. Several studies under
the aegis of UN have been made and from these studies what reveals is that the aids given by the
UN to the African states have been either unutilized or misutilised. The consequence has been
either no development or less development. Studies have shown that for the proper utilisation of
resources a proper public administrative system is to be built up. It has been found that almost all
the emerging states miserably lack a well- constructed administration. This experience shows
that there is a close relationship between administration and development.
Some scholars believe that behind the idea of development administration there is a
spectacular contribution of the economically developed nations. How? For several reasons after
the Second World War the industrialised states of West expressed their eagerness to help the
developing nations in their efforts for rapid development. But, according to Caiden, when the
developed nations began to supply materials for development it was found that because of the
absence of proper infrastructure including a well-built administrative system the development
materials either are not utilised or under-utilized.
The developing nations miserably suffer from good administrative structure which
hindered the utilisation of growth materials. In this connection, we can quote a few lines from
Caiden. He says: “Development administration had its origin in the desire of the richer countries
to aid the poorer countries, and more especially in the obvious needs of the newly emerging
states to transform their colonial bureaucrats into more responsible instruments of social
change.” Caidan has blamed the developing nations for the failure of utilising the aids and
materials of development.
From the above analysis it is obvious that development requires both materials and
administrative system for the proper utilisation of materials. The absence of any one condition
will invariably frustrate the efforts for development. We thus find that public administration has a
crucial role to play in the field of development. Before the 1950s it was not fully realised.
Riggs’s model is regarded by some as a potential source of development administration.
Riggs has classified the states into three broad categories; industrial, agricultural, and transitional
states. The industrial states generally do not suffer from an absence of good administrative
system. There is practically a very small necessity of good public administration for agriculture-
based states. But when the transitional and agricultural states proceed to adopt measures for
industrialisation, a good administrative system is seriously felt.
Most of the states of Asia and Africa were either agricultural or transitional and when they
made efforts for development the necessity for good and efficient public administration arose.
Riggs thinks in this line. During the colonial administration the public administration was not
thought as an important element. But without the direct and effective role of public
administration, development can never be successful.
