The developed nations of the world are a reflection and testimony to the need for bureaucratic input alongside its efficiency. Those countries that have managed to keep the bureaucracy insulated from political influences and exigencies are the ones that have achieved progress the most. Institutional independence is a critical factor to the economic growth and development of any country.
The demarcations and all lines of delineation between the various pillars of the government and governance need to be as solid as the wall of China. Any attempt to smudge these invisible boundaries can seriously impair performance and accountability.
Even in ancient civilisations of China and Mesopotamia, a kind of bureaucracy existed, which was entrusted to manage people (in today’s parlance Human Capital), which ultimately led to the creation and development of administrative structures.
The term bureaucracy is believed to have been coined in France in the 18th century; it combines the French word “bureau” (desk/ office) with the Greek word “Kratos” (rule) to signify rule by an office — an administrative unit.
Without delving deeply into the philosophy relating to the development of bureaucracy, it would suffice to say, that, it is a concept in sociology and political science, which refers to the way and manner in which the administrative implementation of legal rules/regulations is socially organised.
Policymaking is the job of the bureaucracy. Politicians, who raise slogans relating to economic growth, have to allow the parliament to legislate upon the economic manifesto; once this is done, it has to be left to the experts in the bureaucracy to reduce it into several policy documents. While doing this assignment, the bureaucracy looks at the legislation with a microscope to ensure it has no weaknesses of overlooking precedent rules and regulations; and also, it has to expunge the issues that are repugnant to either the Constitution or prevalent laws.
It is unwise to expect parliamentarians, who come from diverse backgrounds and for “different” reasons, to have the capacity to make a deep dive into technicalities of every subject. It is anybody’s guess how many parliamentarians would actually know the impact of, say, the interest rates upon the exchange rate or how does a country’s ranking affects the country’s international trade and the cost of doing business? These details are to be looked at by the bureaucracy— it cannot escape their oversight.
The bureaucratic set-ups in developed countries that see no or little political interference work in an integrated manner. All ministries and departments move in unison in one direction and not in the opposite or, in worse governance situations, against each other.
Something we see happen quite often in our peculiar situation. Developing nations face daunting challenges relating to corruption, politicisation and parochial considerations in the development of proper administrative structures. Our system is also afflicted with similar challenges.
Bureaucratic capacity has proven to be a singular reason for economic growth miracles. South Korea is a case in point. It was the bureaucracy that framed policies to promote exports; the country exports to as many as 87 countries of the world today.
South Korean economic managers subscribed to the notion that rotation of bureaucrats on a three-year scale increased the bureaucratic ability to increase exports by a good 37 percent. There is empirical evidence from South Korea, Japan, Singapore, and Malaysia that organised an efficient bureaucracy, which has contributed directly in enhancing exports.
The South Korean bureaucracy emulated the Japanese economic model, where the bureaucracy played a pivotal role in its economic development. The bureaucracy in both these Northeast Asian nations ensured a climb, which was steady and rapid, into the comity of OECD countries. Bureaucracy provided for a competent and stable framework and environment, which in turn was the first necessary step towards developing and implementing the industrial policy, which led to a better coordination of investments, giving the economy a serious bent towards exports-led growth.
Subsequently, from the mid-1990s into the decades of 2000 the Southeast Asian countries followed suit to become and be classified as Newly Industrialised Countries (NICs) —- Malaysia Singapore and Thailand, collectively known as “Asian Tigers”. During the same period, China and Taiwan traversed the same path, where the bureaucracy played an enhanced role in the promotion of economic growth.
Bureaucracy is not about appearing busy while doing nothing. Its job is not to create a Mt. Everest of paper work that has no or little value of any significance. Alexander Ostrovsky had rightly remarked: “Civil Services is like a fortress made of papers, forms and red tape”. The trouble with many developing countries is that there are too many politicians who believe, with a conviction based on experience, that one can fool all the people, all of the time (thought borrowed from Franklin Adams). Arising from this attitude is the intent to manipulate the bureaucracy too.
In fact, “Nowadays, for the sake of the advantages which are to be gained from the public revenues and from office, men want to be always in office” (Aristotle). Regrettably, our bureaucracy has come to represent this thought expressed centuries ago. The revenue collectors aren’t seen any better than an authorised pickpocket. We have far too long a time fudged our numbers to hoodwink our own-selves; that we get caught speaks of the inability to do even a statistical jugglery. “No economic growth happens with imaginary numbers — mythical beans as investment do not yield real beans” (Will Rogers).
Performance of the bureaucracy is based upon resolve — what one resolves, achieves for surefull performance. Bureaucracy has to be designed to perform public business. However, in the developing countries once this is done, the so established bureaucracy develops an autonomous spiritual life and soon comes to regard the public as its adversary. Large bureaucracies are a burden, both in terms of cost and of their innate ability to stick their nose into everything. Large organisations are invariably a prelude to disorganisation.
Looking at our bureaucracy’s role in the last 50 years or so, one is reminded of, “The perfect bureaucrat everywhere is the man who manages to make no decisions and escape all responsibility” (Brooks Atkinson).
Alongside the bureaucracy, the role of the Planning Commission is also most important due to its direct relevance. Planning Commission which normally resides outside the periphery of bureaucracy needs to be given equal importance, for it is meant to be an expert agency that comes up with long term economic programme and acts as an important adviser to the PM/ government.
Bureaucracy and the Planning Commission must address issues of self-reliance for sustainability of plans that usher a meaning and a reasonable measure of growth without excessive dependence upon external resources that are usually on offer at commercial rates. This of course results in a refined form of economic imperialism, that is then thrust upon the hapless borrowers by the multilateral financial institutions (World Bank and others lenders) they make demands to suit their “self-interest” (vested is a better description).
Borrowed garments never fit well, it is best to buy than borrow. Economic plans made by politicians draw strength from ability to borrow, the bureaucracy on the contrary has to act independently to curb this tendency, and its job must remain to promote internal generation of resources, for no sorrow is ever able to pay/settle debts. We are an amazing nation; a nation that shows no remorse in borrowing, in-fact, once it is given the whole country “celebrates” borrowing from countries and multinational institutions.
Pakistan’s bureaucracy is where your wits are tested. Instead of purging political influence, it promotes and gives space to others. Through these columns I have on many occasions appealed for unlocking the civil service reforms authored by Dr Ishrat Husain that have so far been elusive. One wonders why this document has been warehoused. We need to get it out from the cold storage for serious implementation: a strong case for reorganisation of our economic perspective. Indeed, it must begin with an involved, independent and forward-looking bureaucracy.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
The writer is Senior Banker & Freelance Contributor