Explaining the Myth of Public Sector Reform in South Asia: De-Linking Cause and Effect

Abstract The states of South Asia initiated reform in the public sector for various reasons. At times, the impetus for reform came from within the systems while there have also been pressures from powerful external actors. Reform policies in these states neglected comprehensive analyses of the issues and the problems were exacerbated by the inability of the leadership to resist external pressures to guide reforms in certain directions. The policies were based on unrealistic assumptions about the needs and capability of the systems which only contributed to the perpetuation of status quo. Ambitious reforms plans were partially or minimally implemented. In the process, critical aspects were overlooked while power and privilege of influential public bureaucracies and other groups continued to increase. The overdependence of political leadership on a competent and permanent civil service and, in some cases, the military precluded any possibility of meaningful change through reforms. A second problem is the tendency to view administrative reforms as public sector reform. The administrative machinery and personnel constitute an important element of the public sector, but economic, political and social actors and institutions must also be included to make public sector reforms comprehensive. This article argues that public sector reform remains a myth in South Asia due to the neglect of establishing a clear cause and effect relationship in reform policies and formulating strategies without a clear definition of the public sector. Limited progress, however, has been achieved in some areas, but they do not add up to the scale of public sector reform.