Planlama ve Bürokrasi

Date

1981

Author

Şaylan, Gencay

Metadata

Show full item record

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Item Usage Stats

135
views

180
downloads

Cite This

PLANNING AND BUREAUCRACY There are more than twenty years behind the planning experience in Turkish public life. Undoubtedly, this experience is highly interesting for economists, sociologists and political scientists who could easily raise questions concerning development planning. One of the important questions among others is the relationship between the planning process and the bureaucracy. It seems that the available literature on the subject, planning and bureaucracy, can be considered quite satisfactory quantitywise. However, a close examination of this literature reveals a lack of consistent and overall theoretical framework on the problem of relations between planning and bureaucracy. The majority of the studies done in the Western countries focuses 011 planning experience in socialist countries and attempts to prove that through planning, bureaucracies in the latter have become "new dominant classes". In this paper, the main emphasis will be on the bureaucracy of planning in the Turkish experience, i.e. the structure and some problems of the State Planning Organization (SPO) bureaucracy will be examined and evaluated. Instead of writing a complete history of the bureaucracy of planning, the paper will be devoted to the discussion of three main topics. The first topic is the growth and the politicization of planning bureaucracy. In its short history, it is found that while the First Plan is prepared by a professional staff of 42, this number has risen to 335 by 1980. Although classical planning or administration theory assumes that planning is a nonpolitical, impartial and technical process, the top career positions in the planning bureaucracy have always been politicized. The most recent development in this area is the complete politicization of the whole professional cadres through the recruitment of 183 experts and junior experts at the beginning of 1980. The second topic is the relative autonomy of the planning bureaucracy and the type of internal or external conflict as a function of this autonomye.g. the conflict between the SPO and the Ministry of Finance, or the conflict between planners and private enterprises. The third topic is the discussion and the evaluation of the planning ideology with a powerful element of economic nationalism.

URI

https://hdl.handle.net/11511/109849

Collections

Department of Economics, Article