all-pervading will be defined as irrelevant to the bureaucrat. Needs will have
been defined in terms of officially selected attributes of a person’s exis-
tence. The claimant, on the other hand, will not want to present a case. He
will want to present a story about the integrated parts of his whole existence.
Bureaucrats perhaps should not be surprised to discover that their pro-
grammes do not have the impact which the policy-makers hoped for.
Resources provided by officialdom are often used to satisfy what the bene-
ficiaries regard as more pressing needs (Wood, G. D., 1977). Nor should
they be surprised that the intended beneficiaries do not come forward and
claim their rights. Entering a government programme may be risky if it
involves disengaging from the traditional obligations of the community. If
the bureaucratic allocation fails to work as intended and if one has removed
oneself from the local community and no longer seeks the protection, assis-
tance and reciprocity of local relationships, the consequences could be dis-
astrous. A position of dependency and even exploitation may be preferred
to the position of recipient of a state programme.
Pressures on officials, including corruption, may mean that the resources to
be allocated are not received by the target group but instead find their way to
other destinations. Administrative officials may to a certain extent be at the
mercy of political pressures to benefit local élites at the expense of target
groups identified by government programmes. Bureaucrats need to be able to
demonstrate success. They can use their discretion to allocate resources to
those who can produce the results, say in terms of agricultural output, that can
be translated into the levels of administrative performance that will satisfy
superiors: for example, farmers who have experience of modern agricultural
techniques and commercial transactions. Since it is the capitalistic, rationally
economic, literate and market-oriented farmerwho corresponds to the model
of behaviour on which bureaucratically administered programmes are predi-
cated, such programmes will inevitably favour him rather than the survival-
oriented, indebted, dependent, marginal and vulnerable poor peasant. In this
way bias is introduced into much development planning that directs state
interventions at particular groups of beneficiaries (Wood, 1977, 1984b).
A ruling class
It has also been claimed that bureaucracies are more than just political insti-
tutions. They have developed as a new kind of class, and a ruling class at
that. There are a number of reasons why this conclusion has been reached
for some Third World states.
Bureaucracy and Political Power 167