Answer:
APPROACH AND STRUCTURE
1. Write an introduction on PCA.
2. Write some basics about PCA.
3. Then write about problems with Public interest (PI) and public service motive(PS) of state.
4. Then write how PCA solves this problems.
5. Write merits of PI and PS.
6. Conclude
NOTE: critically analyse command means not necessarily criticism of PCA needs to be written.
INTRODUCTION: Public Choice Approach rejected the idea of public interest and public service and propagated the idea of choice maximisation-individual choice based on market principle. Public Choice Approach is a market‐led approach against a state‐led welfare approach. It is about choice maximization of people which is considered as a basis for development for the realization of aspirations of people, which can be best done by the market rather than the role of the welfare state.
BODY: PCA thinkers rejected the traditional concept of welfare state and postulated individual interests based on methodological individualism. They promoted self-interest rather than public interest. Infact, they consider public interest, social justice and welfare as mystical notions and all these as misleading concepts. Rather state should focus on maximisation of self-interest. They said that an individual is utility maximiser and behaves in self-interest, knows how to gain maximum profit in a given situation.
PCA is the application of consumer behavior theory in the field of public administration. Consumer behavior theory explains the behavior of consumers in the context of a market the consumer behaves purely on basis of self‐interest to maximize his/her choice. Thereby, PCA tries to maximize the choice of people through market mechanisms through:
-
- Methodological individualism
- Privatisation‐ ensures efficiency in service delivery.
- Contracting out‐ ensures expertise.
- Competition‐ ensures best prices for customers
- Institutionalism Pluralism
Why: Because it’s based on New Rights Philosophy which believes more in the roles of market than that of athe state. If freedom is given to the individual, then s/he has the ability to maximise their choices.
Thinker James Buchanan opined that the Traditional PA and welfare state are subjective notions and ignore the principles of 3Es. The failure to achieve a desired goal by the state may be justified in the name of public service.
The local bodies, government hospitals, schools etc. are inefficient but they are doing public service, so they can’t be criticised. Likewise, police in India is generally inefficient but it works 24*7 in harsh conditions with humble objective of maintaining law and order, so it is appreciated.
As long as PA remains on the basis of public interest/public service motive, it would not be able to achieve efficiency because it will not have an objective way to evaluate its performance and achieve efficiency. It doesn’t face survival threat, lacks competitive spirit, so even if it’s inefficient its works are appreciated.
Therefore, PCA thinkers rejected the grounds of welfare state as mystical notions, subjective ideas. Instead, they talk about objective idea i.e. self interest.
Eventually, these ideas of PCA thinkers gave rise to the Strong state vs market debate which led to the emergence of NPM.
Alternative view of PCA:
Individual interests can be recognised but at the same time the idea of public interest and public service of TPA can’t be rejected as these are basis for PA as a separate discipline. The state has been created for the specific purpose. Market has been created for profit motives. We can’t run state like market although we can incorporate some characteristics of the market. The state can reduce its burden by contracting out and privatise the services so that it is able to serve its citizens more efficiently.
CONCLUSION:
The approach of PCA to achieve efficiency and better functioning of state is appreciable but it should only act as means. The ends should always be public interest and public service motive which are cornerstone of a democratic polity.
Spread the Word