Which criticism argues that agencies grow too large despite benefits?

• A. Imperialism
• B. Waste
• C. Conflict
• D. Turf battles

Answer: (A)

Imperialism in this context describes the tendency of agencies to expand their reach, size, and power—often to justify larger budgets and more staff—even when their programs already provide benefits. This is like “empire-building” within government: once an agency has a program, it seeks to add more tasks, claim new responsibilities, and expand its jurisdiction, leading to growth that outpaces what might be strictly necessary. Because the critique focuses on growth for its own sake, or for greater influence and prestige, it explains why agencies can get bigger despite the benefits they already deliver.

Waste, turf battles, and interagency conflicts are real concerns, but they don’t pinpoint the motive and outcome as precisely. Waste emphasizes inefficient use of resources, turf battles highlight struggles over control of areas, and conflicts refer to disagreements over policy. Imperialism targets the broader trend of growth driven by a quest for power and budget, which is why it best explains why agencies may become larger than warranted even when their work has value.