The information-energy model is a theory which purports to explain changes in bureaucratic development for developing nations in terms of changes in ecological variables. This research note attempts to test the validity of the model and to assess its explanatory power through aggregate data analysis and cross-national causal modeling techniques. The results indicate that though ecological variables account for some variation in bureaucratic development, the overall explanatory power of the model is not what was initially hypothesized. Of all the paths in the causal model leading to bureaucratic development, the direct linkage between information and bureaucratic development is the strongest.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Adelman, I. and C. T. Morris (1967) Society, Politics, and Economic Development: A Quantitative Approach. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press.
2.
Alker, H. (1965) Mathematics and Politics. London: Macmillan .
3.
Banks, A. S. and R. B. Textor (1963) A Cross Polity Survey. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
4.
Blalock, H. (1971) "Four-variable causal models and partial correlations," pp. 18-32 in H. Blalock (ed.) Causal Models in the Social Sciences. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton.
5.
Blank, B. (1965) "A proposal for a statistical approach to comparative administration : the measurement of national bureaucracies." Indiana: CAG Occasional Papers.
6.
Burrowes, R. (1970) "Multiple time series analysis of national level data." Comparative Pol. Studies2 (January): 465-480.
7.
Cottrell, W. F. (1955) Energy and Society: The Relation Between Energy, Social Change, and Economic Development . Westport, Ct.: Greenwood .
8.
Dorsey, J. (1963) "The bureaucracy and political development in Viet Nam," pp. 318-359 in J. LaPalombara (ed.) Bureaucracy and Political Development . Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press.
9.
--- ( 1962) "An information-energy model," pp. 37-57 in F. Heady and S. Stokes (eds.) Papers in Comparative Administration. Ann Arbor : Institute of Public Administration, University of Michigan.
10.
Eisenstadt, S. N. (1959) "Bureaucracy, bureaucratization, and debureaucratization." Admin. Sci. Q.4 (December): 302-320.
11.
Gerth, H. H. and C. W. Mills (1946) From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology . New York: Oxford Univ. Press .
12.
Ginsberg, N. (1961) Atlas of Economic Development. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
13.
Heady, F. (1966) Public Administration: A Comparative Perspective. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
14.
Labovitz, S. (1970) "The assignment of numbers to rank order categories." Amer. J. of Sociology35 (June): 515-524.
15.
McCrone, D. J. and C. F. Cnudde (1967) "Toward a communications theory of democratic political development: a causal model." Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev.61 (March): 72-79.
16.
Palumbo, D. J. (1969) Statistics in Political and Behavioral Science. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
17.
Pride, R. (1971) "An alternative approach to quantitative historical data." Comparative Pol. Studies4 (October): 373-368.
18.
Riggs, F. (1959) "Agraria and industria: toward a typology of comparative administration," pp. 23-116 in W. Siffin (ed.) Toward the Comparative Study of Public Administration. Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press.
19.
Rummel, R. J. (1970) Applied Factor Analysis. Evanston: Northwestern Univ. Press.
20.
Russett, B. et al. (1964) Yale Handbook of World Indicators. New Haven: Yale Univ. Press.
21.
Schench, E. K. (1966) "Cross-national comparisons using aggregate data: some substantive and methodological problems ," in R. L. Merritt and S. Rokkan (eds.) Comparing Nations: The Use of Quantitative Data in Cross National Research. New Haven : Yale Univ. Press.
22.
Sigelman, L. (1972) "Administrative development and dominance: a new test of the imbalance thesis." Nashville: Department of Political Science, Vanderbilt University. (unpublished)
23.
——— (1971) "Modernization and the political system: a critique and preliminary analysis." Sage Professional Papers in Comparative Politics . 01-016 Beverly Hills, Calif. : Sage.
24.
Smith, A. K. (1969) "Socioeconomic development and political democracy: a causal analysis." Midwest J. of Pol. Sci.30 (February): 95-125.
25.
Turner, M. E. and C. Stevens (1971) "The regression analysis of causal paths," pp. 75-100 in H. Blalock (ed.) Causal Models in the Social Sciences. Chicago : Aldine-Atherton.
26.
White, L. A. (1949) The Science of Culture. New York: Farrar, Straus .
27.
Wright, S. (1934) "The method of path coefficients." Annals of Mathematical Statistics5: 161-215.
