ADVERTISEMENTS:
The developmental approach claims to know about a set of important variables among other properties of a political system, and also their limits or potentials. All systems at different levels of differentiation and secularisation or subsystem independence encounter different sets of limitations, pressures and potentialities. Developmental approach not only describes, compares, and explains, but also predicts political changes and developments occurring in political systems.
A theory, according to Almond and Powell, designates relationships between variables in such a way that predictions can be made about the consequences of their interactions. It can be tested and further reformulated. They believe that their approach enables us to lay a basis for prediction as well as for description and explanation. It is aware of restrictions and limitations of political systems. These are inherited from the past, and influence their future, limiting as well as excluding certain alternatives.
Political development is related by Almond to political structure and political culture. In the development approach, political development is measured by role differentiation and subsystem independence, and political culture by secularisation. Political culture also involves socialisation process. The approach moving towards the direction of a scientific theory analyses political systems at three levels and by interconnecting them draws out certain important theoretical conclusions.
Almond spells out these three levels as that of:
(i) Conversion,
(ii) Capability, and
(iii) Classification of political systems.
All these have been discussed on the basis of structural differentiation, subsystem autonomy, and secularisation. They respectively deal with ‘inside’, ‘outside’, and ‘comparative’ view of political systems. The development-aspect reflects the syndrome of political structure, subsystem independence, and secularisation, but the analysis at each level goes along the path of their conversion functions, capabilities, and system-maintenance-patterns.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Almond and Powell have described and analysed political systems indicated in their typology or classification scheme. They have found that there is a tendency for the interrelated variables of structural differentiation, subsystem autonomy, and secularisation to vary together. But their relationship is not necessary, direct or unchanging. Almond’s classification is based rather on its utility and meaningfulness in comparing political systems. It simply shows how the structural and cultural characteristics of political systems are associated with their processes and performance characteristics.
Political systems, face four types of development problems:
(i) State-building,
(ii) Nation-building,
ADVERTISEMENTS:
(iii) Participation, and
(iv) Distribution.
All of them influence the development variables of differentiation, secularisation, and subsystem independence. They make up the turning points of the path of political development. In other words, a political system has to encounter the problems of unification and control, group identity and loyalty, involvement of members of the society in the decision-making processes, and distribution of goods and services to its people by gradual increase of the three variables.
An emerging theory of political development, according to Almond, has to connect the ways in which particular political systems have encountered and solved these four problems of development with their prevailing patterns of structure, culture, and performance. In the event of conversion, capability and adaptation processes of a class of political system juxtaposed have to face these problems. One has to relate their past experiences with the contemporary performance, and see its impact on the future also.
Political development, to a certain extent, can be predicted by:
(a) Describing and comparing (i) performance of political systems as ‘units’ or ‘persons’ in their environments; (ii) their input-conversion-output pattern; and (iii) their system-maintenance and adaptation processes;
(b) Classifying and comparing political systems according to basic structural and cultural characteristics related to different levels and performance patterns; and
(c) Relating various types of political systems to their historical experience about solving four development problems.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
In case, relationships between fundamental variables are determined, the way to predicting limitations, pressures, and potentialities shaping the future of a political system becomes clear.
All explanation and prediction of political development is based on the following theoretical assumptions:
1. Development of higher levels of system capabilities is dependent upon the development of greater structural differentiation and cultural secularisation. For example, the rise of rational bureaucratic organisations carries over the system to a higher level of regulation, distribution, and extraction. Similarly, the development of political structures like interest-group or party-system increases responsive capability of political systems.
2. There is a close relationship between subsystem autonomy and responsive capability. In the absence of subsystem-independence, despite highly differentiated political structures, responsiveness of the system would remain low and limited.
3. Political systems have to face the system development-problems of state-building, nation-building, participation, and distribution. All the pre-mobilised and traditional and primitive and pre-mobilised systems, along with expansion of communication and technology, tend to suffer from development-problems in a cumulative and pressing manner. Owing to their inadequate level of differentiation and capability, alternatives before them always remain severely limited.