ABSTRACT

CONTENTS 30.1 Th e Institutional Strategies ................................................................................. 496 30.2 Th e Indian Social Structure ................................................................................ 499 30.2.1 Th e Demographic Characteristics .......................................................... 499 30.2.1.1 Th e Caste System ..................................................................510 30.2.1.2 Impact of Religion .................................................................512 30.2.1.3 Bureaucratic Dysfunctionalism .............................................512 30.2.1.4 Secularism, Casteism, and Religious Values ..........................513 30.2.1.5 Authoritarian Character of Indian Bureaucracy:

Th e Cultural Context ............................................................514 30.2.1.6 Th e Linguistic Multiplicity .................................................... 515 30.2.1.7 Th e Social Classes: Urban/Rural Dichotomy ......................... 515 30.2.1.8 Social Justice and Poverty-Alleviation ...................................516 30.3 Policy of Industrial Development and Public Sector ............................................518 30.3.1 Social Structure and Small-Scale Industries ............................................519 30.4 Toward Good Governance: Impact of Globalization and New Public

Administration Movement ...................................................................................520 30.4.1 Introducing NPM in the Governance of India .......................................521 30.5 Concluding Refl ections ........................................................................................524 Notes ............................................................................................................................. 526

Th e interrelationship between the state and society has been an important theme in the evolution of political thought in the past half century. Th at the state is deeply embedded in society, and that societal variables do aff ect the autonomy and performance of the state, is now an accepted fact. Whether it is the system theorist, or the dependency theorists, or the ecologist interpreters of public administration, all seem to agree that in any society, interactions between the state, its sociopolitical structures, and its administrative framework ultimately determine its policy outcome. Such interactions not only help pattern societal preferences but also pave the way to political and administrative developments in the context of divisiveness within and between classes, ethnic and religious segments, interest groups, or linguistic diff erences. Th e literature on comparative public administration is replaced with the emphasis on interaction and interrelationship between an administrative system and its external environment and the impact of sociocultural values on bureaucratic behavior, the processes of political and administrative changes and vice versa.1 While scholars have concentrated more on the study of the state’s capacity to bring about socioeconomic change through the evolution of a pattern of political and administrative institutions, little attention has been paid to understanding the impact that the sociopolitical structures in any society make on their political or administrative development.