THEORETICAL COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION MODELS

Abstract

The field of public administration has experienced significant evolution, mirroring changes in political ideologies, societal expectations, and the complexity of contemporary governance. This study undertakes a theoretical and comparative analysis of five major models of public administration: Classical Public Administration, New Public Administration (NPA), New Public Management (NPM), Postmodern Public Administration, and New Public Governance (NPG). Each framework is analyzed in terms of its historical emergence, philosophical foundations, guiding principles, and administrative implications. The analysis draws on both foundational theorists and contemporary scholarly discourse to critically evaluate the strengths and limitations inherent in each model. Through a structured comparative approach, the article explores how these paradigms conceptualize the roles of the state, public officials, and citizens, as well as their differing approaches to accountability, efficiency, participation, and responsiveness. A comparative table is provided to systematically synthesize and contrast key theoretical and operational dimensions of the models. Additionally, the discussion section contextualizes each framework within the evolving landscape of 21st-century governance, including issues such as digital transformation, participatory policy-making, and multi-level governance challenges. By offering a nuanced theoretical examination and synthesizing key distinctions, this study contributes to a deeper understanding of the intellectual trajectory and practical implications of public administration models. It aims to support scholars, policymakers, and practitioners in identifying the most contextually relevant administrative strategies in an era characterized by complexity, interdependence, and institutional change.