Dear Friends ,
            You may not  find the " Anti Development Thesis of Public Administration (PA) " in many books .This is a Concept which is very complex if not understood well . It needs few backgroud knowledge to understand this .So here I am going to write every thing bit by bit concepts with background details , so that u can get it eas...ily .Be patience and read the entire document carefully. It will take not more that 15 mins but this 15 mins must help u through out the journey of Public Administration .
____________________________________________________

         " Anti Developement Thesis " comes under the Chapter " Growth and Developement  of Public Administration " and may be a part of " Evolution of Public Administration " , which is a part of PAPER I of the syllabus .

 INTRODUCTION :

•   The term Public Administration stands for two Implications -

1. As a practice ( administering the office of Government )
2. As a Discipline ( as a field of study like other subjects )

• As a practice it is as old as our Civilisation , but as a discipline it is not very old one .
• The systematic study of PA began in 18th century . But the official academic status to the discipline didn't come until World war 1 . It was against the back ground of the Government reform moment in USA that the emerging discipline of PA was born in USA
• PA as a separate subject of study originated and developed in USA .

PHASES OF DEVELOPMENT :
      PA has passed through several phases of development :

1. First Stage : Politic / Administration Dichotomy ( 1887 - 1926 )
2. Second Stage : Principle of Administration ( 1927 - 1938 )
3. Third Stage  : Era of Challenge ( 1938 - 1948 )                            
4. Fourth Stage : Crisis of Identity / Anti Development ( 1948 - 1970 )
5. Fifth Stage : Public Policy Perspective ( 1971 - 1991 )
6. Sixth Stage : Rowing to Steering ( 1991 - continuing )

           All the sequences of events that had occoured during the period of " Fourth Stage : Crisis of Identity " comes under " Anti Development Thesis " , because these were the period when the discipline of PA had ever faced the Greatest set back in its History of Development .

To understand the Events we have to under stand the importance of its previous Stages .
Let's discause it one by one .

First Stage : Politic / Administration Dichotomy ( 1887 - 1926 )

•         During this period the subject (PA) began to gain increasing recognition in USA and its study was steadily spreading . 
• Here in this period we can't forget the Contribution of Woodrow Wilson ( Father / Founder of the Discipline of PA )
• Woodrow Wilson is the originator of Politics Administration dichotomy .
• He made the distinction between PA and Polity , which is regarded as the mother of PA .
• Again comes the contribution of Leonard D. White , who wrote the first ever text book of PA (" Introduction to study of PA ")

Second Stage : Principle of Administration ( 1927 - 1938 )

• This years creates new trust on the Discipline and presented PA as science of Management .
• Few author implied that PA is a science .
• POSDCORB (P- Planning , O-Organising , S-Staffing , D-Directing , Co-Coordinating,R-Reporting,B-Budgeting)
• These were the Golden years of Principles in the History of PA .

  Third Stage  : Era of Challenge ( 1938 - 1948 )    

• .The discipline was challenged by few Famouse Scolars .
• As a result of their criticisms , the morale of PA became Low .
• According to Nobel Laurel Simon " The ' Principle ' are in true no better than " Proverbs ". He write this in his book " Proverb of Administration " , which gained wide acceptance.
• Robert Dahl challenged the claim that PA as a Science .

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 : Anti Development Thesis :
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Fourth Stage : Crisis of Identity / Anti Development ( 1948 - 1970 )

• These were the Periods of Crisis for the PA . The future of the PA appeared Little Uncertain .
• Proffesionals of PA try to return to the fold of mother science , namely , Political Science .
• But thy were not very much welcomed here . In Short this period witnessed the spectacle of Political science , not only not letting PA separate itself from it , but also not fostering and encouraging its growth and developement with in its own field .
• The process of de-emphasis of PA in the larger discipline of Political Science got accelerated in the 1960s.
• So PA , naturally , was in search of an alternative and the alternative was avalable in the form of administrative science
• Here ,too, PA had to lose its distinctive and separate identity and merge with larger field 

                      So in brief , Development  administration began in 1950′s and till 1960′s was the heyday of Development Administratin .however late 1970′s onward shadow of doubt for Dev admn as was prescribed emerged.The western countries started the path of Development  assuming and claiming that there was UNDER DEVELOPMENT in these countries and they were to be led on the path of  dev admn in order to b MODERNISED which was similar to WESTERNISE.

                         This approach led to growth of development admn.,administrative development and administered development.

                         Late 1970′s a group of scholar said it was actually COUNTER DEVELOPMENT..and the goals of dev admn should be achieved through people’s participation and not western imitation.they gave ALTERNATE DEVELOPMENT model.
in 1980′s world bank further questioned the state led development and need was felt for market supremacy.

                   This thought became more vocal in 1990′s and it gave rise to the phase of DEADMINISTERED DEVELOPMENT.it was the phase of PARTICIPATORY DEVELOPMENT,PEOPLE CENTRIC DEVELOPMENT,AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT.

               THUS DEV ADMN CHANGED ITS PROFILE FROM 1950′S TO 1990′s.

                    There  has been a group of scholars from 1980′s onward who has been called ANTI DEVELOPMENT(which is more evoled thought of counter dev ).they outrightly reject the western model of dev admn.They are ANTI that model of dev admn given by the west.they are not anti-dev per se.they dont object change but that sh not be based on western model.it should be indigenous based on each individual and his thought.it is a bottom up approach to development in which imitating the west is outrightly rejected.