Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T16:09:26.509Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Dilemma of Development Administration: Complexity and Uncertainty in Control-Oriented Bureaucracies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 June 2011

Dennis A. Rondinelli
Dennis A. Rondinelli
Affiliation:
Syracuse University
Get access

Abstract

While development strategies of international assistance organizations and governments of less developed states have become more complex over the past decade, the methods of planning and management used during the 1960s and 1970s to formulate and implement policies have become less effective. Synoptic planning and scientific management techniques are used to control development activities rather than to facilitate and encourage the flexibility, experimentation, and social learning that are essential. The prospects of improving control-oriented administration are constrained by difficulties in defining objectives; lack of appropriate data; inadequate understanding of local social and cultural conditions; ineffective means of controlling behavior; the dynamics of political interaction; and low levels of administrative capacity in developing countries. Changes that must be made include: recognizing explicitly the uncertainty and complexity of development problems; managing development activities as policy experiments; building widespread administrative capacity; relying on adjunctive and strategic planning; simplifying analytical techniques; creating incentives for error detection and for innovation; and viewing effective program and project management in new ways.

Type
Research Article
Information
World Politics , Volume 35 , Issue 1 , October 1982 , pp. 43 - 72
Copyright
Copyright © Trustees of Princeton University 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See Rondinelli, Dennis A. and Ruddle, Kenneth, “Coping with Poverty in International Assistance Policy,” World Development, VI (April 1978), 479–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and , Rondinelli, “Administration of Integrated Rural Development Policy: The Politics of Agrarian Reform in Developing Countries,” World Politics, XXXI (April 1979), 389–416.Google Scholar

2 See Esman, Milton J. and Montgomery, John D., “Systems Approaches to Technical Cooperation: The Role of Developmental Administration,” Public Administration Review, XXIX (September/October 1969), 507–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Rondinelli, Dennis A., “Planning Development Projects: Lessons from Developing Countries,” Long Range Planning, XII (June 1979), 48–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3 Many of the issues are explored in essays appearing in Korten, David C. and Alfonso, Felipe B., eds., Bureaucracy and the Poor: Closing the Gap (Singapore: McGraw-Hill International, 1981).Google Scholar

4 Lindblom, Charles E., The Intelligence of Democracy (New York: Free Press, 1965)Google Scholar; Lindblom, Charles E. and Braybrooke, David, A Strategy of Decision (New York: Free Press, 1970).Google Scholar

5 The argument is made more extensively in Dennis A. Rondinelli, “Designing International Development Projects for Implementation,” in Honadle, George and Klauss, Rudi, eds., International Development Administration: Implementation Analysis for Development Projects (New York: Praeger, 1979), 21–52.Google Scholar

6 See Rondinelli, Dennis A., ed., Planning Development Projects (Stroudsburg, Pa.: Hutch-inson and Ross, 1977)Google Scholar, esp. chaps. 1 and 5; , Rondinelli, “International Assistance Policy and Development Project Administration: The Impact of Imperious Rationality,” International Organization, XXX (Autumn 1976), 573–605Google Scholar, and “International Requirements for Project Preparation: Aids or Obstacles to Development Planning?,” Journal of the American Institute of Pknners, XLII (July 1976), 314–26.

7 Henderson, P. D., “What's Wrong with the Brandt Report?: Economics Askew” Encounter (December 1980), 12–17.Google Scholar

8 World Bank, Annual Review of Project Performance Audit Results (Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 1978), 3.Google Scholar

9 See Lindblom (fn. 4), and Lindblom, Charles E. and Cohen, David, Usable Knowledge (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1979).Google Scholar

10 See Rondinelli, Dennis A., “Urban Planning as Policy Analysis: Management of Urban Change,” Journal ofthe American Institute of Planners, XXXIX (January 1973), 13–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Urban and Regional Development Phnning: Policy and Administration (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1975), esp. chap. 10; Lindblom (fn. 4); Wildavsky, Aaron, Speaking Truth to Power: The Art and Craft of Policy Analysis (Boston: Little, Brown, 1979).Google Scholar

11 United States General Accounting Office, U.S. Development Assistance to the Sahel: Progress and Problems, Report B-159652 (Washington, D.C.: G.A.O., 1979), 26.Google Scholar

12 ibid., 27–28.

13 See Noranitipandungkarn, Chakrit, Bangkok Metropolitan Immediate Water Improvement Program (Honolulu: East-West Center, 1977).Google Scholar

14 See Strachan, Harry W., “Side Effects of Planning in the Aid Control System,” World Development, VI (April 1978), 467–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Thomas, John W., “Development Institutions, Projects and Aid: A Case Study of the Water Development Programme in East Pakistan,” Pakistan Economic and Social Review, XII (Spring 1974), 87–103.Google Scholar

15 United Nations Development Programme, Rural Development: Issues and Approaches for Technical Cooperation, Evaluation Study No. 2 (New York: U.N.D.P., 1979).Google Scholar

16 ibid., 33.

17 G.A.O. (fn. II), 5.

18 ibid.

19 American Public Health Association, The State of the Art of Developing Low Cost Health Services in Developing Countries (Washington, D.C.: A.P.H.A., 1977).Google Scholar

20 U.N.D.P. (fn. 15), 27.

21 Kilby, Peter, “Evaluating Technical Assistance,” World Development, VII (March 1979), 309–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 309.

22 United Nations Development Programme, The UNDP Programme in Nigeria: Repor of the Evaluation Mission (New York: U.N.D.P., 1973).Google Scholar

23 U.N.D.P. (fn. 15), 27.

24 A.P.H.A. (fn. 19), II.

25 Implementation of “New Directions” in Development Assistance, Report to the House Committee on International Relations on Implementation of Legislative Reforms in the Foreign Assistance Act of 1973, prepared by the Agency for International Development, 94th Cong., 1st sess. (Committee Print, 1975), 5.

26 U.S. Agency for International Development, Country Development Strategy Statement, FY 1982, Philippines (Washington, D.C.: U.S. International Development Cooperation Agency, 1980), 4.Google Scholar

27 Kilby (fn. 21), 316–17.

28 See Ahmad, Yusuf J., “Project Identification, Analysis and Preparation in Developing Countries: A Discursive Commentary,” in Rondinelli, Planning Development Projects (fn. 6, 1977), 161–65.Google Scholar

29 U.S. Agency for International Development, Country Development Strategy Statement, FY 1981, Pakistan (Washington, D.C.: Department of State, 1979), 7.Google Scholar

30 U.S. Agency for International Development, Country Development Strategy Statement, FY 1981, Sri Lanka (Washington, D.C.: Department of State, 1981), 1.Google Scholar

31 U.S. Agency for International Development, Country Development Strategy Statement, FY 1981, Burma (Washington, D.C.: Department of State, 1979), 2.Google Scholar

32 Chambers, Robert and Belshaw, Deryke, Managing Rural Development: Lessons and Methods from Eastern Africa (Brighton, England: Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, 1973).Google Scholar

33 See Hutchinson, E. and others, intercountry Evaluation of Agricultural Sector Programs, IV, Guatemala (Washington, D.C.: USAID, 1974).Google Scholar

34 Thimm, Heinz-Ulrich, Development Projects in the Sudan: An Analysis of their Reports with Implications for Research and Training in Arid Land Management (Tokyo: United Nations University Press, 1979), 48.Google Scholar

35 Tendier, Judith, “Intercountry Evaluations of Small Farmer Organizations: Ecuador and Honduras,” Final Report (Washington: U.S. Agency for International Development, 1976), 31–33.Google Scholar

36 World Bank (fn. 8), 8.

37 U.S. Agency for International Development, Office of the Auditor General, An Evaluation of the Management of Technical Assistance: Projects in Three African Countries (Washington: US AID, 1972).Google Scholar

38 Kilby (fn. 21), 312.

39 Gordenker, Leon, International Aid and National Decisions: Development Programs in Makwi, Tanzania and Zambia (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1976).Google Scholar

40 Taylor Ostrander, F., “Botswana Nickel-Copper: A Case Study in Private Investment's Contribution to Economic Development,” in Barratt, J. and others, eds., Accelerated Development in Southern Africa (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1974), 534–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

41 Tendier (fn. 35), 17.

42 G.A.O. (fn. 11), passim.

43 Kilby (fn. 21), 313.

44 U.N.D.P. (fn. 15), 21.

45 See Lindblom, Charles E., “The Sociology of Planning: Thought and Social Interaction,” in Bornstein, Morris, ed., Economic Planning East and West (Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger Publishing Company, 1975), 23–60.Google Scholar

46 Kuhn, Thomas S., The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2d ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970)Google Scholar; Lindblom, Charles E. and Cohen, David, Usable Knowledge: Social Science and Social Problem Solving (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1979).Google Scholar

47 Korten, David C., “Management of Social Transformation,” Public Administration Review, XLI (November/December 1981), 609–18Google Scholar, at 613.

48 ibid., 613, and , Korten, “Community Organization and Rural Development: A Learning Process Approach,” Public Administration Review, XL (September/October 1980), 480–511.Google Scholar

49 See Rondinelli (fn. 2),passim.

50 Hirschman, Albert O., Development Projects Observed (Washington: Brookings, 1967), 135.Google Scholar

51 For a detailed discussion, see Rondinelli (fn.5); also Weiss, Wayne, Waterston, Albert, and Wilson, John, “The Design of Agricultural and Rural Development Projects,” in Rondinelli (fn. 6, 1977), 95–139.Google Scholar

52 Esman, Milton J. and Montgomery, John D., “The Administration of Human Development,” in Knight, Peter, ed., Implementing Programs of Human Development, World Bank Staff Working Paper No. 403 (Washington: World Bank, 1980), 183–234.Google Scholar

53 For a more detailed discussion, see Rondinelli, Dennis A., “Government Decentralization in Comparative Perspective: Theory and Practice in Developing Countries,” International Review of Administrative Sciences, XLVII (March 1981), 133–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and “Administrative Decentralization and Economic Development: The Sudan's Experiment with Devolution,” Journal of Modern African Studies, XIX (December 1981), 595–624.

54 The concept of adjunctive planning is outlined in Rondinelli, Dennis A., “Adjunctive Planning and Urban Development Policy,” Urban Affairs Quarterly, VII (September 1971), 13–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

55 Lindblom (fn. 45).

56 Chambers, Robert, “Project Selection for Poverty-Focused Rural Development: Simple is Optimal,” World Development, VI (February 1978), 209–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 211.

57 Amin, Galal A., “Themes from the Discussion at the Symposium,” World Development, VI (February 1978), 227–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 230 and 232.

58 Chambers (fn. 56), 215–19.

59 Esman and Montgomery (fn. 52), 207.

60 ibid., 208. See also Rondinelli, Dennis A. and Ingle, Marcus D., “Improving the Implementation of Development Programs: Beyond Administrative Reform,” in Shabbir Cheema, G., ed., Institutional Dimensions of Regional Development (Singapore: Maruzen Asia, 1981), 56–85.Google Scholar