Public Administration and Development

Publication date:


Since its founding in 1949, Public Administration and Development (PAD) has been reviewing and assessing the practice of public administration at the local, regional, national and international levels where it is directed to managing development processes in low and medium income countries. It gives special attention to investigations of the management of all phases of public policy formulation and implementation which have an interest and importance beyond a particular government and state. PAD has a particular interest in the link between public administration practice and management research and provides a professional and academic forum for reporting on new experiences and experiments. PAD also publishes articles on development management research in the NGO sector. It is widely read by academics and practitioners alike, including consultants, donors and policy advisers. With its case study approach, it is also frequently used for teaching and training purposes.

Latest documents

  • BRICS and international development assistance Towards divergence or convergence in development assistance amongst North and South donors?
  • The governance of China's foreign aid system: Evolution and path dependence

    Summary As China become a major donor in international development, there is an urgent need to improve its capacity to govern its aid policy and management system. This study provides a comprehensive review of China's aid governance system and its evolution along the time, showing its changes and nonchanges. Path dependence effects are used to explain such evolution and are further illustrated by the consistent central role of the Ministry of Commerce in the aid system and by the central–provincial arrangement of development finance. Further, by exploiting limited yet novel evidence of the newly established State International Development Cooperation Agency, we argue that path dependence effects make it difficult to achieve the goal to comprehensively restructure the aid governance system by establishing State International Development Cooperation Agency. The study offers a useful perspective to understand the functioning and future evolution of China's aid governance system.

  • Alternative South–South development collaboration? The role of China in the Coega Special Economic Zone in South Africa

    Summary Aid, in the form of financial aid and investment, has become increasingly prevalent in both bilateral and multilateral partnerships in the BRICS. In Africa, the Forum on China–Africa Cooperation provides the official framings for forms of development assistance to the continent, with financial forms of aid available through the New Development Bank and the China–Africa Development Bank (CADFund). This article explores how Chinese international development assistance has influenced South Africa's economic growth and development strategies and is reshaping South Africa as “gateway” to Africa and continental leader. Special economic zones (SEZs) have become a prioritised form of BRICS development collaboration particularly in terms of Chinese trade and investment expansionism into Africa through South Africa. Chinese international development assistance and foreign direct investment in South Africa in particular are very notable and have been strengthened during the Chinese official state visit prior to the Johannesburg BRICS Summit in 2018. The article critically analyses the development policy discourse on BRICS spearheading an alternative model of South–South international cooperation by examining the Coega SEZ in South Africa, hailed as the most SEZ in Africa. The article critically examines the development alternative potential of the Coega SEZ.

  • Donors in transition and the future of development cooperation: What do the data from Brazil, India, China, and South Africa reveal?

    Summary How are Development Assistance Committee (DAC) donors evolving their financial flows and aid modalities in response to the growing influence and economic power of Southern BRICS? After presenting the shifting landscape of international development cooperation, we explore five hypotheses about the changing nature of DAC aid allocation patterns and modalities in BRICS countries. In our conclusion, we reflect on the evolution of DAC engagement in Brazil, China, India, and South Africa (BASIC countries) and what it might mean for all official donors. Our assessment is that the changing geopolitical environment for development cooperation is once again privileging economic diplomacy concerns within DAC donors, propelling specific kinds of decisions about the choice of instruments, sectors, and modalities in BASIC countries. It would appear that the administrative practice of foreign aid is increasingly derived from changes within the institutional environment for international development.

  • BRICS, the southern model, and the evolving landscape of development assistance: Toward a new taxonomy

    Summary In recent years, there has been an explosion of categories and labels to account for the expansion of forms of cooperation beyond the membership of the Development Assistance Committee. Such hype has led to the construction of the so‐called southern model as the archetype of development cooperation coming from non‐Development Assistance Committee countries that are somehow committed to the principles of the South–South cooperation. The present article challenges the idea of a southern model by providing an analysis of drivers, tools, and modality of development assistance.

  • The new architects: Brazil, China, and innovation in multilateral development lending

    Summary Recent academic works have shed light upon the motives and negotiation dynamics leading to the creation of the New Development Bank (NDB) and Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB). We know less about their day‐to‐day activities and if (and if so why) they are being innovative in the field of multilateral development lending. This article evaluates novelty in the two banks. It uncovers and suggests an explanation to the puzzle of why the NDB appears more innovative (in terms of institutional design, staffing, and lending policy guidelines) than the AIIB by exploring the cases of China and Brazil. The two countries played central roles in the set‐up of each the AIIB and NDB. Drawing on extensive field research, the article proposes that their preferences and capability to engage in institutional innovation depend on interests, status, economic power, and regulatory capacity.

  • Issue Information

    No abstract is available for this article.

  • Brazil's South–South development cooperation: Principles and experiences of the domestic bureaucracy

    Summary How did Brazilian bureaucrats view President Lula's approach to the provision of development assistance in the context of South–South cooperation (SSC)? How did they see their own bureaucracy's role, as a provider of such assistance? This paper addresses these questions within the broad context of Brazil's development assistance program. The analysis begins with an elaboration of the internal legal and political structure supporting the country's provision of development assistance. Then, it addresses the research questions by drawing on original material obtained from 54 interviews, conducted in Brasilia, with diplomats and public servants from 25 federal ministries and institutions directly involved with implementing technical cooperation agreements. Evidence leads to three main observations: (a) the bureaucracies' limited autonomy vis‐à‐vis the Presidency's command of the Brazilian development assistance program; (b) great convergence in the worldviews and principled values upheld by public servants and diplomats in regard to Brazilian foreign policy; and (c) the existence of interbureaucracy complaints and struggles related to the operational side of agreement implementation. These findings are relevant for understanding the inner workings of Brazilian SSC, as well as in comparison to other national bureaucracies' involvement in the conceptualization and implementation of South–South knowledge transfers.

  • An explorer of Public Administration and Development: Dr. Paul D. Collins (in memoriam)
  • What is wrong with job security?

    Summary Most Western studies into motivation suggest that public servants are prosocial. Moreover, scholars suggest that a desire for external rewards, like pay and job security, may crowd out prosocial proclivity. However, recent studies from non‐Western contexts provide mixed results about the actual drivers of public servants' motivation to seek and retain public sector employment and perform their duties. To advance the development of theory regarding motivational dynamics of public servants in developing countries, we examine how pursuing external rewards impacts public service motivation, job satisfaction, and turnover intention among public servants in Kazakhstan (n = 627), a developing former Soviet republic that has been subjected to various waves of personnel reform. Our quantitative and qualitative data show that a desire for job security relates positively to public service motivation and job satisfaction, whereas a desire for monetary rewards correlates negatively with public service motivation and positively with turnover intention. We conclude with the implications for theory and practice.

Featured documents

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT