And the units and levels of analysis of the new CPA are much broader and more flexible than the grand theories of the old CPA.
Under the old CPA, studies on the bureaucracies of developing countries were mainly undertaken by scholars teaching in American universities. There were loose links among academicians, practitioners, and consultants. Under the new CPA, however, scholars, practitioners, and consultants collaborate closely and have a common focus on governance and public management reforms.
The old CPA saw developing countries as having characteristics that were obstacles to achieving higher levels of development. These included weak democratic institutions, military intervention in politics, the monopoly of power by the bureaucracy, the inability of the public to monitor the bureaucracy, and low levels of education. But the new CPA regards the development and reform of public administrative systems as an ongoing process for all countries-both developing and developed. The borrowing of reform ideas from abroad was a one-way, top-down process for the old CPA, but the borrowing process is a circle for the new CPA. Developed countries can learn from one another, and they can also learn from developing countries. Instead of blaming developing countries for being unable to develop at an expected pace, scholars of the new CPA focus on the process of reform diffusion. They ask questions like these: What happens when reform innovations from abroad enter a foreign country? Are reform hybrids produced? What are the intended and unintended consequences of reform?