FOOD SECURITY AMONG ASEAN MEMBER.

1.0  ACKNOWLEDGE

Bismillahirahmanirahim. In The Name Of God and The Merciful. Alhamdulillah, we are successfully done this task. First and foremost, we would like to express our deepest appreciation to all those who provided the possibility to complete this report. A special gratitude we give to our respected and beloved lecturer, Madam XXXXXX whose contribution in stimulating suggestions and encouragement helped us to coordinate our project especially in writing this report. We also would like to thank her for showing us some example that related to the topic of our project.

Special thank also goes to all team members, who had gave fully commitment and cooperation during completing this task. Through sweat and weariness, we are finally done this task successfully. Apart from that, special thanks are adhered to our parents who energize us and always give support from every aspect.

Finally, once again, an honourable mention goes to our families and friends for their understandings and supports on us in completing this project. Without helps of the particular that mentioned above, we would face many difficulties while doing this task. Thank you very much.

 

 2.0 INTRODUCTION

Food security is the basic priority for every government to be fulfilled for their own populations. In ASEAN region as well, agriculture is the dominant and biggest sector which is responsible for the employing majority of population acting as the key driver for growth, poverty reduction and security of region. It is vital in all ASEAN nations, with exception of Singapore; in terms of production and job creation as most of those countries are agrarian countries well-endowed with natural resources.　Extensive fertile river basins with favourable weather conditions make agrarian Southeast Asian nations possible agriculture as primary source of income, employer of labour, and contributor to export revenues since many years. Agriculture has, therefore, remained one of the key sectors of their economies, despite success in manufacturing sector during the last decades. Even though the trend of Southeast Asian agriculture has been changing dramatically along with other sector development, they still need to focus on agriculture attentively in the light of food security concerns as well as poverty reduction.

Nowadays, every country is facing the problem of food insecurity with varying levels both at developed or developing countries. For example, the root cause of food insecurity for developing countries is poverty whereas high dependency on imported food due to low productivity and low self-sufficiency rate is, mostly, the case of developed countries.　However, depending on food aid program is another case of food insecurity for vulnerable groups of both developing and developed countries which are at crisis of wars, riots, natural disasters, hunger, and famine. In this regard, World Food Summit strongly suggests that each nation must adopt the strategy for food security through concreted action plan, at all levels, which is consistent with its resources and capacities to achieve its individual goals while cooperating regionally and internationally in order to organize collective solutions to global issues of food security. 

2.1 ASEAN FOOD SECURITY INFORMATION SYSTEM (AFSIS)

In the last few decades Southeast Asia had made substantial gains in reducing hunger. The 2013 report of the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization shows that the region has exhibited the biggest decline in terms of number of undernourished people—from 140 million in the 1990s to 80.5 million in 2008-2010, and most recently, to 64.5 million from 2011 to the present. The prevalence of undernourishment also decreased from 31.1 percent of the population to 10.7 percent over the same period. Poverty levels also went down, as the number of people in the region living below the poverty line of $1.25 per day dropped from close to half (45.5 percent) of the population in the 1990s to 14.7 percent in 2010. Climate change, in the form of increased occurrences of extreme weather events like typhoons, droughts and heavy rainfall, changes in temperature and rising sea levels to name a few, is intensifying uncertainties in agricultural production and increasing the incidence of crop failures. Various studies have identified Southeast Asia as one of the region most vulnerable to climate change impacts. Land and water grabbing exacerbated by the unregulated entry of private-sector investments in the sector and in land and water resources are displacing small agricultural producers. All across the region, unregulated private-sector investments in agriculture and related land acquisitions are pushing farmers out of their farms, and depriving them of their source of food and means of livelihood. 

The ASEAN Food Security Information System (AFSIS) Project is an ASEAN and Japan initiative with participation of China and the Republic of Korea. The overall objectives of AFSIS include facilitating food security planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation in ASEAN through the systematic collection, organization, management, analysis, and dissemination of food security data and information. The AFSIS project is a five-year undertaking from January 2003 to December 2007 (www.afsisnc.org).

 The Office of Agriculture Economics (OAE), Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives (MOAC), Thailand, is the executing agency. The Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF), Japan is the donor through ASEAN trust funds (www.afsisnc.org).

Prior to the termination of the 1st Phase, in the AMAF +3 Meeting in September 2005 in the Philippines, the Ministers expressed their commitments of contribution to AFSIS Project with respect to the promotion of regional food security and the importance of continued improvement in the details of food security data and information among Member States and the regional cooperation. Accordingly, the Implementation Plan of the 2nd Phase Project was endorsed by the AMAF +3 Meeting in November 2007 in Bangkok, Thailand (www.afsisnc.org). The implementation of the 2nd Phase had the period of 5 years from 2008 - 2012 with financial support from MAFF Japan, with objective to strengthen food security in the region and continue implementing core activities of the 1st Phase. The additional elements including: Early Warning Information, Agricultural Commodity Outlook and Mutual Technical Cooperation were also included in the 2nd Phase. In the 2nd Phase, the Project emphasizes on the enrichment of database and data analysis. The development of Early Warning Information and Commodity Outlook was included to monitor and analyze food security situation in the region. In addition, the Project plans to provide a number of network equipment to some Member States as considered necessary for Project implementation.

Firstly, AFSIS database and website. AFSIS Database and Websites will be reviewed and improved to provide users with all information required for the assessment of food security situation and policy planning in the region.

Secondly, Early Warning Information (EWI). The Early Warning Information (EWI) will be introduced to the system. It includes the report of the information related to the production of major food crops during current growing system. The information would cover three items which are forecasted planted/harvested areas, production and yields. Next is crop growing conditions and the last one is damages by natural calamities, outbreaks of pests and disease, etc. The project will make a list required information for Member Countries to collect from regional offices and other sources available in their respective countries. Member Countries will send information to AFSIT Centre for compilation and dissemination through Websites. The EWI will be used to monitor food security situation in the region. If there is any foreseen difficulties in production of major food crops that will affect food security, the project will inform the concerned agencies to be aware of the possible problems in advance.

Thirdly, Commodity Outlook. The project will make analysis of all relevant information in AFSIS Database and from other sources such as Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), World Bank and Asian Development Bank (ADB) as well as the reports and studies that are available in Member Countries to make Commodity Outlook Report of major food commodities. The Report will analyze and present the current and projected situation in various aspects of each major food commodity in the region. For example, production, consumption, demand and supply, trade, etc. This will help the concerned agencies in assessing food security situation in the region. The report is planned to be published twice a year. 

2.2 ASEAN INTEGRATION FOOD SECURITY (AIFS 2009-2013)

        With the goal of ensuring long-term food security and improving the livelihoods of farmers in ASEAN region, ASEAN member states (AMSs) pledged to adopt the ASEAN Integrated Food Security (AIFS) Framework and the Strategic Plan of Action on Food Security in the ASEAN Region (SPA-FS) with assurance of resources required to undertaking such a Plan of 2009-2013 (ASEAN AIFS’s SPA-FS 2009-13).

　　 Rice, maize, soybean, sugar and cassava are initial prioritized commodities for food security for the ASEAN region (ASEAN AIFS’s SPA-FS 2009-13). The driving force of that plan is the 2007-08 sharp increase in international food prices that increased food insecurity around the globe and exposed long term failures in functioning of the world food system (ASEAN AIFS’s SPA-FS 2009-13). Therefore, examining underlying cause of food crisis and taking reactive as well as preventive measures are the essential tasks for AMSs not repeating that kind of crisis in the region but enhancing regional food security.

　　 As a matter of permanent and high priority policy, that remarkable food security strategic plan is adopted on 1st March 2009 at 14th ASEAN summit, Chan-am, Thailand by reviewing AMSs’ commitment to achieving of Millennium Development Goal of the World Food Summit.　It is also determined to make ASEAN dynamic, resilient and cohesive regional organization for the well-being of its Member States and people with a balance given between economic growth and social development in order to reduce and not to create negative impacts to food security (ASEAN AIFS’s SPA-FS 2009-13).

　　 The following ASEAN Integrated Food security (AIFS) framework provides scope and pragmatic approaches with interrelated four components which are supported by six corresponding strategic thrusts supported by action programs, activities, responsible agencies and work schedules.

         Firstly, this ASEAN food security framework considered food security and emergency shortage relief as the core component and fundamental part of framework while focusing on strengthening national food security programs / initiatives, and development of a regional effective and timely mechanism for supply of rice as food aid for emergency relief (food aid or grant) and/ or under unusual market situation (grant or loan agreement) (ASEAN AIFS’s SPA-FS 2009-13). It aims at establishing a long-term mechanism for ASEAN plus Three Emergency Rice Reserve.

　　 Secondly, sustainable food trade development to support fair/balanced food trade within the acceptable levels of food prices by developing a buffer mechanism is the aim of second component. It is hoped to help ensuring that due consideration is given to balancing domestic accessibility to food, intra and extra regional food trade, agreed criteria and conditions (i.e. high speculative food commodities such as rice, cooking oil, sugar and maize) for the application apply (ASEAN AIFS’s SPA-FS 2009-13).

　　 Thirdly, establishing an information network on food security among the Plus Three Countries is the component three for fast-tracking the current AFSIS project under AMAF PLUS THREE initiative to provide a sound and timely information on outlook and surveillance report for food security policy planning, implementation and monitoring. It aims at other elements include Early Warning Information System, Mutual Technical Cooperation and Preparation of Commodity Outlook Reports in that component (ASEAN AIFS’s SPA-FS 2009-13).This component is hoped to provide a basis for a regular monitoring and surveillance system to the making of sound development planning and policy decision to address food security and also the soaring food prices.

　　 Finally, the long-term plan aiming at formulating and implementing a regional comprehensive research and development (R&D) plan, through public and private sector partnership, to promote efficient and sustainable food production, food consumption, post-harvest practices & loss reduction, marketing and trade is component 4. It is mentioned that R&D areas, through priority setting, may include strengthening and expanding agriculture cooperatives and farmers’ organizations, agri-business entrepreneurship particularly SMEs, intra-regional contract farming, etc.　In addition, other supporting activities include building upon the ASEAN Good Agriculture Practices (GAP), targeting at promoting sustainable agricultural practices with due consideration on environmental concern. In this context, GAP could be used as a market tool adding value to food and agriculture products, which in return could support sustainable food production and trade.　The key roles of the governments are to encourage success models, support R&D, transfer of technology with capacity building, and develop GAP certification scheme and its accreditation system (ASEAN AIFS’s SPA-

FS 2009-13).

　　 These entire components backed up by action programs and activities are being tried with the objectives of increasing food production, reducing post-harvest losses, promotion of conductive market and trade for agriculture commodities and inputs, ensuring food stability, promotion availability and accessibility to agriculture inputs and operationalizing regional food emergency relief.

2.3 STRATEGIC PLAN OF ACTION ON FOOD SECURITY IN THE ASEAN REGION (SPA-FS)

 Within the ASEAN Integrated Food Security (AIFS), these programmes been supported by Strategic Plan of Action on Food Security in the ASEAN Regions (SPA-FS). It covers of five years of period start 2009- 2015. SPA included of consultations with various relevant parties/stakeholders at the regions and national level to promote sense of greater ownership of the AIFS Framework and the SPA-FS (ASEAN AIFS’s SPA-FS 2009-13). Implementation of the AIFS and SPA-FS will be coordinate by the ASEAN sectorial bodies, while other government agencies are responsible for expected output of those programmes and prepare for more action plan at national level.

Likely, SPA used systematic implementation mechanism to run all those minor programmes under AIFS. ASEAN Minister on Agriculture and Forestry (AMAF) with ASEAN Sectorial Bodies are collaborating to coordinate AIFS and SPA-FS. They shall be accountable for the overall implementation of the AIFS Framework and the SPA-FS, while ASEAN Sectorial Working Groups under AMAF are tasked to elaborate detail and arrangement of the implementation of SPA-FS. In order to allow for effective and efficiency of AIFS Framework and SPA-FS, the selected committee of these programmes will be cooperate with international organisations and donor agencies like World Bank. Progress of these programmes needs to be monitored, reviewed and reported to relevant parties annually. It shall be review and monitor compliance of such implementation by ASEAN Secretariat (ASEAN AIFS’s SPA-FS 2009-13).

In term resources, AIFS and SPA-FS are supported by cost-sharing among the ASEAN Member States. Additional financial supports for implementation of activities and sub activities should be sought from dialogue Partners and international organizations and donor agencies.  Meanwhile, Research and capacity building support is to be mobilised from various facilities such as the ASEAN Development Fund and ASEAN Foundation. Success of the implementation of the AIFS Framework and the SPA-FS requires involvement by all stakeholders. A good communications programme is required to create greater public awareness of the implementation of the AIFS Framework and the SPA-FS as well as to keep all stakeholders informed of the progress of such implementation in order to avoid confusion and misunderstanding on the status of food security in the region (ASEAN AIFS’s SPA-FS 2009-13).

2.4 INCREASING AFFLUENCE IN ASEAN ACCOMPANIED BY POPULATION GROWTH  

           The ASEAN region exhibits great diversity, which makes the achievement of food and nutrition security a complex problem. The changing demographics and economic conditions of the ASEAN member countries are driving changes in food consumption patterns and lifestyles. There is a greater demand for more oils and fats, sugar, livestock products and fruits and vegetables. This process is accompanied by changes in the way food is handled and distributed, away from traditional markets to supermarkets. Moreover, the growing urban middle class desires better quality food which is safe. To provide these foods requires resources such as additional public expenditure on transportation, marketing and storage infrastructure. Demand for these resources competes with the needs of the sizeable portion of the population that still lives in abject poverty and undernourishment. The economic divide is thus accompanied by a food and nutrition security divide (Grosh, et al, 2008),

          Some countries in Southeast Asia still have a very high incidence of extreme poverty; more than 40 per cent of the population in Cambodia, Laos and Timor-Leste and more than 20 per cent of the population of Indonesia, the Philippines and Vietnam live on less than USD 1.25 a day.  Currently, social protection exist mostly in the form of safety nets, which are non-contributory transfer programmes targeted at the poor and vulnerable (Grosh, et al, 2008), who would be more exposed to risks of food insecurity than other segments of the population.  The main objective of food-based safety net programmes is therefore to provide adequate food and help poor consumers achieve and maintain better nutritional status.

        In the absence of such intervention, the poor would likely decrease their food consumption, which may result in problems such as malnutrition, disease and possibly death.  Countries in Southeast Asia already have a number of food-based safety net programmes including supplementary feeding programmes, food- for-work programmes, food stamps, vouchers, coupons and food price subsidies (Grosh, et al, 2008),.  However, most of these programmes are poorly targeted resulting in a high rate of leakage to non-poor households. Policy initiatives which have been used in other regions to increase economic access to food include reduced taxes, customs duties, food assistance, distribution food, price subsidies, and imposition of safety nets, conditional cash transfers, price controls, and release of stocks.

          Some of these are relevant to ASEAN but may have to be selectively adopted to meet local situations.  The use of social safety nets to address the food security of the poor or near poor can be undermined by protectionist trade policies. In the case of Indonesia, an import ban on rice was introduced in 2004 to stabilise domestic prices after the end of the Asian Financial Crisis.  While social protection measures ensured that poor households were entitled to purchase 25 per cent of their monthly rice consumption at subsidised prices, the prevalent availability of subsidised rice, the low price elasticity of rice demand and the import ban on rice led to higher domestic prices (Sudarno and Bazzi, 2011).  As a result, poor households had to purchase the remaining 75 per cent of their monthly rice consumption at higher prices, which challenged the government's rationale behind its social protection policy.  The ban on imports also led to a 1.8 per cent increase in poverty incidence between 2005 and 2006 as many households were unable to cope with the rising prices of rice (Sudarno and Bazzi, 2011).

2.5 MORE THAN ‘STOCK’ SOLUTION NEEDED

Countries in Southeast Asia face a fresh challenge to their food security as food consumption patterns change, and reliance on imports increases to meet such shifts. Consequently, they may be left with no choice but to seek regional or multilateral options to complement their own food strategies. Malaysia and Thailand could be hit the hardest - being, respectively, Southeast Asia’s top importers of wheat, corn and soybean. The impact may be exacerbated by an estimated 27 per cent population growth and increasing demand for these key commodities over the next three decades.

Country of Singapore is one example state may feel the reverberating effects in the form of increased prices or a shortage of wheat and livestock, as it imports wheat mostly from North America and Australia, and a large proportion of livestock from Indonesia and Malaysia. Southeast Asia’s experience with rice could be instructive in guiding decisions and efforts towards ensuring a sufficient stock of animal feed and wheat. At present, many countries still focus on national-level strategies. For example, traditional rice-importing countries Indonesia and the Philippines seek to be self-sufficient in rice through a combination of national stockpiling schemes, imports, and domestic production and procurement. (Southeast Asia’s Food Security Challenge: More than ‘Stock’ Solution Needed, 2013).

In order to solving this problem ASEAN Plus Three Emergency Rice Reserve (APTERR) was introduced. Food reserves are, however, costly and tedious to manage. Studies show that stabilizing prices through buffer stocks and trade policies requires rigorous conditions, including sufficient access to finance, and well-timed purchases and sales. When reserves are released in non-emergency situations, it can cause instability in the international markets. Basically, APTERR itself has seen limited success. Contributions from the 10 ASEAN countries make up just 11 per cent of the current reserves, with Japan, China and South Korea making up the balance. Total reserves stand at 787,000 tones - less than two days of consumption in Southeast Asia and East Asia. (Southeast Asia’s Food Security Challenge: More than ‘Stock’ Solution Needed, 2013). This is despite ASEAN member states being among the world’s largest producers, exporters and stockpiles of rice. This does not mean that food-stock mechanisms are ineffective. Properly crafted, such measures can strengthen a country’s resilience to food supply shocks. There is a need, however, to look at what could be done to improve their design.

To begin with, ASEAN could look at how APTERR can be enhanced. Specifically, countries will need to step up their commitment to APTERR, by increasing their rice pledges and providing higher financial support to boost operational capacity. Beyond that, a range of other bilateral, multilateral and regional arrangements that involve partnerships with the private sector could be considered (Southeast Asia’s Food Security Challenge: More than ‘Stock’ Solution Needed, 2013). Shared management of specific food items could allow countries to hold a lower level of stocks in other items, which could help them manage costs and strengthen access to a wider range of food stocks. Governments could also tap private-sector logistics networks to facilitate rapid and smooth distribution of food stocks.

On the other, for the food reserve strategy to be effective in times of supply shortages, efficient management and rapid distribution are vital. Among other things, this would require strong air and port connectivity, specialized infrastructure such as a sizable refrigerated-container port, short turnaround times for shipments, and straightforward customs procedures. (Southeast Asia’s Food Security Challenge: More than ‘Stock’ Solution Needed, 2013).

3.0  CONCLUSION

In a nutshell, food security is a multi-dimensional phenomenon. National and international political action seems to require the identification of simple deficits that can be the basis for setting of targets, thus necessitating the adoption of single, simplistic indicators for policy analysis. Something like the “State of global food insecurity” analysis has to be undertaken. Since food insecurity is about risks and uncertainty, the formal analysis should include both chronic sub-nutrition and transitory, acute insecurity that reflects economic and food system

Entitlement as a construct introduces an ethical and human rights dimension into the discussion of food security. There has been a tendency to give food security a too narrow definition, little more than a proxy for chronic poverty. The opposite tendency is international committees negotiating an all-encompassing definition, which ensures that the concept is morally unimpeachable and politically acceptable, but unrealistically broad. As the philosopher, Onora O’Neill, recently noted:

“It can be mockery to tell someone they have the right to food when there is nobody with the duty to provide them with food. That is the risk with the rights rhetoric. What I like about choosing the counterpart, the active obligation of duties rather than the rights, you can’t go on and on without addressing the question who has to do what, for whom, when”.

  

REFERENCES

AFSIS / ASEAN Food Security Information System. (n.d.). Retrieved August 6, 2014, from http://www.afsisnc.org/

 ASEAN INTEGRATION FOOD SECURITY (AIFS 2009-2013). (2009). Retrieved August 8, 2014, from http://www.asean.org/news/item/fourteenth-asean-summit thailand-26-february-1-march-2009

Grosh, M., C. Del Ninno, E. Tesliuc and A. Ouerghi (2008), For Protection and Promotion: The Design and Implementation of Effective Safety Nets. Washington, D. C.: World Bank.

       Southeast Asia’s Food Security Challenge: More than ‘Stock’ Solution Needed - (2013, October 4). Retrieved August 8, 2014, from http://reliefweb.int/report/world/southeast-asia’s-food-security-challenge-more-‘stock’-solution-needed

   

Sudarno, S and S. Bazzi (2011), ‘Social Protection in Indonesia: Past Experiences and Lessons for the Future’, Paper presented at the Annual Bank Conference on Development Opportunities (ABCDE) jointly organized by the World Bank and OECD, 30 May-1 June. Paris.

       

                                                                                                                                                       

SIGNIFICANCE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION AND PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION.

INTRODUCTION

When one speaks of a Government's development programme, one means its forward-looking plans for improving the social and economic well-being of the country and its people, particularly its plans for the next few years. Development programmes differ from country to country. Commonly, they are multispectral and require a wide array of institutions -public, non-governmental and private for their implementation; they address investment and infrastructural needs as well as more general issues of capacity-building and human resource development; they are articulated to provide for national, regional and local needs; they attempt to provide consistency and integration between various developmental initiatives; and they indicate the quantum and sources of funds to be used for the programme and the manner in which such funds are to be allocated to competing uses.

Clearly, the ideal is a host-country Government with adequate capacity in all aspects of managing development: macroeconomic planning, fiscal management programme design, project execution, budgeting, financial control, review and evaluation, accountability reporting, and, in the substantive areas, specific technical know-how. However, in practice, countries vary greatly in their steering and implementation capacities. This has spawned an extensive literature describing implementation problems, often ascribing failures to various host-country shortcomings.

The extent of national capacity influences several aspects of managing development: the relative roles of donor and recipient; strategies designed to improve host-country capacity; and the possibilities for successful development.

SIGNIFICANCE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION AND PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION.

The significance relationship between development and public administration can be studied from points of view, namely;

i) Its significance as an instrument of governance;

ii) Its significance as an instrument of development and change;

iii) Its significance in modern domestic welfare state; 

 I) its significance as an Instrument of Governance

          The most important function of the Government is to govern i.e. to maintain peace and public order and to ensure the safety and security of the life and property of the citizens. It has to ensure that the contracts are honoured by the citizens and their disputes settled. This most significant role of the Government is to be fulfilled through the instrument of public administration. In the beginning of the civilization this was probably the only function performed by the public administration. As the civilization has advanced, many very important functions have been taken over by the Government, but, the importance of this basic function should not be minimized.  Worthwhile progress or development is possible unless the citizens can live in peace. The continuing performance of this function is like the presence of oxygen in the air we breathe. It is hardly noticed so long as it exists. However, in its absence civilized life is impossible. 

          It is also a mistake to think that this regulatory function of the public administration has been static. It has been growing with the growing complexity of modern civilization. For example, new methods of investigation have had to be devised to take care of the better equipped criminals. New sets of controls had to be devised to enable the citizens to share the scarcity of food and other essential articles (Moten, Abdul Rashid, 2008).

          It can be concluded that the government had develop the system to deliver service from good to better in giving servicing to its people. The present government had improved in various ways to ensure the people get the good and satisfy services from the public service. Example, in public universities like Technology Mara University (UiTM), these statuary bodies had made an important system such as entrance and exit survey. These systems help students as customer towards government to evaluate the performance of their lectures in giving services to them. 

           In present, a good governance lead to many successful development in our country. The governments’ functionality is outstanding and can be reliable in managing the country in each aspect. We also had made many important public reform strategies to avoid seven deadly sins that been presented by Tun Abdul Razak such as introduction of a code of ethic to public servant. The government also develop institutions building like Malaysian Administrative Modernisation and Management Planning Unit (MAMPU). MAMPU act as central agencies that centralized all aspect of moderation of public servant cultures’ in effectiveness and efficiency way to overcome internal and external problem that occur in workplace. It stated that MAMPU regulate framework to guide all the public agencies to give an outstanding services towards our local citizens. Development Administration Unit (DAU) is one essential part of these agencies. DAU acts as operational agencies that help MAMPU to fulfil their objectives and aim to modern the administrative system in our country (Hussain, Ahmad Atory, 1995).

ii) Its significance as an Instrument of Development and Change

       The public administration has to play a very significant role as an instrument of development and change. The administration of the country reflects the genius of its people and embodies their qualities, desires and aspirations. Whenever the people decide to proceed on the road to development, their main instrument is the public administration. They need trained manpower to run this school, colleges and the technical institutions. They need technical manpower to build roads, bridges, buildings and to run the machines in the industry. They need scientific manpower to undertake research and development. It is the well-developed public administration which makes all this possible. It is true that part of the effort comes in the private sector, but it alone cannot complete the task. A lot of basic infrastructure has to be developed for which the private initiative is usually not forthcoming. For example, nationwide rail transport, telecommunication network, fundamental research are all to be organised by the Government. 

         In several development areas initial thrust has to be provided by the Government. All this is not possible without a well- developed public administration. This fact was also highlighted by the American administrators and private aid giving agencies who took up the task of assisting the developing countries. It was their experience that the recipient countries could not make much use of their assistance because they did not have the well-equipped administrative machinery to absorb it. The equipment provided by them could not be used for want of skilled manpower. Financial assistance could not be channelized into productive schemes. The first task of developing countries is, therefore, to develop adequate administrative machinery which can take up the diverse tasks required for all round development. 

          The above discussion may create an impression that the public administration plays a significant part only in economic development. Nothing could be farther from truth. In a developing country, the public administration is also an instrument of social change and development. A number of social welfare measures have to be taken up. New laws have to be enacted and enforced. The obvious examples are anti- untouchables, anti-dowry laws and laws for the protection of weaker sections like labour, children, women etc. While the impetus for social change may come from the political process, somebody has to draft the laws and enforce them. This is the task of public administration. 

          In present, good public administration the good result of development and change. It can see in term of development in urban area that totally change from 1960 to 2014 and it develop rapidly. The development and change of urban area came from Tun Abdul Razak that introduced Federation Land Development Authority (FELDA) in Malaysia toward the modernization of the country. The development and change of country bring more job opportunities to the public. It can see through the establishment of Economic Planning Unit (EPU). EPU is focus on development planning of economy. EPU is helps to reduce the gap of the race in term of wealth creation that give opportunities job to all races, give opportunities make a business and shareholder. EPU objectives give comprehensive planning through formulation effective policy for to development and change he public administration (Malaysia. Unit Perancang Ekonomi, 2007).

(iii) Significance as an Instrument of Welfare State

In a modern democratic welfare State, the Government has to provide many services for the welfare of its citizens. It includes the provision of schooling, medical facilities and social security measures. With the breakdown of joint families, the problem of looking after the old and infants, orphans and widows comes up. With the slowing of economic activity, the problem of unemployed youth crops up. The development process brings up many new problems like those of urban slums and juvenile delinquents. The welfare State has to identify these problems and devise solutions for them. The formulation of these schemes and their implementation is another significant function of public administration.

A welfare state is a concept of government in which the state plays a key role in the protection and promotion of the economic and social well-being of its citizens. It is based on the principles of equality of opportunity, equitable distribution of wealth, and public responsibility for those unable to avail themselves of the minimal provisions for a good life. The welfare state involves a transfer of funds from the state, to the services provided (e.g. healthcare, education) as well as directly to individuals.

            Instrument of Welfare State is important because it will be construct the government become efficient and effective in make the country higher level of welfare and citizens easy to get the resources for generate income. Public administration responsible to serve the agencies that will be control the welfare of the state. All the aid will be produce and contribute to the citizens in development country. Country can reduce the problem of poor people and citizens will be gets more welfare such as construct the house, welfare in education and welfare in job.

            In present the good administration in the government especially in sector welfare of state. Ministry of Rural and Regional Development introduce Urban Transformation Centre (UTC). UTC is one of the Government effort and initiatives providing the urban community with key government and private sector services under one roof. Functions of the UTC provide information and explanations related to the policies, philosophy and the country’s vision. This centre will be manages issues and public feedback as input for the Department, the Ministry as well as the Government’s planning Assist the Ministry of Information. The urban communities can make transactions with government departments and private sector in a building with save time without having to go into the buildings from the government. UTC also provides development and youth activities centre, retail space, both local and central activities of NGO.UTC also centre of welfare services, all about the welfare such as education or healthcare can get in this centre. The citizens can get more assistance that their needed. UTC will be control the welfare of the state and make sure the assistance will be transfer to the right people because to avoid the bias. Development administration is important in this cases to ensure public administration do their task rightly and efficient. So the development country will be achieves and Malaysia will become the higher level of welfare in the state of world.

REFERENCES

Hussain, Ahmad Atory. (1995). Administrative Reform in Malaysia: Strategies for

Promoting Efficiency and Productivity in the Public Service, 1981-1991 (3055).

Retrieved from Universiti Putra Malaysia Press website: http://psasir.upm.edu.my/3055

Moten, Abdul Rashid. (2008). Government and politics in Malaysia. Singapore: Cengage Learning.

Malaysia. Unit Perancang Ekonomi. (2007). Economic Planning Unit: 50 years of charting

       Malaysia's development. Putrajaya, Kuala Lumpur: Economic Planning Unit, Prime Minister's Dept.

    Official Website of Economic Planning Unit - HOME. (n.d.). Retrieved August 2, 2014, from http://www.epu.gov.my

UTC - Urban Transformation Centre | Pusat Transformasi Bandar. (n.d.). Retrieved August 2, 2014, from http://www.utc.my

Weidner, E. W. (1964). Technical assistance in public administration overseas: The case for development administration. Chicago: Public Administration Service.