- (a) The state plays an important role in the development process, and bureaucracy has been considered an important supporting mechanism for modernization and development. However, the experience of third world countries has shown that the representation of bureaucratic theory has not practically achieved as good a result as was expected.
The structural and behaviorist characteristic of Weber’s bureaucratic concept has created a barrier to development. For this reason, an attempt has been made to reproduce Weber’s bureaucratic theory from the specific problems and facts of the developing society. This has resulted in the emergence of the concept of developmental bureaucracy.
- (b) Unlike developed nations, developing countries have less task variation. Due to this, the bureaucracy has become more powerful and important outside its legal limits. There is also a provision for a separate structure for this. There is a right kind of harmony between the bureaucracy and other political structures.
- (c) Appointment is done on the basis of ability, which is decided on the basis of a competitive examination which also includes written and personality tests. However, the bitter truth is there due to the intervention of primitive reasons such as personal, tribal, ethnic or religious. Prejudice is done to those who pass the examinations even without ability.
Caste considerations have emerged as a strong basis for appointment to key posts and public appointments on an incapacity basis. Some nations like India have a reservation system for appointments for the most backward castes and classes in the year. This is done so that the servant is representative of the bureaucracy. Such a system limits the ability of the state to make effective rules. There is a similar gap in the selection and recruitment of bureaucrats.
- (d) Politicisation of bureaucracy is another feature in developing countries. Prime Minister Indira Gandhi introduced the concept of “committed bureaucracy” in India in the late 1960s, which implied that the bureaucrats remained reflective of the party in power. Although later, due to public voice, Mrs. Indira Gandhi again clarified her position that she was more committed to the law of the state rather than the government, in reality, the policy of bureaucratic neutrality in the nation is getting eroded. The selection of high officials (at the Center and in the states) is being done on an individual and party basis.
Swapping and transferring civil servants is a common practice before and after elections. The situation in African states is worse than in Asia. As the political organization has become an established system within the political system in Kenya, Tanzania, Zambia, Nigeria and Uganda, political parties have found it necessary to cooperate with the structure of the bureaucratic system. As a result, bureaucracy, political parties, and different types of relations are seen in society.
Because of these links, the bureaucracy in African populist theory and the public welfare capitalism system perform their function at a lower level than in the presidential law. Sometimes the bitterness between the political party and the state bureaucracy increases, due to which the presidency increases in importance and the hereditary and individual government is also institutionalised. This is seen in Latin American countries. However, one such exception is Botswana in African countries where the basis of the relationship between politicians and public servants is a policy of neutrality.
- (e) Another feature of bureaucracy in developing countries is excessive corruption at various levels. It has become so dangerous that it undermines even the sustainability, efficiency and effectiveness of public services. Not only are low-level workers paid a small amount of money to work, but high-level bribes are paid on a large scale to serve financial or political interests. Public officials in Africa are legally exempted from conducting private business, adding to the problem.
Role of Bureaucracy in Developing Countries Post-World War II and former colonial states tried to bring about development in their societies on a large scale. The objective of rapid economic development was linked to democratic political development. Development meant nation-building, equality, democracy, stability and autonomy. These countries had achieved a colonial bureaucracy. It was characterized by the centralization of authority, the general administrative neutrality; the nature of such bureaucracy is elitist authoritarian and patriarchal.
No organization with these characteristics can be effective in the process of development. Thus the organization of the logical legal bureaucracy generally propounded by Max Weber and the work of control and income collection created by the colonial masters came to be viewed with suspicion, as this system of influence was not there in the process of development.
Some scholars appealed to these countries to strengthen the centralized efficiency and strong bureaucracy to achieve economic and political development. In the words of Joseph La Palombara, a strong bureaucracy is needed to prevent the competing forces of the family and tribal structure from having the disruptive effect of unnatural political walls. Apart from this, there is also a need for a bureaucratic system to organize and provide financial assistance to political parties to deal with the problem of low population production, which is becoming consumerist instead of paying attention to capital formation.