A Preliminary Report of PA in the Philippines


Published on


Published in: Education, Technology, Business
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • intellectual hubris- Overbearing pride or presumption; arrogance
  • Defined narrowly, epistemology is the study of knowledge and justified belief
  • Complacency - contentment
  • Atheoretical - Unrelated to or lacking a theoretical basis; ahistorical not related to history;
  • involving the theory of a subject or area of study
  • Condemnation of PA
  • Auspicious – promising; ominous ambivalence – threatening coexistence of opposing attitudes or feelings
  • A Preliminary Report of PA in the Philippines

    1. 1. Life begins at 40An Inquiry on Administrative Theoryin the Philippines and the Structure of Scientific Revelations Author: Danilo R. Reyes NCPAG, UP, Diliman, Quezon CityPresented by: Edwin Badu Rawlings Gbargaye, MPA, MDM LNU MPA Class as Guest Lecturer
    2. 2. Introduction• Public Administration as an academic enterprise in the Philippines suffers from the problem of a precarious and unwiedly intellectual tradition. It is a predicament that can be best described as visceral, emerging and gnawing at the bowels of the discipline after forty years of academic bliss and intellectual hubris.
    3. 3. • One generally viewed by contemporary scholars as academic questions that can be set aside in favor of pressing issues that figure prominently in the horizons of the profession. But these questions, however, strike at the heart of the discipline, they reflect a poverty of epistemology spawned by four decades of conceptual neglect, incubating as it did, because of our over-preoccupation with what passes as more important an visible dilemma of the administrative praxis.
    4. 4. • Public Administration in the Philippines today can only appreciate vicariously the efforts invested by scholars of the field in other countries in defining and examining the intellectual heritage of their discipline.• Sad to say, public administration as a field of study in this country exhibits richness in experience but is blunted by its complacency to assess how far it has gone to advance the frontiers of the discipline.
    5. 5. • Public Administration in the Philippines undoubtedly has largely been atheoretical, ahistorical, and inattentive to the development of its own intellectual and ontological well-being. It has not sufficiently articulated its theoretical legacies, its conceptual foundations, or its basic normative values mainly remains indifferent to introspective questions which may be subversive to its current fundamental commitments.
    6. 6. • PA in the Philippines as a discipline has experienced rapid and remarkable strides in curricular development, training, applied research and continuing involvement in professional affairs. But however, it has not enrich its theoretical foundations in addressing such question like “Is there a Philippine Public Administration?”.
    7. 7. Four decades of PA in the Philippines have found administrative theory in that neverland. Four decades have not provided a cogent and administrative theory or to serve as an intellectual reference point to the scientific and moral authority to legitimize the field‟s competence to provide solutions to the many problems.
    8. 8. • After forty years of seemingly „self aware‟ PA in the Philippines …because according to Reyes it has not been generally self-conscious or insecure with regard to its standing in the Filipino academic community as compared to that of the American counterpart with whom the field gained acceptance in the seventies.
    9. 9. The Purpose and Structure of the Article• Reyes advised that the paper should not be view as an indictment of PA or the efforts of the Scholars today or in the past. He says it is „a call to arms‟, plea to retool the armory of concepts and philosophies to evolve a distinct administrative theory suitable to Philippine setting.
    10. 10. • This work is a preliminary initiative towards inquiring into the development of administrative thought in the Philippines, it took into account the growth of the discipline in terms of its contributions of scholars in the field since 1952 when the institute now CPA (that time) was established at the University of the Philippines.
    11. 11. Development of PA in the Philippines – Four PhasesCataloguing the Intellectual Past• These phases are separable and overlapping periods.• Segmented on the basis of peculiarities of the literature that characterized the period and event.
    12. 12. Two basics Orientations of the Four PhasesInward looking perspective:dominated the early periods ofPA, moving to the sixties.Outward-looking theme: evolvedafterwards, especially in the aftermathof the martial law era-preoccupiedwith development administration.
    13. 13. Conceptual Framework of Analysis• A discussion to kick off Philippine PA from neverland at forty years of existence.• It is the reassessment of the discipline: where we have been, where it is and where it is going.• He describes it as „self-aware‟ in giving meaning to developing an indigenous theory of Philippine Public Administration.
    14. 14. Four Phases• Beginnings, 1952-1956• Foundations and Growth, 1957-1972• The Transition Years: 1973-1981• The Activist Public Administration: Reform and Reflection, 1982-Present
    15. 15. The Inward and the Outward- looking Orientations• An inward-looking focus on the phenomena administrative institutions, their dynamics, processes, resources, structu ring, the operations, that pervade within them and the efficiency of these institutions, values of efficiency, effectiveness and economy of public organizations.• Focuses on institutional concern
    16. 16. • The outward-looking focus refers to PA interaction with its public, or its environment. It goes beyond the study of public organizations or institutions.• It extends to examine their impacts on their clientele, the general public, and their linkages and interaction with the environment.
    17. 17. The Study of PA in Perspective• According to Donald Kettl (1990) Every discipline periodically undergoes a period of sometimes wrenching reassessment. For PA this has been nearly constant, as the discipline itself continuously struggled for acceptance.
    18. 18. A Self-Aware PublicAdministration in the Philippines?• Reyes reminds us that the peculiarities with which PA as a field of study was introduced in the veins of Filipino scholarship may account in part for its atheoretical and ahistorical stance towards epistemological questions.• He says it was not under a hostile manner unlike that of the US PA which was influenced by the challenges of the civil service reform in the 1880s.
    19. 19. PA in the Philippines: A Review• Philippine Public Administration Primeval• PA emerged in the Phil in the postcolonial period marked by auspicious and ominous ambivalence.• Emerging from the ruins of WWII.• Phil gained independence in 1946 was ushered into a volatile period of reconstruction.
    20. 20. • PA as a discipline appeared in this era with uncertainty and conflict as the Philippines found itself into turmoil with political, social and economic problems.• The move towards professionalizing the conduct of Public affairs started in 1947 when a joint US-Phil Commission was set up in Washington to study and help improve the financial position of the Phil.
    21. 21. • In Nov. 1950 a Memo of agreement was concluded between Pres. Quirino and Foster. The agreement was known as the Quirino-foster agreement which provided for the creation of the Phil council for US Aid (PHILCUSA).• Among the components of the assistance program was the establishment of an Institute of Public Administration at the University of the Philippines.
    22. 22. The Institute of Public Administration University of the Philippines• The institute of PA was set up under a private contract between the UP and the University of Michigan with technical and professional aspects of the organization.• A two and a half years beginning June 15, 1952 and was later extended to June 15, 1956.
    23. 23. Three Areas of Concern For the IPAThe establishment of a public administration library.An educational program which was two-pronged, in-service training initiative, the academic program which began second semester of 1952-53.The conduct of research and publication of literature on PA.
    24. 24. Philippine Public Administration: Beginnings, 1952-1956This first phase started at the time when PA Was formally introduced at the IPA in UP. It saw the coming of American PA scholars to the IPA as early as 1952.James K. Pollock and John W. LederleSurvey mission: Prof Lederle was appointed Director of the Institute
    25. 25. • The American Scholars had to relied on stock of books on history of the Philippines in order to understand Philippine History.• They had to observe and experience public processes by way of extension of services in the observation of bureaucratic phenomena.
    26. 26. This stage was the in-ward looking orientation of the program.They had to look at collection that the emphasis was very much centered on the internal and procedural management of public organizations.1955, the IPA published one of the first comprehensive text book on PA.
    27. 27. 1956, the year the UP contract with the University of Michigan was terminated. HB Jacobini edited a collection of essays devoted to a critical examination of various governmental services in the Philippines.
    28. 28. The preface to the volume was directed to govt. personnel services, students of PA, political science and related disciplines, a careful, accurate, and comprehensive survey of the services which the government performs.
    29. 29. Foundations and Growth 1957-1972During this period Filipino scholars began to take over from their American counterpartsCarlos P. Ramos was appointed as director of the Institute succeeding Jose Velmonte who served as Acting Director after Ferrel Heady.
    30. 30. • Ramos later served as Dean when the Institute was renamed as the Graduate School of Public Administration (GSPA) in 1963, as the School of Public Administration (SPA) in 1966 and later as the College of Public Administration (CPA) in 1967.• He served as Dean until 1973.
    31. 31. In 1972 the IPA, now CPA marked its twentieth year.It was also in this year martial law was declared in the PhilippinesAgain it was in 1957 the first publication of the PJPA was published under the editorship of Jose V. Abueva
    32. 32. PJPA has since become a major forum for the publication of articles, papers and research reports in the discipline.Lastly, it was during this era that the Institute, now renamed as the UPCPA expanded from a single unit to shelter three specialized sub-units under its umbrella.
    33. 33. These units are the Philippine Executive Academy, estd. in 1962 for executive developmentThe Local Government Center set up as a research program in 1963Administrative Development Center, organized in 1968 later known as the Center for Policy and Administrative Development (CPAD)
    34. 34. This period had a profound effect on Filipino scholarship, this time Filipino PA scholars assumed responsibility of determining the course of the IPA as an organization, and the discipline itself.In 1956 the institute revised the entire masters program in PA.
    35. 35. This period saw intense applied research and studies done.This era saw research efforts began to multiply into the areas of ; Concern for local government admin Concern for public accountability Concern for comparative administration(study for admin systems
    36. 36. Leading Filipino PA Scholars• Raul de Guzman: Public Accountability• Gerardo Roxas: analyzed pork barrels• Ledivina Vidallon: Systems Theory in Research; Pork barrel cases• Benjamin Cariño; „Pork barrel‟ at the crossroads.
    37. 37. 1972: Year of NeglectDe Guzman raised the disenchantment in 1972of the field in a paper he wrote entitled: “Achieving Realism in PA Academic Programs.He decried the lack of teaching materials on basic concepts in the field.The year martial law was imposed.
    38. 38. The Transition Years: Social Consciousness an The Search for the Development Model, 1973-1981• During this period PA took the initiative to move out of its institution or organization orientation.• This period saw the concept of development administration crippling into the Philippine administration.
    39. 39. In 1973 Raul de Guzman assume the deanship of the UPCPA succeeding Dean Ramos.The turn of the seventies found Phil society in disarray as discontent became increasingly endemic.September 1972, Pres Marcos declared martial law.
    40. 40. • Philippine society was plunged into uncertainty as to which direction it was heading.• Pres Marcos promised a „new society‟• Pres Marcos legislated by decrees under an arrangement he called „constitutional authoritarianism‟•
    41. 41. • The martial law rule found PA in a web• It affected the bureaucracy of which PA was mostly concern• This period PA scholars began to write about „negative bureaucratic‟ behavior in government.• Corruption and nepotism were institutionalized at a large scale.
    42. 42. • This period saw „Filipinization‟ of contemporary PA approaches to pervasive issues and problems.• Martial law regime saw various commentaries that both justified and criticized it.• PA scholars like Reyes(1979) began to question the „identity‟ of PA
    43. 43. The Activist Public Administration: Reform and Reflection,1982 to the Present• Researches on graft and corruption, bureaucratic inefficiency, rural development, local government administration and specialized studies on various social concerns have continued to appear to the present.
    44. 44. • PA is no more confined to bureaucratic institutions as in the past.• The activist nature of PA in this period is manifested not only by its growing concern for political institutions, but on a propensity towards examining other interests in the discipline.• Scholars and students have been finding answer to question raised by de Guzman and Corpuz „Is there a Philippine PA?
    45. 45. IPA-NCPAG Deans 1952-Present John W. Lederle : 1952-1953 Ferrel W. Heady : 1953 Jose E. Velmonte: 1954 Carlos P. Ramos: 1955-1963 Paul P.de Guzman: 1973-1982Gabriel U. Iglessias: 1986-1989Romeo B. Ocampo: 1989-1992Proserpina D. Tapales: 1992-1995
    46. 46. Jose N. Endriga : 1995-1998Ledivina V. Carino : 1982-1984;1998- 2001Ma. Concepcion P. Alfiler: 2001-2004Alex B. Brillantes, jr. : 2004-2010Edna E. A. Co : Present
    47. 47. Conclusion• Prof Reyes says that the paper is a preliminary report of a larger study on PA in the Philippines.• He says the shortcoming of this paper is it did not provide the entire range of output during the forty years span of PA entry into the Philippines because books, articles and monographs that served as part of the foundations of PA were excluded from the writing of this article.
    48. 48. • He acknowledged that with this in mind he did not do justice to the works of other scholars who contributed to the field in the country.• He offered a Filipino proverb “ang hindi marunong lumingon sa pinanggalingan, hindi makarating sa patutunguhan.”•
    49. 49. Thanks for Listening