03325pab a2200193 454500008004000000100001700040245006300057260000900120300001500129362001200144520274700156650001402903650001502917650002002932773004402952909001102996999001903007952010503026180718b2015   xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d  aSingh, Amita  aGrazing public goods: Pressure groups in liberal democracy  c2015  ap.357-363.  aJul-Sep  aA competitive spread of interest groups in a neo-liberal state has changed the nature of politics by dispersing authority to govern. Most groups function with a plea to overcome capacity deficits of the government and for strengthening democratic participation. While some may be driven by altruistic service provider to people and the nation, most others have proved to be self-interest seeking pressure groups or lobbies to camouflage constitutional safeguards to accountable governance. The recent past and implementation of flagship programmes has proved that they offer substantial benefits to the state in terms of sustained political support but also increase citizens' vulnerability to lack of distributive justice. Most groups become unaccountable partners in governance and distribution of public goods to weaken democratic institutions. The plea of this article is to insist on administrative reforms as a priority agenda at least in three directions; capacity enhancement and professionalism of every level of bureaucracy, linking state training institutions with central universities, and strengthen accountability structures for publicprivate partnerships and collaborative networks. This article attempts to capture this change he tilt and suggest ways to re-route the tilt from a group oriented governance to the strengtheningA competitive spread of interest groups in a neo-liberal state has changed the nature of politics by dispersing authority to govern. Most groups function with a plea to overcome capacity deficits of the government and for strengthening democratic participation. While some may be driven by altruistic service provider to people and the nation, most others have proved to be self-interest seeking pressure groups or lobbies to camouflage constitutional safeguards to accountable governance. The recent past and implementation of flagship programmes has proved that they offer substantial benefits to the state in terms of sustained political support but also increase citizens' vulnerability to lack of distributive justice. Most groups become unaccountable partners in governance and distribution of public goods to weaken democratic institutions. The plea of this article is to insist on administrative reforms as a priority agenda at least in three directions; capacity enhancement and professionalism of every level of bureaucracy, linking state training institutions with central universities, and strengthen accountability structures for publicprivate partnerships and collaborative networks. This article attempts to capture this change and suggest ways to re-route the tilt from a group oriented governance to the strengthening of constitutional institutions.  of constitutional institutions.   aDemocracy  aLiberalism  aInterest groups  aIndian Journal of Public Administration  a115530  c115524d115524  00104070aIIPAbIIPAd2018-07-19hVolume no: 61, Issue no: 3pAR115990r2018-07-19w2018-07-19yAR