by: Pankaj BOra and Maniki Madhuri Sarma
Introduction:
We believe, do you? We believe that environment constitutes a very important part of our life but human development actions in last few decades have challenged it. We also deem that there is an importance of Sustainable Development (SD) to protect the environment. Environmental problems and concern are not new. Humans have had a major impact on their environment. They have been exploiting the environment for long. But recent trends of development have severely affected the environment which leads to its degradation. Philosophers like Aristotle, Montesquieu, and Marx have made serious statements on environment. About them S.S. Awasthy and N.D Arora in “Political Theory” said “political philosophers from Aristotle to Montesquieu and to Marx made serious attempts to relate environment to political structure or vice-versa. Environment facilitates life – Aristotle showed it in his description of ‘polity’ as the best practicable state. Environment makes and unmakes our political systems, so emphasized Montesquieu. Marx, more than anybody else, demonstrated very ably that our material development and freedom depend on our environment."1 The recent development activities of human being have underestimated the importance of environment and this has not only challenged the present environment but also has posted severe question to the environmental security of the future. This environmental insecurity has drawn the importance of a new model of development which the world accepts as Sustainable Development. So Sustainable Development is an important area of concern in human life. We accept it; we believe that Sustainable Development is required for securing the future of humanity, and for that nation, including India has been stepping forward. But these steps are not enough. We believe that for a better and secured environment some more steps should be taken under the framework of Sustainable Development. Do you also believe?
Concept of Sustainable Development:
Development refers to the yearning for a better life. This development should be environment friendly. It is why Sustainable Development is the need of the time. But what is sustainable development?
Worlds Commission on Human Environment defines Sustainable Development as development that “meets the needs of present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”2 Again another definition is “Sustainable development (SD) is the process which effectively balances the needs of development with concern for the health of the environment.”3 Sustainable Development is socio-economic development that meets the needs of the present without negotiating the ability of future generation to meet their own needs. It is an ideology which maintains an appropriate balance between economic development, social development and environmental protection. Sustainable Development is characterized by economic growth that does not exhaust the resources.
The ideology of Sustainable Development refers to the process of development in a sustainable way. Sustainable Development in the words of Baylis and Smith is “economic and social development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs; programmes which maintain an appropriate balance between economic development, social development, and environmental protection. In practice, this is a contested concept, in that groups with differing political, economic, social, and environmental perspectives disagree about its exact meaning.”4
Sustainable Development is typified by economic and social growth with sustainability. This development does not exhaust the resources of the country. Sustainable development, to Abraham “is characterized by economic and social growth that does not exhaust the resources of a host country; that respects and safeguards the economic, cultural, and natural environment; that involves grass roots participation and builds indigenous institutions; and that is nurtured by eco-friendly policies and programmes.”5 Investment in human capital like in education, food, health, and total well being of the population can bring Sustainable Development.
So to sum up, Sustainable Development is a development pattern where resources are used in such a way that it meet the human needs by preserving the environment so that these needs can be met not only in the present, but also for generations to come.
Emergence of the concept:
Though there were few discussions about the importance of environment in the era of Aristotle and Montesquieu but as the development activities of those days were not identical to these days, environment had not degraded as it is today and hence importance of Sustainable Development was not realized. It is only after the two world wars, people has started realizing the environmental degradation and started working towards it protection both nationally and internationally. The concept and importance of Sustainable Development was even realized much later in 1980s. “The credit of inventing the term ‘sustainable development goes to Eva Balfour and Wes Jackson. The term first came into prominence in the World Conservation Strategy (WSD) (1990), and had become a catchphrase of the 1990s.”6
The concept of Sustainable Development has received most attention since the UN conference on Environment and Development held in Rio De Janerio in 1992. This marked the first international attempt to draw up action plans and strategies for moving towards a more sustainable pattern of development. Before that in 1987 the term Sustainable Development was popularized by UN Commission on Environment and Development through the Brundtland Report. This report used Sustainable Development to mean use of renewable resources to promote economic growth, to mean protection of animal species and biodiversity and for commitment to maintaining clean air, water and land. But it was after Rio Summit; its importance is realized and recognized by the globe. Socialist Abraham believes that 1992 Rio conference and 2002 Johannesburg World Summit encouraged governments towards Sustainable Development. To quote him “The United Nations sponsored two worldwide summits-the Rio Conference on Environment and Development in 1992 and the Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development in 2002- which encouraged governments to partner with NGOs and private industry to make a bold commitment to applying Sustainable Development principles in every area where humans impact on environment.”7
Again Sustainable Development is also one of the Millennium Development Goals which aim to reduce any form of poverty in coming decades. The MDGs includes the integration of the principles of Sustainable Development into country policies and programmes. MDGs also aims at control of biodiversity loss, water resource management etc.
In India also Sustainable Development has gained its importance simultaneously. India has cooperated in the world summits on Sustainable Development. In February 2001, Tata energy Research institute organized a Sustainable Development summit in New Delhi, which was attended by several environmentalists from all parts of the world. The Bhopal Gas Tragedy, where leak of poisonous gas from a chemical plant claimed life of many people, becomes an important accident towards rise of the concept of Sustainable Development in India.
India and policies of Sustainable Development:
The idea of 'Sustainable Development’s is not fresh to India. Through the lectures of Buddha, Ashoka and Gandhi, the concept of sacrifice for others became the integral part of the oriental philosophy. Gandhi said that earth can meet our need not greed. But the concept as ideology developed and adopted much latter. India, to meet the goal of development adopted the policy of environment friendly development model which reflects the ideology of Sustainable Development. “The constitution of India does not explicitly conceptualize the inter-relationship between environment and development. However a perusal of the ‘Directive Policies of state Policies’ and ‘Fundamental Duties’ incorporated in it reveals that it (the Constitution) has only outlined possible directions of development but also ensured protection and improvement of environment.”8 The Constitution of India, through Articles 48A and 51A (g), lays down a foundation for Sustainable Development by outlining the blueprint of social and economic development by providing protection to the environment. Earlier Government of India did not feel the need for a separate specific strategy for Sustainable Development as Five Year Plans provides medium-term strategies for overall development which has tried to acquire environment friendly development. However, in 2002 India presented its perspective on Sustainable Development before the World Summit for Sustainable Development (WSSD) and after that, India initiated a process of preparing and implementing a national strategy for Sustainable Development by 2005.
After this now India in it Sustainable Development policies encompasses a variety of development schemes in social clean-tech (clean energy, clean water and sustainable agriculture) and human resources segments, having caught the attention of both Central and State governments and also public and private sectors. The forty second amendment to Indian constitution of 1976 also introduced principles for environment protection. In constitutional framework Article 21 ensures right to Life and Liberty which has relation with Sustainable Development. Here right to Life and Liberty stands for a person who has a right to a decent life with good environment, which could be achieved through Sustainable Development. Article 48A is also related to environment and Sustainable Development which stands for Protection and improvement of environment and safeguarding of forest and wild life. Under Article 51A (G), people are, as their fundamental duty, responsible for protection of the environment. Article 253 is on Legislation for giving effect to international agreement. Under this Article India has accepted the Stockholm conference.
Apart from constitutional framework, there are some other arrangements also, which draws path towards Sustainable Development. For example we can say about the role of judiciary. The Supreme Court of India has pronounced few judgements and orders and issued various directions with the objective of securing the protection, prevention and conservation of the environment. In India Public Interest Litigation and writ petitions are also use to brought Sustainable Development issues before the court. Environment-Impact Assessment (EIA) is also an instrument which is available to scrutinize policies of development in India.
Apart from these above, there are some laws and acts which stand towards Sustainable Development. These may include the followings:
1.The National Environment Tribunal Act, 1995: The National Environment Tribunal Act, 1995 enforced the principle of no-fault liability which has extended the compensation limits prescribed under the Public Insurance Liability Act 1991. The Act deals with, inter alia, compensation related to accidents concerning toxic substances.
2.The National Environment Appellate Authority Act, 1997: This act enabled the Union Government to establish the National Environment Appellate Authority. The Authority is empowered to hear appeals against orders granting environmental clearance in designated areas where industrial activity is restricted under the Environment Act. The Tribunal has an exclusive jurisdiction over the claims of compensation in these circumstances.
3.Criminal Procedure Code, 1973: Part B of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 –provides provision for public nuisance relating to environmental pollution.
4.The Wild Life (Protection Act), 1972: After the UN General Assembly Conference on Human Environment in June 1972, this act came into existence. This Act was amended in 1991 and in 1996 and the Rules came into being in 1995. Under this Act, every State has to constitute a Wild Life Advisory Board.
5.The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974: the act aims to provide for the prevention and control of water pollution and maintaining or restoring of wholesomeness of water establishing Boards for the Prevention and Control of Water Pollution for carrying out these purposes and conferring on and assigning powers to such Boards. The Water Act was amended in 1977, 2003 and additionally the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Rules, 1978 and the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Rules, 1975 were enforced
6.The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981: this act came into existence with the objectives to provide for the prevention and control of air pollution and maintaining or restoring of wholesomeness of air establishing Boards for the Prevention and Control of Air Pollution for carrying out these purposes and conferring on and assigning powers to such Boards. The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Rules and the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) (Union Territories) Rules came into existence in and 1982 and 1983 respectively.
7.The umbrella legislation for environment protection(Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 ): This act has the following objectives:
1. Protection of the environment,
2. Improvement of environment,
3. Prevention of hazards to: a) human beings, b) other living creatures,
c) Plants and d) property.
From the above discussion we can see that India has tried to adopt few Sustainable Development policies to make the environment better and trying to secure it for the next generation. India to meet Sustainable Development has given emphasis on energy conservation, Promotion of renewable energy sources, Abatement of air pollution, Afforestation and wasteland development, Economic reforms, subsidy removal and joint ventures in capital goods, Fuel substitution policies etc. It has enacted Acts, adopted policies, made constitutional provisions, amended the Constitution and also supported transnational outcomes to Sustainable Development. So we can say she has been trying to attain development in a sustainable way.
What have not?:
Yes, it is true that in last few decades environment has degraded and to protect it several actions has been taken up. But it is noticed that even after these attempts there are various inadequacies towards realizing the dream of Sustainable Development and secured environment in India. Here we are highlighting few of these, so that further steps may take to improve the condition. The inadequacies are-
Under the Water and Air Acts, the sole responsibility of protection and preservation of water and air quality is given to the Central and State Pollution Control Boards. But these Boards are suffering from some structural weaknesses.9 The State Boards, in many times, are lacking of adequate funds and expertise to pursue their main objectives. In the various pollution related acts of India and under the Environment Act, the central government has been given more power and authority rather than the state government. Therefore over centralization hinders efficient implementation of the provisions of the Acts in the states. Again, for various developmental programs and projects, the Central government may overlook the vital environmental issues.
Another point of inadequacies mentioned by Vibhute is on pollution control Acts. To quote Vibhute “All three anti-pollution Acts do recognize the locus standi of a public spirited individual to invoke provisions of these Acts against their (Acts) violators. But it is made conditional to the 60 days notice to the appropriate authority constituted under the concerned environmental statute. This idea of an individuals' suit is borrowed from the US Clean Air Act wherein no such 60 days notice is required. The condition of 60 days notice not only causes delay in prosecuting an erring industry and allows it to pollute the environment during this period, but it also gives an opportunity to the polluter to destroy the proof of such pollution and thereby avoid conviction. Interestingly, such an individual does not have either any legitimate access to the relevant information, or a right to obtain it from the polluter to sustain his claim in a court of law. However, recently the relevant provisions of the Water Act and the Air Act have been amended (respectively in 1988 and 1987) to mandate a Pollution Control Board to make available to such a complainant, on demand, the relevant reports in its possession. A Pollution Control Board is, however, allowed to refuse to concede such a demand if, in its opinion, it would be against 'public interest'. Curiously enough, even such a qualified access to information, for reasons best known to Parliament, is not made available under the Environment Act. The condition, thus, further minimizes the limited role to be played by environmentalists and voluntary organizations in the protection and improvement of the human environment. A legal right to prosecute a polluter, thus, is conferred on an individual but enough obstacles are created to make it a mere symbolic one. One of the surest ways to stop pollution, effectively and meaningfully, therefore, would be to delete the requirement of 60 days notice and to confer a legal right on such individuals, and voluntary organizations, to seek necessary information. The right should not be subjected to a wide and undefined discretion (by using words such as 'public interest' or 'public policy', or any other term of equally wide amplitude, unreasonably justifying the refusal exercise of the right). In fact, in the prevailing scenario of alarming environmental degradation, inefficiency and unwillingness of the environmental policing agencies, few prosecutions, and minimal convictions under the anti-pollution laws in vogue, insensitiveness to the environmental degradation of the Government and rampant corruption, 'public interest' would be better served if environmentally conscious voluntary organizations and individuals were armed not only with the right to prosecute a polluter but also with the right to information.”10 So it can be state that these acts are not perfect for Sustainable Development. Again, regarding setting up of effluent treatment plant or Air Pollution control devices, it is very expensive for the small-scale industries. Moreover, the pollution control laws are not backed by good and effective policies or guidelines.
The strategies sustainable rural and urban development of India is also questionable. The contemporary urban development is not based on the principles of sustainability. Most of the cities of India are not based on the Sustainable Developmental policies. The urbanization model, India has been experiencing, is not suitable for environment.
To have a better environment, Sustainable Development is very important and for this technologies which can promote Sustainable Development is essential. As India is not independent in case of technology so we need to import and export eco-friendly technologies in international level. But it is observed that India is not giving much importance to it. The same thing happens in case of other import also. India should import only those goods which do not affect the principles of Sustainable Development.
The waste-management strategies and re-cycling policies of India are also inadequate. In many parts of India, the solid waste is disposed of in lands which pose a threat to the ground-water contamination. The wrong waste-management strategies and re-cycling policies have resulted in environmental degradation. It has challenged the bio-diversity, posed negative impact upon the air and land and also polluted the water. All these have questioned the Sustainable Development policies of the nation.
In India, the solar energy or bio-energy policies are not given much importance. India is still, to a large extent, depends upon traditional non sustainable sources of energy. These traditional modes of energy question the notion of Sustainable Development. Traditional energy sources are non renewable sources of energy. So it is not based on the principle of Sustainable Development. So we can find some inadequacies in case of policies of energy in India.
Again, India is also locking in policies to prevent over exploitation of resources and unsustainable consumption pattern. It is said that do less with less. We know that resources are limited and we need to save it for the upcoming generation also. But India is missing in it. Neither the people nor the government is conscious about the consumption patter. So it is also an inadequacy in India.
Having a law is not enough, its implementation and durability is also important. In India there might be several laws which protects the environment and promotes the Sustainable Development. But these laws are not implemented properly. These laws are amended so frequently that many a time these laws fails to protect the environment. Again some laws are so feeble that people can easily violate these laws and can escape from punishment. This is also an area where India needs to work.
It is true that state is responsible for protecting the environment and promoting Sustainable Development. But we also can’t ignore the role of people. But in India public awareness about environment is very poor. Recently government has taken several steps to make people aware of importance of environmental protection and importance of Sustainable Development. But more commitment is required from government, Civil Societies and NGOs, so that people know its importance and start working for it.
Conclusion:
We believe, do you? As we have mentioned in the starting of the paper, here in conclusion also we admit that environment constitutes a very important part of our life but human development actions in last few decades have challenged it. India as a responsible nation and also as a welfare state forwarded its noble hand towards an environment friendly development. India has adopted environment friendly policies both in national and transnational level, but all these are not enough. To attain Sustainable Development, we have to remodel our outlook and rebuild the strategies which can protect the environment. With these, we should also follow, to some extent, the Gandhian approach of sustainable development for better attainment of sustainability. As Gandhi himself believes that the Earth has enough for our need but not for our greed. He as a champion of Sustainable development advocated existence of mankind with nature and ecology based on equity and justice. Therefore, we believe that India needs to do some more homework to attain Sustainable Development. So here in conclusion we again accept the importance of Sustainable Development and accept that India is trying for it but need more commitment. Do you also?
Monday, April 4, 2011
BEHAVIORAL AND POST BEHAVIORAL APPROACH TO POLITICAL SCIENCE
Meaning and definition of Behavioural Approach:
The behavioural approach to political science mainly emphasizes on scientific, objective and value free study of political phenomenon. This approach stresses upon the use of empirical as well as scientific methods of study political behavior. This approach shifts its emphasis from the study of the state and government to the day-today problems, activities and behaviour of individuals and groups. Behavioural approach has portraits individuals as center of attention and examines their behaviour, actions and tries to comprehend them through a scientific outlook. To Leslie Lipson, “The behavioural method records the details of what men do, seeking to explain why they do...” David Easton, one of the prominent scholars of this school said about it as, “the behavioural researcher wishes to look at the participants in the political system as individuals who have the emotions, prejudices and pre-dispositions of human beings as we know them in our daily lives.” Thus, behavioural approach studies the political behaviour of individuals through an empirical viewpoint. It studies the legislatures, voters, decision makers, policy makers etc. in a scientific way and by correlating their activities and practices, tries to conceptualize and give answer to political outcomes.
Characteristics of behaviouralism:
Behavioural approach is based on some fundamental assumptions. Scholars like David Easton, Kirkpatrick, Heinz Eulou etc have highlighted some basic characteristics of behaviouralism. David Easton has laid down eight basic characteristics. These are Regularities, Verification, Techniques, Quantification, Value free, Systematization, Pure Science and Integration. According to Eulan and Eldersveld, Study of Human political Behavior, Empirical Methods, Interdisciplinary Focus, Scientific Theory of Politics etc. are the main features of the approach. From these we can draw a few common features of Behavioral Approach. These are –importance of study political behavior, practice of theory and empirical research, use of scientific methods, importance on inter-disciplinary studies, application of new techniques and exercise of value neutral observation etc. In practice, behavioural approach studies political science through the perspective of defining individuals and group behaviours empirically by using scientific, value-neutral observations.
The behavioral approach brings to the fore, certain positive signs and makes the study of political science more authentic. By using scientific methods of study political phenomenon, exercise of value-neutrality in exploring human behaviour, the approach attempts to reach out a new height of analysis the political aspects of society theoretically. Despite having these advantages, behavioural approach to political science has been facing some criticisms on the following grounds.
Behavioural Approach advocates empirical study of individual behaviours. But all aspects of individual behaviour can’t be observed and stated through empirical generalizations. Thus, the approach loses the focal assumption, it has taken up.
This approach is based on value-neutrality, is also not practical. Because, in political science, we study human-behaviour and it cannot be make a value-neutral discipline at any cost. Again critics pointed out that, in developing countries a value-free study of political science will not be fruitful due to overlapping in political structures, relations and activities.
This approach gives more importance to individuals than institutions. But critics say that without looking at institutions we can’t draw proper conclusion as institutions hold prime importance in the subject matter of political science.
Again one can criticize the approach due to the large diversity and differences among the political scientist of behavioural school itself. Here, we can derive the answer that though theoretically behavioralism is a much applicable approach but that lakes fruitful application in practice.
Post-Behavioural Approach
After discussing the Behavioural Approach, we put light on the Post- Behavioural Approach to develop a greater understanding of the prospects of Political Science. The Post-Behaviouural Approach is such an approach which developed after witnessing the loopholes of Behavioral Approach. Considering the popularity in 1940’s, Behavioural Approach has been one of the most important approaches to Political Science. But in 1970’s, there was general dissatisfaction with the achievements of behaviouralist as it failed to solve practical problems of the society and it led to the emergence of the post-Behavioural Approach. The failure of the Behavioural Approach to make any real progress towards the objective of building a scientific political theory compelled the behaviouralists to admit reforms in Behavioural Approach and that result in Post- Behavioural Approach. David Easton, who at one time was a Behaviouralist, criticized it for its limitations in later course. Thus, the Post- Behavioural Approach complains that the Behavioural Approach had not taken into account serious social matters.
Post- Behavioural Approach is both a movement and academic tendency. It opposed the efforts of the Behavioural Approach to make Political science a value free science. The Post- Behavioural Approach is a future oriented approach which wants to solve problems of both present and future. To this approach, the study of Political Science should put importance on social change. To it political science must have some relevance to society. Along with relevance, this approach believes that action is the core of study political science. It accepts that political science needs to study all realities of politics, social change, values etc.
There are some basic characteristics of Post- Behavioural Approach. Importance on action and relevance, human problem oriented, qualitative and qualitative, concerned with regularities and irregularities are the basic features of Post-Behavioural Approach. David Easton has mentioned about seven key features of Post- Behavioural Approach to political science. Considering this seven features, he opined that substance must have precedence over technique, political science should put emphasis on social change, research in social science must not lose touch with reality, study should accord value also, study should also be future oriented etc. To him mad craze for scientism should be discarded as social science can’t be pure science at any cost. Therefore, we can say that Post- Behavioural Approach lays emphasis on substance than technique. It is an attempt to develop a practical, social change oriented approach to political science. Actually, the Post- Behavioural Approach refines the Behavioural Approach and tries to make it acceptable.
The behavioural approach to political science mainly emphasizes on scientific, objective and value free study of political phenomenon. This approach stresses upon the use of empirical as well as scientific methods of study political behavior. This approach shifts its emphasis from the study of the state and government to the day-today problems, activities and behaviour of individuals and groups. Behavioural approach has portraits individuals as center of attention and examines their behaviour, actions and tries to comprehend them through a scientific outlook. To Leslie Lipson, “The behavioural method records the details of what men do, seeking to explain why they do...” David Easton, one of the prominent scholars of this school said about it as, “the behavioural researcher wishes to look at the participants in the political system as individuals who have the emotions, prejudices and pre-dispositions of human beings as we know them in our daily lives.” Thus, behavioural approach studies the political behaviour of individuals through an empirical viewpoint. It studies the legislatures, voters, decision makers, policy makers etc. in a scientific way and by correlating their activities and practices, tries to conceptualize and give answer to political outcomes.
Characteristics of behaviouralism:
Behavioural approach is based on some fundamental assumptions. Scholars like David Easton, Kirkpatrick, Heinz Eulou etc have highlighted some basic characteristics of behaviouralism. David Easton has laid down eight basic characteristics. These are Regularities, Verification, Techniques, Quantification, Value free, Systematization, Pure Science and Integration. According to Eulan and Eldersveld, Study of Human political Behavior, Empirical Methods, Interdisciplinary Focus, Scientific Theory of Politics etc. are the main features of the approach. From these we can draw a few common features of Behavioral Approach. These are –importance of study political behavior, practice of theory and empirical research, use of scientific methods, importance on inter-disciplinary studies, application of new techniques and exercise of value neutral observation etc. In practice, behavioural approach studies political science through the perspective of defining individuals and group behaviours empirically by using scientific, value-neutral observations.
The behavioral approach brings to the fore, certain positive signs and makes the study of political science more authentic. By using scientific methods of study political phenomenon, exercise of value-neutrality in exploring human behaviour, the approach attempts to reach out a new height of analysis the political aspects of society theoretically. Despite having these advantages, behavioural approach to political science has been facing some criticisms on the following grounds.
Behavioural Approach advocates empirical study of individual behaviours. But all aspects of individual behaviour can’t be observed and stated through empirical generalizations. Thus, the approach loses the focal assumption, it has taken up.
This approach is based on value-neutrality, is also not practical. Because, in political science, we study human-behaviour and it cannot be make a value-neutral discipline at any cost. Again critics pointed out that, in developing countries a value-free study of political science will not be fruitful due to overlapping in political structures, relations and activities.
This approach gives more importance to individuals than institutions. But critics say that without looking at institutions we can’t draw proper conclusion as institutions hold prime importance in the subject matter of political science.
Again one can criticize the approach due to the large diversity and differences among the political scientist of behavioural school itself. Here, we can derive the answer that though theoretically behavioralism is a much applicable approach but that lakes fruitful application in practice.
Post-Behavioural Approach
After discussing the Behavioural Approach, we put light on the Post- Behavioural Approach to develop a greater understanding of the prospects of Political Science. The Post-Behaviouural Approach is such an approach which developed after witnessing the loopholes of Behavioral Approach. Considering the popularity in 1940’s, Behavioural Approach has been one of the most important approaches to Political Science. But in 1970’s, there was general dissatisfaction with the achievements of behaviouralist as it failed to solve practical problems of the society and it led to the emergence of the post-Behavioural Approach. The failure of the Behavioural Approach to make any real progress towards the objective of building a scientific political theory compelled the behaviouralists to admit reforms in Behavioural Approach and that result in Post- Behavioural Approach. David Easton, who at one time was a Behaviouralist, criticized it for its limitations in later course. Thus, the Post- Behavioural Approach complains that the Behavioural Approach had not taken into account serious social matters.
Post- Behavioural Approach is both a movement and academic tendency. It opposed the efforts of the Behavioural Approach to make Political science a value free science. The Post- Behavioural Approach is a future oriented approach which wants to solve problems of both present and future. To this approach, the study of Political Science should put importance on social change. To it political science must have some relevance to society. Along with relevance, this approach believes that action is the core of study political science. It accepts that political science needs to study all realities of politics, social change, values etc.
There are some basic characteristics of Post- Behavioural Approach. Importance on action and relevance, human problem oriented, qualitative and qualitative, concerned with regularities and irregularities are the basic features of Post-Behavioural Approach. David Easton has mentioned about seven key features of Post- Behavioural Approach to political science. Considering this seven features, he opined that substance must have precedence over technique, political science should put emphasis on social change, research in social science must not lose touch with reality, study should accord value also, study should also be future oriented etc. To him mad craze for scientism should be discarded as social science can’t be pure science at any cost. Therefore, we can say that Post- Behavioural Approach lays emphasis on substance than technique. It is an attempt to develop a practical, social change oriented approach to political science. Actually, the Post- Behavioural Approach refines the Behavioural Approach and tries to make it acceptable.
POLITICAL SCIENCE
Political Science:
We have already read the meaning of the term politics. Now we will see what political science means. Many a times, the two terms “politics” and “political science” are used interchangeably. Aristotle used the term ‘politics’ instead of political science. Originally the discipline, which studies state, came to be designated as politics. Later on philosophers started using the term political science and in the early 20th century almost all the political scientist used the term “political science”. Now a large number of political scientist use both these terms but preferred to use political science. But there are some distinction between political science and politics. Political science is a body of knowledge about the state and politics refers to the actual operation of a political system.
Origin of the discipline of Political science can be dates back to the origin of the state. As an academic discipline it is concern about individual’s, groups, their political institutions, structures, arrangements, terminologies and activities such as the state, government, citizenship, public administration, public affairs etc. It is a part of social science revolves around individual and his/her political environment, which is a vital ingredient of social life. There is no universally accepted definition of political science. As a separate subject, Political Science concerned with the study of state, government, citizenship etc. Definitions of political science have two different manifestations, i.e. traditional and modern. Traditional definitions identify political science as the study of the state, government, society etc. whereas modern school defines political science as the study of political system, power and authority.
Traditional view to Political Science:
Traditionally Political Science is related with the study of the state and government. Aristotle, the ‘Father of Political Science’ used the term politics, from which the term political science is derived, to denote the state. Hence, the traditional school of Political Scientist considers that as the body of knowledge about the state and its various manifestations. This school defines Political Science as the study of the state, the government, their prospects and practices and so on. They viewed Political Science as the science of the state and government or the theory of the state and government. It talks about the systematic study of the state and the process of governing its internal and external affairs, both theoretically and from its empirical dimensions. To this school Political Science is somewhat different from that of politics. They have provided numerous definitions of Political Science. Some of these are mentioned below---
According to Garner, “Political Science begins and ends with the state.” According to Paul Janet, Political Science is a “part of social science which treats of the foundations of the state and the principles of government.” Gettel defines it as “the historical investigation of what the state has been an analytical study of what the state is and a political-ethical discussion of what the state ought to be.” P. Jenks observes that Political Science is a subject which deals with the state and government.” To Willoughby, “Generally speaking there are three topics with which Political Science deals with-the State, Law and Government.”
From these definitions mentioned above, we can say that, the idea of Political Science spins around the concepts like state, government, political systems, ideologies, theories and affairs of national and international lives, power, authority, legitimacy etc. In simple words Political Science is a subject which studies the activities of state and government. It contains the study of both the organizations and functions of the state, government and the principles and theories appear in the political life with the course of history.
Modern view to Political Science:
Modern Political Scientists believe that traditional view regarding Political Science is unscientific and backed by illusion. According to modern view, Political Science studies politics and political relations. To them Political Science is the science of political relations and interactions characterized by power. Here, focal point of consideration is power. It studies the political relationship of the individuals and the social groups with that of political institutions. This provides a wider connotation to that of Political Science. There are several definitions of Political Science given by the modern school. Some of these are given below.
According to Jellinek, “The task of political science is to study in their fundamental relations the public powers, to examine the conditions under which they manifest themselves, their end and their effect, and to investigate the state in its inner nature.” Apter defines Political Science as, “Taken as whole political science is about the relations between the rulers and ruled, and the means and the ends each employs.” To Harold Lasswell also politics is the process of shaping and sharing power.
From these definitions, one can derive the fact that the modern Political Scientists accept Political Science as the study of power relations and prefer to use the term ‘Politics’ than ‘Political Science’. In its modern connotations, the concept of Political Science can be defined as the analysis of power in relation to society. Moreover, the study of Political Science concentrates upon the concepts like political system, power, authority and many more.
Practically, one can combine the traditional as well as the modern view to Political Science to acquire the exact meaning of the term comprehensively. In summary, the discussion wants to draw the point that political science is one of the branches of social science which studies the state and its relation with other political institutions. It studies the activities of the individual in relation to political institutions and systems. As an academic discipline, Political Science includes the study of political institutions, activities and behaviours of individuals, social groups, state and non-state actors.
Scope of Political Science:
We have already discussed the meaning, concepts and definitions of Politics and Political Science. Now, we will explain the depth of the discipline. At this crucial juncture, we tend to focus on the subject matters, which comprise the study of Political Science. Regarding the scope, we can say it as an emerging area of study today having dynamism and overwhelming ness in its character. As the discipline lakes precision in defining and providing meaning to the concept of Political Science, there is no harmony among the scholars regarding its scope. Consequently, it is difficult to draw out the boundary lines for the scope of the discipline. But on the whole, we can say that the subject Political Science studies the concepts like the state and its organs; their past, present and future; government; political thoughts and ideologies; political groups and political structures; election and participation in politics; comparative politics and constitutions; concepts, theories and approaches to politics; political behavior, political authority, political infrastructure, public administration, international politics and the articulation of power, power-relation and other associated issues. It includes the study of the concepts like citizenship, democracy, justice, rights, nationalism, secularism, peace, development etc. As we have already know that it is a growing discipline and its scope is changing and updating day by day, it now incorporates all the regional, national and international affairs, having direct and indirect impact upon political lives of individuals and society concerned. Sir Frederic Pollock breaks up the subject of political science into two parts. Firstly, the Theoretical Politics- which studies the features of the state and the basic principles of government and secondly, the Applied Politics- which studies the actual working of any particular government. In this regard, it is important to describe the fact that, before second world war, political science primarily focus on the study of the state, but in the post second world war era, it shift its emphasis from state to the political system. Thus, political science comprehensively includes the study of the theoretical as well as empirical experiences related to state, government and political lives of individuals and social institutions, both structurally and from its empirical dimensions.
We have already read the meaning of the term politics. Now we will see what political science means. Many a times, the two terms “politics” and “political science” are used interchangeably. Aristotle used the term ‘politics’ instead of political science. Originally the discipline, which studies state, came to be designated as politics. Later on philosophers started using the term political science and in the early 20th century almost all the political scientist used the term “political science”. Now a large number of political scientist use both these terms but preferred to use political science. But there are some distinction between political science and politics. Political science is a body of knowledge about the state and politics refers to the actual operation of a political system.
Origin of the discipline of Political science can be dates back to the origin of the state. As an academic discipline it is concern about individual’s, groups, their political institutions, structures, arrangements, terminologies and activities such as the state, government, citizenship, public administration, public affairs etc. It is a part of social science revolves around individual and his/her political environment, which is a vital ingredient of social life. There is no universally accepted definition of political science. As a separate subject, Political Science concerned with the study of state, government, citizenship etc. Definitions of political science have two different manifestations, i.e. traditional and modern. Traditional definitions identify political science as the study of the state, government, society etc. whereas modern school defines political science as the study of political system, power and authority.
Traditional view to Political Science:
Traditionally Political Science is related with the study of the state and government. Aristotle, the ‘Father of Political Science’ used the term politics, from which the term political science is derived, to denote the state. Hence, the traditional school of Political Scientist considers that as the body of knowledge about the state and its various manifestations. This school defines Political Science as the study of the state, the government, their prospects and practices and so on. They viewed Political Science as the science of the state and government or the theory of the state and government. It talks about the systematic study of the state and the process of governing its internal and external affairs, both theoretically and from its empirical dimensions. To this school Political Science is somewhat different from that of politics. They have provided numerous definitions of Political Science. Some of these are mentioned below---
According to Garner, “Political Science begins and ends with the state.” According to Paul Janet, Political Science is a “part of social science which treats of the foundations of the state and the principles of government.” Gettel defines it as “the historical investigation of what the state has been an analytical study of what the state is and a political-ethical discussion of what the state ought to be.” P. Jenks observes that Political Science is a subject which deals with the state and government.” To Willoughby, “Generally speaking there are three topics with which Political Science deals with-the State, Law and Government.”
From these definitions mentioned above, we can say that, the idea of Political Science spins around the concepts like state, government, political systems, ideologies, theories and affairs of national and international lives, power, authority, legitimacy etc. In simple words Political Science is a subject which studies the activities of state and government. It contains the study of both the organizations and functions of the state, government and the principles and theories appear in the political life with the course of history.
Modern view to Political Science:
Modern Political Scientists believe that traditional view regarding Political Science is unscientific and backed by illusion. According to modern view, Political Science studies politics and political relations. To them Political Science is the science of political relations and interactions characterized by power. Here, focal point of consideration is power. It studies the political relationship of the individuals and the social groups with that of political institutions. This provides a wider connotation to that of Political Science. There are several definitions of Political Science given by the modern school. Some of these are given below.
According to Jellinek, “The task of political science is to study in their fundamental relations the public powers, to examine the conditions under which they manifest themselves, their end and their effect, and to investigate the state in its inner nature.” Apter defines Political Science as, “Taken as whole political science is about the relations between the rulers and ruled, and the means and the ends each employs.” To Harold Lasswell also politics is the process of shaping and sharing power.
From these definitions, one can derive the fact that the modern Political Scientists accept Political Science as the study of power relations and prefer to use the term ‘Politics’ than ‘Political Science’. In its modern connotations, the concept of Political Science can be defined as the analysis of power in relation to society. Moreover, the study of Political Science concentrates upon the concepts like political system, power, authority and many more.
Practically, one can combine the traditional as well as the modern view to Political Science to acquire the exact meaning of the term comprehensively. In summary, the discussion wants to draw the point that political science is one of the branches of social science which studies the state and its relation with other political institutions. It studies the activities of the individual in relation to political institutions and systems. As an academic discipline, Political Science includes the study of political institutions, activities and behaviours of individuals, social groups, state and non-state actors.
Scope of Political Science:
We have already discussed the meaning, concepts and definitions of Politics and Political Science. Now, we will explain the depth of the discipline. At this crucial juncture, we tend to focus on the subject matters, which comprise the study of Political Science. Regarding the scope, we can say it as an emerging area of study today having dynamism and overwhelming ness in its character. As the discipline lakes precision in defining and providing meaning to the concept of Political Science, there is no harmony among the scholars regarding its scope. Consequently, it is difficult to draw out the boundary lines for the scope of the discipline. But on the whole, we can say that the subject Political Science studies the concepts like the state and its organs; their past, present and future; government; political thoughts and ideologies; political groups and political structures; election and participation in politics; comparative politics and constitutions; concepts, theories and approaches to politics; political behavior, political authority, political infrastructure, public administration, international politics and the articulation of power, power-relation and other associated issues. It includes the study of the concepts like citizenship, democracy, justice, rights, nationalism, secularism, peace, development etc. As we have already know that it is a growing discipline and its scope is changing and updating day by day, it now incorporates all the regional, national and international affairs, having direct and indirect impact upon political lives of individuals and society concerned. Sir Frederic Pollock breaks up the subject of political science into two parts. Firstly, the Theoretical Politics- which studies the features of the state and the basic principles of government and secondly, the Applied Politics- which studies the actual working of any particular government. In this regard, it is important to describe the fact that, before second world war, political science primarily focus on the study of the state, but in the post second world war era, it shift its emphasis from state to the political system. Thus, political science comprehensively includes the study of the theoretical as well as empirical experiences related to state, government and political lives of individuals and social institutions, both structurally and from its empirical dimensions.
POLITICS
Politics is a widely observed phenomenon. Every social being is a part of politics. In general parlance, politics referred to the activity of the individual and social groups, which express their wills and interests in ordering and managing public affairs. The word politics is applied to a particular social phenomenon which involves the study of political lives of the individual, society, social groups, State and Non-State Actors and over all private and public spheres of society and administration. The term politics is derived from the Greek word ‘polis’ which means the City-State. However, some scholars believe that apart from ‘polis’ two other Greek words ‘polity’ and ‘politeia’ means government and constitution respectively, also contributed to the development of the term politics. So, politics means the study of the state and its administration in practical as well as philosophical terms. It can be understand as the study of the state and government. The term “politics” was first used by Aristotle in his book ‘The politics’ where he used the term to indicate state as a distinct branch of study. It is not easy to define politics. There have been numerous definitions of politics. There are two major schools to define politics one is traditional and the other is modern or scientific school. The traditional and modern school not only debates about the definition of politics but also debates that whether it is science or art. One school believes that it is arts and the other as science. According to the traditional school, politics is the study of the state and the government whereas modern school defines politics as the study of power-relations and power-structures. To comprehend the thoughts of both of these two schools, we can go through the following definitions on politics.
According to H. J. Price “politics is the exercise of power in society.” To Bluntschlli politics “is concerned with the state which endeavours to understand and comprehend the state in its fundamental conditions, in its essential nature, in its various forms of manifestations, its development.” Catlin writes, “Politics is the study of political aspects of organized human society.” According to Dahl “politics is the process of the shaping and sharing of power in society.” According to Laski “The study of politics concerns itself with the life of man in relation to organized states.”
So, defining politics is not an easy task. But by correlating both the traditional and modern views, we can define politics as a social practice associated with power-structure, legitimacy, law, authority, government, state and other political and non-political institutions being formal and informal and non-formal kind. It is the activities of the individual in relation to political institutions and political systems. Politics can be evaluated through exploring what is political or what influence the political environment. It studies the activities of individual and social groups in public life characterized by political socialization, mobility and political articulation. It is about power and its relation with individual, groups and institutions.
According to H. J. Price “politics is the exercise of power in society.” To Bluntschlli politics “is concerned with the state which endeavours to understand and comprehend the state in its fundamental conditions, in its essential nature, in its various forms of manifestations, its development.” Catlin writes, “Politics is the study of political aspects of organized human society.” According to Dahl “politics is the process of the shaping and sharing of power in society.” According to Laski “The study of politics concerns itself with the life of man in relation to organized states.”
So, defining politics is not an easy task. But by correlating both the traditional and modern views, we can define politics as a social practice associated with power-structure, legitimacy, law, authority, government, state and other political and non-political institutions being formal and informal and non-formal kind. It is the activities of the individual in relation to political institutions and political systems. Politics can be evaluated through exploring what is political or what influence the political environment. It studies the activities of individual and social groups in public life characterized by political socialization, mobility and political articulation. It is about power and its relation with individual, groups and institutions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)