UNIVERSITY OF LJUBLJANA, FACULTY OF ADMINISTRATION MYk OLAS ROMERIS UNIVERSITY PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION REFORMS IN EASTERN EUROPEAN UNION MEMBER STATES POST-ACCESSION CONVERgENCE AND DIVERgENCE Edited by: Polonca k ovač and Mantas Bileišis Ljubljana, Vilnius 2017 ISBN978-9955-19-851-2 (print) ISBN978-9955-19-850-5 (online) Reviewers: Assoc. prof. dr. Aleksander Aristovnik, Slovenia, University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Administration Assoc. prof. dr. Ieva Deviatnikovaitė, Lithuania, Mykolas Romeris University, Faculty of Law Prof. dr. Harald koht, Norway, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sci- ence, Department of Public Management Assoc. prof. dr. Mirko Pečarič, Slovenia, University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Adminis- tration Proofreading: Prevajanje za vas, Boštjan grošelj, s. p. Publishing was approved by: Institute of Public Administration of Mykolas Romeris University (9th of January 2017, No. 1VAI-2). Faculty of Politics and Management of Mykolas Romeris University (18th of January 2017, No. 1PV-6). Publication Review and Approval Commission of Mykolas Romeris University (15th of February 2017, No. 2L-15) © Mykolas Romeris university, 2017 © University of Ljubljana, 2017 TABLES OF CONTENTS 3 LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................. 8 gRAP HIC LIST ................................................................................................... 10 FOREw ORD ....................................................................................................... 11 LIST OF AUTHORS ........................................................................................... 14 1. Public Administration Reforms in the EEU – Introduction ........................................................................................ 26 References ............................................................................................................. 32 2. Public Administration Reforms in Eastern Europe: Naïve Cultural Following, HesitaNT Europeanization, or Search for g enuine Changes? .................................................................................... 34 2.1. Introduction ............................................................................................. 34 2.2. Catching and Analyzing Administrative Reforms .............................. 35 2.3. Comparative Analysis of Contemporary Public Administrations and Their Reforms: Towards a Composite Theoretical Frame ..........38 2.4. Basic Research Implications ................................................................... 44 References ............................................................................................................. 47 3. Public Sector Reforms in Lithuania since 1990 ........................................... 50 3.1. Introduction ............................................................................................. 50 3.2. Early Developments: A Very Stringent Constitutional Setup ............ 52 3.3. Developments in Central Administration ............................................ 54 3.4. Developments in Regional Policy and Municipal Administration ... 59 3.4.1. Early Y ears ...................................................................................... 59 3.4.2. Debates on Different Levels of Regional and Municipal Administrations ............................................................................. 60 3.4.3. Moderate Municipal Reform ...................................................... 61 3.5. Civil Service .............................................................................................. 64 3.6. Sector w ide Public Administration Reforms ...................................... 70 3.7. Conclusion: In Pursuit of Efficiency? .................................................... 80 References ............................................................................................................. 84 4. Public Administration Reforms in Latvia (1990–2016) ............................. 90 4.1. Introduction ............................................................................................. 90 4.2. Historical Experience with Impact to Decision-makers ..................... 92 4.3. Interest g roups with Influence on Reforms ......................................... 95 4.4. Reforms of Public g overnance Model ................................................ 101 4.5. Organization of PA Functions .............................................................. 113 4 4.6. Civil Service ............................................................................................ 122 4.7. Administrative Process and Procedures ............................................. 128 4.8. Conclusion .............................................................................................. 132 References ........................................................................................................... 137 5. Public Administration in Poland: Reforms and Systemic-Organizational Issues ................................................................... 139 5.1. Introduction ........................................................................................... 139 5.2. Theoretical Issues of the Public Administration Reform ............... 141 5.3. Historical Context of Formation of Public Administration in Poland ................................................................... 142 5.4. Determinants of Administration Reform after 1989 ...................... 149 5.5. Assumptions, g oals, and Principles of the PAR in 1998 ................. 152 5.6. Importance of the Concepts of Territorial Divisions in the Public Administration Reform ............................................................. 157 5.7. Structure, Organization, and Functions of Public Administration in Poland .................................................................... 159 5.7.1. g overnment Administration ..................................................... 160 5.7.2. Self-government Administration .............................................. 165 5.7.3. Regional Self-government .......................................................... 166 5.7.4. Essence of Territorial Self-government ................................ 168 5.7.5. Functions of Public Administration and tTerritorial Self-government .......................................................................... 169 5.7.6. Direct Democracy in Local Government ............................. 173 5.8. Public Finances .............................................................................. 174 5.8.1. Legal g uarantees of Financial Independence of Local g overnment ................................................................................... 175 5.9. Civil Service ............................................................................................ 178 5.10. Openness and Transparency of Public Administration Operations: Public Participation ............................................................................. 181 5.11. Conclusion ............................................................................................ 184 References ........................................................................................................... 187 6. Public Administration Reforms in Slovakia .............................................. 195 6.1. Introduction ........................................................................................... 195 6.2. Sequence and Character of Public Administration Reforms in Slovakia .................................................................................................... 197 6.2.1. Historical Legacy of Public Administration Reforms ............ 197 6.2.2. Developments – Realized Reforms and Their Contents and Character ............................................................. 198 5 6.2.3. Summary – Character of Public Administration Reform in Slovakia ..................................................................................... 203 6.3. “Marketization” of Delivery of Public Services, and Agencification ................................................................................ 209 6.3.1. Local Communal Services Delivery: Massive Externalization ............................................................. 209 6.3.2. Education – Student Vouchers at Primary and Secondary Level and Performance Financing of Higher Education........................................................................ 212 6.3.3. Health Care Delivery: Competitive Health Insurance Financing and Plurality of Ownership Forms ......................... 215 6.3.4 .Agencification .............................................................................. 217 6.4. Civil Service Reform .............................................................................. 221 6.5. Improving Administrative Services and Procedures, E-g overnment ........................................................................................ 224 6.5.1. Improving Efficiency and Quality of Administrative Services ............................................................ 224 6.5.2. Administrative Procedures: “Red Tape” .................................. 226 6.5.3. Transparency ................................................................................ 228 6.5.4. Accessibility and E-g overnment ............................................... 229 6.5.5. Lack of Accountability and Responsibility ............................... 231 6.6. Conclusion ............................................................................................. 231 References ........................................................................................................... 233 7. Hungarian Public Administration: Last Thirty Y ears, w aves in the Story ..................................................................................... 237 7.1. Introduction – Defining Models ......................................................... 237 7.1.1. Socialist System ........................................................................... 238 7.1.2. Bureaucratic Administration ..................................................... 241 7.1.3. New Public Management (NPM) .............................................. 242 7.1.4. New Public g overnance (NPg) ................................................ 243 7.1.5. Neo-w eberian State (Nw S) ....................................................... 244 7.2. On Major g overnance Fields: Structure, Procedures, Personnel .... 246 7.2.1. Structure of PA............................................................................. 246 7.2.2. Functioning and Operation ....................................................... 262 7.2.3. Civil Service Regulation ............................................................. 273 7.3. Public Administration – Scholarly Debates over Models ................. 276 7.3.1. Materials and Methods ............................................................... 276 7.3.2. Overview ...................................................................................... 279 6 7.3.3. On Various Models of PAR ....................................................... 280 7.4. Conclusion: Stages and Models in Hungary with Further Considerations ............................................................... 283 References ........................................................................................................... 291 8. Slovene Public Administration Reform: Europeanization as a Bridge over Traditional and Post-Socialist Legacies ................................................. 302 8.1. Introductionary Characteristics of Slovenia and Its Public Administration ...................................................................................... 302 8.2. Mainstream PAR in Slovenia 1991–2016 ............................................ 307 8.2.1. Paradigms Shift in National Strategies on PAR in Slovenia ........................................................................... 307 8.2.2. Organization, Decentralization, Funding, and Functions of the PA .................................................................... 313 8.2.3. Civil Service and Integrity System ........................................... 320 8.2.4. g ood Administration: Modernized Administrative Procedures and Transparency ................................................. 325 8.3. Conclusion ............................................................................................. 331 References ........................................................................................................... 333 9. Reform of the Croatian Public Administration: Between Patchy Europeanization and Bumpy Modernization ........................................ 339 9.1. Introduction ........................................................................................... 339 9.2. Croatia as a Country Imbued with History ........................................ 342 9.3. Croatian Public Administration .......................................................... 347 9.3.1. Outline .......................................................................................... 347 9.3.2. Development ................................................................................ 350 9.3.3. Main Problems and Attempts to Solve Them ..........................357 9.3.4. Reform Concepts and Processes ............................................... 368 9.3.5. Future of Croatian Public Administration: Modernization, Inertia, or Decline .......................................... 377 9.4. Conclusion .............................................................................................. 379 References ........................................................................................................... 382 10. Public Administration Reform in Romania after 25 Y ears .................... 389 10.1. Introduction ......................................................................................... 389 10.2. g eneral Information about Romania’s Public Administration ...... 389 10.3. PAR in Romania. Challenges and Changes ...................................... 391 10.3.1. Communist Legacy ................................................................... 392 10.3.2. Motivation for Reform – External vs. Internal Pressures ...................................................................... 393 7 10.3.3. Reform Coherence (or Lack of It) ........................................... 395 10.3.4. Magnitude and Approach. Sectorial Policy vs. Structural Reforms ................................................................... 398 10.3.5. Pre-Bureaucracy towards Post-Bureaucracy ....................... 400 10.3.6. Context of Reform..................................................................... 402 10.4. Specifics of the Administrative System. Civil Service, Decentralization, Agencification, Public Funding ........................... 406 10.4.1. Civil Service ............................................................................... 406 10.4.2. Reform and Decentralization Process .................................... 410 10.4.3. Public Funding and Agencification ........................................ 415 10.5. Conclusion ............................................................................................ 419 References ........................................................................................................... 422 11. Public Administration Reform in Bulgaria: w eberian Bureaucracy, New Public Management, and g ood g overnance at the Same Time ......... 427 11.1. Introduction and Country Overview ................................................ 427 11.2. PAR Overview: Three Stages and Concepts of Public g overnance ............................................................................. 429 11.2.1. First Stage of the Reform From State Socialism to Democracy ........................................................................... 430 11.2.2. Second Stage: Towards Traditional Administration and Public g overnance through the Private Sector ................... 433 11.2.3. Third Stage: Towards g ood g overnance ............................. 444 11.2.4. More Centralization than Decentralization ........................... 457 11.3. Conclusion: Setting of Administrative Practices instead of g overnance Model .......................................................................... 466 References ........................................................................................................... 468 12. Conclusion: Main Themes of Public Administration Reforms in the Eastern EU Member States ......................................................................... 471 12.1. Convergence, Divergence, and Administrative Spaces ................... 471 12.2. Call them EEU-11 ............................................................................... 474 12.3. EU, EEU-11, or Case-by-case? ........................................................... 477 12.4. Initial Institutional Steps ..................................................................... 479 12.5. Non-Alignment of Domestic and International Drivers for Reforms ............................................................................. 481 12.6. w hat Are the Visions for Reform? .................................................... 484 12.7. w here Is EEU-11 in the Broader PAR Debate? ............................... 488 References ........................................................................................................... 492 Subject Index ..................................................................................................... 495 8 LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1: The Number of Employees in Public Administration Institutions 2010-2016 ........................................................................................ 75 Table 3.2: Ethics Problems in Lithuanian g overnment since 1918 ............................... 79 Table 4.1: Dominant g roups and Their Interests during the Reform .........................102 Table 4.2: Features of Public Administration Model Developed during the Reform Periods .................................................................................................. 104 Table 6.1: Zigzag “ Administrative” Reforms .................................................................... 203 Table 6.2: Profile of Organizations Providing w aste Management Services in Slovakia Ranked in Ascending Order of Cost to the User (situation in 2003) ............................................................................................. 210 Table 6.3: Percentage of Contracted Local Public Services ........................................... 210 Table 6.4: Comparative Efficiency Index for Contracting vs. Internal Production (Internal Form = 100) ....................................................................................... 211 Table 6.5: Public Transfers to Public Higher Education 2002–2006 (mil. Skk, current prices) ................................................................................ 213 Table 6.6: Number of Newly Accepted Higher Education Students in Slovakia ........ 214 Table 6.7: Public and Own Resources of Universities/Higher schools (thousands Sk) ................................................................................................... 214 Table 6.8: Hospital Ownership by Region (2009) ........................................................... 217 Table 6.9: List of Service Delivering Agencies (per Selected Sectors) in Slovakia ..... 218 Table 6.10: Main Regulatory Agencies in Slovakia ........................................................... 220 Table 6.11: Civil Service Positions and the Selection Process thereof ........................... 223 Table 6.12: Estimated Costs of Taxation in Slovakia in 2011: Income Taxation .......... 227 Table 6.13: Alternative Recalculations ............................................................................... 227 Table 7.1: Basic Changes in Public Service Provision from the System Transition ... 265 Table 7.2: Appearance of the Nine Approaches ............................................................. 281 Table 8.1: Strategic Documents on Slovene PAR ............................................................ 308 Table 8.2: Cutback Management and Political Decision-Making in Slovenia, 2008−2014 .......................................................................................................... 312 Table 8.3: Selected Indicators of g overnmental Efficiency, Values and Ranking in Eastern European Countries ....................................................... 313 Table 8.4: Number of (Public) Agencies in Slovenia (Type 2, National level) over Time .......................................................................................................... 320 9 Table 9.1: Fragmentation Process in Croatia 1991−2016 .............................................. 349 Table 9.2: Number of Personnel in the Croatian Public Administration, 2016 ......... 350 Table 11.1: Number and Percentage of Employees in Agencies (by Type) ................... 443 Table 11.2: Index of the United Nations for the Development of e-g overnment for 2013 and 2014 ................................................................... 447 Table 11.3: E-g overnance .................................................................................................... 448 Table 11.4: Data for Employed Persons in the Administration ...................................... 452 Table 11.5: Data for Employed Persons in the Local Administration ............................ 459 Table 11.6: Municipal Revenues (in millions of leva) ...................................................... 463 Table 11.7: Expenses in Municipal Budgets (in millions of leva) ................................... 464 Table 11.8: gDP and gV A by Economic Sector and Region (2014) .............................. 465 Table 12.1: PAR Types in EEU-11 ....................................................................................... 482 Table 12.2: Focuses of PAR in (groups) of EEU-11 (nine countries included) ............ 487 10 gRAP HIC LIST Figure 3.1: Dynamics in the Number of Lithuanian Agencies, 1990−2012 ..................71 Figure 3.3: The Number of Employees in National and Municipal PA Institutions between 2010 and 2016...............................................................74 Figure 3.4: Civil Service Relative to the Lithuanian Population and Labor Market in 2013 .......................................................................................76 Figure 5.1: Structure of Public Administration in Poland ............................................160 Figure 7.1: Simplistic Model of State Administration before 2011 ..............................247 Figure 7.2: Schematic Structure of Soviet-Type Council System .................................253 Figure 7.3: g eneralized Organogram of a County g overnment Office ......................261 Figure 7.4: Reform- based Articles in the Journals ........................................................279 Figure 7.5: Aggregated Distribution of Models ..............................................................281 Figure 10.1: Number of Urgency Ordinances ...................................................................397 Figure 10.2: Linear Logic of New Legislation ...................................................................400 Figure 10.3: Areas Regulated by the Code of Conduct for Civil Servants ....................408 Figure 10.4: Public Administration Reform Strategies in Romania ..............................412 Figure 11.1: Corruption Perceptions Index ......................................................................441 Figure 11.2: Control on the Corruption (w orld Bank) ...................................................442 Figure 11.3: Administrative Structures in Central Administration ...............................443 Figure 11.4: Regulatory Quality according to the w orld Bank ......................................451 Figure 11.5: Strategic Documents at the National Level .................................................454 Figure 11.6: g overnment Effectiveness w orld Bank .......................................................455 Figure 11.7: Administrative Structures in Local Administration ..................................458 Figure 11.8: Types of Services Provided by Central and Local Administrations .........460 11 FOREVORD Foreword The idea to design and prepare a scientific monograph on public admi- nistration reforms (PAR) and public governance, particularly dedicated to the Eastern European counties and their development after accession to the European Union (EU), was born in September 2015 in Vilnius. Namely, My- kolas Romeris University organized a conference on this topic in order to ce- lebrate 25 th anniversary of Lithuania‘s Restoration of Independence. During the respective conference in-depth discussions have been led acknowledging the need to scientifically analyze this field by marking key convergent charac- teristics of countries involved, particularly taking into account that there is hardly any available literature in English to mark the progress in this region respectively. At that time, we have also developed a notion of the EEU-11, i.e. a region of post-communist and post-socialist EU Member States (See more in Part C). The book hence represents an effort to conceptualize the content and dimensions of the Eastern European (EE) region post-communist / socialist transformation upon the role and results of PAR as a “success story” . The ge- neral research question that we addressed has been based on an assumption of radical change in public governance in respective countries due to their Europeanization. Simultaneously, we have envisaged that: A) PAR are facing so called implementation gap in general, B) there are crucial differences in individual (groups of) countries (e.g. among Baltic countries, Visegrad (V4) or former Austrian-Hungarian or Yugoslavian countries, etc.). Especially with regard to governance convergence towards the EU standards and among each other as well as different trajectories of divergence as the homogenizing effects of communism have faded and construct a more relevant and contem- porary theory of PAR that could replace the outdated notion of one-size-fits- all post-communist / EE transformation theory. Our aims by developing and publishing this monograph are therefore: • to provide comparative analysis of PAR in the 11 new EU member states (joined in 2004, 2007 and 2013) in the period of 1990-2016 ba- sed on scientific research and harmonized profile enabling optimal objective comparisons; 12 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence • to enhance interdisciplinary public administration (PA) related rese- arch and its dissemination; • to analyze selected subtopics within PAR in terms of main aims, prio- ritized activities and level of realization, in particular: Ŝ public governance models and trends in political-administrative decision-making, and accountability of PA incorporated; Ŝ functions and organization of public administration (in the bro- adest sense), local self-government, delegation of authority (e.g. regulatory agencies), public-private partnerships and similar in- cluded; Ŝ civil service system based on integrity and ethics; Ŝ work processes with special emphasis on administrative procedu- res modernization and transparency in terms of good administra- tion; • to scientifically, comparatively and empirically define key differen- ces and characteristic of the new EU member states, i.e. the EEU-11, addressing among others non/compliance to w estern European mo- dels and practices and ongoing post-socialist processes; • to detect main con- and divergences among individual countries in this region; • to transfer current research results through a comprehensive literature review of academic publications in (only or mainly) native languages of the EEU-11; • to enable knowledge transfer from theory to practice in the region to policy makers; • to establish and enhance the role of publishers as key developers of PA studies at the European level. The initiative has been accepted by a joint venture of two publishing houses, namely University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Administration, and My- kolas Romeris University. Such a co-operation represents one of the aims that we strived for, in terms of a more close collaboration between the countries in our region to enable exchange of best practices, and thus to learn from each other. w e have invited distinguished national scholars in the field to prepare a profile of their country in this respect, following a joint outline. Unfortunate- 13 FOREVORD ly, Estonian and Czech colleagues could not respond in due time but we have managed to gather nine national reports that we believe serve the purpose. All contributions have been subjected to a full review, conducted by four revie- wers of different expertise (political science, law, economics, management), aiming to cover as much disciplinary specifics as possible but simultaneously focus on interdisciplinary holistic study. Finally, in editors’ capacity, we would especially like to thank to all experts involved in this initiative for their collaboration, efforts and patien- ce within the coordination process. Besides the authors drafting the country profiles, special thanks go to the reviewers, Prof. dr. Harald k oht, and assoc. prof. dr. Aleksander Aristovnik, assoc. prof. dr. Ieva Deviatnikovaitė and as- soc. prof. dr. Mirko Pečarič. Moreover, we would like to acknowledge contri- bution of both publishing houses and their representatives for their profes- sional support. Ljubljana, Vilnius, January 2017 Polonca k ovač and Mantas Bileišis 14 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence List of Authors Mantas Bileišis Lithuania, Mykolas Romeris University, Institute of Public Administration, mantas.bileisis@mruni.eu Mantas Bileišis is Associate Professor of Public Administration. He has been lecturer int public administration since 2008, and in 2012 defended a doctoral dissertation at Mykolas Romeris University focusing on interinstitu- tional relations of executive government in Lithuania at the national level. He has authored numerous articles on subjects of government interinstitutional co-operation, regional governance, strategic planning and the civil service of Lithuania. He has been a visiting teacher to over 10 European universities. Since 2015, he is heading the Mykolas Romeris University Public Manage- ment Innovation Laboratory focused on applied research and management solutions for provision of the Lithuanian public sector organizations. Jurgita Domeikienė Lithuania, Office of the Government of the Republic of Lithuania, jurgita. domeikiene@lrv.lt Jurgita Domeikienė is Director of Public Administration and Social En- vironment Department at the Office of the g overnment of the Republic of Li- thuania. Her experience in the civil service spans multiple positions, including those of representing Lithuania in various EU formats. In her capacity as direc- tor of the department, she has been the leading civil servant in the process of implementing the current Lithuanian long-term strategy “Lithuania 2030” , and is monitoring the reforms that are being implemented as a part of the measures of the long-term strategy thereof. The department itself also initiates projects and reforms relevant to the modernization of public management both at the Office of the g overnment and throughout the central government. György Gajduschek Hungary, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Centre for Social Sciences. g yörgy gajduschek is Senior Researcher and Head of Research Unit at 15 LIST OF aUTHORS the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Centre for Social Sciences, and a pro- fessor at Corvinus University, Budapest, Department for Public Policy and Management. He holds Master’s degrees in Sociology (ELTE University, Bu- dapest) and in Public Administration (SUNY, Rockefeller College, NY.) and a PhD degree in Political Science (ELTE University, Budapest) and in Law (University of Pécs, Hungary). He has published several papers and books both in Hungarian and in English, mostly in the field of public administra- tion, especially on bureaucratic functioning, civil service in the CEE region, the legal aspects and the ‘legalistic’ nature of PA in the region. He served as an appointed President of the Public Policy Section of the Hungarian Poli- tical Science Association for 4 years, and is presently the Co-chair of one of NISPAcee Standing w orking g roups. He worked as a consultant on various PA reforms in about a dozen post-socialist countries. Călin Emilian Hințea Romania, Babes Bolyai University, Faculty of Political Science, Adminis- tration and Communication, hintea@fspac.ro Călin Emilian Hințea is Professor at Babes Bolyai University, Cluj Na- poca, Romania. He teaches Public Management and Strategy courses. He is Dean of the College of Political, Administrative and Communication Scien- ces at BBU. He is also former Secretary of State, Head of Strategy Unit, Prime Minister‘s Office (2008-2010) as well as a former Chair of Public Adminis- tration Department at BBU (2004-2012). He serves as a Senior Editor of the Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences.  Tamás M. Horváth Hungary, MTA-DE Public Service Research Group, horvath.m.tamas@ law.unideb.hu Tamás M. Horváth is Professor at the University of Debrecen, Hungary, Leader of MTA–DE Public Service Research g roup and Head of the Depar- tment of Financial Law and Public Management, Faculty of Political and Le- gal Studies. He received his MA and PhD in political and legal studies, and was awarded the title of Doctor of the Hungarian Academy of Science. For- merly, he was also a public services project manager in Budapest Urban Ser- 16 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence vices Management Center cPlc (2011–2016), Vice Dean (2009–2011), Lead Expert of the EU URBACT II, Joining Forces w orking g roup on metropoli- tan governance (2008–2010), and Deputy Director g eneral in the Hungarian Institute of Public Administration (2001–2007). His main fields of interest are public management, decentralization, public finance, and management of public services. He is regularly involved in comparative research projects and has extensive experiences as a consultant in public administration in many countries. His special professional interests are public utility and metropoli- tan services, and regulatory functions in the public sector. Károly Jugovits Hungary, National University of Public Service, Corvinus University of Bu- dapest, karoly.jugovits@uni-nke.hu k ároly Jugovits is a PhD student at the Corvinus University of Budapest and a research fellow at the Institute for Research and Development on State and g overnance, National University of Public Service. Currently, he also wor- ks as an expert in the Public Administration and Local g overnment Monitor Project. He holds a MA degree in Public Administration (NUPS, Budapest). His doctoral study focuses on public policy evaluation in a CEE context. He has been instructing courses in comparative public administration, adminis- trative law and research methodology. During his undergraduate studies, he led the well-established Zoltán Magyary Student g roup for Advanced Studies, and organized a number of small group seminars, lectures, national and in- ternational conferences in this respect. He is a Board Member of the National Association of Doctoral Students Administrative Sciences Department. Ivan Koprić Croatia, University of Zagreb, Faculty of Law, ivan.kopric@pravo.hr Professor Ivan koprić is Head of the Chair of Administrative Science at the Faculty of Law, University of Zagreb, and President of the Institute of Public Administration, Croatia. He is Full Professor of Administrative Sci- ence, and has 30 years of professional experience in law, public administra- tion, science, and consultancy. He acts as Editor-in-chief of the international scientific journal Croatian and Comparative Public Administration; editor of 17 LIST OF aUTHORS the book series Contemporary Public Administration (29 books to date); men- tor of 11 PhD theses; leader, researcher, and expert in more than 35 scien- tific, policy, and professional projects; consultant on more than 25 projects in South-Eastern Europe; member of several academic and public bodies in Croatia; author and editor of 20 books, around 110 scientific papers and more than 170 other articles and more than 140 presentations at scientific confe- rences. Recent books (in Croatian) include European Administrative Space (co-author, 2012), Reform of Local and Regional Self-Government in Croatia (ed., 2013), Administrative Science: Public Administration in Contemporary European Context (co-author, 2014), Europeanisation of the Croatian Public Administration (ed., 2014), Public and Social Services in Europe (co-editor, 2016, Palgrave). Fields of expertise and research include local governance, de- centralization, multi-level governance, the European Administrative Space, organization theory, administrative theory, administrative education, human resource management, performance management, administrative procedu- res, public policy, and comparative public administration, etc. He has been a UN, UNDP , USAID, LgI, and wB expert, acted in all SEE countries. He re- ceived the Alena Brunovska Award for Teaching Excellence in Public Admi- nistration by NISPAcee in 2016. Polonca Kovač Slovenia, University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Administration, polonca.ko- vac@fu.uni-lj.si Polonca k ovač is Associate Professor of Administrative Law and Public Administration, graduated from the Faculty of Law in Ljubljana in 1995, com- pleted a specialist 18-month international programme on the reforms of pu- blic administration, MSc studies on new public management in 1999 at the Faculty of Social Sciences, and her doctoral studies on delegation of public authorities in 2005 at the Faculty of Law, Ljubljana. She has over 20 years of working experiences in public administration and in higher education, inclu- ding guest lectures in foreign universities and serving as an OECD, wB, SI- gMA and ReSPA expert regarding Europeanization of public administration and modernization of administrative (procedural) law. She is the (co)author, editor and reviewer of numerous scientific monographs, articles and conferen- ce papers, including monographs such as Contemporary g overnance Models 18 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence and Practices in Central and Eastern Europe, Administrative-Legal Dilemmas, Commentary on the Slovene Constitution, Regulatory Impact Assessment, etc. She also acts as a Steering Committee Member of the NISPAcee and a Co-director of Study g roup on Law and Public Administration within EgPA. Stanisław Michałowski Poland, Marie Curie Sklodowska University, Faculty of Political Science, Department of Local Government and Policy, smichalowski@poczta.onet.pl Stanisław Michałowski is Professor of Social Sciences. His academic re- search focuses on the problems of political thought and public administra- tion with particular emphasis on social aspects of the functioning of local government. He has practical experience in working with local-government as a councilor of the City of Lublin and the Regional Council of the Provin- ce of Lublin. He still closely co-operates with local government authorities working as an expert. He is the author and co-author of numerous academic papers devoted to the problems of local government and public administra- tion. Moreover, numerous master’s theses and doctoral dissertations in his respective fields have been conducted under his direction. He combines his research and teaching interests with a number of organizational duties for the Faculty of Political Science and Maria Curie-Sklodowska University serving as Vice Dean, Dean and Vice Rector for students’ affairs. Since 2012, he has served as Rector of the University. Beáta Mikušová Meričková Slovakia, Matej Bel University in Banská Bystrica, Faculty of Economics, beata.mikusovamerickova@umb.sk Beáta Mikušová Meričková is Professor of Public Economics and Ser- vices at the Faculty of Economics, Matej Bel University in Banská Bystrica, Slovakia. She has focused her research activities in the areas of public sec- tor, public finances and new approaches to the provision of public services. These activities are documented in several monographs, numerous research studies and articles published in current academic journals and conference proceedings at home and abroad. Her research activities include co-operation in projects of international and national significance (SRDA, VEgA, gACR, NISPAcee, COST, NASPAA, and Strategy of Slovak Society Development). 19 LIST OF aUTHORS Her research is quite extensive and the results have focused mainly on the im- plementation of market tools of management in public sector. The significan- ce of her research activities is also confirmed by quite relevant references to all of her published results. The most significant contribution of her research on the theoretical and practical levels includes outlining the recommendations and guidelines in the area of the legislative, institutional, economic and or- ganizational requirements of successful implementation of different forms of partnerships of the public and private sectors. Maria Murray Svidronova Slovakia, Matej Bel University in Banská Bystrica, Faculty of Economics, maria.murraysvidronova@umb.sk Maria Murray Svidronova is Assistant Professor at the Faculty of Eco- nomics at the Department of Public Economy and Regional Development, Faculty of Economics, Matej Bel University in Slovakia. Her teaching and research activities focus on non-profit and non-governmental organizations (their management and financing), public services and social innovations. Some of the latest projects she has participated in include FP7 (LIPSE) and HORIZON 2020 (SOLIDUS). She is the author of more than 40 publications and scientific papers. She also works part-time as a project manager and lec- tor in several educational non-governmental organizations in Slovakia. Juraj Nemec Czech Republic, Masaryk University in Brno, Faculty of Economics and Administration, juraj.nemec@umb.sk Juraj Nemec is Professor of Public Management at the Faculty of Econo- mics and Administration of the Masaryk University in Brno, Czech Republic. He has 36 years experience in teaching economics, finance and management in the public sector. He has published over 400 books and scientific articles in this field and fulfilled several academic posts, including the position of Dean of the Faculty. In 2010, he received an important reward for his performance – NISPAcee Brunowska Award. He is President of NISPAcee, Vice-President of the International Research Society for Public Management, Vice-President of the Management Board of the International Association of Schools and Institutes of Administration (IASIA), member of the Board of the European 20 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Association for Public Administration Accreditation, member of the g roup of Independent Experts on the European Charter of Local Self-g overnment by the Council of Europe, and Editor-in-chief of the Journal of Public Admi- nistration and Policy. He coordinated numerous research and advisory pro- jects. He primarily acts as a senior public procurement advisor and has a track record of 23 years professional experience in various transition countries. As a key advisor to the governments of Slovakia and the Czech Republic, both ex-Phare countries, he supported all levels of public administration in their internal reforms and improvement of public procurement systems, prior and after their accession to the European Union. Simeon Petrov Bulgaria, Sofia University, Faculty of Philosophy, simeon.at.petrov@gmail.com Simeon Petrov is Assistant Professor at the Public Administration De- partment of Sofia University. He graduated in public administration, political science and international relations. He holds a PhD in political science and public administration. His PhD thesis focused on the public policy change. He is author of several articles analyzing labor market problems at the natio- nal and European level. He worked as an expert and researcher for govern- ment institutions and NgOs on projects related to the administrative reform, education policy, standardization, social reform, and others. He works as a lecturer on fundamentals of management, public policy study, public policy analysis, social policy, European social policy and others. He is a member of the Committee for Scientific Research, Faculty of Philosophy and member of the Editorial Board of electronic scientific peer review journal (ПУБЛИЧНИ ПОЛИТИКИ.bg, ISSN 1314-2313). Primož Pevcin Slovenia, University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Administration, primoz. pevcin@fu.uni-lj.si Primož Pevcin is Associate Professor of Public Sector Economics and Management at University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Administration. He defen- ded his doctoral dissertation in 2004 at the Faculty of Economics, University of Ljubljana. His thesis focused on the empirical verification of factors affec- 21 LIST OF aUTHORS ting the size of government as well as on the possible determination of the optimal size of government. His research interests are widely associated with the public sector economics and management topics. Currently, he focuses mostly on topics related to austerity management and local government orga- nization. He has been involved in several national and international research projects that addressed various public sector issues, and has published several scientific publications. He has been also working for some time in insurance industry as a product developer and underwritter. During his career he has also performed several managerial posts at the faculty, where he served as a Vice-Dean for International Co-operation and Scientific Research, and cur- rently as a Vice-Dean for Academic Affairs. Peter Pisár Slovakia, Matej Bel University in Banská Bystrica, Faculty of Econo- mics, peter.pisar@umb.sk Peter Pisár is Associate Professor of Public Economics and Public Finan- ce at the Faculty of Economics, Matej Bel University, Banská Bystrica in Slo- vakia. He is Head of the Finance and Accounting Department. His scientific work is focused on innovation, public finance, public economics, cohesion policy, regional development and regional aspects of finance. Among other publications, he published scientific articles on innovation and public subsidy effectiveness in several impact factor journals. He participated in internatio- nal projects (Horizon 2020, Visegrad Fund in co-operation with Interreg 4C and Progress). He is currently involved in a research project “Universities and Economic Development of Regions” and „Innovation and Innovation Policy at Regional Level“. In practice, he focuses on project management in the pu- blic sector and obtaining support from the EU fund programs. Māris Pūķis Latvia, University of Latvia, Latvian Association of Local and Regional Governments, maris@lps.lv Maris Pukis is Senior Adviser of LALRg, Doctor of Technical Sciences (1987, Leningrad Politechnical Institute), Doctor of Physics (1992, Latvian Academy of Sciences), Doctor of Economics (2007, University of Latvia). He 22 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence has experience in practical politics acting as a Concillor and Vice Chairman of the Committee of Budgets (Riga City government), and used to be Parlia- mentary Secretary in 5 national governments (1988-2004). He also has expe- rience as Associate Professor at the University of Latvia (2000-2015), particu- larly he was a lecturer to doctoral students in Public Administration Reforms. He has been acting as an alternate in the Council of Europe Experts g roup on European Charter of Local Self g overnment since 2012 and a member of Subsidiarity Expert g roup of the EU Committee of Regions. For 25 years he permanently participated in different working groups and parliamentary discussions on public administration reform in Latvia. Mariusz W . Sienkiewicz Poland, Marie Curie Sklodowska University, Faculty of Political Science, De- partment of Local Government and Policy, m.sienkiewicz@localdevelopment.eu Mariusz w . Sienkiewicz is Assistant Professor in the Department of Lo- cal g overnment and Policy, Faculty of Political Science of Marie Curie Sklo- dowska University in Lublin. He graduated from the Faculty of Political Sci- ence and the Faculty of Law and Administration at the University of Maria Curie-Sklodowska University in 2000. He works as a University lecturer in management, local government, public finance, public utilities, public procu- rement, planning, local and regional development. He has authored over 60 national and international publications on topics related to local government, public finance and local development. Since 2007, he has been Founder and President of the Local Development Centre Foundation. He is member of several national and international scientific organizations, among others, NISPAcee, IPPA, LkB, PTNP. He acts as an Editor-in-chief of the yearbook Journal of Local Development, a coordinator of several projects co-financed by the European Union grants, an advisor and trainer on issues relating to the EU funds, strategic management, public finance and public procurement. Vainius Smalskys Lithuania, Mykolas Romeris University, Institute of Public Administration, vainius@mruni.eu Vainius Smalskys is Professor and Director of the Public Administration 23 LIST OF aUTHORS Institute at Mykolas Romeris University. In 2006, he defended his doctoral thesis on police personnel training reforms at k aunas University of Techno- logy. He published numerous articles and books on civil service, history of administration and other topic of public administration. He has over 10 ye- ars of experience in academic public administration research, public sector consulting and training of civil servants. He was the editor and contributing author to the most prolific public administration textbooks in Lithuania, such as Public g overnance (lith. Viešasis valdymas, 2010), Theories of Public Administration (lith. Viešojo administravimo teorijos, 2015). He is the leading representative of Mykolas Romeris University at the 5 university consor- tium, which organizes a doctoral studies program in Management and Public Administration, and is a member of the Personnel Management. Olga Stariņeca Latvia, University of Latvia, Faculty of Business, Management and Eco- nomics, olga.starineca@lu.lv Olga Stariņeca is a PhD candidate in Management Sciences, subfield of Public Administration. She finished her MSc studies in Entrepreneurship and Management in 2013 at the Faculty of Engineering Economics and Manage- ment, Riga T echnical University, Latvia. She has 3 years of working experiences in higher education. She is the author and (co)author of numerous scientific articles and conference papers on human resource management, human re- source recruitment and selection, employee training, social responsibility, etc. Andrius Stasiukynas Lithuania, Mykolas Romeris University, Institute of Public Administration, stasiukynas@mruni.eu Andrius Stasiuskynas is Associate Professor at the Institute of Public Administation and Vice-Dean of the Faculty of Politic and Management at Mykolas Romeris University. He has been a teacher of public service provisi- on and related subjects at the Institute of Public Administration since 2006. He defended his dissertation in 2010 at Mykolas Romeris University on the subject of energy policy reform with a focus on increasing citizen participa- tion in the context of shifting technologies of energy production. In parallel, he has been actively involved in the NgO and consultancy activity focusing 24 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence on reduction of youth substance abuse, risky behaviors, and social exclusion. He has been advising the Ministry of Social Affairs and Labor on policy re- forms in related areas of public service provision and co-authored multiple applied studies in youth policy of Lithuania. He authored and co-authored dozens of academic articles on various subjects of public administration, such as citizen participation, energy policy and governance, public service provisi- on, and youth policy and governance. Tudor Cristian Țiclău Romania, Babes Bolyai University, Faculty of Political Science, Adminis- tration and Communication, ticlau@fspac.ro Tudor Ticlau is Lecturer at the Public Administration Department, College of Political, Administrative and Communication Sciences, Babes-Bolyai Univer- sity, Cluj Napoca, Romania. He received a PhD in sociology in 2012 from the same university for a dissertation in public leadership. His research interests are public leadership and public marketing. He is affiliated to the Cluj Management and Planning g roup (CMPg) and has done work as a consultant in strategic planning for various Romanian local governments. He is currently teaching Or- ganizational Theory and Public Leadership at Babes-Bolyai University. Tatyana Tomova Bulgaria, Sofia University, Faculty of Philosophy tatiana.tomova@gmail.com Tatyana Tomova is Associated Professor of Public Administration and Public Policy at Sofia University. She graduated in sociology in 1983 at the same University, and works as a researcher in the field of political institutions and relations. Her PhD thesis was done in the field of comparative social po- licies. She has 20 years of experience in teaching public and social policies, including policy making in the EU. She is the author of 4 monographs, of which two are dedicated to the social policy practices and the other two to the methods of public policy making. She has a extensive experiences of working as a consultant. She worked for state and local authorities in Bulgaria. She dis- plays her main competences in the field of analysis and research of public and social policies with a focus on social security, labor relations, health, minority, including ethnic groups. 25 LIST OF aUTHORS Inesa Vorončuka Latvia, University of Latvia, Faculty of Business, Management and Eco- nomics, inesa.voroncuka@lu.lv Inesa V orončuka is Pprofessor of Public Administration, graduated from the University of Latvia in Riga in 1992. She has more than 40 years of wor- king experience in higher education including guest lectures in foreign uni- versities and acting as a Director of a Master program „Public Administra- tion“ and a PhD program „Management Science“ (Subfields: Public Admin- istration, Business Administration) at the Faculty of Business, Management and Economics of the University of Latvia. She is a member of NISPAcee and ASPA. She is the (co)author, editor and reviewer of numerous scientific monographs, articles and conference papers. The main directions of her re- search work are reform of state administration, municipal reform, regional economic development, problem of project administration, improvement of staff administration, etc. Michiel S. de Vries The Netherlands, Radboud University Nijmegen, Institute for Management Research, m.devries@fm.ru.nl Michiel S. de Vries is Full Professor and Chair in Public Administration at the Radboud University of Nijmegen. He acted as the President of IASIA in the period of 2012-2016. He is Full Member of the g roup of Independent Experts on the European Charter of Local Self-g overnment of the Council of Europe and member of the editorial board of numerous journals on public administration. His research concentrates on local government, public sector reform, policy evaluation, policy change and comparative public administra- tion. He coordinates the NISPACEE working group on local governance. His latest book is Understanding Public Administration (Palgrave 2016). 26 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 1. Public Administration Reforms in the EEU – Introduction Michiel S. de Vries Political institutions can change overnight. Illustrative is the fall of the Berlin wall in November 1989, by which the people from then called Eastern g ermany were offered the exit option to escape from the communist regime. w ithin a couple of years, the political regime in the whole region of Central Europe changed from belonging to the Communist bloc towards moving to the w estern bloc in which democracy and the free market ideology became dominant. However, the governmental, administrative and societal institutions that until then influenced the norms, beliefs and actions of individuals and or- ganizations still had to be reformed and this process continues until today. This includes creation of new governance models, organization of the public administration, reform of administrative procedures, development of a civil service, process of decentralization and agencification. The process pointed to several interesting issues, for instance, that what is normally seen as most difficult, changing the constitution proved to be the easiest part of the whole reform process. One would have expected that other reforms would evolve as smoothly because a huge amount of money was released by the affluent world (IMF, w orld Bank, EU etc.) to provide international technical assistance in order to make the reforms work, and the new w estern partners offered an in- teresting incentive that if the reforms would work out and go in the direction desired by these countries and international organizations, the Central Eu- ropean countries could become member of the European Union, which was judged at the time to be very profitable. The EU also provided a strategic goal for the needed reforms, the model of the European Administrative Space (EAS). The idea of EAS was launched when the Central European countries applied for EU membership in the 1990s. One of the criteria for the potential Member States was that they should have sufficient national administrative capacities to comply with the acquis (Trondal & Peters, 2013: 303, see also Trondal, J., & Jeppesen, L., 2006). 27 PAR in the eeU – intR od Uction It was in the 1980s and 1990s that institutional standards to promote this idea emerged. Scholars point to the advisory role of EIPA and SIgMA. Others see the catalytic effect of the actual emergence of local twinning pro- jects, cross-border regions, and the emergence of the Schengen area, the area without borders within the European Union, on the need for effective enfor- cement of the Union Law through the EAS (Beck, 2015). Still others point to the decisive impact of the Copenhagen Criteria of 1993, defining whether a country is eligible to join the European Union; the Madrid Treaty, introdu- cing the need for adjustment of administrative and judicial structures so as to be able to transpose the EU Law and effectively implement it; the Luxem- bourg Treaty of 1997, pointing to the need for strengthening institutions; and the Helsinki Treaty of 1999, with the explicit obligation of candidate coun- tries to share the values and objectives of the European Union as set out in the treaties (Torma, 2011). The standard-setting organization at that moment, SIgMA, rightly pointed out in 1998: “[I]t is clear that the EAS is now begin- ning to emerge” (SIgMA 1998: 15). At the time, the “future” accession provided an incentive for a huge number of reforms in the CEE-countries. The expanding acquis, with its requirements limiting institutional discretion and thus having a profound impact on national administrative styles and structures, made sure that not only the CEE countries, but also the existing Member States were affected (k nill, 2001: 214). This influence varied over different policies, dependent on the basic pattern by which the European policies exerted influence on natio- nal administrative styles and structures, and according to the extent to which such needed compliance was in line with national administrations’ beliefs and preferences (k nill, 2001: 227). However, overall, an Europeanization of national administrations was said to have taken place, making Matei and Ma- tei conclude in 2008: It “appears as the closure for a large process that implies convergence, Europeanization and administrative dynamics” (2008: 46). Also theoretically one would expect a smooth and rapidly progressing process, as institutions are seen as endogenous, that is, that “their form and their functioning depend on the conditions under which they emerge and endure” (Douglas North, 1980, 1990, Przeworski, 2004: 527). Since the con- ditions had changed dramatically in Central Europe, there was a necessity that administrative and societal institutions would adapt to the new situation 28 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence swiftly. From a rationalist and functionalist perspective, availability of a strategic goal – the model of the EAS and the necessity to reform – needed adaptation to the new conditions, desirability to reform – the incentive to become the EU members, opportunities created through the availability of resources and technical assistance to make the reform happen international resources relea- sed to make it feasible, and technical assistance offered, all result in the same expectation, namely that the institutional structure existing in all Central Eu- ropean countries in all its dimensions would quickly change and converge to the w estern model. However, this rationalist and functionalist approach neglects the limita- tions and inhibitors to such institutional reforms. The best-known inhibitor is posed by the so-called path-dependences. “Institutions are the rules of the game in a society or, more formally, are the humanly devised constraints that shape human interaction” (North, 1990: 3) and often have a life of their own in that it is difficult, if not impossible, to initiate radical changes in the ins- titution or to eliminate it. As Mahoney (2000: 507) argued, “path dependen- ce characterizes specifically those historical sequences in which contingent events set into motion institutional patterns or event chains that have deter- ministic properties“. w hen more and complementary institutions are set up, as is usual in societies, it becomes costly to radically change them or to aban- don them because changing one institution can have serious implications for other institutions. Often, there are “configurations of complementary institu- tions in which the performance of each is affected by the existence of others” (cf. de Vries, 2016: 47; Pierson, 2000: 78). Being subject to a communist regi- me for 45 years had created a system of such complementary institutions in Central Europe and a legacy that would be easily overcomed by the reforms. In Central Europe, such path dependences were strengthened by factors at the macro-, meso- and micro-level. At the micro-level the legacy remained visible because individual public administrators who were already in function in the previous regime with all their norms, beliefs and values and inclina- tions to act in ways acquired in the previous regime, were given the opportu- nity to stay in function under the new regime, resulting in the conservation of those norms, values and beliefs within the administrative apparatus. At the meso-level, path dependencies are seen in the legalistic traditions being 29 PAR in the eeU – intR od Uction still dominant in many Central European countries. One of the reasons for this is that, although the EAS requested more efficiency, it also promoted the conservation of that already existing legalism through the bureaucratic pro- cedures it imposed by requiring the Central European countries to adopt the acquis communautaire of the EU. At the macro-level, institutional arrangements at the national level, are not just decided upon and changed because of the emergence of a new regime and on rationalist and functionalist reasoning, but remain subjected to the basics of politics, that is, power and interests. People in power, irrespective of the regi- me-type, will always be hesitant to renounce that power and will be irrespecti- ve of the regime-type have a keen eye after their own interests. This conforms to the theory of Hall and Taylor (1996: 938) and Steinmo (1992) who explain institutional resilience by the actions of the coalitions in power, trying to pre- serve their prerogatives and avoid reforms that would diminish their power or would counter their interests. This predominance of power and interests is seen in processes of decentralization; processes to change the position of national banks, for instance, processes to increase transparency, etc. (cf. de Vries, 2000). The above results question what has really happened to the administra- tive institutions in Central Europe during its transformation and how public administrative reforms are perceived, conceptualized and implemented, and if this could resulted in additions to the currently dominant theories about pu- blic administration reform. It is not a question that can be answered through a general, rather abstract overview of the developments, but needs in-depth analyses pointing out the communalities and differences in the approaches in different countries. That is the topic of this book and is being investigated for the Central European countries. Vainius Smalskys, Andrius Stasiukynas, Jurgita Domeikienė, Mantas Bi- leišis investigate the reforms in Lithuania and point out that such reforms in Lithuania were challenging for the governments trying, on the one hand, to be the darling of the EU in complying swiftly to its requirements, but on the other hand losing sight of the interests of its citizens, and hardly reforming its administration in so far as it is not required by the EU. Maris Pukis, Inesa Voroncuka and Olga Starineca argue for Latvia that the reforms were accompanied by huge conflicts between the stakeholders, and again that as far as the EU legislation was concerned the reforms went 30 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence rather smoothly, but regarding the domestic reforms, conflicts of interest and political considerations were dominant. This resulted in reforms that at times went back and forth, dependent on the distribution of power and the discre- tion allowed to the public administration. Mariusz w. Sienkiewicz and Stanisław Michałowski investigate the re- forms that have occurred in Poland, and note that all these reforms failed to meet the citizens’ interests, and that the achievement of all objectives of the reforms can be disputed. Juraj Nemec, Beata Mikusova Merickova, Maria Murray Svidronova, and Peter Pisar set forth the reforms in Slovakia, andalthough certain reforms were effective, the overall system is still overpoliticized and the reforms un- controlled, not modeled according to a rational design, and having hardly any benefits for the population. g yörgy gajduschek, Tamás M. Horváth and k ároly Jugovits argue for Hungary by stating that the reforms lacked a coherent strategic vision and political support, and emerged out of contradictory reform models as Poland went back and forth dependent on the dominant political coalition in power. Polonca kovač and Primož Pevcin argue for Slovenia by stating that although there are radical changes of previous governance approaches visible due to internal incentives and the Europeanization process there always have been and still are implementation gaps, and that it all depends on political consensus rather than technical and operational measures to improve on this. For Croatia, that although in the light of the EU membership many re- forms were intitiated, as analyzed by Ivan k oprić, the size of its public sector, history, administrative tradition, and other administrative particularities in combination with the existence of a number of influential trade unions who follow the internal bureaucratic resistance to reforms, inhibited in-depth pu- blic administration reforms. Călin Emilian Hințea and Tudor Cristian Țiclău highlight the reforms in Romania, and observe that despite, or perhaps due to all the reforms that have been initiated during the last 25 years and are still ongoing in the field of legislation, intergovernmental relations, human resource management and financial management, the predictability and coherence of the civil service is still severely lacking, the managerial performance has not improved, that one cannot yet speak of a rational use of public resources, and finally, that the popu- 31 PAR in the eeU – intR od Uction lation did not profit from the reforms. Tatyana Tomova and Simeon Petrov present the reforms in Bulgaria that were hardly following a coherent strategic plan. Instead, they point out that Bulgaria witnesses a strong fragmentation in the field of strategic planning and a huge number of strategic documents. w hat strategy to follow seems to depend on the international and supranational commitments of the State, which are a result of financial dependence (International Monetary Fund), donor programs (w orld Bank, EU), or the voluntary inclusion in general po- litical and normative space (EU). All this implies there was no common conceptual model underlying the reforms that took place in Central Europe. Reforms were initiated only if they were really needed based on external pressure, but not out of a coherent re- form model, such as New Public Management, New Public g overnance, Va- lue Based g overnance, New Public Administration, and the like. Certainly, such models were referred to with the purpose to give the intended reforms some credibility and legitimacy, but they did not present the basis out of which one could understand the outcomes of the reforms. From the perspective of public administration as a discipline, the findings that reforms in Central Europe were not based thereon and also were hardly done on behalf of the interests of the population, but rather on the interests of administrators and politicians, is on the one hand weird, but at the same time very interesting. It makes one inquisitive in the answer to the question whether there is any convergence to the w estern model, whether all the reforms are just temporary instead of structural and whether the return to the central state model as is happening in Hungary could also be possible in other Central Eu- ropean countries if the EU fails to deliver on its promises. As all the authors in this book argue, most of the reforms in Central Europe were were conducted seemingly reluctantly. The consequence is that all these reforms are far from stable and structural and can easily be reversed if their payoff fails to materia- lize (cf. Sobis & De Vries, 2014). This is already seen in some way in Hungary and Poland, but could also become reality in other Central European states. This makes the investigation of institutional change and its driving forces not only interesting from a scholarly perspective, but also from the perspecti- ve of a concerned citizen, who was pleased to see the EU expand, but has to reconsider the dangers thereof possibly emerging in the near future. 32 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence References 1. Beck, J. 2015. Cross-Border Cooperation and the European Administra- tive Space – 9 Prospects from the Principle of Mutual Recognition. Inter- national Public Administration Review 13 (2), 9–36. 2. Douglass C. N. 1980. Structure and Change in Economic History. New Y ork, w . w . Norton 3. Douglass C. N. 1990. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. 4. Douglass C. N. 1997. Some Fundamental Puzzles in Economic History/ Development, in: w. Brian Arthur, Steven N. Durlauf & David A. Lane (Eds), The Economy as an Evolving Complex System II. London, Addi- son-w esley, 223–37. 5. Hall, P ., & Taylor, R. 1996. Political Science and the Three New Institutio- nalisms. Political Studies, 44 (5), 936−957. 6. knill, C. 2001. The Europeanisation of National Administrations: Pat- terns of Institutional Change and Persistence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 7. Mahoney, J. 2000. Path Dependence in Historical Sociology. Theory and Society, 29(4), 507–548. 8. Matei, L., & Matei, A. I. 2008. g lobalization and Europeanization. A Pro- jection on a European Model of Public Administration. Theoretical and Applied Economics, 4(4), 33−52. 9. Przeworski, A. 2004. Institutions Matter? government and Opposi- tion, 39(4), 527−540. 10. SIgMA. 1998. Preparing Public Administrations for the European Admi- nistrative Space, Paris: OECD. 11. SIgMA. 1999. European Principles for Public Administration. SI gMA papers, No. 27, Paris: OECD. 12. SIgMA. 2012. Civil Service Professionalisation in the w estern Balkans. SIgMA papers, No. 48, Paris: OECD. 13. Sobis, I., & de Vries, M.S. 2014. Reluctant Reforms: The Case of kazakh- stan. Public Organization Review, (14)2, 139−157. 33 PAR in the eeU – intR od Uction 14. Steinmo, S., Thelen, k., & Longstreth, F . (Eds). 1992. Structuring Politics: Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis. Cambridge: Cam- bridge University Press. 15. Torma, A. 2011. The European Administrative Space (EAS). European Integration Studies, 9(1), 149−161. 16. Trondal, J., & Jeppesen, L. 2006. Images of Agency g overnance in the European Union: Community Institutions, Autonomous Administra- tive Spaces, or Multilevel Network Administrations? kristiansand and g rimstad: Agder University College. 17. De Vries, M. S. 2000. The Rise and Fall of Decentralization: A Compara- tive Analysis of Arguments and Practices in European Countries. Euro- pean Journal of Political Research, 38(2), 193−224. 34 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 2. Public Administration Reforms in Eastern Europe: Naïve Cultural Following, HesitaNT Europeanization, or Search for Genuine Changes? Ivan Koprić 2.1. Introduction Administrative reform is a common issue in administrative and political science. Comparative analyses of administrative reforms seem to be an im- portant source of information necessary for experiential learning. Although national specificities are unavoidable, international comparison should fol- low a standardized analytical path in order to produce and offer useful know- ledge. Comparative approach to administrative reform in the former socialist countries of Eastern Europe (i.e. Central, East, and South-East Europe) has been running against several problems of theoretical significance. The first one is a general problem with comparative approach in public administration studies based on the complexity of contemporary public administrations, different goals of their change, various possible developmental paths, varia- tions of institutional and other arrangements in providing public services in different countries, etc. The second problem arises from defining administra- tive reform and classifying the particular national reform paths into a smaller number of administrative reform types to make them comparable with those in other countries. The third problem lies in identifying what transition me- ans in different contexts, and what it means in the specific case of Eastern Eu- ropean countries whose recent history was marked by the socialist type of so- cial experiment because all of them are (still) seen as the t ra n si t io n co un t r ies. Eastern European transition countries have chosen the European Union accession path. Although their accession tracks have not been the same, and the harmonization with European standards has not been performed at the same time and in the same manner, there is a body of administrative insti- tutions and standards commonly accepted by various countries in order to boost their administrative capacity necessary for the EU accession. After for- mally joining the EU, these countries have continued to converge, to a degree, 35 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro Pe: nAïve cultur Al following, Hesit Ating euro PeAniz Ation, or s eArcH for genuine cHAnges? on the simple basis that their everyday functioning takes place within the European Administrative Space (See EAS in: koprić, 2014; 2012 for more detail). This type of administrative convergence serves as a mitigating factor of comparative analysis as well as a general endeavor of these countries’ tran- sition towards the model of democratic liberal state. 2.2. Catching and Analyzing Administrative Reforms Choosing the monumental multi-layered project of transforming pre- vious single-party system to democratic multi-party system, with a privati- zation of former state or quasi-social ownership, and design of free market economy the transition countries were brought to the emerging task of deep reform of state machinery. Further tasks, such as the accession to the Coun- cil of Europe, NATO, the European Union, and some other European and international organizations additionally stressed the urgency of public admi- nistration reform. However, there are limited capacities of society to accept changes, logic of path dependency, bureaucratic resistances, and all other sorts of complications accompanying reform efforts. Because of these coun- terforces, administrative reforms can be slow, formal, and shallow. Political elites faced with multiple efficacy pressures tend to proclaim almost every single legislative change to be an administrative reform. This opens a problem of defining the administrative reform. Is there only one, continuous and constant reform or many of them? Is every change a reform, regardless of its effects? w hich effects count, short-term and easi- ly visible outputs or long-term and barely observable deep cultural impacts? Does the term administrative reform convey only positive connotations or can it just as easily acquire a negative meaning? w ho is competent to pro- claim which reform consequences and impacts are positive or negative, i.e. who evaluates their results and proclaims their success? These are not new concerns and considerations. As Caiden pointed out, administrative reform is “the artificial inducement of administrative trans- formation against resistance” (Caiden, 1969/2009: 1). Differentiating between societal changers, societal revolutionaries, and societal reformers (ibid., p. 5) he also gave a good indication for discernment of the three types of changes in public administrations (and societies), according to their width, depth, and intensity. 36 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Only deeper administrative changes that bring about more significant institutional innovations into the administrative system of a country may be called reforms. They usually trigger resistance, because of their impacts on the power structure. Other smaller adaptations of administrative functi- oning, new laws and regulations, periodic reorganizations of public admi- nistrative bodies, changes in the civil service system, and other incremental administrative modifications can be of some importance, at least on a daily basis. These incremental changes are the grains of sand that sediment on the much larger beaches of administrative landscape. The change of power structure is not the only political dimension of administrative reforms. They are designed and managed on the basis of spe- cific value orientations distillated through the political processes participa- ted by political actors, citizens and general public. Moreover, their commen- cement and pace are decided, directed and influenced by the political bo- dies and processes, although with a significant influence of administrative theory, doctrines, and professionals. That is why the administrative reform is also considered as “a political process designed to adjust the relationships between a bureaucracy and other elements in a society, or within bureaucra- cy itself ” (Montgomery, 1967: 1). Administrative changes can be defined as an administrative reform only if, as pointed out by Caiden, they end in certain improvements of a pu- blic administration. Value choice made within the decision-making process about an administrative reform sets the base for its evaluation. Evaluation of the reform success depends on the assessment of a degree to which the re- form contributes to the established goals and values that stand behind them. If it contributes in an acceptable manner and to an acceptable degree, the improvement necessary for each administrative reform has probably been achieved and the reform may be treated as a success. However, the success and degree of a reform’s efficacy may not be self- evident, even when the value base is known. Because of that, further, more precise and attentive evaluation exercise is needed. The success of an admi- nistrative reform may be evaluated by using the standards of evaluation studies, especially those rooted in the logic of program theory evaluation (Rogers et al., 2000; Sharpe, 2011). A complete and precise reconstruction of all the elements of reform program theory is, in the majority of cases, almost 37 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro Pe: nAïve cultur Al following, Hesit Ating euro PeAniz Ation, or s eArcH for genuine cHAnges? impossible because they are vaguely defined, complicated and implemented in complex circumstances (comp. Rogers, 2008), and accompanied by only broadly defined and scarce success indicators. Such situations call for a pro- found and perspicacious theoretical analysis. Establishing success or failure in achieving the official reform goals is but first analytical task. It is widely recognized that administrative reforms are frequently unsuccessful or, to be more optimistic, only moderately su- ccessful. Yet administrative changes do occur. Both success and failure are to be ascribed to politics and public administration. k nowing the reasons requires a huge effort put in the research of a complex machinery of the political and administrative systems in their relevant environments. Be that as it may, we can count not only on official results, but also on unintended side effects of administrative reforms, such as changing of administrative and political rhetoric, strengthening or weakening of the system legitimacy, introducing variety into routines of organizational life, etc. (March & Olsen, 1989; Czarniawska-Joerges, 1989). It seems important for administrative re- form analysis to take into account not only the ‘hard’ and officially expected results, but also such soft, unexpected results, which may – at first glance – be treated as side effects, but whose role in long-term administrative chan- ges is far from being unimportant. It is well known that different countries answer similar challenges from complex domestic and international circumstances in a different manner. Hence, they choose different strategies of administrative reform. 1 According to Pollitt and Bouckaert (2001; 2003), there are four main reform strategies: to maintain, modernize, marketize, or minimize. Maintaining means to pre- serve and incrementally improve or upgrade the classical, w eberian model of public administration as a rational, well-organized mechanism with pro- fessionalism, impartiality, legality, and standardized bureaucratic procedu- res. Modernizing means to make more fundamental changes in structures and functioning of public administration (autonomous agencies, output budgeting, employment contracts, etc.). Marketization introduces market 1 National public administrations are not unified actors who have one and only will, and who can choose only one pace of development. Real picture shows that in every gover- nance system there are many actors with various reform concepts. The main reform orientation is, thus, an approximation derived from the reform mainstream. 38 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence principles and mechanisms in public administrations (internal market, com- petition, real prices, etc.). Minimizing is oriented towards shrinking the pu- blic sector by means of privatization, civil (voluntary) sector involvement, etc. This classification, which has become widely accepted, may serve as a useful tool for in-depth analysis of administrative reform in a country as well as for a comparative analysis of administrative reforms in a group of countries, Eastern Europe included. 2.3. Comparative Analysis of Contemporary Public Administrations and Their Reforms: Towards a Composite Theoretical Frame This monograph is devoted to improving understanding, research, and interpretations of public administration reforms in national settings as well as to comparing administrative reforms in those post-socialist Eastern Eu- ropean countries, which have become the European Union member states. The composite theoretical frame seems appropriate for such a great task. The system theory and organization theory as well as the neo-institutional theory may serve as the fundamentals of such frame. They warn and orient the analysis toward many important issues of contemporary administrative systems: − Complexity, structure, and components of administrative systems, and their interdependencies, − Changing tasks and purposes, − Inclusion or exclusion of private and non-profit subjects, citizens, and small primary communities in the provision of public tasks, − Opposite developmental processes, such as concentration and deconcentration, centralization and decentralization, widening pu- blic sector and privatization, strengthening and loosing hierarchical ties and means of internal administrative coordination, etc., − Adaptation of public administrations to dominant actors and influ- ences from wider environment, and possibilities of national public administrations to influence broader processes, − Consolidation and stabilization of administrative systems in their societal contexts, different ways of achieving institutional appropria- teness, and paths of stabilization, etc. Post-socialist transition can be considered a complex systemic trans- 39 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro Pe: nAïve cultur Al following, Hesit Ating euro PeAniz Ation, or s eArcH for genuine cHAnges? formation, different from previous democratic transitions in South-wes- tern Europe (Portugal, Spain), Latin America, and other parts of the world. The span of transition processes is the main difference, since previous tran- sitions were oriented towards democratization, while post-socialist one is more complex and comprehensive, a systemic one, tackling almost every aspect of social life (Stark & Bruszt, 1998; Marčetić, 2005). The transition theory thus calls for an analysis of many relevant contextual variables of administrative reforms in Eastern European countries and puts a perspecti- ve to dynamic processes of overall transition. In addition, it warns about the importance of analyzing design, building, and development of new admi- nistrative, political and other societal institutions, which were not part of the previous, socialist regime. The neo-institutional theory is a logical complement to the transition theory. It directs research to pay attention to values, expectations, regu- lations, and norms, phases in the institution building, critical junctures, convergence and divergence in the institutional development, path depen- dency, sedimentation in institutional development of public administra- tion, etc. (Peters, 1999). The first step in a more detailed design of the composite theoretical frame on previously established grounds should be focused on systemic and structural considerations. Contemporary public administrations, tho- se in Eastern European countries included, are becoming more and more complex, and function in increasingly complex and dynamic environments. National public administrations are characterized by numerous new tasks, functions, goals, subjects, organizations, and arrangements with other sec- tors (private, civil, and non-formal). More and more complex knowledge, skills, abilities and competences of public servants are needed for accepta- ble (quality) level of public services delivered to citizens, businesses, com- munities, and society as a whole. Apart from public administration, the other sectors, civil and private, are also involved in providing certain public services. Innovative and complex financial, legal, directing, supervising, communicating and coordinating ties and mechanisms have been established in such new public sectors. It might seem that public administration, captured in manifold relations with the pri- vate and civil sectors, loses its boundaries and its distinctive identity. 40 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Public administration can be seen as a system composed of nume- rous administrative organizations. These organizations function as the ele- ments of three main public administration subfields with various purposes, i.e. state (national) administration, territorial self-government, and public services. State administration, consisting mainly of classic administrative organizations like ministries, supports elected politicians in designing and implementing strategic and vital public policies. Territorial self-government at both local and regional level serves as a counter-balance to central state power, contributes to democracy standards, serves to local and regional com- munities, promotes and supports local and regional development, etc. Public services (services of general interest in the new European terms) provide ser- vices to citizens, users and consumers that are of public interest. 2 For decades, general tasks of the whole public sector have been diffe- rentiating, broadening and cumulating. The development of modern, pro- fessional state administration began with simple, yet strategic tasks, such as to ensure the stability of state power and regulate basic societal processes. Subsequent differentiation has led to the tasks of providing services of pu- blic interest to users, preventing and helping people in cases of social and other risks (poverty, unemployment, illnesses, etc.), preserving natural and social environment, and ensuring infrastructure for economic and social development, etc. The relations within and between these subfields are not constant. Incre- asing dynamics can be identified in that regard. Concentration or deconcen- tration can take place within state administration; centralization or decentra- lization are the processes that can occur in relations between the central state and administration, on one side, and local and regional governments, on the other. State administrations concentrate, under policy of the lean state, on their “core-businesses” (public policies, legal drafting, authoritative decision-making in concrete cases, inspections). Territorial self-government increasingly devo- tes to promoting and supporting sustainable local and regional development. Regionalization is a process that might harm either central or local powers or can upgrade the capacity of the whole public sector of a country. Liberalization and privatization are generally connected with providing services of general 2 There are two groups of such services, services of general economic interest, with network industries as the main group, and non-economic services of general interest. 41 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro Pe: nAïve cultur Al following, Hesit Ating euro PeAniz Ation, or s eArcH for genuine cHAnges? interest – the opposite processes can also be seen in certain cases. Privatization or etatization indicate tensions between the public and private sectors, etc. All parts of public administration are involved in wider regional and global processes. Some of them are more formal, connected with formal in- tegrations (for example, the European Union, NATO, the w orld Trade Or- ganization, the OECD, etc.), while others are predominantly informal, like spreading influential administrative doctrines, neo-liberalism, or economic globalization. Public administrations are changing during such complex en- vironmental challenges. The changes are connected with organization and structure, ways of functioning, legal regulation, personnel, relations with po- litics and citizens, and other significant dimensions. In Europe, there is an especially significant influence of the European Union (EU) and, to a lesser degree, of the Council of Europe (CoE) and some other actors on administrative changes in the member states and accessing countries (comp. kuhlmann & w ollmann, 2014; Himsworth, 2015; k oprić, 2014a). Such an influence is more intense with regard to transition countries than to consolidated w estern democracies, because accession process is inf- luenced by the EU conditionality. g lobally and regionally induced administrative changes do not mean simple adaptations of national bureaucracies to external pressures. Certain pieces of national administrative traditions can upgrade the new and cons- tantly evolving European administrative standards. This is the case with the Ombudsman and open access to public sector information (Scandinavian tra- dition), traditional regulation of general administrative procedure (Austrian, i.e. Central European tradition), and other governance institutions. Building on that, one can speak about interdependencies of national administrative traditions and global, European and regional administrative standards and governance practices (comp. k oprić, 2012). Certainly, interdependencies can be observed in many other respects. If everything mentioned is true in general, the notions of task environ- ment complexity, environment complexity and technical (inter)dependen- ce, borrowed from organizational theory, can help administrative science to perform a better and more productive analysis of such noticeable technical complexity in public administration of a country, objective complexity of its environment, including temporal complexity (k iel & Seldon, 1998), and de- 42 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence pendence of public administration on complex environment (See, for exam- ple, Anderson, 1999; Dooley & Van de Ven, 1999; etc.). However, one question still remains unresolved. w here does such task environment complexity stem from, having in mind public administra- tions? In an attempt to answer it, a notion of values, legitimate interests, norms, and expectations based on them should be mentioned again. An analysis of both instrumental and value rationalities (Dong, 2015) is ne- cessary for understanding and interpreting administrative reforms. The contemporary world is characterized by previously unthinkable value com- plexity. Numerous grounds and causes are inbuilt in their complexity and almost constant differentiation, but their enumeration is not relevant to the present discussion. New values are developing constantly. Public adminis- tration has been changing, trying to respond to this great and frequently inconclusive value pressure. Although values and expectations are many and diverse, they are, in sum, the integrating point of a governance system. Values are crystallized through political processes of interests and amalgamation of ideologies. Be- cause public administration should gain overall legitimacy in its social mi- lieu, it has to adapt to complex value orientations and expectations. If public administration respects a specific mixture of values in a specific field, citi- zens will tend to say that it functions in the public interest. Such importance of values gives us a focal point and basis for further analyses. Be that what it may, contemporary public administration is not a simple value area with only one value dimension (k ickert, 2001). Citizens and the broader public expect public administration to respect and realize not less than five groups of values: political (democratic), legal, social, economic, and ecological. Values might compete with each other. In various sectors of pu- blic administration there are specific mixtures of relevant values. It is not the same situation in social work or the transport sector, finances or local self- government. Furthermore, in continental Europe the stress is traditionally on political, legal, and social values – there is the fatherland of g reek democracy and Roman law. Opposite, Anglo-Saxon zones are characterized by the stress on economic values and pragmatism. During the modern era, dominant va- lue orientation has changed from political (democratic) and legal to social, economic, and ecological. Although such a general picture cannot be very 43 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro Pe: nAïve cultur Al following, Hesit Ating euro PeAniz Ation, or s eArcH for genuine cHAnges? helpful in analyzing the value situation in a country at a particular time, it can warn us about possible value frame, its importance and effects. The notion of values has been strongly stressed by the neo-institutional theory. Values, and expectations derived from values, are the elements of institutions. Institutions are social structures composed of interconnected and coherent expectations stabilized in time, in a certain social commu- nity, which regulate interpersonal relations or establish the authority of a community, and emerge through habitualization (repeated use), or a more direct and explicit set-up (comp. Pusić, 1989: 182-184). An institution is characterized by stability and steadiness, and tends to repeatedly orient, steer and channel human behavior. In other words, an institution has nor- mative content and importance, and people do not accept changing their expectations if they are disappointed. In normative institutionalism (Peters, 1999) a task of identifying values, norms, regulations and other normative phenomena that frame the public sector is very important for the analysis of public institutions. From older doctrines, such as cameralism in continental Europe, to the new public management, from the new public administration in the USA (the Minnowbrook perspective) to good governance, administrative doctrines have significantly influenced administrative development. An administrative doctrine is a system of ideas about desirable ways of opera- ting and a set of prescriptions about good practices grounded on dominant values and systematized experiences, comprising standards with regard to organization, functioning, regulation, management, and reform of public administration. Administrative doctrines are themselves influenced by so- cial, economic, political, demographic, and other societal circumstances. Contemporary administrative development is characterized by two main and very influential administrative doctrines – the new public ma- nagement (NPM) and good governance, although it seems that Eastern Europe is in search of its genuine doctrine that would adequately mirror its particular circumstances. Thus, for example, Randma-Liiv pleads for appropriateness of neo-w eberian state (Nw S) as the normative model or doctrine (2008/9). In sum, expectedly and justifiably, influences, which administrative doctrines produce in transition countries, have continuously attracted resounding scientific interest in Eastern European countries. 44 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 2.4. Basic Research Implications Although there is little doubt about the usefulness of comparative approach in researching public administrations, many texts address the pro- blems of comparative analyses (Hopkin, 2002; Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2001; Jreisat, 1999; etc.). It is important to build a reasonably firm frame for com- parative analysis based on the relevant theoretical postulates and built from relevant concepts suitable for comparison. A list of more practical issues, themes, and moments has to be developed, encompassing the whole ran- ge, from structural and functional to cultural and environmental issues. Not only reform programs and regulations but also results of administrative re- forms, their outputs, outcomes, long-term impacts and side effects have to be taken into account so we would be able to perform an in-depth comparison (comp. kuhlmann & w ollmann, 2014). However, having in mind specific value situations, different developmental paths, and many different influen- ces, an attentive analysis of national idiosyncratic specificities has to get an adequate place. Comparative analysis is not a new approach in post-socialist countries. There are many publications which compare the particular components, elements or issues of administrative systems in these countries, such as lo- cal self-government, regionalization, performance management, influential doctrines, civil service systems, influence of economic and fiscal crises on public administrations, public management, etc. (Vintar et al., 2013; k attel et al., 2011; Bouckaert et al., 2008; Coombes & Vass, 2007; etc.). The books about national paths have been published. A number of papers inspect cer- tain issues of interest for comparative analysis, but in a limited number of Eastern European countries, even in only one country, employing a case stu- dy approach. There is an ever-growing body of published work, research and project results, and other types of sources for quality comparative analysis. Official and semi-official reports of national and international bodies and organizations also contain a lot of data on public administration reforms in Eastern Europe. w hat is specific to this monograph is the span of countries, since only the new EU member states from Central, East and South-Eastern Europe have been included. Other post-socialist transition countries are not analy- 45 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro Pe: nAïve cultur Al following, Hesit Ating euro PeAniz Ation, or s eArcH for genuine cHAnges? zed. Apart from the constrained territorial coverage, the approach is syste- mic, as all parts and components of public administration have been taken into account. Structural, functional, cultural and environmental issues have been included, as well as history, tradition, developmental paths, trends, and influential doctrines. Methodologically, the comparison is based on in- depth and firm data based on national analyses. A thorough and systemic comparative analysis of public administration reforms in new Eastern EU member states may help answering whether this part of the European Union is characterized by naïve cultural following, he- sitating Europeanization or deliberate search for genuine changes. One of the conclusions based on the results of current research is that the changes of administrative systems of the EU member states, especially those in Eastern Europe that are a component of the EU integration, fos- ter comparative public administration research Europe-wide (kuhlmann & w ollmann, 2014). Some of the most distinct administrative changes identified by previous comparative analyses are: − Centralization of national public administrations which have become increasingly integrated networks of multi-level governance, − Mushrooming of public agencies, especially at the national level, with increasing role of independent regulators, − Strengthening the position of the executive, and diminishing the role of national parliaments, − Redistribution of power at the ministerial level in favor of the minis- tries of finance, − New tendency towards regionalization and strengthening of other institutions dealing with the implementation of regional policy and regional development, − Narrowing local competencies and reducing the autonomy of local governments, − Increasing the role of private and non-governmental providers of pu- blic services, − A new quest for more intensive citizen participation with increasing efforts to make public administrations more transparent and open, 46 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence − Attempts to foster strategic planning, design sound policy processes, and initiate data-driven evaluations, − Efforts to develop modern, professional civil service, and promote pu- blic administration education that fits that end, − Setting anti-corruption institutions and new ethic infrastructure of civil service, etc. It is not easy to identify the real causes and sources of such changes, but it is undeniable that they have been parallel with the EU accession process, and that at least a part of them has been facilitated by the EU and, in general, w estern technical assistance. There are numerous bitter assessments of that assistance, and many more bitter experiences in Eastern Europe (Sobis & de Vries, 2009; Nemec, 2008). w hat can be generally concluded is that w estern standards, concepts and recommendations for Eastern Europe are far from unequivocal, and that the attempts to foster one-sided model based on the new public management do not really fit the circumstances of Eastern Eu- ropean countries. Such a situation not only opens the possibility, but also asks for the development of genuine domestic responses to mammoth gover- nance challenges. If they are still based on dwindling ideas, thus producing muddled governance (k oprić, 2012), it is not a definite argument against the possibility of finding appropriate solutions. 47 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro Pe: nAïve cultur Al following, Hesit Ating euro PeAniz Ation, or s eArcH for genuine cHAnges? References 1. Anderson, P . 1999. Complexity Theory and Organization Science. Or- ganization Science, 10(3): 216−232. 2. Bouckaert, g., Nemec, J., Narkošis, V ., Hajnal, g., Tönnisson, k. 2008. Public Management Reforms in Central and Eastern Europe. Bratisla- va: NISPAcee Press. 3. Caiden, g. E. 1969/2009. Administrative Reform. New Brunswick, London: Aldine Transaction. 4. Coombes, D., Vass, L. 2007. Post-Communist Public Administration: Restoring Professionalism and Accountability. Bratislava: NISPAcee Press. 5. Czarniawska-Joerges, B. 1989. The wonderland of Public Administra- tion Reforms. Organisation Studies, 10(4): 531−548. 6. Dong, L. 2015. Public Administration Theories: Instrumental and Va- lue Rationalities. New Y ork: Palgrave Macmillan. 7. Dooley, k. J., Van de Ven, A. H. 1999. Explaining Complex Organi- zational Dynamics. Organization Science, 10(3): 358−372. 8. Himsworth, C. M. g. 2015. The European Charter of Local Self-g o- vernment: A Treaty for Local Democracy. Edinburgh: Edinburgh Uni- versity Press. 9. Hopkin, J. 2002. Comparative Methods. In: Marsh, D., Stoker, g. (Eds). Theory and Methods in Political Science. Houndmills, New York: Pal- grave MacMillan. 10. Jreisat, J. E. 1999. Comparative Public Administration and Reform. In- ternational Journal of Public Administration, 22(6): 855−877. 11. k attel, R., Mikulowski, w ., Peters, B. g. 2011. Public Administration in Time of Crisis. Bratislava: NISPAcee Press. 12. k ickert, w . 2001. Public Management in the United States and Europe. In: k ickert, w . J. M. (Ed.). Public Management and Administrative Re- form in w estern Europe. Cheltenham, Northampthon: Edward Elgar. 13. kiel, L. D., Seldon, B. J. 1998. Measuring Temporal Complexity in the External Environment: Nonlinearity and the Bounds of Rational Action. American Review of Public Administration, 28(3): 246−265. 48 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 14. koprić, I. 2012. Managing Public Affairs in South Eastern Europe: Muddled g overnance. In: Bissessar, A. M. (Ed.). g overnance: Is It for Everyone? New Y ork: Nova Publishers. 15. koprić, I. 2014. g ood Administration and g ood g overnance as the k ey Elements of the European Administrative Space. In: EU Adminis- trative Law and its Impact on the Process of Public Administration Re- form and Integration into the European Administrative Space of South East European Countries. Skopje: South East European Law School Network. 16. k oprić, I. 2014a. Prilagodbe hrvatske javne uprave europskim standar- dima. g odišnjak Akademije pravnih znanosti Hrvatske, 5(1): 8−38. 17. kuhlmann, S., w ollmann, H. 2014. Introduction to Comparative Pu- blic Administration: Administrative Systems and Reforms in Europe. Cheltenham, Northampton: Edward Elgar. 18. March, g. J., Olsen, J. P. 1989. Rediscovering Institutions. London: Macmillan. 19. Marčetić, g. 2005. Javni službenici i tranzicija. Zagreb: Društveno veleučilište and k onrad Adenauer Stiftung. 20. Montgomery, John D. 1967. Sources of Bureaucratic Reform: Problems of Power, Purpose and Politics. Bloomington: Comparative Adminis- tration g roup Occasional Papers. 21. Nemec, J. 2008. Public Management Reforms in CEE: Lessons Lear- ned. In: Bouckaert, g., Nemec, J., Narkošis, V ., Hajnal, g., Tönnisson, k. 2008. Public Management Reforms in Central and Eastern Europe. Bratislava: NISPAcee Press. 22. Pollitt, C., Bouckaert, g. 2001. Evaluating Public Management Re- forms: An International Perspective. Revista Internacional de Estudos Politicos (Rio de Janeiro), 3 (Especial): 167−192. 23. Pollitt, C., Bouckaert, g. 2003. Evaluating Public Management Re- forms: An International Perspective. In: wollmann, H. (Ed.) Eva- luation in Public-Sector Reform: Concepts and Practice in Internatio- nal Perspective. Cheltenham, Northampton: Edward Elgar. 24. Peters, B. g. 1999. Institutional Theory in Political Science. The “New Institutionalism” . London, New Y ork: Continuum. 49 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro Pe: nAïve cultur Al following, Hesit Ating euro PeAniz Ation, or s eArcH for genuine cHAnges? 25. Pusić, E. 1989. Društvena regulacija. Zagreb: g lobus and Pravni fakultet. 26. Randma-Liiv, T. 2008/9. New Public Management versus the Neo-w e- berian State in Central and Eastern Europe. The NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, 1(2): 69−81. 27. Rogers, P., Petrosino, A., Heubner, T. A., Hacsi, T. A. 2000. Program Theory Evaluation: Practice, Promise, and Problems. Evaluation, No. 87, pp. 5−13. 28. Rogers, P . J. 2008. Using Programme Theory to Evaluate Complicated and Complex Aspects of Interventions. Evaluation, 14(1): 29−48. 29. Sharpe, g. 2011. A Review of Program Theory and Theory-Based Eva- luations. American International Journal of Contemporary Research, 1(3): 72−75. 30. Sobis, I., de Vries, M. S. 2009. The Story behind w estern Advice to Cen- tral Europe during Its Transition Period. Bratislava: NISPAcee Press. 31. Stark, D., Bruszt, L. 1998. Postsocialist Pathways: Transforming Poli- tics and Property in East Central Europe. Cambridge etc.: Cambridge University Press. 32. Vintar, M., Rosenbaum, A., Jenei, g., Drechsler, w . 2013. The Past, Pre- sent and the Future of Public Administration in Central and Eastern Europe. Bratislava: NISPAcee Press. 50 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 3. Public Sector Reforms in Lithuania Since 1990 Vainius Smalskys, Mantas Bileišis, Jurgita Domeikienė, Andrius Stasiukynas 3.1. Introduction This chapter covers several aspects of public administration reforms in Lithuania: (i) constitutional context, (ii) formation and developments at the central administration level, (iii) regional and local governance reforms, or in many instances their lack thereof, and (iv) development of the civil service. These, in our opinion, were the key areas where dynamic change took place, or a lot of effort was made on behalf of reformers to bring about change. But what is more telling, perhaps, is that over recent years the focus of the political elites has shifted away from public administration in general. Public adminis- tration and civil service are treated as if they were given, and onlyfew attempts yielded the reforms. But this is primarily not for lack of trying and initiati- ve on behalf of civil servants, as much as it is a result of a hung parliament that has now lasted for 4 parliamentary terms. In this context, comprehensive reforms present more risks that opportunities as far as the deputies on the floor of parliament are concerned. In our section we offer a short overview of crucial initiatives to change the key elements of public governance that have never really materialized beyond academic and informal discussions, such as government-wide guidelines or regulation on administrative process, standards of ethics, clear distinction between public administration and other public agencies, as well as that of civil servants and public employees. These are the questions that produce the proverbial ‘implementation gaps’ , because they leave far too much discretion to various actors to skew initial reform ideas, and discourage such reforms on behalf of political leadership. In the early 1990s, the Baltic states started their post-communist trans- formation with a statehood formation, which apparently offered the oppor- tunity for a radical break with the previous system of governance. However, many of the governance practices did persist. It is worth noting that the three Baltic states were constituent republics of the Soviet Union, and as such had an extensive administrative system completed with prototypes of the parliament (the Supreme Soviets of the Soviet Union), and a full ministeri- 51 Public Sector reformS in lithuania S ince the 1990S al structure. And the people who staffed these structures in many instances had a possibility to remain in the public administrations of the independent states. This is especially true for Lithuania, where the Communist Party was mostly composed from ethnic Lithuanians, and managed to successfully ma- neuver to dissociate itself from the party structures of the Soviet Union just prior to independence. Although, as elsewhere in the region, communism was seen as imposed from outside and foreign to statehood itself, the fact is that the Lithuanian Communist Party successfully rebranded and positioned itself as partakers in the independence movement, a mass layoff of adminis- trative staff never materialized. In fact, in many instances the transition to the market economy was taken advantage of by the people closely aligned with both the communist party and communist administration of the Republic. And this further reduced the possibility for radical administrative reform. The situation changed towards the second half of the 1990s, when the EU membership perspective became a reality, and the political and economic elites built a consensus on advancing the agenda of joining the EU. The years between 1995 and 2000, arguably have seen the greatest pace and substance of governance reform which included the stabilization in the way municipalities are organized, a major central government structure overhaul (including a ministerial reform), emergence of the process of agencification, creation of framework legal regulation in the form of civil service laws and public admi- nistration laws. It may be argued that later editions to the practice of Lithu- anian governance just prior to the EU accession, such as the program budge- ting and strategic planning, have had substantially less effect on the workings of public governance. Over the quarter of the century, the economy of Lithuania has seen unprecedented economic growth out of the collapse of the economy in the early 1990s, which outperformed most of its neighbors, and this goes a long way in claiming that the institutional setup of the countries’ governance is fit to meet the contemporary challenges. Lithuania has managed to surpass over the past two decades all neighboring countries in terms of economic output. However, several notable instances of failure in governance may jeo- pardize most of the achievements reached to date. Namely, (i) inefficiency, or lack altogether of a meaningful regional development policy, (ii) great econo- mic disparities that have since 2004 led to the migration of a large number of 52 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence citizens to countries abroad. In fact, the process of emigration has been so dramatic that Lithuania as a EU member state with the youngest population became the fastest depopulating member state by 2013 (Sipaviečienė & Stan- kūnienė, 2013). The youth bulge that existed in 2004, and all the economic achievements that were reached while it still made an impact on the economy in the late 2000s was lost due to the global financial crisis of 2008-2010. Li- thuania suffered one of the largest economic declines worldwide, and had to undergo a radical fiscal consolidation (Nakrošis & Vilpišauskas, 2015). The global financial crisis of 2008-2010 in Lithuania gave rise to a go- vernment with the most ambitious public administration reform plan over the entire 25-year period. However, it has largely failed to achieve its goals. Although only some leeway was made, the hope for comprehensive reforms did not materialize. In addition, this informs our key thesis about the Li- thuanian public governance – its constitutional setup does not allow a com- prehensive reform after they were conducted in the late 1990s by the cons- truction of the EU-compatible administrative mechanisms. w e believe that the primary reason for this inability to implement the comprehensive reform is due to complex checks and balances of the decision making mechanisms regulated by the constitution, and a powerful business lobby that had its say in the process of the formation of the current public administration system and whose interests remain most salient within the political process (Norkus, 2012). However, all this is not to say that an incremental process of adminis- trative change is not occurring. Lithuania is fully committed to the EU and best practices and recommendations are keenly adopted. 3.2. Early Developments: A Very Stringent Constitutional Setup Lithuania was the first country to leave the Soviet Union by a democratic parliamentary vote, which included both a union-wide and constituent repu- blic election. The February 1990 elections, which were the first democratic elections under the g orbachev’s Perestroika and Glasnost initiatives, resulted in the victory of Sąjūdis, a pro-independence movement active under Glasnost reforms for over 2 years before. The manifesto of Sąjūdis explicitly declared an intention to declare independence in case of electoral victory (Lietuvos Sąjūdis, 2016). Similar political movements in Latvia and Estonia also won elections, however, they did not follow through with the declarations of independence 53 Public Sector reformS in lithuania S ince the 1990S until one and a half years later in the wake of August Putsch in 1991 in Moscow. This early movement on declaring independence had lasting effects on the governance structure of the country and the paths its administrative re- forms took. In a decision just prior to the 1990 election, the Lithuanian Com- munist Party made an important declaration – that the Lithuanian Commu- nist Party would legally become a separate entity apart from the Soviet Union Communist Party (g enzelis, 2004). In the election, the Communists attained a 1/3 representation. Their vote for or against the independence could have made the difference between a crackdown and attempts at a peaceful negotia- tion with the authorities of the Soviet Union. The decision to declare independence within a month of the election was made because the Soviet constitution of 1979 had provisions, which allowed constituent republics to one-sidedly declare independence. However, the first post-election Soviet Union Supreme Soviet session agenda (scheduled for late March 1990) included the constitutional amendments that would have closed this possibility. On March 11, 1990, Lithuanian Supreme Soviet (immediately renamed itself to the Reconstituent Seimas), almost unanimously, with the communist MP’s support voted in favor of independence. This unanimity in the independence vote had a price in terms of public administration reform. The soviet administrative structures of Lithuania re- mained largely unchanged immediately after its independence. The first two years of independence were not favorable for the reform, because of the pre- carious situation of the country’s statehood being occupied by over 130,000 soviet troops, and later, in the wake of August Putsch, Sąjūdis parliamentary faction fragmented in the face of its loss of raison d’etre. Various factions of Sąjūdis became proto-political parties of the modern political system, inclu- ding the Social Democrats, conservatives, and liberals. The fragmentation produced a protracted post-August 1991 parliamentary stalemate. It was agreed to break it by calling for an early election, which would coincide with a referendum on the new constitution in late 1992. 3 It is within that context of drafting that the constitution included a variety of safeguards, which created 3 The 1990-1992 period was regulated by the Temporary Main Law (Lith. Laikinasis pa- grindinis įstatymas) approved by the parliament on the day of independence and is, in most respects, not regulating public administration, and allowing most administrative processes to continue onwards from the Soviet times. 54 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence a complex decision-making and staff assignment procedures to the executive, but also retained the Soviet-era mixed proportional and majoritarian par- liamentary election model. Both of these features of the constitution work made the Lithuanian governance system increasingly hard to reform, as the parliamentary majorities since 2000 have in all instances been coalitions, and all comprehensive reforms need to pass through 3 to 4 autonomous decision- making institutions. The Lithuanian constitution was drafted in the context of a broken par- liament, and this is the primary cause for including an extensive number of so-called checks and balances, which mean that comprehensive reforms are hard to come by. The constitutional court has ruled on presidential, parliamen- tary, and government interaction on several occasions, and in 1998 stated that Lithuania is a parliamentary republic with certain features of presidentialism (LRkT, 1998). In essence, this means that the President can actively participa- te or block policy processes that originate in the interaction between the go- vernment and parliament. The President also has extensive powers to assign ministers; and the Prime Minister (PM) has no possibility to relieve ministers without the President’s, or Parliament’s consent. At the ministerial level, this is further complicated by the fact that individual ministers are responsible to the parliament personally for policy of their respective ministry, meaning that they have the possibility and often the motivation to block or stall policy for- mulation at the cabinet level, and the PM or other ministers may not be able to do much about it, especially when this relates to junior coalition partner ministers. The fact that Lithuania has a partly majoritarian system of elections, which consistently fails to produce one-party governments, the reforms that are either comprehensive or controversial are next to impossible to initiate (Bi- leišis, 2012a). 3.3. Developments in Central Administration In the first decade of Lithuania’s independence the political vision of post-1990 Lithuania as a ‘western’ country was a key element of the con- sensus of the political elite. Moreover, the post-EU accession carried on this legacy in the context of diligent compliance to the EU standards (Maniokas, 2009). However, the capacity to realize this vision and understanding what it entails in terms of developing public governance was initially lacking. Only 55 Public Sector reformS in lithuania S ince the 1990S the adoption of the Constitution in late 1992 and coinciding general election allowed the beginning of public governance modernization in earnest. In 1994, a ministry called “Ministry of g overnance Reforms and Municipa- lities” was set up, and its main task was developing and implementing go- vernance modernization, decentralization and other policies in the context of public administration reform. This ministry was liquidated in 2000 with most of its staff being integrated into the Ministry of Interior with two de- partments: Regional Policy and Public g overnance Policy being the main public administration reform policy structures to this day. Other two ele- ments of public administration reform ecosystem are the center of govern- ment – the g overnment Office and the Civil Service Department under the g overnment. Several other ministries, such as the Ministry of Economy and Ministry of Finance, play a role in steering policy goal setting. The Ministry of g overnance Reforms and Municipalities at the outset formulated three key public administration modernization areas: (i) sim- plifying the administrative process, (ii) making public administration more accessible to citizens, and (iii) creating real administrative responsibility me- chanisms (Rokickienė, 1999). These areas were seen as particularly lacking with respect to Lithuania’s EU accession process, a formal bid submitted in late 1995. An important factor for reforms was also the fact that the parliamentary terms of 1992−1996 and 1996−2000 did not need a coalition. The pendu- lum election phenomenon, which occurred throughout the decade, brought the ex-communists to power. 4 In addition, during the parliamentary term of 1996−2000 the Conservatives party – party that emerged from the largest faction of Sąjudis held the parliamentary majority. During the 1992−1996 reform, the focus was on reforming the territorial administrative setup of the country, while no comprehensive reform at the central level of administra- tion was taken. It was the 1996−2000 reform, that the PM and the President were keen on radical shift in terms of governance that consisted of the most profound series of central government reform, including an overhaul of the ministerial system, development of Civil Service and Public Administration laws both passed in 1999. It was the passing of the Public Administration 4 At that time known as the Democratic Labor Party of Lithuania (Lith. Lietuvos demo- kratinė darbo partija, LDDP). 56 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Law that cemented the reforms of prior three years into a governance system that has been changing only incrementally since. In the process of development of the Public Administration Law, there was no clear vision of which countries should be taken as examples for the system. The United k ingdom, Norway, and Finland became the prototypes that were taken into consideration primarily for the preparation of the law (Rokickienė, 1999). In the Lithuanian public administration discourse, the division between Anglo-Saxon and continental administrative systems is persistent, and Nordic countries are often perceived as being closer to the Anglo-Saxon model. This perception is based on the fact that Nordic and English-speaking countries em- braced New Public Management (NPM) reforms much more than those in the continent. Although the EU accession did raise requirements for administra- tive capacity which were closer to the standards of w eberian bureaucracy, the Lithuania’s policy was also strongly affected by NPM-style recommendations of the IMF (g uogis, 2014). Mostly this was due to the need for fiscal consoli- dation and for purposes of boosting competitiveness as the Lithuania’s public finances suffered three major economic downturns: (i) immediately after in- dependence, (ii) during the Russia’s sovereign debt crisis of 1998, and (iii) the 2008 global financial crisis. However, these policies produced a serious social inequality which now threatens future growth prospects (IMF , 2016). There is some controversy over the outcomes of economic policy re- forms that were made possible through the creation of NPM-style adminis- trative system, focused on economic growth and catering to businesses and investors (Norkus, 2012), as it produced one of the most successful econo- mic performances not only in the region, but worldwide, yet is characterized by a large income inequality and low salaries, and exceedingly small propor- tion of the Public Sector relative to gDP within the European context. In addition, some studies suggest that the Lithuanian reform path (differently from that of Estonia), never espoused the NPM’s rhetoric and was never reflected by the political elites as a clear policy goal. 5 In a way, these reforms were seldom comprehensive and were imposed by the IMF requirement, EU accession process, or business lobby. 5 w ith some exceptions considered, most noteably the two governments under PM An- drius k ubilius in 1999−2000, and 2008−2012. These governments did explicitly formu- late their reform agenda by using the NPM rhetoric. 57 Public Sector reformS in lithuania S ince the 1990S The government under PM g ediminas Vagnorius of 1996−1999 coin- cided with the election of a diaspora representative Valdas Adamkus as its president. Both have consistently expressed their attitude that the Lithuania‘s institutions did not transform together with independence and kept soviet- style practices in place long after they were relevant and argued for radical administrative reforms. The two-year period between 1997 and 1999, when the leaders agreed on the need of administrative reform and together pus- hed for it, coupled with a parliamentary majority and created the necessary conditions favorable for radical reform. This movement was also spurred by the fact that in 1997 Lithuania was listed as a country not eligible for initial enlargement (together with Romania and Bulgaria), and building pu- blic support for greater reform. These conditions are the only instance that allowed radical reforms to occur. It is not for lack of trying but rather the institutional setup of the country that has created severe problems for com- prehensive reform, as evidenced by the developments in the wake of 2008 global financial crisis. The period between 2000 and 2008 was characterized by a rapid econo- mic growth and only minor reforms, such as introduction of strategic plan- ning. However, this did not become a tool for policy making as much as a fis- cal policy instrument (Bileišis, 2012a) important for the use of EU structural funding. It was the global financial crisis, coupled with a housing bubble in the Baltic States, which resulted in double-digit recession in all three coun- tries that drew attention to governance mechanisms that allowed this to oc- cur. Several key issues were identified by research in the past years as needing policy-makers attention and reform efforts: agencification, low return on in- vestment made by the state-owned companies, unclear criteria for awarding the status of civil servants, and disparities in regional development. Martinaitis and Nakrošis (2011) have demonstrated that Lithuania has undergone a very rapid process of agencification with varying results. Ho- wever, several important negative outcomes are evident: smaller agencies cannot mobilize enough resources even for most basic innovations, or staff training, many of the agencies have unclear status as to their responsibility, and there is no registry at the level of central administration to monitor the process. Many of the agencies may be registered as service providers when, in fact, they may perform public administration with limited oversight. 58 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence However, during the parliamentary term of 2008−2012 the government underwent a major overhaul at the level of central government. The legal basis for the central government is laid down in the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania and in the Law on the g overnment. According to this law, the government is responsible for coordinating the activities of ministries and agencies as well as the activities in the scope of the strategic plans of the government, such as the strategy for national development. To improve the management of state institutions, the government approved the concept for the Improvement of the Executive Power System in 2009. Improvement directions of an executive power system were oriented to mo- dernize particular systems: government agencies, ministries, state agencies under the ministries, territorial management, public institutions, and sta- te-owned enterprises. An attention was paid to the performance improve- ment of government institutions −their status and role in the formulation and implementation of state policies were defined more clearly, more ro- bust relationships with ministries were established, and their organization principles were unified. It also set out the criteria for the establishment of ministries and defined their purpose more clearly. In order to improve the system of state agencies under the ministries their competences were pu- rified, clearer public administration authorization procedure was establis- hed, and their organization principles were unified. However, the central government has experienced stalling, if not a reversal of this reform during the tenure of the government of the 2012-2016 parliamentary term. State-owned enterprises pay a disproportionately small amount of divi- dends to the state budget in the context of the EU. There are serious doubts that these companies make investments, since they are inefficient, not focu- sed on returns, or even corrupt. However, the 2008−2012 government’s at- tempt to create an incorporated enterprise tasked with management and oversight of all state-owned enterprises failed as some of the coalition par- tners did not approve of this model (Jurkonis, 2012). w ith regard to both agencification and investments few attempts were made to address these shortcomings. Nevertheless, there was a lot activity with regard to the development of civil service and municipal reform in Lithuania, albeit it was similarly plagued by lack of consensus for compre- hensive reforms. 59 Public Sector reformS in lithuania S ince the 1990S 3.4. Developments in Regional Policy and Municipal Administration 3.4.1. Early Y ears One element of g orbachev’s Perestroika was greater autonomy given to the constituent Soviet Republics to organize their governance, and in Lithu- ania, this took advantageprior to the declaration of independence. In Fe- bruary 1990, a Law on Local Self-g overnment was passed. However, this document did not meet the many of the European standards of good gover- nance: there was no clear distinction between local and central government functions outlined, and also the law foresaw a two-level municipal system with no clear distinction of functions at that level either (Lazdynas, 2005). Moreover, the territorial-administrative division was not reviewed, and the division formed in 1963 still forms the basis of contemporary Lithuanian municipal system (Atrauskas & Bileišis, 2013). The problem with the 1963 territorial-administrative reform is that it does not fit the pattern of territori- al-administrative divisions elsewhere in Europe, with lower-level municipa- lities having in many cases under 1,000 residents while the mean size of the higher-level non-urban municipalities is near 50,000 residents. This system was not workable at the lower level, but instead of its review, its municipal status was abolished and these areas became territorial-administrative units with municipal offices (elderships). Municipalities in Lithuania have few powers and discretions. On the one hand, this is seen as a negative feature of the Lithuanian governance system (VDU, 2016), especially in a sense that it has created great developmental dis- parities between Vilnius and the rest of the country. This has led to straining of public services systems in the capital and overcapacity in the rest of the coun- try which burdens municipal budgets, and is difficult to abridge due to the political salience of laying off highly educated staff in smaller municipalities. At the outset of independence, municipal councils elected mayors who were heads of administration. However, very quickly and in contradiction to the idea of separation of powers, amendments to the Law on Municipalities were made, which integrated the position of the chairperson of the council and mayor. In 2002, the Constitutional court ruled this to be unconstitutio- nal, and an amendment to the Law on Municipalities was made to create the 60 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence position of Director of Administration, appointed by the Mayor (who remai- ned the head of the council) (Astrauskas, 2006). However, there are many doubts if directors of administrations have sufficient independence from ma- yors for the municipal governance to be considered to conform to democratic standards of separation of powers. 3.4.2. Debates on Different Levels of Regional and Municipal Administrations By 1994, it was understood that first level municipalities cannot mobilize resources to conduct effective activity, and they were abolished. Meanwhile, at the higher level of administrative territorial division debates on having re- gions emerged. The result was the division of 56 Lithuanian municipalities into 10 counties (Žilinskas, 1999). However, rather than having a municipal status they became a mechanism of deconcentrating central government. The logic behind their creation was to implement reforms (such as land reform and land restitution) regarding which there were doubts about the municipal capacities. Another argument for the establishment of counties was the need to offer services of the central government geographicaly closer to citizens living outside Vilnius. Nevertheless, the county administrations were not seen as efficient, as many of the government agencies would have their own network of offices, and the advent of ICT in government made the whole con- cept obsolete. w ith the land reform having ended, county administrations were one of the most notable victims of 2008−2010 crisis austerity measures. In parallel to counties, starting in the early 2000s, a debate on new regi- ons that would correspond to NUTS II requirements began. Primarily, this was driven by a New Politics parties: Law and Justice and New Alliance, and in 2000, parliamentary elections started the era of coalition governance. These two parties managed to hold the coalition just for six months. After falling out with each other, the New Alliance created a coalition with the Social De- mocrats (which emerged as a major party when it merged with the LDDP , and the Lithuanian communist leader of late 1980s, and the President between 1993 and 1997 became the Prime Minister). However, it was Law and Justice in their election manifesto that planned to create four administrative regions based on ethnographic of Lithuania. 61 Public Sector reformS in lithuania S ince the 1990S At the time, Lithuania could have formed four NUTS 6 II regions, but accidentally, the Soviet-era planning foresaw five major cities as regional cen- ters; and the attempts to identify which four should become regional centers failed, therefore Lithuania entered the EU as a single NUTS II region. During the economic crisis, and the abolition of county administrations, the idea of NUTS II regionalization emerged again (Žilinskas, 2009). Again, no agreement could be reached, as by then the depopulation allowed only three regions, any municipality near Vilnius that would be included in the Vilnius region would probably lose access to the EU structural funding, while Vilnius on its own is too small to form a NUTS II region. It was only in 2015 when projections showed that due to Vilnius’ economic prominence the enti- re country might lose access to the EU structural fund, a decision to form two NUTS II regions was taken, it included Vilnius County (also a NUTS III; the only county having more than 800,000 residents) and the remaining territory. Once again, as in so many other areas of public governance, the reform focus is on incremental change to adapt to the challenges posed by outside forces. Regional governance reform in 2009 was limited. The County Manage- ment Reform, 7 despite its fancy title, was in practice a liquidation of county bureaus. The aim was to use the state budget funds more effectively i.e. to reduce administrative burden and bureaucracy, and to bring public services closer to the people via their transfer to the jurisdiction of municipalities. Tasks and functions of the county governors’ offices in many instances dupli- cated functions of central or local public management institutions and were eliminated altogether. 3.4.3. Moderate Municipal Reform In 2000, it was becoming clear that the 56 municipalities of the county, based on territorial-administrative division of 1963 sorely stuck out in the re- gional context of EU integrating states, and several reform steps were underta- ken. A moderate attempt to reform was undertaken with a possibility opened in the Law of T erritorial Administrative Units given several geographic criteria. 6 NUTS – Nomenclature of T erritorial Units for Statistics, an EU regionalization instrument. 7 County offices were deconcentrated central government units. Counties remain a reference for statisti- cal purposes representing NUTS III level but no administrative structures are imposed on them. None- theless, some of the central agencies still organize their territorial units along the lines of counties. 62 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence According to that regulation, at the time nearly 40 territories could form new municipalities. A consultation was conducted with the residents. However, the outcome concluded that the residents of only five territories decided that mu- nicipalities are needed. In addition, another four territories had their bounda- ries changed; these included three areas which had a status of city municipality, which was awkward because these were very small municipalities that had a special resort status in the soviet territorial-administrative division. As a result, Lithuania still maintains a system of districts (Lith. rajonas from Russ. tras- lation. rayon). The reform has affected 10 territories that have the status of mu- nicipality (Lith. savivaldybė), 43 district municipalities (Lith. rajono savivaldy- bė), and seven cities (Lith. miesto savivaldybė) (Astrauskas, 2011). However, this classification is of little material impact in the administrative sense as they all need to comply with a single law, which is especially problematic because the smallest municipality has 200 times fewer residents than the largest. There are speculations that these disparities need to be addressed with a more nuan- ced regulation, yet no practical steps have been taken to that account. In term of administrative reform in the municipalities, a similar mo- derate incremental change is the norm. The period between 1997 and 1999 was characterized by increasing the administrative power of the mayor by allowing him/her to employ advisors and other immediate staff on his own account. On the other hand, in 2000, the elders of the territorial sub-units of municipalities (those that were 1st level municipalities prior to 1995) became career civil servants. However, the national parliamentary realities starting in 2000 affected municipalities in a similar manner. In most municipalities, coalition rule became the norm, and mayoral power was in decline. This was countered by multiple initiatives to change the mayor status, primarily with regard to direct election, and possibly making mayors head of the executive. These debates lasted far more than a decade, and in 2014, an amendment to the law was passed which created the direct mayoral election but kept mayor status as chair of the council. This raised questions of governability of muni- cipalities in cases when mayors are not part of the ruling coalition. The issue of elderships, especially after the elders became career civil ser - vants, is also a contentious issue with some proposing to liquidate the institu- tion altogether, while other proposing a return to some municipal status. In 2008, a compromise regulation was adopted. The localities in elderships can 63 Public Sector reformS in lithuania S ince the 1990S now elect seniūnaičiai − members of the community that form a board at the eldership, and discuss and identify areas of action for the elder. However, this board is purely advisory, and cannot affect the elders or municipal actions in any imperative form. In 2012, the Council of Europe and Local Self-g overnment Congress adopted a recommendation No. 321 for Lithuania to identify the key areas where local self-government needs reform: − Sub-optimal competencies of municipalities, − Insufficient funding, − Lack of competency on the part municipal servants − Low level of community involvement into municipal affairs (CoE, 2012). Reforms aiming at remedying these shortcomings are not underway, ho- wever, one bright spot is among the larger municipalities, namely Vilnius and k laipėda, which due to their large size and a tradition of right wing, Mayors had used the of the “Dawn” and “Sunset” recommendation commissions es- tablished in 2000 by the outgoing Conservative government to modernize their internal processes. These cities are regularly cited as livable, competitive municipalities with best services (g uogis & g udelis, 2003). Nevertheless, the capacity to apply modern public management methods is severely lacking in smaller municipalities due to both financial reasons and the difficulty of attracting capable personnel. In conclusion, the absence of territorial-administrative reform at the outset of independence has proved to have a lasting legacy on municipal de- velopment. On the other hand, the urban policies of the Soviet period make it problematic to create regions of the NUTS II level, and administrative structures of the NUTS III did not find their function either. Lithuania does suffer from an absence of meaningful regional policy and reform, while the single level municipal system that exists is severely lacking autonomy and capacity to implement its mandates with the Law on Local Self-g overnment, limiting reforms in the large cities and making next to impossible to achieve a minimum standard of good governance in the smaller municipalities. Occational political initiatives which advocated a differentiationof regu- lation for municipalities of different size, or to introduce a second level of municipal administration have not been successful. As in other areas of PAR, 64 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence reforms are incremental and an outcome of not well-considered and reflected strategy, but imposed from − without the government − by either internatio- nal actors or pressure groups. 3.5. Civil Service Civil service developments followed a similar pattern as reforms of cen- tral government, with substantive changes occurring only after Lithuania’s bid to join the EU, period of Presidential and Prime Ministerial concord, and perceived Lithuania as lagging in the integration process between 1997 and 1999. In the period preceding the Law on Civil Service only one attempt at modernization was undertaken, and that was the 1995 valdininkai 8 Law. Ne- vertheless, this Law was merely an attempt to harmonize the regulation of civil service with the democratic constitutional provisions, which the Soviet era regulation was incompatible with. Other than that, the Law did not have any ambition to modernize the civil service. In fact, it can argued that in most areas of public governance the capacity to develop relevant reform visions was painfully lacking, and there was a large gap of understanding of how mo- dern w estern democracies operate (Masiulis, 2007). In Lithuanian literature on Civil Service, typically three stages are identi- fied: (i) pre-Valdininkai Law, (ii) under the Valdininkai Law, and (iii) post-1999 development of the current civil service system within the framework of the Law on Civil Service. It also can be claimed that a fourth stage is underway as civil service has been identified as needing further strengthening and depoliti- cization (Meyer-Sahling & Nakrošis 2014). In 2010, the department was trans- formed into an agency under the g overnment of Lithuania, previously being an agency under the Ministry of Interior. w ith this shift a several editions for a new law on Civil Service were drafted and submitted to the parliament, howe- ver, the parliament had failed to pass any of these over a period of four years. Between 1990 and 1995, the key focus of political principles was loyalty of civil servants, and a large degree of politicization plagued the system. Ho- wever, the effect on the replacement of servants was limited, as Sąjūdis could 8 Lith. Valdininkas is a direct translation from Russian term of beauraucrat - chinovnik. This term is linguisticaly concidered inaproptrirate as it implies governing, rather than serving the public. Yet, this term is firmly set within the public discourse when critici- zing government officials. 65 Public Sector reformS in lithuania S ince the 1990S not organize large-scale reorganization before 1999, and later the LDDP g o- vernment was mostly aligned with the civil service due to the close nature of relationships between the Communist Party and the Administrative system in the nomenklatura 9 model. The first stage of civil service reform began with the adoption of the Law on g overnment in 1990 which included some provisions on personnel policy of institutions within the executive. However, this regulation was abstract and did little to affect the practices of recruitment, which was conducted by indi- vidual institutions based on internal guidelines (Minkevičius & Ivanauskienė, 2007). w ith the country’s statehood in question for more than one and a half year after the declaration of independence, the primary concern of the g overn- ment was the loyalty of civil servants assured by ad hoc measures. In addition, it was only the LDDP government which came to power after the adoption of the Constitution that included a program provision to regulate the civil service. By 1995, the Valdininkai Law was finally passed (Juralevičienė, 2005) and the second phase of the development of civil service began. The Valdininkai Law was not a radical break from the Soviet system in a sense that it regulated not only the civil servants engaged in public administration but also public service provider professions. Hence, this period is better characterized as a public service (rather than a narrower civil service) period of Lithuania’s pu- blic sector human resource (HR) policy (Smalskys & Minkevičius, 2013). On the other hand, the law identified two levels of the service: A level was referred to as political appointees, and B level was referred to as servants. The B level public servants were categorized into Corps of service by profession (medics, police officers, judges, valdininkai). Although the Law provided professions of public service provision a similar legal status, the Law mostly focused on regulating HR procedures of the valdininkai (civil servants), leaving large dis- cretion to organizations that employed personnel from other corps. The law included some contemporary HR management elements never 9 The Soviet Communist Party structure duplicated the administrative structure of the state, and there was a large overlap between the two which means that all of the soviet bureaucracy was, in w estern terms, politicized. And the LDDP were the direct inheritors of the Communist party, while at the point of independence, the majority of the servants were appointed through the Nomenklatura model. And this was very different from the other two Baltic States, where Communist parties were in large part Soviet era imigrants, and did not qualify for citizentship, and consequently, a right to serve in civil service. 66 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence before seen in Lithuania: civil servant assessment (at the time called attes- tation, Lith. atestavimas), provisions for harmonizing the HR management across the public sector, data bank of civil servants, training of civil servants. The main institution tasked with creating the overall HR management system was the Ministry of g overnance Reforms and Municipalities which created regulation on recruitment and examination of candidates, set qualification standards, such as age, experience, education, personal traits. However, the passing of the Valdininkai Law coincided with the Lithu- ania’s bid to join the EU, and the missions of OECD SIgMA immediately in- dicated that the Law is not up to standard and would need amendment − the Law was seen as too complex, with plentiful loopholes, and training provisions were not implemented (Cordona, 2008). Furthermore, the Law was referred to the Constitution court immediately after the 1996 election, and parts of it were declared unconstitutional and had to be changed. In 1997, with the inter- national PHARE program aid a government project Administrative Reform of Lithuania (Lith. Lietuvos administracinė reforma) was started. One of its goals was the creation of an EU-compatible Law on Civil Service. The program lau- nched discussions about which model of civil service would best suit Lithu- ania’s needs (Adomonis, 1999). Despite the recognition that the NPM-style position system may be more flexible, it was considered at the time that the civil service should be more insulated from the general labor market to ensure stability and loyalty to the government in the face of low capacities of the state to resist corrupt influences and politicization, hence the civil service mostly adhered to the principle career system (Minkevičius & Ivanauskienė, 2007). In 1999, the Law on Civil Service was passed. It regulated the civil service in the strict sense, with only civilian servants implementing administrative functions being awarded the status of civil servants. The uniformed (statutory) services were by then regulated by several specialized statutes which included necessary HR provisions (border guard, police, military, etc.). The new Law applied to the statutory services only insofar as the statutes did not regula- te relevant aspects of the service. The professional corps were also no longer regulated, and the public service provision professions were regulated by the general labor code, making no distinction to employment in the private sector. The Law on Civil Service was amended dozens of times since its adoption in 1999. And since 2012, there is an academic consensus that a new compre- 67 Public Sector reformS in lithuania S ince the 1990S hensive reform is needed. However, the fact remains that attempts to pass a new edition of the law are frustrated by political impasse. The underlying prin- ciples of the Law on Civil Service have in most part remained intact since 1999 but an incremental movement towards greater control of recruitment, and in parallel, the introduction of principles of the position model can be cited. The Law identified four types of civil servants: political appointees, ca- reer civil servants, statutory civil servants, and replacement civil servants for temporary openings. And the main aim of the regulation for civil servants was the creation of a meritocracy in the civil service, and also greater mobility across institutions. This − it was hoped − could build capacity of institutions despite the recruitment to higher positions excluding much of the labor force (Adomonis, 1999). The new law also harmonized the remuneration system, introducing 20 salary categories and set bonus regulations and limits. The Law was criticized at the outset for its restrictive effect on recrui- tment which was perceived as risking greater corruption, rather than redu- cing it through loopholes that allowed unfair examination. This was attemp- ted to be remedied with new amendments (most notably in 2002). The 2002 Amendment listed social guarantees, clarified remuneration framework, and more importantly, included explicit listing of civil service values as imperative guidelines for HR practice: political neutrality, efficiency, publicity and transparency, quality of service provision, and responsibility for decisions taken. Also the experience requirement for certain positions was removed, although PA institutions still have the right to include it in the job opening qualifications requirements, and often exercise that right. Another major changes in 2002 included the creation of a civil service agency − the Department of Civil Service under the Ministry of Interior which was tasked with overseeing the implementation of the civil service regulation and also several cross-cutting functions, the need for which was apparent in the hope of attaining the original goals of the civil service law (Smalskys & Minke- vičius 2013). The 2002 Amendment did not raise any major policy goals, but was rather an attempt to remove unforeseen shortcomings of the original 1999 edition. The European Commission Progress Report for 2002 has indicated that the Lithuanian civil service complies with the accession standards but also cautioned that the system is still highly sensitive to political shifts and could be deconstructed (CEC, 2002). The EC report – praising the achievements and 68 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence cautioning for the future – was a watershed moment for civil service reform. No radical reforms were undertaken since. The existing system offers a large degree of discretion to public administration institutions with regard to deci- ding which members of the staff can be awarded the status of a civil servant. But the practice that emerged over the years indicates that a restricted number of personnel would hold such a status in any given organization: personnel engaged in policy formulation, coordination, and oversight, drafting of regu- lation and contracts on behalf of PA organizations, budget funded project and program coordinators, and those making decisions on implementation of po- licy and the application of regulation in particular cases (Šarmavičius, 2005). The shock of the economic crisis spurred the new right wing government into action. The governance reform became the core element of the govern- ment program. The governments answer to the crisis was to attempt the im- plementation of a comprehensive NPM-style reforms. The civil service was at the core of this initiative (Lith. Valstybės valdymo tobulinimo komisijos 2009−2012 m. veiklos ataskaita). A greater shift towards a position model was envisaged but the crisis meant that planning for a new governance system needed to coincide with immediate measures to appease fiscal pressures. During the period of 2008−2012, a process of cuts in the number of public administration agencies and numbers of civil service was underway. The deci- sions were primarily in reaction to budgetary cuts, and were mostly made at the ministerial levels. The government office conducted assessments of efficiency using the methodology functional analysis (Lith.V alstybės valdymo tobulinimo komisijos 2009−2012 m. veiklos ataskaita). The goal of these assessment was to develop policy-relevant criteria for the identification of areas of cuts. These were in some instances used to abridge public administration organizations of unnecessary functions, and reduce the numbers of staff but ministries exercised significant discretion in the way they acted upon the results of assessments. The main philosophy of the 2008−2012 civil service reform was the crea- tion of an individualized system of assessment which would then lead to indi- vidualized remuneration and training. Leadership skills of managers were also identified as a key focus of the reform (Pivoras, 2012). Systems of organizational management which would allow a management-by-objectives style aligning the individual civil servants competencies and job results to attain strategic goals of the organization were also envisaged (Rimkutė & k irstukaitė, 2011). 69 Public Sector reformS in lithuania S ince the 1990S Several initiatives were incorporated within the existing framework of the Law on Civil Service, such as annual civil servant assessment by the ma- nager, and individual civil servants action plan. However, the position model was criticized in the academia as it was ill-fitted to the uncooperative com- partmentalized and highly legalized modes of action of the Lithuanian public administration, and which would need to change first (kasiulis & Pivoras, 2012). The new edition of the Law on Civil Service did not receive a parlia- mentary majority vote and was returned for review in 2012, already under a different government. In the wake of parliamentary elections of 2012 a new coalition headed by the social democrats was formed and its program did not include any major changes or ambitions to the governance system. Nonethe- less, it also did not roll back the changes that were put in place and looked favorable, albeit in a watered down form of initiated reforms by the previous government. w ithin the civil service this was an attempted introduction of a competency-based model in the civil service which did not deconstruct the existing status of civil servants, but would allow better HR management in all respects. It is recognized that a low salary base of many civil servants does not create sufficient incentives for most qualified staff, and robust social guaran- tees need to be in place in order to retain and build administrative capacity. By 2016, the Department of Civil Service developed a civil service com- petency model, and drafted a new edition of the law again submitted to the parliament. It included: − Competency-based horizontal HR management system across PA ins- titutions; − Distinction between general competencies, leadership competencies, and special competencies is made. All civil servants would need to meet a certain standard of general competences, and managers – a certain standard of leadership competencies. Special competencies would be set by professional requirements of a specific job opening and would be contested in open examinations; − Unified registry of civil servants, and also other potential candidates that have gone through competency testing would be held, and used for purposes of recruitment, training mobility across agencies, and performance assessment; − Civil servant category system would be simplified to a list of job title: 70 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence specialist, senior specialist, etc., which would ensure baseline remune- ration, while the salary would significantly depend on competencies and performance assessment; − Harmonization of competency requirement for similar positions in different public administration organization would be implemented (VTD, 2013). The new competency model of HR management would entail significant changes in the remuneration system, the outcomes of which are hard to pre- dict whether they would attain the called for change in the PA culture (Rus- teika & Diržytė, 2014). The outcomes of other PA reforms in this regard are not encouraging in the sense that other elements of Lithuania’s public admi- nistration reform have shown that at the administrative level it is difficult to overcome the stringent institutional tension at the political level to build networks of cooperation for policy implementation. The compartmentalizing of Public administration starts at the government and ministry level, and even such cross-cutting initiatives as the civil service competency model are unlikely to do the trick. Substantial bottom-up initiatives are likely needed on behalf of leading civil servants themselves to create these networks through associated action as the political system is not permissive for accommodating these goals at the moment. 3.6. Sector Wide Public Administration Reforms In this section, we will cover several transversal developments that have taken place, or often more tellingly, have not. The topic of administrative over- sight has been a central area of administrative reform throughout the 1990s, and the strategic planning in 2000s, while since 2000, the digitization of go- vernment both in terms of the process of administration and public service delivery has come to the fore. On the other hand, there are several areas of public administration which have received hardly any attention on behalf of governing poltical elites: ethical conduct, setting clear administrative proce- dures, and clear criteria for which public service employees should and should not to be awarded the status of civil servants, as well as which agencies should and should not be awarded the status of institutions of public administration. w e believe that the three factors of (i) absence of integrated code of ethical conduct for public sector employees and civil servants, (ii) the fact that in 71 Public Sector reformS in lithuania S ince the 1990S Figure 3.1: Dynamics in the Number of Lithuanian Agencies, 1990−2012 Source: Nakrošis & Bankauskaitė-g rigaliūnienė, 2015, cit. analysis of the LAOC data. 10 situtions can alter the status of their employees with little or no grounding and oversight, and (iii) that there is substantial room to setup public agencies outside of the realm of general regulation of public administration, deserve a separate discussion. Four major developments in administrative oversight in the 1990s can be listed: (i) creation of the national audit office, (ii) creation of the ombudsman’s institution, (iii) passing of the law on public administration, and (iv) creation of administrative courts. The National Audit Office (Lith. Valstybės kontrolė, lit. State Control) is regulated by the Constitution, but already by the mid- 1990s, it moved away from being an institution of budgetary expenses review to the institution responsible for conducting financial and performance audits of the entire public sector. This institution is accountable to the parliament, and has a very large measure of discretion to conduct planned audits but also to implement audits on request of institutions themselves, including perfor- mance audits of strategic plans and programs which cover several policy areas. 10 The difference in the number of agencies as defined by Nakrošis & Bankauskaitė-g rigaliūnie- nė, 2015 from those cited from Open data of Civil Service of Lithuania in Figure 2 is caused by the fact that Nakrošis & Bankauskaitė-g rigaliūnienė, 2015 applied a stricter test to the definition of an agency, than merely the legal status of „institution of public administration“ . 72 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Figure 3.2: The Number of National and Municipal PA Institutions between 2010 and 2016 Source: Open Data of Civil Service of Lithuania. In 1994, the parliament adopted the Law of Ombudsmen. Lithuania has two ombudsmen overseeing national and local government institutions but both of them are serviced by the same institution. This institution received roughly 1,800 complains annually between 2012 and 2014, about ¾ were complains filed against national government officials, and ¼ against local self-government officials. The institution would investigate about ⅓ of com- plains, and another ⅓ would be mediated between the conflicting parties, and majority of remaining complains would be reffered to other institutions. Between 35% and 40& of complaints in total were recognized as valid. 11 Om- budsmen have become an important consulting institution to the parliament with regard to developing new regulations in trying to resolve occurring conflicts between government institutions and citizens (Pranevičienė, 2002). 11 Note: (1) Another 30% are resolved in good will with the mediation of the institu- tion. Therefore, the ratio of recognition of validity of complains which are not resolved peacefully is around 50%, or around 600 cases annually. (2) These data are cited from the 2015 Annual Report of of the activities of the seimas ombudsmen's office of the Re- public of Lithuania. This and other reports are available at: http://www.lrski.lt/lt/seimo- kontrolieriu-veikla/metines-seimo-kontrolieriu-veiklos-ataskaitos.html [2016-09-10]. 73 Public Sector reformS in lithuania S ince the 1990S But there is no research available on what impact this interaction has for future conflicts. The passing of the Law on Public Administration in 1999 was another noteable moment of the development of public administration in Lithuania. The Law identifies the category of public sector organizations which are granted powers of public administration: “The system of entities of public administration shall mean entities of public administration which are re- lated to each other by subordination and coordination relations and have been granted the powers in accordance with the procedure laid down by this Law to engage in public administration” (VIII-1234, 1999; citing amen- dmend XII-511, 2013). This Law limits the establishment of ‘ public adminis- tration’ institutions without the approval of the parliament, except in matters of EU regulation. In fact, the EU accession has been the key force behing the explosion of agencies, both in Lithuania and the rest of the region (Nakrošis & Bankauskaitė-g rigaliūnienė, 2015; see Figure 3.1). The registry for these institutions in 2016 has identified 597 agencies, and 772 in 2010 (the earliest year covered by the registry; see Figures 3.2 and 3.3). However, the overall number of civil servants has kept incrementally growing over the same pe- riod but the overall number of employees (including statutatory and civil servants) remains realtivelly stable at around 80,000, i.e. under 4% of the labor force (see Figure 3.4 for a breakdown of civil servants, Table 3.1 for the numbers of civil servants). One important sidenote with regard to the Lithu- anian public sector is its incredible feminization of the career civil service. In 2016, women constitute 76% of all career civil servants, and that ratio has not been changing since 2000. However, only 37% of heads of institutions, and 40% of the statutatory servants are women. An important stage in the development of public administration star- ted in 2004 when the g overnment approved Public Administration Deve- lopment Strategy (2004−2010). It was the first strategic document for public administration modernization and its further development. This strategy set out objectives to create a transparent, effective public administration system based on new technologies and oriented to results and appropriate service. Five areas were identified for the improvement: central government, territo- rial central government, local government, administrative capacity (HRM), and e-government. A subsequent strategy: Public Management Improvement 74 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Figure 3.3: The Number of Employees in National and Municipal PA Institu- tions between 2010 and 2016 Source: Open Data of Civil Service of Lithuania. Programme for 2012−2020 aims at improving key public management processes, such as designing, planning, and implementing public policies. It sta- tes the goals “to enhance openness of the public governance processes and to en- courage society to take an active part in them; provide good quality administra- tive and public services; strengthen the capacities of strategic thinking in public administration institutions; and improve the management of their activities. ” Much of the development of public governance was incremental and initiated on behalf of civil servants themselves (Nakrošis, 2011). The laws on civil service and public administration were not comprehensively reviewed and this is a key characteristic of PARs which tend to be bottom-up with civil servants advancing new developments in agencies that have greater au- tonomy. And those in most cases turn out to be the agencies that conducted their activities in policy areas directly related to the EU regulation. Nakro- šis & Martinaitis (2011) and Nakrošis & Bankauskaitė-g rigaliūnienė (2015) corroborate this generalization to some extent. However, as is the case with the institution of the ombudsman research of how the networks of civil ser- vants impact the practices and outcomes of public administration need to be substantially developed. 75 Public Sector reformS in lithuania S ince the 1990S Table 3.1: The Number of Employees in Public Administration Institutions 2010-2016 Ye ar Employees without the status of civil servants Civil servants Statutoty civil servants Political confidence civil servants Heads of institu- tions Total 12 2010 21 992 26 063 5 236 841 434 54 566 2011 21 421 25 756 4 991 852 337 53 357 2012 21 064 26 348 5 013 666 369 53 460 2013 20 922 26 938 5 139 891 332 54 222 2014 20 833 27 302 5 153 894 322 54 504 2015 20 358 27 311 5 118 913 321 54 021 2016 19 565 27 603 5 035 921 311 53 435 Source: Open data of Civil Service of Lithuania. Administrative courts, a system of 5 regional and one Supreme Adminis- trative Court are a key feature of Lithuania’ s public administration. These have become a vey important source of driving the harmonization of administra- tive practice. Nonetheless, this feature of Lithuania’s governance may also be criticized from the point of view of veto points. As we remarked above, the institutional setup at the level of political decision-making creates severe im- passes for reforms as it is. The fact that the judiciary also has specialized ins- titutions to tackle intra-government conflicts does allow the political elites to slip easily of the hook, and not pursue the reforms when needed, as the courts through the issuance of Buletins on Court Decision practice the application of various regulation. In the context of absence of strong associations of the civil service professionals the bottom-up model of reforms is the only one available, and is thus severely hampered. Nonetheless, the Supreme Admi- nistrative Court has created a dynamic legal doctrine which is continually updated not only based on the practice of the courts but also on research on the subject of administrative process. As new research comes out, the court is willing to amend its practice. 13 12 The number is lower compared to Rekašienė (2014) since the Open Data of Civil Service Portal do not collect data on statutatory service, institutions which do not report to the Department of Civil Service. In 2014, the overall number of statutatory civils servants was around 23,000 (VTD, 2014). 13 Research that is expressly part of the doctrine is available at the website of the Supreme Administrative Court at: http://www.lvat.lt/lt/administracine-doktrina.html [2016-09-10]. 76 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Figure 3.4: Civil Service Relative to the Lithuanian Population and Labor Market in 2013 Source: Rekašienė (2014). Strategic planning became a key element of public administration just before Lithuania’s accession to the EU in 2002 (g overnment Regulation No. 827). However, the tools of strategic planning were mostly a tool of budgetary oversight for Ministry of Finances. The 15 th Cabinet substantially amended the regulation on strategic planning in 2009. The new regulation gave substanti- ally greater powers to the center of government, renamed the Office of Prime Minister during the tenure of the 15 th Cabinet 14 . Based on this new regulation, a long-term strategic plan “Lithuania 2030” was developed (Parliament Regu- lation No. XI−2015, 2012). This strategy forms the tip of the integrated hierar- chy of strategic plans at the national level. This created the context in which the National Development Strategy (g overnment Regulation No. 1482, 2012), en- compassing the entirety of the EU structural support for period of 2014−2019 was developed with reference to the goals of “Lithuania 2030” . Y et, the success of strategic planning to create substantial effects on the overall outcomes of governance requires a large degree of interinstitutional cooperation, which in coalition governments is always hard to come by (Bileišis, 2012b). A major share of attention with regard to public administration modernization in stra- tegic planning of Lithuania as far as public administration is concerned is the digitization of public governance. Lithuania is seeing an explosion of creation 14 A decision reversed by the 16 th Cabinet. 77 Public Sector reformS in lithuania S ince the 1990S of new online tools for public service delivery, consultation, etc. Y et, the system integration is one part where this was lacking. As a means of mitigating this, in 2003, the g overnment passed Regulation No. 418, setting the standards for the websites of public administration institutions. This Regulation includes the provisions which alow the Information Society Development Committee under the Ministry of Transport and Communications to regulate technical standards of administrative and civil services run as an “umbrella’ portal, the e-g overnment gateway 15 for various online services. The developments that we overviewed in this section lack several impor- tant elements, which we believe, are crucial for successful process of public administration reforms: Law of Public Administration provides a very vague definition of public administration, identifying five activities that qualify as public administration: − Administrative decision-making, − Control of implementation of laws and administrative decisions, − Provision administrative services, − Administration of public services, − Internal administration of public administration institutions (Supre- me Administrative Court Bulletin No. 30, 2016). The main criteria for becoming a public administration institution are procedural − the awarding of the status of public administration institution (Supreme Administrative Court Bulletin No. 30, 2016). Although another important criterion is the passing of normative administrative acts, there is a very large number of public sectors that may be conducting public adminis- tration in substance but are not recognized as such, and employees of these organizations are not civil servants. Hence, this creates a major blind spot in the system of administrative oversight of Lithuania. The civil service in this regard is particularly interesting because civil serv- ants are present in a great majority of public administration institutions. Howe- ver, the number of civil servants is roughly matched to the number of statutato- ry servants as well as employees that do not hold the status of civil servants but work in public administration organizations. In addition, public administration institutions are not limited to the executive: courts and agencies accountable to 15 The address of the portal is: https://www.epaslaugos.lt/portal/en [2016-09-10]. 78 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence the parliament also have that status. All things considered, this means that the- re is a messy overlap between the civil service and branches of the government where the civil service does not include the entirety of the executive but has an impact on judiciary and legislative branches. The entirety of what we have said in describing the complex institutional hurdles for public administration re- forms in Lithuania create loopholes that are a cause of constant attention by the media, and negatively affect the attitudes of citizens towards the government. It has been argued that public administration ought to be legaly defined entirely within the executive (Bakaveckas, 2001). In this case, a more lenient initiative of public administration reform would be possible as these reforms would not need to stand the test of compliance to the principle of separation of powers as they would need to do now and face strong lobbys of respective institutions. The aspect of codes of ethics is the final topic in this chapter, and there is little to say on its behalf. Lithuania has over dozens of institutional ethical codes, and the 2002 Rules on Civil Servants Ethics (g overnment Regulation No. 968). However, the latter lack oversight and are rather a guideline, outli- ning and specifying eight principles: − Respect of citizens and state, − Justice, − Selflesness, − Desency, − Objectivity, − Responcibility, − Publicity (Author’s note – transparency), − Exemplary conduct. The absence of any enforcement mechanisms make this document (not reviewed for nearly 15 years) more of a guideline for conduct (Palidauskaitė, 2010). The relevance of this document is furthermore limited by the fact that both Law on Public Administration and Law on Civil Service outline similar lists of principles which clearly refer to ethics in public administration. The Law on Public Administration outlines the following principles of „public administration“: − Supremacy of law (Author’s note – rule of law), − Objectivity, − Proportionality, 79 Public Sector reformS in lithuania S ince the 1990S − Absence of abuse of power, − Institutional assistance, − Efficiency, − Subsidiarity, − “One-desk” (Author’s note – onestop shop), − Equality, − Transparency, − Responsibility for the adopted decisions, − Novelty and openness to change. And the Law on Civil Service: − Rule of law, − Equality, − Political neutrality, − Transparency, − Career. The shortcomming of regulations for ethical conduct in a more broader context may be understood by looking at how major issues with ethics in pu- blic administration were dealt with in the 1990s. Lithuania had not developed means of dealing with unethical or corrupt behaviors both in the 1920s and the 1930s, and during the Soviet occupation as well. Palidauskaitė (2011) offer a broader look at the way how ethical behavior is enforced in Lithuania through a lense of analyzing ‚hard‘ regulation that addresses these issues (see T able 3.2). Table 3.2: Ethics Problems in Lithuanian g overnment since 1918 1918−1940 1946−1989 1990−onwards „Bureaucratism“ (Author’s note – Red tape) Occurred on occasions Not legally identified Legally defined, subject to complaints to Ombudsmen Conflict of interests Limitation on having subordi- nate realtives. Not legally identified Illegal, special regulation passed and the Agency of Chief Official Ethics Commission established Bribing Occurred on occasion Not legally identified Illegal, special anti-corruption agency with right to conduct criminal investigations established (Special Investigations Service) 80 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Abuse of office Occurred on occasion w ide spread, blat, practice Illegal Protectionism (Author’s note – Clientelism) Occurred on occasion w ide spread The creation of the state of political confidence civil servants in the Law on Civil Service Corruption Occurred on occasion, was defined as theft, waste of budget funds. Several systemic corruption cases are docu- mented. Not legally identified, most com- mon form of – embezzle- ment Illegal, special anti-corruption agency with right to conduct criminal investigations established (Special Investigations Service). Numerous other institutions are also empowered to investigate such cases. Source: Palidauskaitė, 2010. 3.7. Conclusion: In Pursuit of Efficiency? The business idea of efficiency, by relating revenues to expenses, is pro- blematic in the public sector. Naïve NPM-style attempts to plan for public investment with return calculations have never happened in Lithuania. But rhetorics calling for more refined attempts at creating efficient policy and administration has never ceased. Yet, a clear definition of how efficiency is understood in Lithuanian policy documents on reform does not exist. w hat this indicates is that one key ingredient is often missing in the entire reform calculus. This ingredient is clear understanding of policy goals – what they are. As government coalitions come and go, their administrative reforms pro- ve to be only minor, extending only as much as they may appear useful for the election term. Major reforms are driven by goals which have a political con- sensus across the board. Lithuania had three clear goals in the first 25 years of its independence: memberships of NATO, EU, and Eurozone. All of these were based on a broad political consensus, and all governments worked diligently to achieve these goals. Nevertheless, all these goals were related to Lithuania’s greater integration into other governance structures. Upon integration, Lithu- ania continues to be a most loyal and diligent member of the institutions it joined, and readily accepts all reforms put forward. In this regard, Lithuania could run a campaign to claim the title of the darling of EU’s institutions. However, in the context of public administration reform, the EU (and even 81 Public Sector reformS in lithuania S ince the 1990S more so NATO or ECB) does not impact the entirety of a Lithuania’s adminis- trative system. Institutions and policies are still mostly a sovereign matter in the areas such as social security, education, health, decentralization, and so on. Lithuania manages to be attractive to foreign investors because it complies with their requests and demands but fails to be attractive to its own citizens, losing on average more than 1% population net to economic migration over the past 10 years. In terms of emigration, poverty, and social stratification Lithuania is at a significant disadvantage in the EU (Nakrošis & Vilpišauskas, 2014). There has never been a consensus on these key domestic policy areas, and many of the administrative processes run on Soviet legacy institutional arrangements and practices. Even in cases when reforms are implemented, these reforms are half-measures, with reformers often not bothering to claim otherwise. Lithuania has demonstrated that it can deliver on reforms when there is a broad political support. But the institutional setup has proven that with regard to comprehensive public administration reform this support is seldom availa- ble. Therefore, it is not so much a case of implementation gap as much as it is support and will-to-follow-through gap. Lithuanian constitutional setup al- lows only narrow windows of general concord among the highest institution. On behalf of the public, the pursuit for public administration reform is also unlikely. Since 2004, Lithuania has lost its youth bulge to migration (Bileišis et al., 2015), the economic transformation has fragmented the society and created a large protest vote (Ramonaitė, 2014) which results in coalitions, and the small media market mostly focuses on the politics of the day. Lithuanian civil servants have no established associations or networks which could com- municate their collective attitudes and opinions towards reforms both to the political elite and the public. Using the principle-agent theory terminology, this means that on behalf of the state there are no professional structures that could perform the role of a qualified principle in the state-society relations. Lithuania’ s challenges with PAR are not exceptional, and the lack of com- prehensive reform does not mean that there are no persistent social and eco- nomic pressures which force to introduce reforms, albeit not as ambitious as an odd academic would want. If Bertelsmann Stiftung’s Transformation Index (BTI) is to be believed, Lithuania comes top with regard to transformation achievement in 2015, and in 2016, being ranked 6 th (or very good), despite the fact that this report also claims that policy-makers confine themselves to 82 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence minor changes (BTI, 2016). Therefore, it can be argued that Lithuania’s strin- gent institutional system does limit its leadership in policy innovation and reform, rather it insulates it from major mistakes. Y et, what this also indicates that closing the gap of development between Eastern and w estern EU mem- ber states needs a shift of paradigm in the way public administration is done; by simply adopting the best practices from outside the region is doomed to eternally falling behind, and serve as a periphery of the European project. In Lithuania at least, there is no evidence that the situation is likely to change. One particular reform deserves attention in this regard. Fiscal consolida- tion of 2008−2010 was followed, in 2012, by the passing of Lithuania’s second long-term strategy colloquially referred to as ‘Lithuania 2030’ (Šiugždinienė, gaulė & Rauleckas, 2013). The design of this strategy is based on Lithuania’s standings in various international ratings and goals to move up in these stan- dings. This idea can be considered as an optimal solution in the sense that a consensus that Lithuania needs to move up in various ranking is easy to come by. On the other hand, it is difficult to hold ministries accountable for achieving these goals because the methods of evaluation in the indexes are patchy, and do not cover the entirety of government activities. This means that deconstructing indicators to the level of individual agencies’ actions, which could contribute to Lithuania’s rise in many of these ratings, requires intense decision-maker engagement and adherence to the evidence-based de- cision-making principle. T o this end ‘Lithuania 2030’ was passed under a new edition of strategic planning guideline, also updated in 2012. As part of this strategic planning system, a comprehensive planning scheme has been creat- ed which formally requires institutions to draw up their plans to correspond with ‘Lithuania 2030’ provisions. But the system lacks a clear monitoring sys- tem to identify the correlation between budget allocations, institutional goal attainment, and their relation to the long-term national strategy. One of the strategic plans − one level bellow ‘Lithuania 2030’ is the program for the De- velopment of Public Administration of 2012−2020. In essence, this document is supposed to be the public administration reform agenda of the country. If explicitly focuses on citizen empowerment. The analysis behind this program claims that citizen empowerment allows build trust, support, and gain effici- ency in the government. However, how this empowerment can be attained and how it would affect country rankings is rather vague in the program. 83 Public Sector reformS in lithuania S ince the 1990S It can be claimed that persistent issues outlined in the earlier program with regard to unclear accountability of agencies in many cases leave the ci- tizen empowerment initiatives at the discretion of individual agencies. Em- powerment in this regard is used similarly to efficiency − it is devout of clear definition and impossible to measure. The program’s key metric − achieving majority of citizens − would claim they trust public administration institutions is a good illustration. Sociological survey’s which measure trust show strong correlation to current events and basing the national long term strategy on such an indicator only creates confusion when evaluating it the strategy is a success. Strategic planning with these shortcomings still in earnest is not a forum for highly public policy debate and government accountability. Rather, it is an effective instrument of fiscal control. One important principle in the strategic planning is overlooked which could alter this with only minor re- gulatory change − by ensuring that long-term strategic planning is done on a continuous basis with continuously extended planning horizon. Now, this is not being done, and public debates on long-term policy questions are not pro- minent in Lithuania’s public life (Bileišis 2012b). In essence, many of the limi- tations of strategic planning and performance assessment that have emerged in the early 2000s (Verheijen & Dobrolyubova, 2007) are still not remedied. In summary, Europeanization in Lithuania is the key driving force of re- form in Lithuania (Nakrošis & Bankauskaitė-g rigaliūnienė, 2015). It is the force that comes up against few institutional barriers. But the problem with Europeanization is that it is not all encompassing, and the elements of public administration that are not directly impacted by Europeanization lag behind in terms of modernization. Although Lihtuania has avoided the fate of Latini- zation, as did the other post-communist EU state members, g oetz’s idea (2001) of ‘islands’ of Europeanized administration still holds value when describing Lithuanian public administration. Post-communist transformation is well and truly over but it is not to say that it does not have a legacy. In fact, on the one hand, the reforms in the 1990s did not deconstruct many of the administrative setups that remained from the soviet period, and on the other hand, the drive to create safeguards against a possibility of return to dictatorship or foreign domi- nation in a sense cornered Lithuania with inability to completely deconstruct obsolete and dysfunctional policy areas, or in many instances, implement com- prehensive reforms that could give a boost to the development of the country. 84 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence References 1. VIII−1234. 1999. Lietuvos Respublikos viešojo administravimo įstatymas [Law on Public Administration]. Retrieved from: https://www.e-tar.lt/ portal/lt/legalAct/TAR.0BDFFD850A66/OCQvcNCBEt [2016-09-10]. 2. VIII−1316. 1999. Lietuvos Respublikos valstybės tarnybos įstatymas [Law on Civil Service]. Retrieved from: https://www.e-tar.lt/portal/lt/ legalAct/TAR.D3ED3792F52B/ZXSyxwXznk [2016-0-20]. 3. Adomonis V. Valstybės tarnybos reforma Lietuvoje [Civil Service Re- form in Lithuania]. Viešasis administravimas Lietuvoje: profesionalumo ir efektyvumo paieškos. – k aunas: Naujas lankas, 1999, 59−61. 4. Astrauskas A. 2006. Savivaldybių institucinės struktūros modelių taiky- mo galimybės Lietuvoje [Possible Institutional Structure Models in Mu- nicipalities of Lithuania]. Savivaldos institucijų socialinis politinis veiks- mingumas (Ed.in Ch. S. Puškorius). Vilnius: MRU leidykla, 216−341. 5. Astrauskas, A. 2011. Vietos savivaldos raida Lietuvoje 1990–2010 metais [Development of Lithuania’s Local Self-g overnment between 1990 and 2010]. Viešoji politika ir administravimas, 10 (2), 283−298. 6. Astrauskas, A. & M. Bileišis. 2014. Transcending Regimes: g overnment g rowth through Fragmentation in Lithuania between 1919 and 2013. Public Administration and Regional Development, 10 (1), 17−24. 7. Astrauskas A. 2015. Lietuvos vietos savivaldos raida nuo 1990 metų iki šių dienų [Development of Lithuania’s Local Self-g overnment since 1990]. Viešoji politika ir administravimas, T. 14, 4, 604−615. 8. Bakaveckas, A. 2001. Viešasis administravimas: samprata, teisinis aspek- tas ir problemos [Public Administration: Concept, Legal Aspects, and Problems]. Jurisprudencija, 21 (13), 131−137. 9. Bileišis, M. 2012a. Institucinis Vyriausybės veiklos aspektas Lietuvos vie- šajame valdyme [Institutional Aspects of the g overnment in Lithuanian Public g overnance] (Doctoral dissertation, Mykolo Romerio University). 10. Bileišis, M. 2012b. Viešasis valdymas ar valdysena? Lietuviškasis kon- tekstas [g overnance or ‘g overnance’: the Lithuanian Context]. Viešoji politika ir administravimas, 11 (2), 314−330. 11. Bileišis, M. & al. 2015. 2005−2014 m. jaunimo ir jaunimo politikos apž- 85 Public Sector reformS in lithuania S ince the 1990S valga [Youth and Youth Policy in Lithuania between 2005 and 2014]. Vilnius: Lietuvos jaunimo organizacijų taryba. 12. BTI [Bertelsmann Stiftung’s Transformation Index]. 2016. Lithuania. Country Report: Retrieved from: https://www.bti-project.org/file- admin/files/BTI/Downloads/Reports/2016/pdf/BTI_2016_Lithuania. pdf [2016-07-01]. 13. CEC [Comission of European Communities] 2002. Regular Report on Li- thuania’s Progress towards Accession. Brussels. 9.10.2002 SEC (2002) 1406. 14. CoE [Council of Europe] 2012. Local and Regional Democracy in Li- thuania. Congress of Local and Regional Authorities, 22nd session, CPL (22)3 REV . 15. Cordona, F. 2008. Valstybės tarnyboje niekada nebuvo geriausių laikų. Interviu su Ekonominio bendradarbiavimo ir plėtros organizacijos vy- riausiuoju administratoriumi Francisco Cordona [Civil Service Never Head the g reatest Era. Interview with OECD Representative F. Cordo- na]. Valstybės tarnybos aktualijos, 2008 11, 35. 16. g enzelis, B. 2014. Atsiskyrimo nuo TSkP mįslės [Riddles of Separation from the Soviet Union Communist Party]. Retrieved from: http://www. delfi.lt/archive/atsiskyrimo-nuo-tskp-misles.d?id=5688821 [2016-07-01]. 17. g oetz, k. H. 2001. Making Sense of Post-communist Central Adminis- tration: Modernization, Europeanization or Latinization? Journal of Eu- ropean Public Policy, 8 (6), 1032−1051. 18. g overnment regulation No. 480. 2003. Lietuvos Respublikos Vyriau- sybės 2003-04-18 nutarimas Nr. 480 „Dėl bendrųjų reikalavimų vals- tybės ir savivaldybių institucijų ir įstaigų interneto svetainėms aprašo patvirtinimo“. Retrieved from: https://www.e-tar.lt/portal/lt/legalAct/ TAR.3FB3953EFFDC/yYzshwtXBe [2016-09-10]. 19. g overnment regulation No. 827. 2002. Lietuvos Respublikos Vyriausy- bės 2002-06-06 nutarimas Nr. 827 “Dėl strateginio planavimo metodikos patvirtinimo”. Retrieved from: https://www.e-tar.lt/portal/lt/legalAct/ TAR.A6665E0FB4EC [2016-09-10]. 20. g overnment regulation No. 968. 2002. Lietuvos Respublikos Vyriausy- bės 2002-05-24 nutarimas Nr. 968 „Dėl Valstybės tarnautojų etikos vei- klos taisyklių patvirtinimo“. Retrieved from: https://www.e-tar.lt/portal/ lt/legalAct/TAR.59D1FFDA35ED [2016-09-10]. 86 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 21. g uogis, A. 2014. k ai kurie socialiniai-politiniai gerovės valstybių kūri- mo Europoje ir Lietuvoje aspektai. Filosofija. Sociologija, (2), 71−79. 22. g uogis A., g udelis D. 2003. Naujosios viešosios vadybos taikymo teoriniai ir praktiniai aspektai [Theoretical and Practical Aspects of Applying New Public Management]. Viešoji politika ir administravimas, T. 4, 26−34. 23. IMF [International Monetary Fund]. 2016. Republic of Lithuania: Selec- ted Issues. Series: Country Report No. 16/126. 24. Juralevičienė J. 2005. Lietuvos Respublikos valstybės tarnybos raida 1990 – 1995 metais [Development of Lithuania’s Civil Sevice between 1990 and 1995]. Viešoji politika ir administravimas. T. 11, 55−64. 25. Jurkonis, L. 2012. Valstybės valdomų įmonių valdymo kontrolės ir auto- nomijos poveikis veiklos efektyvumui [Effects Control and Autonomy of State-Owned Enterprizes on Their Efficiency]. Politologija, 66 (2), 3−31. 26. k asiulis, M. & Pivoras, S. 2012. Valstybės tarnautojų veiklos vertinimas pagal rezultatus: taikymo iššūkiai Lietuvoje [Results-based Assessment of Civil Servants: Challenges of Application in Lithuania]. Viešoji politi- ka ir administravimas, T. 11, 1, 150. 27. Lazdynas R. 2005. Savivalda: filosofija, teorija, praktika [Local Self-g o- vernment: Philosophy, Theory, and Practice]. Šiauliai: Saulės delta. 28. Lietuvos Sąjūdis. 2016. Istorija [History]. Retrieved from: http://www. lietsajudis.lt/index.php/istorija#rinkimai [2016-07-01]. 29. LRkT [Lietuvos Respublikos k onstitucinis Teismas]. 1998. Bylos Nr. 19/97 1998 sausio 10 d. nutarimas dėl Lietuvos Respublikos Vyriausybės programos atitikimo Lietuvos Respublikos k onstitucijai [Constitutional Court or the Republic of Lithuania ruling in the case No. 19/19]. 30. Maniokas, k. 2009. Conditionality and Compliance in Lithuania: The Case of the Best Performer. European Integration Online Papers (EIoP), (2), 3. 31. Masiulis, k. 2007. Valstybės tarnybos vaidmuo ir funkcijos [The Role and Functions of Civil Service]. Valstybės tarnyba Lietuvoje: praeitis ir dabartis. Vilnius: UAB PRaction, 119. 32. Meyer-Sahling, J. H., & Nakrošis, V. 2014. Lietuvos valstybės tarnyba: sėkmės paslaptys ir tolesnio vystymo alternatyvos [The Lithuanian Civil Service: Secrets of Success and Alternatives for Further Development]. Viešoji politika ir administravimas, No. 27, 7−15. 33. Minkevičius A., Ivanauskienė A. 2007. V alstybės tarnybos reforma [Civil 87 Public Sector reformS in lithuania S ince the 1990S Service Reform]. V alstybės tarnyba Lietuvoje: praeitis ir dabartis (sud. k. Masiulis ir A. k rupavičius). Vilnius: UAB „PRaction“, 70−88. 34. Nakrošis, V ., & Bankauskaitė-g rigaliūnienė, S. 2015. The Impact of the EU on Agencification and Depoliticisation in Lithuania. Baltic Journal of Political Science, 3 (3), 7−26. 35. Nakrošis, V ., & Martinaitis, Ž. 2011. Lithuanian Agencies and Other Pu- blic Sector Organisations: Organisation, Autonomy, Control and Perfor- mance. Vilnius: Vilnius University. 36. Nakrošis, V . & Vilpišauskas, R. 2014. 2014 Lithuania Report. Sustainable g overnance Indicators. Retrieved from: http://www.sgi-network.org/ docs/2014/country/SgI2014_Lithuania.pdf [2016-07-01]. 37. Nakrošis, V ., Vilpišauskas, R., & k uokštis, V . 2015. Fiscal Consolidation and Structural Reforms in Lithuania in the Period 2008–2012: From g rand Ambitions to Hectic Firefighting. International Review of Admi- nistrative Sciences, 0020852315581786. 38. Nakrošis, V . 2011. Viešojo valdymo reformos Lietuvoje: kodėl ir kuo rei- kia pakeisti naująją viešąją vadybą? [Reforms of Public g overnance in Lithuania: w hy and How New Public Management Should be Repla- ced?] Politologija, (1), 65−98. 39. Norkus, Z. 2012. On Baltic Slovenia and Adriatic Lithuania: A Qualita- tive Comparative Analysis of Patterns in Post-communist Transforma- tion. Central European University Press. 40. Open Data on Civil Service of Lithuania. Retrieved from: http://statisti- ka.vtd.lt/index.html [2016-09-10]. 41. Palidauskaitė, J. 2010. Lietuvos viešojo sektoriaus etikos kodeksai ir jų tobulinimo galimybės [Codes of Ethics in the Public Sector of Lithuania and Possibilities for Their Development]. Public Policy and Administra- tion, (31), 21−34. 42. Palidauskaitė, J. 2011. Retrospektyvus žvilgsnis į etikos problemas Lietu- vos valstybės tarnyboje: naujos problemos, jų turinys ar raiškos formos? [A Retrospective g lance at Problem of Ethics in the Lithuanian Civil Service: New Problems in Content or Form?]. Politologija, (4), 39−73. 43. Pivoras, S. 2012. k onkursinės atrankos į Lietuvos valstybės tarnybą to- bulinimas gero valdymo iššūkių perspektyvoje [Development of Com- petitive Recruitment of Lithuania’s Civil Servants from the Perspective 88 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence of g ood g overnance]. Viešoji politika ir administravimas, T. 11, 3, 476. 44. Pranevičienė, B. 2002. Ombudsmenas ir viešasis administravimas [Om- budsman and Public Administration]. Jurisprudencija, 32 (24), 95−103. 45. Ramonaitė, A. 2014. Party Identification in Lithuania: The Outcome of Family Socialization, Political Cleavages, or Habit? Politologija, 73(1). 46. Rekašienė, R. 2014. Valstybės tarnyba skaičiais [Civil Service in Num- bers]. Presentation at the Conference „Valstybės tarnyba – laikas po- kyčiams“. Retrieved from: http://valstybes-tarnyba.mruni.eu/?page_ id=109 [2016-09-10]. 47. Resolution No. XI-2015 of the g overnment of the Republic of Lithuania. 2012. Lietuvos Respublikos Seimo 2012-05-15 nutarimas Nr. XI-2015 “Dėl valstybės pažangos strategijos „Lietuvos pažangos strategija „Lie- tuva 2030“ patvirtinimo. Retrieved from: https://www.e-tar.lt/portal/lt/ legalAct/TAR.5EE74F9648A5 [2016-09-10]. 48. Rimkutė, E., kirstukaitė I. 2011. Veiklos valdymas Lietuvoje: ar esame pažangūs ir kokie iššūkiai mūsų laukia? [Performance Management in Lithuania: Are w e Progressive and w hat Challenges Lay Ahead?] Į re- zultatus orientuoto ir įrodymais pagrįsto valdymo praktika Lietuvos ir užsienio šalių viešajame sektoriuje. k laipėda: UAB „k laipėdos banga“ , 28. 49. Rokickienė g. 1999. Viešojo administravimo reformos procesas Lietu- voje [The Process of Public Administration Reform in Lihtuania]. Vieša- sis administravimas Lietuvoje: profesionalumo ir efektyvumo paieškos. – k aunas: Naujas lankas, 53−58. 50. Rusteika A., Diržytė A. 2014. Valstybės tarnautojų darbo apmokėjimo sistema motyvacijos procesų analizės požiūriu [Remuneration of Civil Servants in the Context of Motivation Analysis]. Viešoji politika ir admi- nistravimasT. 13, 14 573−589. 51. Smalskys V , Minkevičius A. 2013. Lietuvos valstybės tarnybos kūrimasis ir raida 1990-2012 metais [The Formation and Development of Lithu- ania’s Civil Service between 1990 and 2012]. Ekonomika ir vadyba: aktu- alijos ir perspektyvos, 1 (29), 20−28. 52. Supreme Administrative Court Bulletin No. 30. 2016. Lietuvos vyriausio- jo administracinio teismo praktika, taikant Lietuvos Respublikos viešojo administravimo įstatymo normas [The Practive of the Supreme Admi- 89 Public Sector reformS in lithuania S ince the 1990S nistrative Court of the Republic of Lithuania in the Application of the Law on Public Administration]. Retrieved from: file:///C:/Users/mantas. bileisis/Downloads/biuletenis_30%20apibendrinimas.pdf [2016-09-10]. 53. Šarmavičius, O. 2005. Valstybės tarnyba – dėmesys žmogui, pagarba įsta- tymui [Civil Service – Focus on the Individual, Respect to the Law]. Vie- šasis administravimas, 1, 18. 54. Šiugždinienė, J., gaulė, E., & Rauleckas, R. 2013. Redesigning the Strategic Management System in a Time of Fiscal Crisis in Lithuania. 2013 EgPA Annual Conference, Strategic Management in g overnment Study g roup. 55. VDU [Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas] 2016. Tyrimas: Seniūnijoms rei- kėtų suteikti daugiau galių [Study: Elderships Should Be Awarded by More Powers]. Retrieved from: http://www.vdu.lt/lt/tyrimas-seniuni- joms-reiketu-suteikti-daugiau-galiu/ [2016-07-01]. 56. Verheijen, T., & Dobrolyubova, Y. 2007. Performance Management in the Baltic States and Russia: Success against the Odds? International Re- view of Administrative Sciences, 73 (2), 205−215. 57. VTD [Valstybės tarnybos departamentas]. 2013. Vyriausybei pristatyti siūlomi valstybės tarnybos pokyčiai [Proposed Changes to the Civil Ser- vice Presented to the g overnment]. Retrieved from: http://www.vtd.lt/ index.php?2073430799. [2016-07-01]. 58. VTD [Valstybės tarnybos departamentas]. 2014. Valstybės tarnaytojų pasiskirstymas pagal vidutinį amžių ir lytį [Differentiation of Civil Ser- vants by Age and Sex]. Retrieved from: http://www.vtd.lt/index.php?- 1485784414 [2016-09-10]. 59. VVTk [Valstybės valdymo tobulinimo komisija]. 2012. Valstybės valdy- mo tobulinimo komisijos 2009−2012 m. veiklos ataskaita [Report of the State g overnance Development Commission 2009−2012]. 60. Žilinskas g. 1999. Valstybinės valdžios politinė-teritorinė organizacija ir jos formos [Political-territorial Organization of Central g overnment and Its Forms]. Viešasis administravimas (ats. red. A. Raipa). k aunas: Technologija, 61−68. 61. Žilinskas, g. 2009. Šiuolaikinės apskričių ir regionų valdymo proble- mos Lietuvos Respublikoje. [Contemporary Problems of g overnance Transformation of Counties and Regions in Lithuania]. Viešoji politika ir administravimas, No. 27, 90−100. 90 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 4. Public Administration Reforms in Latvia (1990–2016) Māris Pūķis, Inesa Vorončuka, Olga Stariņeca 4.1. Introduction The authors of this chapter present an overview of the public adminis- tration reforms in Latvia from 1990 to 2016. The chapter consists of intro- duction, six sections and conclusion. The aim of the study is to provide the characterization of the public administrative reforms from unusual angle for the local researchers. The authors’ focus on historical experience of Latvia in reformation of public administration with its impact on decision-makers. The interest groups of the reform process are emphasized and the analysis results are summarized by using stakeholders and their interests’ definition approach to describe the reforms of public governance model. Methodology for the interest groups of analysis is systematically applied to public adminis- tration dynamics in Latvia for the first time. Finally, the authors divide the reform process according to the time periods, and characterize the features of public administration model developed, civil service development, organi- zation of the public administration functions and the administrative process during each of these periods. Latvia is a small European Union Member State on the eastern shores of the Baltic Sea that has less than 2 million inhabitants (CSP , 2016). Latvian pe- ople were able to implement the national self-determination on this territory after the w orld w ar I. The first popularly elected legislature in Latvia was the Constitutional Assembly, the elections were held on April 17 and 18, 1920. Municipalities on the territory of Latvia have existed in various forms since the 8 th century (Švābe, 1926). Efficiency of self-governments in the territory of Latvia was a compulsory condition according to the Peace Treaty for g er- man occupation army to promote the declaration of Latvia’s independence (The Peace Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, 1918), which was implemented and their effectiveness had a condition. In case the condition would be executed, the g erman army of occupation had to promote the declaration of national in- dependence. 91 Public Administr Ation reforms in lA tvi A (1990–2016) There existed full parliamentary and party democracy, but self-govern- ment democracy continued up to the coup d’ état in May 15, 1934. On Latvian territory, the totalitarian regimes were in power for 55 years which affects the power system up to the present day. Values and perceptions in the mind of people are changing more slowly than the ability to declare that a parliamen- tary democracy has been acquired. In Latvia, the 1922 Constitution (Satversme in Latvian) was implemen- ted with minor amendments, namely, the human rights section was intro- duced (it complements the international obligations of Latvia acceding to the European Convention on Human Rights (Council of Europe, 1950), and some changes were made concerning the state institutions, mentioning also municipalities in several places. The new elements of the Constitutions inter- pretation appeared at the beginning of the 1990s. In February 22, 1996, Latvia joined the European Charter of Local Self- g overnment. In 2004, Latvia became a member of the EU. Thus, the sovere- ignty of the Republic of Latvia on human rights, self-governments and EU competence issues is limited by the international obligations of Latvia. Latvia has a parliamentary system with a single-chamber parliament, the Saeima, which has 100 deputies, who are elected by the citizens from five electoral districts (Latvia’s capital city Riga, k urzeme, Zemgale, Vidzeme, and Latgale). It is characterized by a proportional electoral system with exchange- able sequence of candidates within a list. To enter the Saeima a political party or coalition of parties must receive at least 5% of the total number of votes cast in all five constituencies. In Latvia, 119 local governmrents (110 municipalities and 9 cities) ope- rate, and their election procedures coincide with the European election pro- cedure. The self-government councils are elected like the national parliament, i.e. for a term of four years by proportional elections and exchangeable sequ- ence of candidates, and by applying 5% election’s barrier. Municipalities with less than 5,000 people registered are allowed to form lists of candidates from voters’ association. The ruling coalition is led by the mayors, elected from the voters’ association lists in these municipalities, and this could be an evidence for the voter distrust in the interests of political parties, and development of small self-governments. There are five planning regions in Latvia (names coincide with the names 92 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence of the parliamentary electoral districts, but the boundaries are different). Po- litical leadership of these planning regions is elected by the self-government deputies. Planning regions possess all the characteristics of public power and they are considered as the regional authorities established towards indirect elections. Planning regions are not as important as local authorities. Active and passive voting rights are owned by the citizens on all levels of elections in Latvia (self-government elections by both the EU Member States and the citizens of the Republic of Latvia). 14.2% of residents of Latvia are non-citizens, 2.6% are citizens of other countries. Non-citizens do not have the right to vote, but they can work for self-government executive institutions. Any non-citizens’ discrimination in any form is prohibited in Latvia, and the state policy is focused on promotion of the voluntary acquisition of the citizenship. 4.2. Historical Experience with Impact to Decision-makers Since the Livonian Crusade, and being a part of the Swedish Empire, public administration in Latvia was based on the European traditions as the result of the following changes in administrative arrangement. Even after the incorporation into the Russian Empire, the government structure since Peter the g reat’s times was largely copied from the w est. The influence of the traditional continental European type of bureaucra- cy, which was dominating in the Baltic provinces of the Russian Empire in the late 19th and early 20th century, is still felt in Latvia. It is also important to note that the representatives of regional authorities and municipal deputies at that time were mainly Baltic g ermans, who had not broken their cultural and educational bond with g ermany. After gaining its independence, this model was modernized – took the form of democratic reforms in Russia after February 1917 under the impact of the w eimar Republic’s constitutional model. An improved 1917 version of Russian city law with extended municipal rights was used in Latvia until 1930 (Mucinieks, 1938), and the Russian Civil Code based on ancient Roman civil law until 1937. The authoritarian coup of karlis Ulmanis in 1934 and three occupations by the USSR in 1940 and 1944-1945 and by g ermany in 1941 had an impact on both today’s professors, and not to a less extent, politicians and officials 93 Public Administr Ation reforms in lA tvi A (1990–2016) who, after 1990, had learned from the professors that were affected by the totalitarian ideology. Three guidelines of Ulmanis’ authoritarianism, i.e. leaderism, unity and nationalism increasingly influenced public thinking. They transformed into leadership, anti-pluralism and concern for the survival of the Latvian people, but the base of this line of thought was already laid out in the period of Ul- manis’ dictatorship. The next administrations of bolsheviks and national-socialists differed from the Ulmanis’ dictatorship with one-party dominance (during Ulma- nis’ regime the parties was eliminated, and the opponents were temporar- ily placed in concentration camps), and turning into a mass terror. Further, following three subsequent occupations under Stalin’s and Hitler’s rule, the administrative systems were likewise based on fear and hierarchy. Public ad- ministration was led from one center and the idea that the local government could have a different policy was not tolerated. In Soviet times, the situation was controlled by the Communist Party and security services. The power had technocratic features, i.e. the State plan, and tried to use all available management science achievements in order to ensure implementation of the party directives. Local administration mecha- nisms were based on the executive committee system, i.e. management sec- tor got spread up to the executive committee and the local administrative structures, i.e. bypassing the council. So-called “Councils of People’s Deputies” were created mainly for propaganda, and their real impact on administrative decisions was minimal. The totalitarian period has left the influence, which is not easy to force and which is gaining new impetus to influence the currently existing external factors. The USA once supported the idea of Russia’s unity, consequently, po- wer vertical and media censorship were implemented. Russia came very close to the one-party system. Officials of the European Commission were trying to strengthen the unity of Europe, gradually more and more encroaching on solving of national and regional competence issues. Economists and lawyers in the Soviet Union though recognized the market economy and pluralism, however, truly sought to achieve uniformity, centralized planning, and unity. Characteristic values and way of thinking of the totalitarian system were transferred to the students, but young Latvian officials were trying to become 94 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence the best Europeans, so they would rather defend “the common interests” of the EU than defend the national ones in the best way possible. This promises a possibility of being promoted from the officials of Latvia to the EU ones. Theory and experience of other countries certainly impacted public administration in Latvia. From 1990 to 1993, the model of minimal public administration and decentralization was implemented in Latvia; the model was based, to a large extent, on contemporary educated people’s (scientists’ , engineers’) understanding of democratic values. Equality of public service provider and recipient was recognized as a special value; in both cases, equ- ality should be based on simple and mutually acceptable laws. As it could be assumed that a client does not probably read the laws, it is not necessary to produce it also for the officials. In the same time, monarchism as a theoretical doctrine was not widely known in Latvia then. However, decentralization, to a major extent, was a result of conditions (Communist Party of the Soviet Union nomenclature hoped to be firstly consolidated on the local elections, so an electoral arrangement chosen would be different from that in the majo- rity of Central and Eastern European countries at that time). The reforms of the next period (1993-1998) were largely influenced by the Latvian diaspora. Latvian exiles, who were acquainted with the traditio- nal elements of governance in g ermany, the USA, Australia and Canada, did not urge to take over the New Public Management (NPM), becoming fashio- nable, but advised to go through all stages and begin with the development of the mandarin type bureaucracy. NPM was becoming fashionable / popular all around the world, there- fore, it was used to reorganize political and administrative power during the reforms of 1998-2002, influence the foreign consultants, who won in com- petitions, as well as impact the implementation of these administration ele- ments. Re-inventing of government was the most popular option for the New Public Administration in Latvia (Osborn & gaebler, 1992). Latvia was also required to fulfil the Copenhagen criteria to be able to join the EU. It was necessary to prove both the fact that market economy is functioning in the candidate country and it will be able to cope with compe- ting goods and services pressure on the market of the future member state and the fact that stable institutions are acting as a guarantee for rule of law, human and minority rights. It seemed that the best approach to these requirements 95 Public Administr Ation reforms in lA tvi A (1990–2016) fulfilment was both converting and growing of bureaucratic structures, which led to the neo-w eberianism concepts during the reforms of 2002 and 2008. The next period began with a fight against inflation encouraged by the International Monetary Fund and the European Commission (Pūķis, 2010), which was further transformed into the use of internal devaluation to fight the crisis. During this period, external influence played a significant role − Latvia was used as a testing zone looking for an option to save g reece. 4.3. Interest Groups with Influence on Reforms Since 1990 significant processes of social economical transformations have been taking place in Latvia, and in every such process participated the interest groups being influential nationwide. The interest groups (both at regional, na- tional and international level) position themselves more often, according to their endeavors, to obtain relative preferences within the process of reforms, and less often a competition among the political parties could be observed. In the majority of laws and institutional solutions of the public autho- rities some benefits or harm to particular interest group may be observed, especially those that were actively lobbying for their interests in the course of drafting a policy or a law, and during the process of drafting and accepting regulations delegated to the Cabinet of Ministers. The ideal of the rational bureaucracy envisages a politically neutral go- vernment. Such an ideal is not feasible due to numerous reasons, and there are no real reasons (except the tactical considerations of the competition of the parties) to enforce it. Not only do the politicians accept the laws, but also the development guidelines. They are not altruistic and their activities demonstrate both per- sonal and “public interests” . However, no one but the politicians possess the electoral mandate to express the interests of the society. In Latvia, there are three levels of ‘societies’: (i) politicians elected to the EU Parliament and the ministers of all the member states who accept the laws and policy documents in name of mutual EU interests, (ii) deputies elected to the Saeima who act in the name of the national interests, and (iii) politicians of the local governments who act in the name of local interests. During the period 1990 to 2016, both the dominating interest groups 96 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence have changed and so have the interests. Sometimes these groups have su- cceeded in achieving their goals at least partially, sometimes they have not. During the entire aforesaid period, a contest of opposite interests has been taking place. Politics has been an expression of contest. Public administration is always characterized by inertia that does not allow any rapid changes. Ho- wever, the transformations influence both knowledge and interests. True interests of the groups are usually not named; they can be indirectly judged. The politicians seek to misinform the society, to a higher or lower rate, by putting forward other issues while bringing their true concerns to the forefront. The large interest groups in the society. Consolidation of interests may be established only in separate moments in history. In the early 1990s, the Latvian people could be perceived as a group of unified interests, and its main representative at that time was the Popular Front of Latvia (PFL). Also other national and democratic forces were co-operating with the PFL in rebuil- ding the democratic state. All of the allies, at that moment especially, should mention the democratically disposed persons of other ethnical entities that supported Latvia in getting out of the sphere under the USSR influence. The main opposition to the nationally democratic process at that period was for- med by the members of the Interfront and the supporters of the idea thereof, the majority of whom were colonists of the USSR era, officers of the USSR Army and their family members, and some parts of the nomenclature of the USSR era. This group could be characterized by a tendency to retain the state unity within the USSR territory, preserve the ideology, and alter ‘the memo- ries of history’, and would not admit the real role the USSR played in the Second w orld w ar. Both groups were not capable of preserving their unifor- mity, and the organizations representing them gradually vanished away. Countries with their traditional interests in Latvia. Particularly Rus- sia, the USA and g ermany should be mentioned as they were interested in several aspects of the Latvia situation: firstly, as the sphere of political influen- ce, secondly, as the sphere of economic influence, and thirdly, as the potential ally in action of the external policy conducted by these countries. w ithin the period of concern, especially Russia and the USA, were seeking to control the Latvian policy, and administrative reforms were the subject of their interest only as means of control. g ermany and Russia were also trying to gain the 97 Public Administr Ation reforms in lA tvi A (1990–2016) economic control, especially over the energetics of Latvia. The direct influ- ence was never openly declared, still it could be observed in the unveiled zeal of particular politicians to act in the interest of the superpowers. The- se superpowers were mostly realizing their interests indirectly, including the mediation of non-governmental organizations and through the influence on the political parties. Traditionally, also Sweden has interest in Latvia. Before the Russian in- vasion a major part of the current territory of Latvia was included in Sweden; back then Riga was the biggest Swedish city. The Swedish banks came into Latvia along with other Scandinavian banks; Sweden paid special attention to their protection during the gait of the economic crisis 2008-2013. The European Union bureaucrats. Similarly, to the States, also within the European Union the bureaucrats have become an independent power. In the EU only the European Commission is entitled to submit a draft law. The European Commission may also pass laws on its own, whereas their legal rank is of equal value with the ones accepted through the co-decision pro- cedure of the European Parliament and the European Council. The Europe- an Commissioners organize the procedure for making a political discussion. Although formally organization of public administration is the internal affair of every member state, the European Commission significantly impacts the processes. Formally, the European Commission is obliged to ensure that the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality are observed (EU, 2012). In re- ality, the officials in Brussels are developing a platform for enlarging their number, and thereby influencing the governments of the member states. It should be taken in consideration that in numerous policy fields the in- terests of different member states significantly differ, but the European Com- mission seeks for the mean, supposedly good solution for all. Such a mean solution is not optimal particularly for any of 29 EU states. The groups of banks and insurers. The interests of the banks and the insurance companies in Latvia have merged. Initially, diverse rivalry existed among the banks before gradually two groups emerged: the Scandinavian banks and the banks linked to the Russian capital domestic banks, which were actively involved in lobbying for their interests, including financing the pre-election campaigns. The established system of banks and insurance com- panies received a significant discount in the field of tax policy but, practically, 98 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence they were not financing the industry sector. Their profit interests were tar - geted mainly at receiving advantages and introduction of mandatory state funded insurance for pensions and potentially – also for health. It was in the interests of banks to rule out any state influence over the capital market in case the state would still like to support the industry sector. Oligarchs in the political parties. w ithin the people’s movement of Po- pular Front of Latvia (PFL) a significant influence of the divisions was esta- blished along with democratic procedure of decision taking – including active sectors’ committees. However, as it was discovered by a g erman sociologist Robert Michels (1915) some 100 years ago (according to the oligarchy iron law) every large democratic system develops bureaucracy first, and further the elite undertakes the leadership of the organization. Following the rapid period when a multi-party system was developed between 1992 and 1995, at the end of this period, a tendency of reforming the internal structure of the parties occurred (presidents of parties started co-opting half of the board, influence of the committees was decreasing, ruling decisions were transfer- red to the respective fraction in the Saeima, etc.). In order to strengthen the power, short-term solutions were chosen seeking advantages in next elections (for instance a deformation of the proportional election system through in- troduction of alterable lists, prohibitions in the laws of the political parties financing and pre-election financing that led to potential dependence of the political parties to the shadow economics, and likewise). The privatizers. Initially, privatization was the essential event of the transfer period which ensured irreversibility of the changes, so that the expe- rience of centralized planned economics would be forgotten for good. The PFL had prospected ‘just’ privatization of certificates, which ultimately resul- ted in acquiring of apartments or loss of the certificate value for those who already owned a home. In the first half of the 90s, an interest group develo- ped, which decided to turn the privatization in favor of their own interests by developing a complicated system of legislation, stimulating the certificate market before real enterprises were there for sale against the certificates. It was continued by acquiring the majority stakes at the large state enterprises for the certificates obtained through the speculative operations. Finding the ‘strategic investor’ for these enterprises was the subject of a contest. The do- mestic privatizers impersonated to be foreigners (by registering in offshores) 99 Public Administr Ation reforms in lA tvi A (1990–2016) and lobbied creating taxing advantaged to foreign investors. In Latvia, there still exist desirable enterprises of the national and local governments, there- fore, the privatizers are lobbying laws to forbid the state or the local govern- ments to conduct any business activities. Denationalizers. At the very beginning of the independence period a date should have been determined to which the property restitution would have been applied. At the beginning of the wwII, after splitting Poland between the USSR and g ermany, the majority of the Baltic g ermans left La- tvia. Denationalization was conducted in favor of those persons who over- took these properties, especially in favor of the 1940 occupants. A powerful interest group named the Moscow Orthodox Church appeared that received as the properties of the Constantinople Orthodox Church in “restitution proceedings” . Later, it became essential that a beneficial would guarantee for those having succeeded in the denationalization process, thus the tenants of denationalized house ownership which were lobbied for. Seekers of industry advantages. Next to the banks and insurers also other groups developed that were looking for advantages against other en- trepreneurs in the field, or were trying to receive more favorable tax regime or a special support for the entire industry. Examples of such entrepreneurs were producers of renewable energy, owners of the large farm estates, orga- nizers of gambling establishments, waste processors, and others in favor of whom legislation was lobbied to put other entrepreneurs and consumers at a disadvantage. Seekers of regional advantages. Rivalry of the parties prior to the election stimulates splitting of the society. Having obtained the power, it is advantageous to facilitate consolidation of the society in order to fix the gains in the result of the elections. However, if the victory is not complete (in case of Latvia it became apparent when those coming to power in the local autho- rities were not the same winning majority of the Saeima), the government is eager to provide support to one region against the others (for instance, by splitting the territory to prospective and non-prospective municipalities). The regional advantages showed themselves in organizing the processes of centralization and concentration, as Riga doctors’ endeavors to concentrate the health financing in Riga, and as closing the regional agencies during the crisis in favor of the ministries. 100 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence The lawyers of Latvia. In accordance with the public choice theory (Buchanan, 1960), lawyers as a professional group act in personal interests. Notwithstanding the basic function of the lawyers to apply the law for solving the life situations, they influence legislation processes in the status of experts; they themselves get elected to the legislation institutions and establish the case law in the Constitutional Court procedure. A significant role played by the lawyers themselves was to participate in the privatization process and draft ambiguous laws thereby aiding to achieve the private goals. The lawyers of the USSR era prepared their own replacement thereby by transferring par- ticular values of the totalitarian period to the current legal system. The bureaucrats of Latvia. In Latvia, alike other democracies, every new norm of law or the regulation of the Cabinet of Ministers enlarges the amount of the potential influence of the bureaucracy. The civil servants are gradually gaining confidence that without a total re-regulation and careful control of the independently developed norms the life would cease. Therefore, a certain alarm was caused by the decision made by the Cabinet of Ministers to develop ‘small and effective governance’ . In the further events the representatives of various ministries joined their efforts not to allow such statements regarding small governance put to question. The political parties of Latvia. In the multi-party system, rivalry among the political parties is an essential factor. At the period of concern a range of political force that used to constitute the government have completed a full cycle of development and already terminated (Popular Front of Latvia, Latvian w ay, People’s Party). Particularly significant influence on the state reforms, and the boarders being altered through the administrative territo- rial reform, was exercised by the rivalry among the parties constituting the governing coalition. The local governments in Latvia. Right after the Moscow coup of Au- gust 1991, the initiative of PFL Latvian Association of Local and Regional g o- vernments (LALRg) was founded. On December 14 and 15 the foundation congress was organized where several decisions were made on the basis of determining development of powerful and united association (Pukis, 2010): 1. Only public entities – local authorities – as participants are allowed; 2. Voluntary entrance and seceding; 101 Public Administr Ation reforms in lA tvi A (1990–2016) 3. Membership fee proportional to the non-earmarked budget income of the local authority; 4. Possibility to join also other associations to protect specific interests of the groups. During the further development the minority guarantees were not allo- wed to vote if more than a half of some type of the municipalities (prior to the Administrative territorial reform of 2009 there were 5 types) would deem such voting inacceptable. These conditions allowed developing a powerful organization that had its influence in all the stages of the public governance, and often impeded the endeavors of the central government to centralize its power and realize its reforms against the regional interests of Latvia. A stable system of formal consultations was developed that included submission to the Cabinet of Mi- nisters drawn annual agreement and disagreement protocol along with the budget project (Pukis, 2010). 4.4. Reforms of Public Governance Model The public governance models replaced one another in accordance with the political agenda that corresponded to the interests of those groups that were prevailing at the respective period. The interest groups that significant- ly influenced the shape of the public governance are shown in Table 4.1. As the result of collaboration, confrontation and compromises of these interest groups the models of the public administration appropriate to the respective period were chosen (as shown in Table 4.2). The transitional period (1990–1993). The content of this period was a confrontation between the Latvian people (this was the only period when the interests of such a large group were brought forward) and the part of the inhabitants who wanted to prolong the period of occupation and assimi- lation of the Latvians. The democratically disposed foreigners were the allies of the Latvian people. The reforms of 1990 and following were based on 1) democratization, 2) deoccupation, and 3) decolonization. As the previous power had planned to won the local authority election first, and then exercise the obtained administrative resources at the parlia- ment elections, the sequence of events turned out to be reverse in Latvia. The 102 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence idea of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union did not come true – PFL won the local authority election. That is why the previously mentioned three principles of reform may be added by the fourth one – decentralization. The victory in the following election of the Supreme Council did not provide control in the center. The USSR security services, USSR Army and structures of the Communist Party continued functioning – the situation could be described as diarchy. During the period of the central diarchy the properties, rights of decision and initially ½ of finances were handed to the local governments; and the democratic principles of rights were acting in pa- rallel to the new legislation, thus the legislation of the USSR era was partly preserved. Table 4.1: Dominant g roups and Their Interests during the Reform Period Interest group Dominant interests of the group 1990–1993 Latvian people, democratically minded foreigners Restore the nation state and democracy, natio- nalism and anti-communism. Restore democracy, anti-communism. Colonists, who wanted to preserve the Soviet Union Save a united country from the former Soviet Union territory, defend the former and present communists and laudatory myths about com- munism. 1993–1998 Economically active former participants of the Soviet nomenclature Create national political elite, obtain political power and create hard transparent legislative environment to make it easier to hide at bene- ficiary during the privatization process. Repla- ce the civil service and make it a tool for the ruling elites’ interest implementation. Subtract power from the self-governments that was gi- ven to them during the previous period. PFL and Latvian National Independence Movement members, who wanted to faster turn privatization to a personal benefit Representatives of Latvian diaspora with economic interests in Latvia Self-governments k eep decentralization, achieve a clear division of functions between the state and the local governments. 103 Public Administr Ation reforms in lA tvi A (1990–2016) Period Interest group Dominant interests of the group 1998–2002 g ermany, the USA Add Latvia to the NATO and the EU. Russian oligarchs, who are interested in Latvia Repurchase nationalized or privatized property by obtaining a decisive influence in the sectors. Latvian entrepreneurs – foreign capital importers Improve legislative environment so as to make a reveal of the real beneficiaries impossible. Russian security services Prepare the conditions for economic and poli- tical destabilization. International financial institutions Develop national mandatory funded pension system, and compulsory health insurance system Self-governments k eep development funding from national me- ans. Avoid forced merger of self-governments during the Administrative-territorial reform. 2002–2008 g ermany and Scandinavian businessmen with interests in Latvia Speculate real estate, buy and sell businesses / enterprises. Russian oligarchs, who are interested in market of Latvia Brussels bureaucrats Promote mobility (depopulation of Latvia). International financial institutions Maximize the state compulsory funded pensi- on scheme as much as possible. Latvian officials and politicians, who saw the continuation of a career in Brussels Take the initiative for stricter rules which than the EU needs to implement in Latvia. European super powers politicians Slow down production development in La- tvian. Latvian lawyers Ensure the interests groups’ demands and high salary. Self-government Save existence of national investments. Decrease of spreading over-regulation (nor- mativism). 104 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Period Interest group Dominant interests of the group 2008–2016 Banks that specialize in profit from unsafe lending Obtain state funds, continue to withdraw the capital from Latvia, eliminate state-owned banks. Domestic and foreign entrepreneurs, who want to earn by privatizing and reselling Privatize profitable state and self-government enterprises that have not been privatized so far. Large farms owners Obtain state support to buy out the small agri- cultural plots of land. International financial capital representatives Maintain and develop state mandatory funded pension system, and introduce a funded system of health insurance Achieve public support for bankrupting banks. Ruling political parties Introduce censorship, control expenditures of self- governments. Self-government Maintain the autonomy of self-government personnel. k eep development support for the whole terri- tory (all local governments) of Latvia. withdraw country from the internal deva- luation policy. Source: own compilation. Table 4.2: Features of Public Administration Model Developed during the Re- form Periods Ye ar s Features of public adminis- tration reform Civil service development Organization of functions Administrati- ve process 1990–1993 Model of mini- mal administra- tion. Decentralization, democratization, denationalization and de-occupation. Partial lustra- tion. Legislation on the unified work in both public and private sector. Liquidation of cen- tralized planning. Decentralization: Fiscal, property, administrative, and staff autonomy of the self-govern- ments. Administrative disputes are being solved as a competi- tion between persons and institutions (on behalf of the state or a self- government) under the civil procedure. 105 Public Administr Ation reforms in lA tvi A (1990–2016) Ye ar s Features of public adminis- tration reform Civil service development Organization of functions Administrati- ve process 1993–1998 Traditional mod- el of bureaucracy with features of Max w eber’s bureaucracy. Phasing in- troduction of normativism, increase of the laws in volume and a number of exceptional provisions. Politically neu- tral career civil service, 12 categories and compulsory exams, specific social protec- tion, particular disciplinary process without distinguish- ing discredit of sufficient funding. Partial centraliza- tion (capital, edu- cation, health). Proposals to implement a merger of self- governments without decentral- ization of power and finances that was declined by self-governments. Administrative process typical for the conti- nental Europe was introduced in institutions. Civil process is continued in the court where the parties are competing. 1998–2002 Introduction of New Public Ad- ministration ele- ments (system of agencies, admin- istrative contracts, management contracts, result, and customer- oriented manage- ment). Concentration of controlling and repressive structure, and bureaucratization preconditions. Decision on a large civil service. Liquidation of the state civil service admin- istration. Instead of the career civil service, the civil service was opened (competition instead of exams). Sprit of the responsibilities (separating policy developers, policy decision-makers, policy implement- ers, observers, controllers, and punishments implementers). Normativism and unsuccessful attempts to merge self-governments. Preparation and adop- tion of the Administrative Procedure Act by the parlia- ment, whiche- liminated the competition principle. A specific disciplinary process for the public officials was intro- duced. 106 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Ye ar s Features of public adminis- tration reform Civil service development Organization of functions Administrati- ve process 2002–2008 Legal nihilism in violation of norms of international contracts and conscious draft- ing of controver- sial laws. Administrative- territorial reform (ATR) distortion, giving up goals and reducing the reform to the merger. Normativism as the means for “implementa- tion of the EU requirements” . A large, non- motivated legally civil service was established. Salaries of the civil servants did not increase almost for the entire period, although the wages in the economy mar- ket increased three times. The State Admin- istration Structure Act was imple- mented, contrary to the international agreements of Lat- via applied toyed to introduce a single hierarchical admin- istration ignoring the global and EU commitments as well as existence of the regional and lo- cal governments. Permanent jobs were created due to a complex legislation, result- ing in a potentially confusing division of competences. The Ad- ministrative Procedure Act was adopted, which did not presume the competition any more. The institution used principles that were at- tributed to the court. Concentration of the minis- tries’ and agen- cies’ internal procedures. 2008-2016 Efforts to set up a minimal admin- istration, whilst maintaining a high level of overregulation. Introduction of unified motiva- tion system. A struggle about privatized enter- prises and land. Shift of the pow- er to the Council of Coalition. One more civil service reform is prepared; its introduction was postponed due to the dis- ability to agree on the level of concentration. Repeated attempts of the self- governments’ integration to the state civil service. Local administra- tive territorial reform, regional establishment is postponement ex- pressing a negative attitude. Legislative spatial division of perspective and non-perspective territories. Concentration. Bureaucracy of administrative process. Discussions on introdu- cing various disciplinary proceedings. Source: own compilation. 107 Public Administr Ation reforms in lA tvi A (1990–2016) The Republic of Latvia, alike the events in 1918, was derived from the local authorities. On April 21, 1990, in the Daugava Stadium a convention of all level deputies took place, which was dominated by the deputies of the local and regional governments who with more than 8000 votes against less than 100 votes assigned the re-elected Supreme Council to declare the restoration of independence (Pukis, 2015). Based on the mandate given by the deputies of local authorities the Independence Declaration of May 4, 1990 was adopted. In order to realize transition from the totalitarian system of the centrali- zed planned economics characteristic to the occupation regime, the following activities were conducted: a. Introduction of the national currency; b. Communalization of the state properties; c. Privatization against vouchers; d. Restitution (return of the property and land to the owners at the date of the USSR occupation); e. w ithdrawal of the occupation army; f. Lustration (restriction of the political rights for the persons actively supporting the occupation regime); g. Joining the international organizations and international agreements; h. Supporting the local governments to eliminate the system of executi- ve committees (vertical hierarchy was terminated); i. Elimination of multi-layered budget (reaching financial autonomy of local authorities); j. Preserving of several components of the totalitarian system, inclu- ding only partial implementation of the principle of subsidiarity; k. Partial implementation of the principle of minimal governance. Simultaneously, the transition from a bipolar system to multipolar sys- tem was taking place, the Latvian Popular Front was gradually losing its si- gnificance, and the political parties that would participate in the 5th Saeima election were being created. The dominating domestic interest groups at this stage are shown in Table 4.1. In Latvia, alike the Baltic and the Central Europe countries being under the influence by the USSR, mostly the external factors affected the result of the internal process – mainly the Moscow coup of August 1991 during which 108 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence the restoration of the orthodox communist regime failed. Overall, this period may be characterized as a model of minimum gover- nance with high level of decentralization. This choice was determined by the proportion of forces and necessity to develop a new order from its beginning after 55 years of totalitarian regime. Pseudo-restoration (1993-1998). Restoration was formally content of that period in force of constitution (Satversme) and democratic order of repu- blic proclaimed in 18 November of 1918. That purpose was only partly imple- mented because the interests in 1993 were different from the interests in 1922. Change of the ruling political forces took place. Prior to the 5th Saeima elections a new political elite was emerging, a club principle was introducing itself. The leading force of the time being ‘The Latvian way’ grew out from the ‘Club 21’ . In the meantime, the historic politically influential organizations got their activities restored – the masons and the student fraternities. Participation in organizations, like the Rotary Club and the Lions Club, came into fashion. Being a member of a single club system made easier establishing coali- tions and the development of elitism in the newly founded and restored po- litical parties. As shown in Table 4.1, interest groups had a task determined – to ensure process through which the properties of the USSR period ended up in their hands as the private property. Opposite of the initial minimalism in the law and governance antipodal tasks moved forward. For this purpose, a different legislation and different public governance were needed. The Cons- titutional Law and the Civil Law were reinstated in power, a new wording of the Cabinet of Ministers Structure Law was drawn, the initial version of which did not contain a detailed characterization of the governance referring the State Civil Service Law to be adopted soon (Saeima, 1994a), and became a tool of the public governance reform. At the end of 1993, the Ministry for State Reforms was founded in the temporary regulation (the Cabinet of Ministers, 1993) of which the depar- tments of local municipal reforms and government reforms were envisaged. It is worth mentioning that the local municipal reform is seen as the state reform in compliance with the USSR tradition. Essential elements for realization of the dominating interests were the Anticorruption Law (Saeima, 1995) and the Law on Financing of Political Organizations (Parties) (Saeima, 1995). The former provided a choice among 109 Public Administr Ation reforms in lA tvi A (1990–2016) different models of combatting corruption trying to invent as high norma- tivity as possible, and doubling several controlling institutions. Actually, such policy (even though this approach is popular within the majority of EU countries) leads to rapid growth of the potentially corruptible officials (Pukis, 2004). The higher is the corruption level, the cheaper one can realize one’ s pri- vate interests which otherwise would be difficult to ground. The later deter - mined a disproportionally small maximum amount of party financing in case of a separate official financing body. This norm was envisaged as a tactic tool for decreasing the rivals’ prospects in the following elections, but in fact, it strengthened the connection between the ruling elite and the shadow econo- mics by stimulating various schemes of circumventing the law for providing finances for the activities of the political parties. Overall, this period may be characterized as the model of traditional administration within the framework of which the centralization process was commenced by seeking return to the central power, and the competences that were given over to the local governments in the previous period. New Public Administration (1998-2002). As it is shown in Table 4.1, many interest groups were interested in the changes. Though the lawyers had carefully worked on legalizing the privatization before, the brand new elite was not fully confident that the privatized assets would not be taken away. Therefore, the privatized assets had to be sold and the obtained means had to be transferred offshores. The time had come to involve foreign investors to much wider extent; the entrepreneurs from Russia, the USA and Scandinavia started to understand their interests in Latvia more clearly. In order to substantiate these changes, such foreign statements were arranged that would facilitate the changes required by the local elite. Inclu- ding – the principles of NPM that had become globally popular by then. An exceptional attention was paid to the external form of NPM – agencies were established, governance contracts were concluded with the agencies’ mana- gers, and governance contracts were drafted by the civil servants. It made no obstruction to the spirit of NPM – by ejecting application of entrepreneur- like methods within the public governance. Introducing the elements of NPM was not the goal of the contemporarily ruling elite. Although at the moment the consultants from the New Zealand ac- ted in Latvia, the most essential elements of the system were never introduced. 110 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence In parallel to this, Total Quality Control was introduced that facilitated burea- ucratization of the system and delayed NPM introduction. The Administrative Procedure Law was adopted that envisaged a complicated system of adminis- trative act, and made rapid and effective decision-making nearly impossible. However, the conclusive element for the temporality of NPM was the politicians’ disinclination to gather, summarize, analyze, and publish infor- mation on the achieved results. In order to preserve the possibility to run the state or the municipality like an enterprise, it is essential that the success and failures are objectively assessed. Overall, the reasons of NPM failure in Latvia were similar to those in other countries where the NPM ideas were gradually losing their popularity. Another reason that made success of NPM barely impossible was the tendency to establish a single procedure that should have equally regarded different central government sectors and also local go- vernments. It would have been of similar failure if all the private enterprises had been managed in the same manner by providing similar structures and equal procedures. This would mean that a small and a large enterprise, an enterprise both in the beginning of its lifecycle and in the end thereof; an en- terprise in the stable market and at rapidly changing market conditions would be managed in exactly the same way. It is utterly obvious that in such case the productivity would decrease. However, a single procedure was proposed both by the economists who had been taught by the values of the centralized planning, and the European Commission which was also more interested in unification of the procedures than efficiency of the EU budget use. Joining NATO and the EU (2002-2008). As it is shown in Table 4.1, also during this period other interest groups moved to the forefront, and were see- king to overtake or strengthen their influence. During this period, initiatives were lost by the long-term ruling party ‘The Latvian way’ . At the end of the period, the life cycle of the People’s Party was approaching its termination. New political forces were being organized with a purpose of redistributing power and influence. It is also of importance, that the people’s expectations in the 1990s had not been achieved to a great extent. Therefore, by replacing the ruling parties and starting new reforms elite could sustain the balance and the social peace. One of the preconditions for the new member states to join the EU was the capacity of enduring the pressure of goods, services, and capital from the 111 Public Administr Ation reforms in lA tvi A (1990–2016) old member states after joining. This was the aspect wherein Latvia was prepa- red worst of all. The haste was to be grounded by unwillingness to stay within the sphere of the Russian influence but such haste affected the well-being of the population. That was why Latvia was eager to demonstrate maximum di- ligence in adoption of the legislation and fulfilment of various, sometimes for the Latvian circumstances, destructive requirements. So that even a bigger diligence of adoption of the legislation would be si- mulated, it happened more than seldom that the laws of previous period were adopted under new titles, for instance – the Corruption Combatting Law (Sa- eima, 1995) was renamed Law on Combating Conflict of Interests (Saeima, 2002). However, fundamental changes were also introduced, especially this regards the Law on the State Administration Structure (Saeima, 2002). If the Administrative Procedure Law (Saeima, 2001) let the way for a sharp growth of normativism (overregulation), then the State Administration Structure Law (Saeima, 2002) marked a radical turn towards centralization. The harmful part of the State Administration Structure Law was featured in the title itself – instead of term ‘public administration’ a different term of ‘state administration’ was used in this law. And within this ‘state administration’ a joint hierarchy was postulated. Thus the grounds of an incorrect reading of the Article 58 of the Constitution were being employed (Pukis, 2010). Thereby the State Administration System Law ignores the shared sovere- ignty that existed in Latvia long before in accordance with the international agreements of Latvia. During the gait of adopting the law certain compromise with the Latvian Association of Local and Regional g overnments (LALRg) has been reached by referring to the regulation of the subordination of the municipalities to ‘the Law of Self g overnments’, still the further course of events shows that the fighting centralists use State Administration System Law as a flag both against the fundamental rights of the local governments and the human rights. Overall, this period can be characterized by a term of Neo-w eberianism. The values of the previous period have been rejected in order to give way to unlimited growth of the bureaucracy power. Internal devaluation (2008-2016). The crisis was caused by the inter- national financial institutions that wrongly suggested combating inflation (Pukis, 2010). The commencement of the world crisis Latvia faced being in 112 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence already burdensome economic situation when the Scandinavian banks had slowed down crediting of economics. Therefore, deciding in favor of even tougher austerity seemed to be a logic continuation of the started reforms. The old EU member states felt enticement to utter Latvia as a pilot project for possible solution of the g reek problems. The International Monetary Foundation (IMF) and the European Com- mission drove Latvia into debt quickly. w ithin couple of years Latvia reached 49% of the public debt compared to the gross domestic product started at 9%. The European Commission would not allow to use even the tiniest budget deficit for co-financing the EU funds absorption by forcing the government to sharply reduce the budget expenditure. As a result, the economic shrink in Latvia reached the extent never experienced in the world since the 1930s. In such circumstances the central government and local governments, unwillingly though, had to return to the minimum governance policy. The core opponent to the government at this period was the LALRg that suggested performing more active measures of facilitating the economics, immediate absorption of the EU funds at accelerated amount, more rapid he- ating of the domestic market and facilitating restructuring of the economics, putting productivity as the priority instead of the previous accent on the em- ployment, rejection of such useless expenditures as financing of the mandato- ry state-funded pensions. As the main directions of the public administration reform LALRg suggested decentralization and deconcentration, resignation of overregulation, and reduction of the number of civil servants along with reduction of the regulation provided by the law and the regulations of the Cabinet of Ministers. The ministers partly agreed upon these statements of position, still they could not bear the bureaucracy pressure. During the previous periods, the bureaucracy had already become an independent power as exercised both by the European Commission and the State Chancellery and the ministries. That was why the direction towards a small and effective state adminis- tration was politically accepted along with intensification of the support for economics but the bureaucracy succeeded in compensating these decisions by centralizing and compensative measures as well as sabotaging the decisi- ons taken by the Cabinet of Ministers. 113 Public Administr Ation reforms in lA tvi A (1990–2016) w hile the rest of the population was experiencing decrease of wealth caused by the economic crisis, part of the nation elite was occupied with anot- her matter – how by pleading the crisis to privatize those profitable state en- terprises that were still owned by the state? Due to the discords within the leading coalition, total privatization was unsuccessful. Also the matter of enhanced governance of the remaining state and municipal capital companies was being solved at the lowest pace possible and with recognizable difficulties. However, some decisions concerning pri- vatization were successfully implemented, including the one for privatization the ‘Citadele’ bank thereby making Latvia dependent to the policy of forei- gn (mostly Scandinavian) banks. Latvia lost its possibility of the government intervention in the case of crediting in Latvia slows down and the capital is placed abroad. In general, this period may be characterized by the tendency to return minimum governance along with disability to perform the needed reduction of regulation and decentralization. 4.5. Organization of P A Functions The signature elements of organizing the functions include the follo- wing: observing the principle of subsidiarity and proportionality in the re- lationship among the private sector, the local governments, the state, and EU; observing the principle of the local government (Council of Europe, 1985), the public powers right to property and entrepreneurship; and tendencies of concentration or dispersion. In accordance with the aforesaid tendencies and the governance models (sometimes with some inertia) also the forms of go- vernance building changed. The first period (1990–1993) model was featured by minimum state institution and decentralization. During this period the principle of subsidia- rity was observed better than afterwards: communalization was the first stage of privatization and denationalization; core responsibilities for withdrawal of the Russian Army were entrusted to the local and regional governments. By 1993, autonomy of the local and regional governments was develo- ping. The financial autonomy was being implemented in two stages: first, by abolishing multi-staged budgeting (since 1992 the local government budgets 114 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence had stopped being a component of the regional government budgets; and the regional budget had stopped being a component of the state budget); second, by introducing a stable income basis along with founding a stable financial equalization system (since the budget 1995). The administrative autonomy was established by eliminating the executive committees (since 1992 the ministries had no possibilities to release orders to the local government institutions or structural units, the local executive power was accountable to the local council only. The rights of local government to found institutions or enterprises to its own discretion were recognized. The local personnel autonomy was not disputed, the state was not no- minating any local government officials, allowing agreeing over only several officials (for instance, school principals). In practical politics, a contest between the central power and the local governments was being played in terms of introducing a new judicial order, in certain cases, the voluntary initiatives brought forward by the local go- vernments. Local and regional authorities outpaced similar decisions taken by the central government, i.e. the parliament or the Supreme Council, by months or years. However, in this period the central bureaucracy was preparing itself for a revenge, and it ended up with centralization of Riga (1993-1994) and edu- cation field (1993). At this stage already, those hoping to establish the ruling elite were striving to direct the property transformation matters in a favorable way. Therefore, the privatization process was signed into about 20 various laws, thus creating an unclear and contradictory environment. This process was assisted both by the lawyers (who were founding their prospects of good revenue in future) and by the privatizers-to-be. The second period (1993–1998) model is characterized by deconcentra- tion in the sectors. Every single ruling political force was developing its ‘own’ economy, concept of the state being an enterprise was gradually spreading, ministries were divided and governance functions were handed over to the state-owned enterprises). During this period, every ministry was separately elaborating its own administration model. For instance, the Ministry of Transport developed small scale industry departments with a small number of the employees while the main analytical and administrative capacity was being concentrated in the 115 Public Administr Ation reforms in lA tvi A (1990–2016) enterprises ruled by the ministry. Such a system allows reaching high efficien- cy but it is subjected to the minister of the sector, and is not coordinated with the Cabinet of Ministers and other ministries. An interesting example of fragmentation and decentralization is pro- vided by the health care organization of the time. The primary and secon- dary health care systems in each region (26 units) were variously organized by the enterprises owned by the self-governments, and were called ‘sickness insurance funds’ . Not only the differences in nuances were present but diffe- rent health care organization systems were simultaneously tested in different territories. The regional self-governments were competing over the most su- ccessful model. The tertiary health care systemwas organized by the Ministry of w elfare according to single principles. The reforms of this period partially comply with the governance princi- ples as set out by Max w eber: 1. Arranging the functions of the officials and the institutions in accordance with certain restrictions (w eber, 1947: 330): One of the problems faced by the government during the reform was raised by the existence of powerful and independent local authorities. One possibility would be to recognize the administrative sovereignty (Council of Europe, 1985), the other – to perceive the local authority as a component of the state (thereby continuing the tradition of totalitarian state like during the period of k ārlis Ulmanis’ authoritarianism and the periods of the g erman and the USSR occupation). w eber does not link his bureaucracy theory to the doctrine of centrali- zed state, since the bureaucracy is developed in favor of a cooperative group (state, local government, or large-scale private corporation). w hen discussing in the Saeima the 1994 Self-g overnments Law, a contest was taking place between those two concepts. The LALRg was offe- ring to provide in a single part of the single law all the autonomous functions of local governments. Then any resident or entrepreneur would have the pos- sibility to see an exclusive list of autonomous responsibilities of local govern- ment. Being afraid of the continuous growth of the local government’s role, the legislators refused such a solution – a clear division of the state and the local authority’s functions was not achieved. 116 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Also the opposite – a list of state functions was not elaborated, thereby the factual situation occurring was that the autonomous functions of local and regional governments were ‘partly acknowledged’ but the legal status of the rest (delegated by the state) was disputable. 2. Clearly defined bureaucratic  organization based on the hierarchy (w eber, 1947: 330) This idea has never been fully implemented in Latvia as (except during the transition period), since only multi-party coalitions have been in po- wer. In such a coalition the ministry that is run by a minister representing the party is used as an administrative resource within the rivalry among the coalition partners. Therefore, the competition over expanding one’s compe- tencies cannot decrease. Initially, also the power of the Prime Minister was rather conditional – basically he was no more than a chairman of the Cabinet meeting as the resources were governed by the sectorial ministerial bodies with a respective influence. Only later the coordination among the sectors was improving. Two subjection forms were developed, i.e. subordination and supervisi- on. As a compromise it was intended that the self-governments are subjected to a soft form of supervision that is embedded in the Self-governments Law (Saeima, 1994). Thereby the government was seeking to establish a ‘single hierarchic system’ that, in its substance, contradicted the European Charter of Local Self-g overnment. During this period a formal negotiation system between the Cabinet of Ministers and the LALRg was established. The consultations were taking pla- ce during entire year, and included negotiations with all the ministries and some crucial state agencies. Each session of such negotiations covered a wide range of matters, and resulted in signing about 20 negotiation protocols, in- cluding the core matters of the further reforms in the state and the correspon- ding sectors or industries. The procedure was concluded by the main docu- ment – the annual Protocol of Agreement and Disagreement between the Cabinet of Ministers and the LALgR wherein the main statement of positions of the both parties on the essential matters of the budget and reforms as well as a range of positions upon which agreement had been reached. At the end of this period an ample centralization of health care (1997) 117 Public Administr Ation reforms in lA tvi A (1990–2016) was performed, and the direct regional election was eliminated (1997). Ho- wever, the regional governments were not eliminated due to the resistance demonstrated by the local governments (Latvia got indirectly elected regional councils by the local government representatives). The third period (1998–2002) model demonstrated a wide esta- blishment of agencies and a continuous privatization of the enterprises pre- viously owned by the state and local government. Formally, the New Public g overnance (NPg) was introduced but the result measuring system that would have been needed for evaluating the performance of numerous agen- cies was never developed. Actually, many institutions of public governance (particularly those es- tablished before in the form of state companies) conformed with the concept of the NPg to a greater extent than those developed in accordance with the Public Agencies Law (Saeima, 2001a). By needlessly providing for the public agencies the financial governance procedure equal to the direct authority go- vernment institutions, whereas the very sense of these institutions was dimi- nished. Notwithstanding the existence of numerous attributes of NPg, the Latvian public agencies turned out to be utterly inappropriate for an effective economic activity. Several functional audits (the Ministry of Agriculture, the Ministry of Economics) were conducted purposing optimization of these institutions’ performance. In the end of the period the State Chancellery decided to take the initiative to coordinate different sectors and optimize the civil servant work. The Department of the Policy Coordination was founded to develop a single policy of state reforms. This period was characterized by the central government fighting against the cooperation amongst the local governments. The Law on the Administra- tive Territorial Reform was adopted (Saeima, 1998) wherein, by the pressure performed by the LALRg, cooperation was deemed equal to uniting. Howe- ver, the central government would not withstand and was devoting further 10 years to conquering cooperation in any realm (Pukis, 2010). The fourth period (2002–2008) model was characterized by a gradual elimination of the NPM components by addressing bureaucracy. w ithin this period a sharp growth of controlling and repressive functions was being obser- ved. The Corruption Prevention and Combating Bureau was established, the 118 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence State Audit Office was becoming more active and working to a wider scope. The foreign-funded civil societies (NgOs) were interfering with the state and the local policy, including the NgOs such as Delna, Providus and others. A certain witch-hunt atmosphere was introduced within small-scale non-go- vernmental organizations along with the state control structures giving lots of talks about different offences but no real evidence was usually gathered. Ho- wever, in some cases of corruption also verdicts on the quality were achieved. Due to inertia, a wide range system of agencies and relevant legislation still existed in this period, which was composed of the laws and the regulations adopted by the Cabinet of Ministers so that the agencies would have something to do. Every ministry sought creating as many institutions as possible. The endeavors to conduct a single policy of ministries were being conti- nued. Every ministry alone was no longer allowed to improve its performan- ce – it had to be done in a centralized manner under the leadership of the previously established Policy Coordination Department. Each ministry was required to elaborate a strategic plan for the respective ministry that was not a performance improvement plan for the institutions but were the development guidelines of the governed sub-sectors from the perspective of the correspon- ding industries. During this period a compulsory administrative territorial reform was in- tensely being prepared. The government was gradually refusing previously adopted principles of the reform: 1. In 2003, cooperation ceased being seen as a form of the local reforms (the cooperation methods widely employed in France and g ermany would not be allowed in Latvia); 2. In 2005, the section about establishing the regional self-governments was excluded from the law. The requirement of the subsidiarity prin- ciple was also excluded along with it; 3. During the reform all the local government were visited numerous times, and several uniting scenarios were discussed by granting the state block grant to each local government voluntary uniting, a total of about 150 million euros were spent on achieving this goal). The reaction of the society to the reform stayed negative. In all the sur- veys performed in the period 1999–2009, the majority of the respondents 119 Public Administr Ation reforms in lA tvi A (1990–2016) showed no support to the reform. The most of residents’ trust to local politi- cians was given namely in the smallest rural and urban territories. The fifth period (2008–2016) model has been characterized by further centralization and concentration, and by several attempts to reduce the state administration. IMF , when granting the loan to Latvia, was in exchange requiring structural reforms. For this purpose, the national Functional Audit Commission was es- tablished (presided by the Head of the State Chancellery) which was supposed to manage the state administration minimizing procedure, and the Reform Management g roup (chaired by the Prime Minister) which was working on the single structural reform plan, and particularly – on the reduction of the budget expenditures. One of the authors of this chapter was representing the LALRg with the rights to vote in both structures of the reform management. The direction of the institutional reforms was uniting the agencies or incorporating thereof into the composition of the ministries. This badly inf- luenced the regions as the management of the industries was concentrated in Riga by sharply reducing employment in the regions. In the previous pe- riods, an even allocation of governance institutions along the entire territory had been one of the most effective instruments of the regional support. As a result, the number of nearly 200 state agencies was reduced to some dozens. The local governments also had to decrease the amount of the services as their budget was radically cut. As the amount of the functions was not redu- ced, there were attempts to transfer them to a shortened working week so that no functional unity would be lost. In the process of ‘cutting’ the budget consultations with the social par- tners were exercised. The Reform Management g roup was initially composed of the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finances, one representative of the Saeima, and two representatives were sent by each of LALRg (Latvian asso- ciation of local and regional governments), the Employers’ Confederation of Latvia, the Latvian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (employers), and the Free Trade Union Confederation of Latvia (employees). Regarding the matters to be examined also other ministers, the President of the Academy of Sciences and the representatives of the Alliance of Non-g overnmental Orga- nizations were invited to the consultative meetings. 120 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence The social partners were submitting their proposals in the extent to which the budget expenditures should have been decreased per the industries according to the priorities of the crisis period. A request to execute such a di- vision was offered also to the parties represented in the Saeima but the parties avoided the political responsibility included. The proposals of the social par- tners, after being discussed with and corrected by the government, provided the basis for cutting the expenses and minimizing the budget deficiency. Pur- suant to these budget decisions the structures of the ministries were decreased as well. In this period, following the initiative of the local governments, the mat- ter of combating the normativism came into the political agenda. The State President (2012) also took the side of the local governments. However, the reaction on the part of the bureaucracy showed that the society was not ready for such a way of thinking. Although formally the ruling combat normativism was being fulfilled (plan was drafted and completed, reports were submitted), there has been no signs of a true wish to diminish the overregulation so far. It is not possible to create a smaller state administration if overregulation has not been diminished at first hand. Organizations like the State Revenue Service, the State Audit Office, the Competition Council, the Corruption Pre- vention, the Combating Bureau and others are especially eager to increase the number of their employees and the amount of their functions. In parallel to this, a growing overregulation of the respective fields has been developing. Following the local government election of 2009, the only institutions of some regional authority currently are the 5 planning regions. The planning regions have no more than some functions provided by the law but they still possess the main attributes of the regional government – an elected (even though indirectly through a two-step procedure) decision-making power, executive power is established by and accountable to the elected councils; rights to adopt normative acts of general nature, their own budget that they adopt on their own discretion, rights to issue administrative acts, boarders established by the law. The legal status of the planning regions is regulated by the Regional Development Law (Saeima, 2002). Upon the reform concerned the number of the local governments has been reduced by five times compared to the number of the local govern- ments in the beginning of the reform. Currently, there are 110 municipali- 121 Public Administr Ation reforms in lA tvi A (1990–2016) ties (local governments with attached rural territory) and 9 republic cities (local governments with no attached rural territory). The competencies of the local governments are the same, except for the city of Riga which has some additional specific functions of the capital. The functions of the regional governments were divided amongst the local governments and the planning regions (Pukis, 2015). In order to pre- serve the illusions that some decisions may be taken in the cities and the parishes of the pre-reform period, the institutions of the municipal city and the municipal parish authority have been established. These authorities have been authorized to have less functions year by year, and they were made accountable to the local governments administration. The novelty of this period has been the aspirations of the central go- vernments to split the local governments by opposing the interests of diffe- rent local governments and acquiring some political dividends at the follo- wing local or Saeima elections. On the grounds for such conduct the con- cept of development centers has been employed. In the national planning documents, the local governments have been divided in several groups. 9 republic cities have been presented with the higher status, thereby creating certain advantages for these governments in receiving the state investments (from the EU funds actually). 21 municipalities with the regional develo- pment center (previous city as centre of post-reform municipality) have been presented with the intermediate status, and also these local governments have some advantages granted. Finally, 89 municipalities have been deemed non-perspective and to receive the state support to a much smaller extent. The division into such categories is based on the political motives. 6 out of 9 republic cities are the receivers of the financial equalization fund. The remaining 3 receive funds according to the continuous income per capita, and pursuant to the execution of the budget for 2015 were placed as 4th, 11th, and 18th on the list. 9 local governments of the first ten are formally – if according to the continuous income per capita – and supposedly non- perspective ones. Real sustainability is opposite to that which is formally recognized by the central government. However, having implemented the active policy of ‘divide and conqu- er’ , the leading coalition managed to compensate a total defeat in the local government election of 2013. It must be indicated that even though the Pe- 122 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence ople’s Party was the main organizer of the administrative territorial reform at its final stage, it was dismissed from the Saeima in the following election and has eliminated itself by now. It must be also indicated that Latvia was not the only state where the crisis was employed by those backing centralization. Such tendencies could be observed in most EU countries. 4.6. Civil Service The content of the First period (1990–1993) was best complied by non- existence of a special status of a civil servant. The USSR nomenclature was losing its powers, all the employees entered the labor market as being equal. Initially, neither the state nor local government executed massive redundan- cies of the USSR nomenclature, save the active supporters who were actively positioning themselves as opponents of the Latvian national independence. Most of the professionals were preserved in the service. It regarded even the USSR era structures like State Security Office, the Police, courts, and the Prosecutor’s office. Along with eliminating of the executive committees and establishing the boards (the executive committees were actually subjected to the minis- tries, the boards – only and exclusively to the council), specialists of non- nomenclature ranks got involved in the local governmental work: teachers, scientists, doctors, engineers who invested their professional experience to complete the local authorities. Although the culture of collegial decisions was being preserved, the in- dividual responsibility of a state administration employee was growing at the time. There were no longer any restrictions to be a member of a political mo- vement or a political party. The reforms of the Second period (1993–1998) created the civil service that has been developing ever since. The reform conducted by the Ministry of the State Reforms in charge of Māris gailis was partially based on the Max w eber’s principles like the following: 1. Specialization in certain fields of competency and labor distribution (w eber, 1947: 330): The initial reform was designed on the basis of universalization not specialization. A civil service of the ‘mandarin 123 Public Administr Ation reforms in lA tvi A (1990–2016) type’ was developed that did not envisaged specialists of particular fields but universal experts of legislation and rules. The ministries also initially had a large number of functions that were subjected to no specialization in the beginning. As an exception should be regar- ded any termination of reforms started in the previous periods (for instance, the Privatization Agency that was established in 1994 as a state-owned joint stock company right away). 2. Separating the property rights of the resources used in the adminis- tration from the property of the officials (w eber, 1947: 330): Such an order did not need to be invented as it already existed through the entire occupation period. Also dependence of remuneration on the performance is to some extent linked to this choice. In general, the concept that the officials’ remuneration to be dependent on their per- formance was rejected in Latvia. 3. System of the remuneration based on the ranking (w eber, 1947: 331): The initial concept was to determine different remuneration for diffe- rent ranks (which was done via adoption of the regulations issued by the Cabinet of Ministers), still the wish to develop the civil service ended up in a contradiction with the financial capacity of the sta- te budget. The system of the remuneration according to the ranking was only partly realized as when adopting the recurrent state budgets, they were always short of means. An essential part was played by po- pulism. In order to win the election, it was preferable to pretend that the remuneration to be received from the state is as low as possible. In Latvia, the salaries of the Prime Minister, ministers and the Saeima deputies have always been lower than in the neighboring countries. It also affected remuneration of the other state officials. 4. Assigning to the office and promotion along the gait of the carrier is supposedly based on the merits not on the prejudice or favor (w eber, 1947: 331, 333): Initially, a system was designed wherein promotion would have taken place once an individual would reached the next of 13 stages (a civil servant candidate + 12 stages) – a carrier civil service was being designed. To perform evaluation and training two separate institutions were established: the State Civil Service Office and the State Administration School. 124 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 5. Civil service as the individual’s full time and lifetime occupation, a civil servant may retire from the service but his / hers dismissal is possible only due to a severe offence (w eber, 1947: 333): The initial concept was designed in close compliance with this principle. Furthermore, in the Preventing Corruption Law (Saeima, 1995) the first restrictions for combined appointments were determined by being applied to the politicians, judges, and employees of the local governments as well. A term ‘state official’ was introduced which has a different meaning and sense in Latvia than in other countries. This term refers to a prohibi- tion of the combined appointments. The prospected system was not fully introduced. w hen planning the state budget for developing the civil service, there was a money shortage. No examinations were introduced (except for the first time when the civil servant candidates were accepted). No further rankings were attributed. The envisaged package of social guarantees was not assured. The local and regio- nal governments succeeded avoiding the civil service as the state civil service itself was financially undernourished. The regulations having the force of the law issued by the Cabinet of Minis- ters upon the disciplinary liability of the civil servants were introduced during the break between the Saeima sessions (Cabinet of Ministers, 1994). Pursuant to these regulations, the actions of a civil servant (a civil servant candidate) are unlawful in case if his or her actions (action or inaction) contradict the legal norms, service instructions, or particular service orders. This decreased the personal responsibility while strengthened the role of a civil servant seen as a little screw in a joint mechanism. In the end of this period, the number of service employees was significantly decreasing as it was more profitable to enter the employment under a regular employment contract. During the Third period (1998–2002) inequality was developing. At a low basic salary scale the deputy heads of the departments, heads of divisions and departments, state secretaries and their deputies were exercising both the elaborations of the first period (the possibility to fulfil political positions in the councils of the companies owned by the state and the local government), and recently introduced management agreements (for performing a particu- lar assignment) in accordance with the NPg procedure. As the result, the remuneration of the senior officials normally exceeded 125 Public Administr Ation reforms in lA tvi A (1990–2016) the ones of the Prime Minister and ministers, but the assistants and junior as- sistants in terms of their remuneration were not far from the minimum wage in labor market. As no preconditions linked to the achieved results had been introduced in the system of governance, also the performance agreements were concluded rather formally. The employees would rather perceive them as a pay rise, not as real remuneration for the result of fulfilling which some essential changes or improvements should be achieved. In order to renovate the civil service to some extent, a campaign of inventory was performed in terms of redefining the positions of the civil servants. The personnel depar - tments of the ministries were put to labor in order to find grounds how va- rious positions could be incorporated into the civil service. During this period a discussion took place concerning the matter of the scope of the civil service. There was a proposition submitted to develop a small civil service of a high quality that would have included mainly the po- sitions of managers, and may have been expanded over time along with the budget potential. There was also another concept under discussion envisa- ging two levels, i.e. the elite civil service and the regular civil service. Howe- ver, the choice was made in favor of a large and poorly motivated civil service. During this period also a conceptual change took place – the carrier ci- vil service was replaced with an open civil service. w ith such an open civil service a free movement of the employees from the private sector and their return to the private sector was made possible. This complied with the need for partial replacement of the civil servants, and also foreign investors needed some preferential procedures and potential of a higher yield in Latvia. Contrary to the traditional approach where the basic model was serving from the very bottom ranking so that, along with the term of service, the top rankings may be reached, in the open civil service it became possible to start by having a certain position in the private sector, then spent some time in the civil service position, then continue with a position in the private sector again, and so forth. Bigger than ever, the attention was paid to the extent of specialization. If in the traditional model the basic skill had been participation in the gover- nance process as precisely fulfilling the internal and external administrative acts, then in the open civil service much bigger weight was attributed to the specific knowledge of the field. 126 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence The system could have been introduced to a much wider extent if not for the split that had been occurred between the remuneration of the employees at similar positions in the private and public sectors. At the end of this period, the Law on Corruption Prevention and Combating Bureau (kNAB) was ela- borated and adopted that introduced a new stage of quality as an instrument for combating the political (economic) opponents. During the Fourth period (2002–2008) basically all the previously started processes were continuing even though a gradual deviation from the NPg principles was taking place year by year. After the amendments made to the Public Agency Law (Saeima, 2005), the performance agreements and the administrative agreements were terminated. The agencies would be further administered according to their strategies but no new administrative agree- ments were concluded any more. The work was being continued under stricter requirements to be applied to the civil servants simultaneously restricting any possibilities to motivate the employees. A new version of a more detailed Law on Disciplinary Liabi- lity of State Civil Servants was adopted. It envisaged several types of offences, whereas the civil servants may have been punished if they would perform any actions against the procedure set in the normative acts – by violating not only external but also internal normative acts. As a disciplinary offence was nominated non-fulfilment of official duties, disclosure of an official se- cret, or unauthorized disclosure of any other information; loss of, damage of property or loss of money; incorrect attitude towards a person; inappropriate and disrespectful behavior during the time period when official duties are not fulfilled; and non-conformity with political neutrality. During this period the new kNAB commenced the witch hunt; su- ccessful criminal matters were rarely instituted, and still announcements were often published that casted shadow over the state administration and the local governments. For the influence over the kNAB a rivalry occurred among the politi- cal parties seeking the governance acting in their interests. At the time, the kNAB would be involved in internal intrigues and widen the corruption combating direction of its operations by focusing particularly at the conflicts of interests not corruption. Endeavors to include the local governments into a single civil service 127 Public Administr Ation reforms in lA tvi A (1990–2016) system occurred, despite the fact that the local governments succeeded in pertaining solidarity for the sake of autonomy of their personnel. During the Fifth period (2008-2016) the very idea of the civil servi- ce has been discredited as at the beginning of the period, and too much of influence was handed over to the IMF and the European Commission. A structural reform has been imitated that actually turned out into mechanical pruning of the civil service. The reliance on the promises given by the public power has been lost. At the end of the period a way out from the situation, where no agreement seems possible due to a competition among the parties of the ruling coalition, was sought for. The world economic crisis made us look critically at the developed sys- tem of the civil service on its own terms. Since 1993, there have been talks about a bigger stability as the reason for joining the civil service. Although a civil servant may have received remuneration that was for 20% lower than an employee at a similar level in the private sector, the former had a guaranteed employment and a higher social security. The conduct of the Latvian government utterly erased such hopes. w hen reacting at the IMF requirement to execute the structural reforms, the govern- ment mechanically decreased the number of the civil servants instead of bur- dening itself with restructuring the economics. It turned out that an employee of a private enterprise was more protected than a civil servant. This example was also often followed by the local governments in respect to their employees. From January 1, 2010, the following articles were excluded from the Law on the State Civil Service: 1) allowances in case of injury of a civil servant and in case of death of a civil servant or his or her family member; 2) allowance in the case of birth of a child; 3) compensation to cover travel expenses; 4) allowance in connection with dismissal from a civil service position; 5) sup- plement for the performance of additional duties; 6) supplement for the per- formance of office duties under circumstances of increased work intensity; 7) improving qualifications and covering training costs; 8) study leave. The respective regulation was moved to the Law on Remuneration of Officials and Employees of State and Local g overnment (Saeima, 2010) where the pre- viously available advantages were either excluded or essentially decreased. The law on a single remuneration that was adopted during this period has eliminated all the NPg methods in the personnel management. If the sta- 128 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence te and the local government are managed like an enterprise, there must be the possibilities available for motivating the civil servants through more diverse ways that would have correlate with their input in achieving the goals of the respective organization (Vorončuka, 2003). The single remuneration law de- termines that a bonus may be paid no more often that annually and no bigger that up to 75% of the monthly salary. Such a degree of motivation shows no proportionality to the significance of those matters often solved on the daily basis by the civil servants and the employees of the local governments. A new concept of the civil service was elaborated, and the new State Ser- vice Law draft (Cabinet of Ministers, 2014) provided such qualities of ‘post- bureaucratic civil service’: − Equalizing the employment conditions for the civil servants and the state administration employees by granting an essential role to the private sector experience in development of the carrier and labor remuneration system; − The labor remuneration system gets linked to the work performance by a wide use of the performance assessment; − Open competitions for any position; − Flexible employment conditions; − Delegating the duties to direct supervisors. The performance would have been assessed according to single princi- ples applied both to the civil servants and the employees as well as mobility would have been assured (transfer in favor of the interests of the state). The envisaged model of a single employer gave an impression that one group of the ruling elite was trying to manipulate another. Therefore, implementation of such a model has been postponed for an unknown period, and the law draft was not promoted in the Saeima. 4.7. Administrative Process and Procedures The change of public administration models was accompanied by es- sential transformations in the provisions of the administrative procedure. The administrative procedure is an essential component of the public admi- nistration model; its shape is variable in compliance with the interests of those groups that are seeking their goals and are dominating the society at the time being. 129 Public Administr Ation reforms in lA tvi A (1990–2016) During the First period (1990−1993) the administrative procedure was not formalized within the institution, and a democratic form of principles of the USSR era was observed (the content had changed by reinstated pluralism and completely cancelled the possibility of a single party dictate). In court, the administrative matters where considered on the competitive basis accor- ding to the civil procedure. Initially, it was believed that the public power on the one hand and an individual on the other should be set as equal conditions – the same principles should be made clear to both, and the same documents should be available to both. The internal procedure in the institution was nothing but an auxiliary instrument to ensure balanced relationship between the public authority and the individual. At the beginning of the Second period (1993−1998) the Minister of Justice, Egils Levits, was trying to introduce a new administrative procedure according to the g erman model but he did not succeed in overcoming the resistance of an interest group of lawyers, therefore the administrative pro- cedure was introduced only in the state and local institutions but in court the civil procedure was preserved. The Law on the Constitutional Court was adopted providing the examination procedure of the primary and secondary legislation by initially allowing submissions to a narrow range of applicants only. It was believed that the effective legislation was too contradictory but the capacity of the judges and the state administration employees was insuf- ficient. The administrative procedure was divided into two parts, i.e. in the institutions it was operated ‘in a new way’ (Cabinet of Ministers, 1995) but in court ‘in the old manner’ . During the Third period (1998−2002) the new Administrative Pro- cedure Law was adopted introducing a single bureaucratic order in court and in the institution; an individual who was competing against the local government and the state lost his or her ability to compete as potentially his/her opponent would be judged by a higher quality within a purposefully designed system of administrative courts. A shiftfrom the concept of rule of law to the concept of state of law was an important milestone during this period. In the lawyers’ communities, it is described as a rapprochement with a legal and institutional framework of Continental Europe contrary to British Commonwealth (w estminster) system. It is essential to provide that the principle of proportionality was applied to the administrative procedure 130 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence only, not to designing institutions (Pūķis, 2010) – by naming this principle differently to the principle of the institution development and competency in the primary legislation of the EU. The right to proportionality was named ‘the principle of commensuration’ (following the g erman terminology) but in the Latvian versions of the EU legislation was named ‘the principle of proportionality’ (following the English and French model). During the Fourth period (2002−2008) the hierarchy in relation to the administrative procedure was clarified, and it was recognized that in the local government there was no higher instance than the local government council and a higher status of the hierarchy after the council was reserved to the court (the ministry was supposed to be a higher instance only in case of delegated competencies). However, the bureaucrats of the ministries and even the mi- nisters were seeking to violate this procedure. During the previous period the adopted Administrative Procedure Law had prepared the grounds for a comprehensive bureaucratization. In the new version of the Administrative Procedure Law (Saeima, 2001) a provision was elaborated that provided the grounds for a continuous and stable growth in the number of lawyers. It followed from the provision that an administrative act should be drawn in writing and should have a mandatory substantiation by an external normative act. This norm provided a continuous escalation in the amount of the regulations issued by the Cabinet of Ministers and the binding regulations issued by the local governments thereby inducing a dy- namically growing bureaucratization. The Law of the State Administration System that was adopted at the be- ginning of this period also facilitated bureaucratization, concentration, and centralization. Significantly enough, among the basic principles of the state administration the principle of subsidiarity was at least mentioned opposite to the principle of proportionality that was not mentioned at all. This also conforms with the lack of understanding over the significance of this princi- ple when trying to copy the procedures characteristic of the g erman system. w ithin this stage the matters of responsibilities of the civil servants and the institutions were clarified, and the procedure established how to diffe- rentiate the responsibility of the state from the responsibility of the local go- vernment – along with that it was also specified from which budget the com- pensations would be paid in case of wrongful actions. As it had been purpo- 131 Public Administr Ation reforms in lA tvi A (1990–2016) sefully arranged that autonomous competency of the local governments was not separated from the competency delegated to the local governments by the state, then the court was still facing difficulties in separating those. From the existing legal nihilism barely any function of the local government was cor- rectly provided in the law. Therefore, in case of doubts over the competency to which a particular offence serves, it would be paid from the state budget not from the one of the local government. During the Fifth period (2008−2016) the administrative procedure has not been changed but there have been ongoing discussions in two directions: 1) how to develop the public services system (e-services, feasibility limits of a single supervision), and 2) whether certain controlling and repressive structures are entitled to establish a separate punishment system that has no connection to the administrative procedure. The EU budget was applied to implement a project on the public servi- ces. The main outcome of the project was a single classification of public ser - vices involving both the services provided by the state and those provided by the local governments. The outcome has been used to complete the Latvian e-g overnment portal www.latvija.lv. By developing these outcomes, a novel draft of the Law on the Public Services was prepared and supported both by the Cabinet of Ministers and the LALRg but is was blocked by an interest group of lawyers. The lawyers perceived wide introduction of e-services and simplification of the procedures as the direct threat to their interests. Particular objections were raised by offer of the ‘silence – agreement’ principle: in case a public government institution has not replied to a propo- sal, the proposal is agreed. In order to prevent any aspirations to diminish the administrative burden for the entrepreneurs and the population, the groups of lawyers and civil servants are referring to the norms of the State Adminis- tration System Law (that was criticized by the local governments both during its drawing and afterwards) (Pūķis, 2010) that is facilitating centralization and concentration, and is not following the principle of proportionality. In order to foster their influence during this period the State Audit Office has been trying to acquire also the rights of the repressive structure. It has been offered to apply a norm to the civil servants and the employees of the lo- cal government, so that an external controlling institution is entitled to apply punishments for the aforesaid employees contrary to the opinion of the direct 132 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence supervision and by interfering into the procedure of the personnel mana- gement. The Competition Council has already acquired such a competency, now it is seeking rights to exercise double actions of other state institutions and assess whether it is profitable to establish capital societies owned by the state or by the local government. During the crisis, the Cabinet of Ministers decided to develop ‘a small and efficient’ administration. As in all the coun- tries, the bureaucracy would not accept that, and has been working in order to make the word ‘small’ disappear from all the future state policy documents. 4.8. Conclusion 1. After 1990, the public administration reform in Latvia could be split to five stages. Each stage has its leading interest groups that have their own objectives. The form and scope of the public administrati- ve reform on each stage was determined by the competition among groups’ interests. 2. The first stage (1990−1993) could be characterized as the period of transition from the totalitarianism and centralized planned economy to pluralism and market economy. During this period, the interests of Latvian people were determinative. Model of minimal governance was chosen as the tool for achieving dominant objectives during this period (minimal legislation and minimal administrative structures); it was complemented with an extensive decentralization. A signifi- cant part of the public power was transferred to the self-governments through fiscal, property, administrative, staff, and political decentra- lization. The second stage (1993−1998) could be characterized as a pseudo-restoration, on this stage, the renewal of democratic and free public power constitution of the period (1918−1934) was declared. Newly developed national elite’s interest to multiply wealth by par- ticipating in the process of privatization and denationalization was determinative in this stage. The national elite was developed from a part of the former activists of the Popular Front of Latvia, a part of the former nomenclature of the USSR time that was timely redirected, and a part of Latvian emigration diaspora that returned to mother- land to participate in the assets redistribution and division. Traditio- nal public administration model with features of Max w eber’s burea- 133 Public Administr Ation reforms in lA tvi A (1990–2016) ucracy was chosen to achieve the dominant objectives of this period. The strategy of “state of law” development and over-regulation was chosen that allowed to make legal environment less clear and priva- tization more successfully. In frames of the pseudo-restoration, there were attempts to implement centralization through the administra- tive-territorial reform. Because of the self-governments’ resistance centralization was implemented only in the city of Riga where only one self-government instead of previous seven was established. 3. The third stage (1998−2002) could be characterized as the New Public Management (NPM) period, when a list of the NPM elements were im- plemented, and a part of related to NPM workpieces from the previous period was distorted. The interests of the “foreign investors” (from Rus- sia and Scandinavia in particular) were determinant during this peri- od. The investors beneficially repurchased properties and enterprises that had been privatized in the previous stages. Additionally, pre-es- tablished political elite was interested in getting rid of the previously obtained properties and deploy the capital to offshore zones. In order to fulfil these tasks previous period bureaucrats should be partially re- placed. At that time, the New Public Management Theory, a new global paradigm in public management, was chosen to fulfil the replacement. 4. The fourth stage (2002−2008) could be characterized as a period of entering NATO and the EU, when public administration was stepping back in the development implementing features of the neo-w eberia- nism. This period was determined by the interests of the “old” EU member states and the American entrepreneurs in order to reallocate assets and powers/dominance. A change to reallocate the dominance to both political parties and civil servants was partly needed. Emphasis was placed on strengthening the repressive structures and its depen- dence on the new ruling party’ s impact (State Audit Office, Corruption Prevention and Combating Bureau, etc.). The fifth stage (2008−2016) could be characterized as a period of internal devaluation. The inter- national financial groups and the “old” EU member states’ interests were determined on this stage. The mentioned parties were carrying on compensations from the taxpayers‘ money to banks and insurance companies, did not allow elimination of the state compulsory funded 134 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence pension, and trigged development of national economy. Latvia had become a proving ground for the g reek rescue, and therefore the dee- pest world financial crisis since 1930 was organized. The local political elite started a competition to privatize profitable enterprises owned by the state and self-governments during this period. Because of the fi- nancial reduction, attitudes towards public administration and, partly, return of the minimal regulation model needed to be changed. 5. The change of the public administration models was accompanied by significant changes in the organization of the functions. The mo- del of the first period (1990−1993) corresponds to the minimal state institutions and decentralization. During this period, the principle of subsidiarity was implemented at its best, communalization was im- plemented as the first stage of privatization and decentralization, and the main elements of the economic structural policy were entrusted to the self-governments. The model of the second period (1993−1998) corresponds to deconcentrating in the sectors, i.e. each allowing po- litical force created its “own” administration, idea about the country as an enterprise was progressively spreading, ministries were divided among the parties, and administrative functions were transferred to the state-owned enterprises. At the end of the period, an ambitious centralization in health care was implemented as well as direct regi- onal elections were cancelled. However, because of the self-govern- ments’ resistance, elimination of the regional self-governments failed. The model of the third period (1998−2002) corresponds to a wide development of agencies, and continuation of the privatization of the state-owned and self-governments’ enterprises. The NPA was formally introduced but the performance assessment system that was needed to evaluate performance of the various agencies has not been created. 6. Paradigm shift in public administration was accompanied by a signi- ficant change in civil service. The first period (1990−1993) model best corresponded to the public servant status alignment to private emplo- yee status, which made it possible to achieve both flexibility and high efficiency. During the second period (1993−1998), a traditional Man- darin system (career civil service) was created and government unsu- ccessfully tried to extend it to municipalities. Self-governments mana- 135 Public Administr Ation reforms in lA tvi A (1990–2016) ged to maintain the staff autonomy. Due to a lack of funds, the plans of the second period were only partially fulfilled. During the third period (1998−2002), a change of the concept of civil service was prepared, which better corresponded to the ideas of the New Public administra- tion. Career civil service was replaced by an open civil service. A signi- ficant and broad exchange was seen between public and private sectors, open competitive senior official selection was introduced. Conflict of interest restrictions was developed, which had a negative impact on the elements of the new policy. In the fourth period (2002−2008), the previously built system evolved by applying the civil service borrowed from the New Public Administration within the framework of neo- w eberianism model. Bureaucracy increased and became affected by overregulation and double control, which did not allow raising wages for a long time. In the fifth period (2008−2016), the organization of ci- vil service procedures as set out by previous periods continued. During the period of internal devaluation, a unified system of remuneration was established, which was extended to the self-governments as well. This period is characterized by a high concentration of institutions, worsening the situation in the regions. A new State Service draft le- gislation was developed, which further liberalized the open civil ser- vice model. Political forces failed to find consensus on the new model. 7. Shift in public administration models was accompanied by signifi- cant changes how to ensure administrative process. Administrative process in the institution was not formalized during the first period (1990−1993), and a democratic form of the Soviet time principles was considered (content was changed by restoring pluralism, and comple- tely abolishing the possibility of one-party dictation). Direct adminis- trative cases were examined on competition basis in accordance with the civil procedure. During the second period (1993−1998), the Minis- ter of Justice tried to introduce a new administrative process based on the g erman example, however he failed to overcome an interest group of lawyers’ resistance, therefore the administrative procedure was im- plemented only in case of the state and the self-government institu- tions, in case of the court, the civil procedure remained. The Law on the Constitutional Court was adopted that determined the procedure 136 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence of the examination of the primary and secondary legislation initially allowing only a narrow range of applicants to submit the claims. Du- ring the third period (1998−2002), a new Administrative Procedure Law was adopted that presumed introduction of a single bureaucratic procedure for the institutions and the court. Those, who were litigating with the state or the self-governments, lost the opportunity to compe- te at the same time potentially receiving highly qualified judges from the specially created system of the administrative court. In the fourth period (2002−2008), the hierarchy of administrative processes was de- termined, and it was acknowledged that there was no higher instance of self-governments than a council of the self-governments, and the court had the privilege to participate in the examination on the next degree after the council (a ministry was considered as a higher authority only in case of the competence that was delegated by the state). However, bureaucrats of the ministries and even the ministers tried to violate this procedure. In the fifth period (2008−2016), the organization of admi- nistrative procedures remained the same as in the previous periods. 8. In case of Latvia, the external factors of public administration develo- pment (membership in the EU, interests of Russia or the USA, impact of the international financial organizations) had the secondary meaning. It is important to emphasize that at least for the shared competences the principle of proportionality (minimization of the EU bureaucratic in- volvement) was successfully maintained in the EU primary legislation. Domestic political needs were primary to the forms of public adminis- tration organization, which were the tools for ensuring domestic inte- rests. Various concepts of public administration like good governance, smart governance or corporative governance were applied to support domestic policy objectives. Transparency and anti-corruption concepts were mainly used for inter-party fights to compromise the political op- ponents and emphasize the excellence of their own reputation. 9. Normativism (over-regulation) and excessive promotion of burea- ucratization characteristic for the EU were not able to respond flexi- bly to the global processes, and did not contributed to the popularity of the methods. Hence, each country should seek ways to prevent the disadvantages that the EU public administration has. 137 Public Administr Ation reforms in lA tvi A (1990–2016) References 1. Buchanan, J. M., Tullock, g. 1962. The Calculus of Consent: Logical Foundations of Constitutional Democracy. University of Michigan Press. 2. Council of Europe. 1950. The Convention for Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Retrieved from: http://www.echr. coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENg.pdf 3. Council of Europe. 1985. European Charter of Local Self–g overnment. Retrieved from: https://dlg.gov.mt/en/DLg/Legislation/Documents/ Legislation/122.pdf 4. CSP . 2016. Retrieved from: www.csb.gov.lv 5. EU. 2012. Consolidated Version of the Treaty on European Union. Retrieved from: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/ PDF/?uri=CELEX:12012E/TXT&from=EN 6. Michels, R. 1915. Political Parties: A Sociological Study of the Oligar- chical Tendencies of Modern Democracy. trans. Eden and Cedar Paul. k itchener, Ontario: Batoche Books, 2001. 7. Ministru kabinets. 1994. Noteikumi Nr.158 «Par ierēdņu disciplinārsodiem», pieņemti Satversmes 81. panta kārtībā. Retrieved from http://m.likumi.lv/doc.php?id=57528 8. Ministru kabinets. 1995. Administratīvo aktu procesa noteikumi, Nr. 154. Retrieved from: http://m.likumi.lv/doc.php?id=35627 9. Mucinieks, P . 1938. Latvijas pašvaldību iekārta. Rīga: L.U. Studentu pa- domes grāmatnīca. 10. Osborn, D. g., gaebler, T. 1992. Reinventing g overnment – How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector. Reading: Addison-w esley Publ. Co. 11. Pukis, M. 2004. The Progress of Regulation of Conflict of Interest in Local g overnments in Latvia, in Barbara kudrycka (Eds), Combating Conflict of Interest in Local g overnments in the CEE Countries (107- 144). Budapest: OSI/LgI. 12. Pūķis, M. 2010. Pašu valdība. Rīga: Latvijas Pašvaldību savienība. 138 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 13. Pukis, M. 2015, Regionalism in Latvia, Assembly of European Regi- ons Study on Regtionalism. Retrieved from: http://www.aer.eu/en/ knowledge-centre/thematic-expertise-thematicissues/regionalism/aer- publications/20142015-study-on-regionalism.html, pp. 24 14. Saeima. 1994. Likums “Par pašvaldībām” . Retrieved from: http://likumi. lv/doc.php?id=57255 15. Saeima. 1994a. Valsts civildienesta likums, pamata redakcija. Retrieved from: http://m.likumi.lv/doc.php?id=57240# 16. Saeima. 1995. Politisko organizāciju (partiju) finansēšanas likums. Re- trieved from: http://likumi.lv/doc.php?id=36189 17. Saeima. 1998. Administratīvi teritoriālās reformas likums. Retrieved from: http://m.likumi.lv/doc.php?id=51528 18. Saeima. 2000. Valsts civildienesta likums. Retrieved from: http://liku- mi.lv/doc.php?id=10944 19. Saeima. 2001. Administratīvā procesa likums, spēkā no 2004.gada 1. februāra. Retrieved from http://likumi.lv/doc.php?id=55567 20. Saeima. 2001a. Publisko aģentūru likums. Retrieved from: http://m.li- kumi.lv/doc.php?id=6888 21. Saeima. 2002. Reģionālās attīstības likums. Retrieved from: http://liku- mi.lv/doc.php?id=61002 22. Saeima. 2009. Publisko aģentūru likums. Retrieved from: http://likumi. lv/doc.php?id=202272 23. Saeima. 2010. Valsts un pašvaldību institūciju amatpersonu un dar- binieku atlīdzības likums. Retrieved from http://likumi.lv/doc. php?id=202273 24. Švābe, A. 1926. Pagasta vēsture, I daļa. Rīga: J. Roze. 25. Valsts Prezidents. 2012. Rīkojums Nr.7 “Par priekšlikumu izstrādi liku- mu grozījumu skaita un apjoma samazināšanai” . Retrieved from: http:// likumi.lv/doc.php?id=253362 26. Vorončuka, I. 2003. Personāla vadība. Rīga: Latvijas Universitāte. 27. weber, M. 1947. The Theory of Social and Economic Organisation, translated by A. Henderson & T. Parsons. NY: Oxford University press. 139 Public Administr Ation in Pol And: reforms And s ystemic-o rgAniz Ation Al issues 5. Public Administration in Poland: Reforms and Systemic-Organizational Issues Mariusz W . Sienkiewicz, Stanisław Michałowski 5.1. Introduction w e should support k asiński’s thesis (2011: 215-226) that modern con- cepts of public administration are based on the concept of public service, rather than public authority and on the change of its fundamental role, which is to be not bureaucratic governance, but management which is based on completely different principles. Therefore, greater than ever importance is attributed to non-legal economic, political, organizational determinants of administration. In general, a new image of public administration is promoted in which its acti- vities are only slightly determined by law, although it is still formally bound by the constitutional requirement to respect the generally binding rules. Another trend in the development of modern public administration is associated with the process of its Europeanization. This pertains primarily to the member states of the European Union and is partly linked to globali- zation processes (k asiński, 2011: 215-226). It is determined by the acceptance of patterns of modernization shaped in non-European, especially Anglo-Sa- xon, administrative systems. On the other hand, in the process of Europeani- zation of administrative law and public administration there is an approach based on the assumption that administration modernization should be based mainly on European tradition and experience, and concepts and programs outside Europe can be used only to a limited extent. This pertains, for exam- ple, to strengthening the principle of subsidiarity, primacy of the territorial system over the sectoral one, limits of discretional decisions, access to public information, network connections, horizontal rather than hierarchical, social dialogue and civic participation, and specific ethical standards in administra- tion (k asiński, 2011: 215-226). It should be noted that the Polish public administration system is ge- nerally based on the latter concept. This is caused by the necessity to reform public administration determined by process of European integration, ful- fillment of the EU law requirements in various areas of administrative activi- 140 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence ty, and acceptance of values and principles shared by the administrations in different member states (k asiński, 2011: 215-226). The restoration of the democratic system in 1989 in Poland triggered the reform activity in virtually all areas of socio-economic life (Lutrzykowski, 2009: 10-25). One of important areas of these activities was public adminis- tration, the shape in which reflects the socio-political system in the coun- try. Thus, in the early 1990s the first stage of public administration reform in Poland began. The result was mainly visible in the introduction of local self-government at the municipal level, as the basic unit of major division of the state. This period initiated a process of reforming Polish public adminis- tration, which has continued to the present day. M. k ulesza (2000: 1-2) rightly points out that „Poland is the only country of Central and Eastern Europe, in which today a successful and profound trans- formation of the administrative system is already a fact belonging to history.“ This, of course, does not preclude the observation that we have many problems and difficulties with bureaucracy and other administrative pathologies, inclu- ding corruption (the „normal,“ but also the political one), ignorance, arrogance, waste, etc. Nevertheless, these are just ordinary challenges always faced by poli- tical and state elites, today in Poland as well as in other contemporary democra- tic countries. The restoration of local self-government is considered one of the most important and most successful achievements of the Third Republic, thus perpetuating Polish sovereignty as a civil state. This achievement was accom- plished primarily through deep transformations of the public administration system by means of introduction of a new legislation. The reforms broke three major monopolies of the totalitarian communist state: the political monopoly of a single party, the already mentioned principle of unified state power, and the principle of a single fund of state property. It was followed by decentralization of state administration and state finances. This has led to the profound recons- truction of the public sector – including, in particular, the principles of political governance and the rules of organization, and delivery of key public services and administrative tasks (including – the police ones). This entails significant transformation in many areas of public life (k ulesza, 2000: 1-2). This chapter contains an analysis of the process of the public adminis- tration reform in Poland. The attention is focused on the genesis of the for- mation of public administration in respective periods of Polish statehood. It 141 Public Administr Ation in Pol And: reforms And s ystemic-o rgAniz Ation Al issues also contains a presentation of systemic and organizational issues of public administration operation in the current era. The conducted analyses concern, in particular, the assumptions, objectives and principles of administrative re- forms after 1989; the structure, organization and function of public adminis- tration in Poland; public finance; analysis of the process of reforms of the civil service; manifestations and instruments related to the openness and transpa- rency of public administration. 5.2. Theoretical Issues of the Public Administration Reform A reform of public administration is a process involving a set of activities and instruments undertaken by government administration bodies, aimed at improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the administration which, in consequence, is supposed to lead to an improved quality of life of a society (Sowiński, 2001: 227-236). A reform of public administration in a democra- tic state should not be an end in itself because it frequently leads to the de- centralization of administrative structures and their tasks and competences (w right, 1997: 551-558). According to the United Nations Development Program (UNDP , 2011), public administration reform can be very comprehensive and include process changes in areas, such as organizational structures, decentralization, person- nel management, public finance, results-based management, regulatory re- forms, etc. It can also refer to targeted reforms, such as the revision of civil service statute. w e can point to several types of a public administration reform. Jos C. N. Raadschelders (1994: 4) distinguished three main types: 1) structural reforms pertaining to changes in the existing organizational, administra- tive, and public structure. They may take a form of territorial reforms, or functional reforms, pertaining to modification of the scope of tasks and competences. Structural reforms can be of a mixed nature, that is, both territorial and functional. The second type are reforms, the aim of which is to change the nature of relations and relationships between organizatio- nal units within the public sector. They are connected primarily with rea- lization of the principle of decentralization and de-concentration of tasks and competences. The third type of administrative reforms are the reforms of a system. They pertain to changes in public administration, taking place 142 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence in the framework of the transformation of the political system as a whole. In turn, Vincent w right (1997: 551-558) distinguished, first of all, re- forms undertaken as a result of the emergence of phenomena causing the pressure towards modernization of the political system associated, for exam- ple, with the European integration. The other type he pointed to are reforms arising from the need to respond to emerging social or political events, such as for instance, the reorganization of public administration caused by, for example, the unification processes in g ermany. Discussing the basis of classification of public administration reforms it is worth presenting the division made by Ryszard Herbut who distinguished the following types of reforms: 1) reforms connected with the market, which are characterized by the departure from the traditional model of administra- tion based on hierarchical relationships, in favor of administration applying market principles; 2) participatory ones, whose goal is to expand the circle of actors involved in the decision-making process and providing them with the impact on service quality; 3) deregulatory reforms, which are associated with organizing administration as a separate sub-system (Rajca, 2010: 199-200). Taking the above into account, we witnessed in Poland in the last de- cades a so-called diversified system of administrative reforms. Between the years 1990 and 1998, „big macro reforms“ as well as structural and systemic reforms were carried out related to the creation of new territorial units and new administrative divisions and functions. In turn, during the 1990s, the reforms in individual areas of public administration were implemented, such as the civil service, administrative jurisdiction, public participation, instru- ments of public management, or public finances. 5.3. Historical Context of Formation of Public Administration in Poland Decentralization of state administration became one of the main objecti- ves of the system transformation in Poland after 1989. It was assumed that it would lead to building civil society based on the principle of subsidiarity, i.e. the reconstruction of local government and broad activity of society. The con- cept of self-governing municipalities was implemented very quickly, already in 1990, but the second stage of the reform assuming the introduction of self- governing districts and provinces was quite difficult to achieve in the socio- 143 Public Administr Ation in Pol And: reforms And s ystemic-o rgAniz Ation Al issues political reality at that time. Districts and provinces appeared on the map of Poland only in 1998. This process will be shown in the following discussion. It should be noted, however, that a complex process of building public adminis- tration in Poland has exerted a big influence on this process, just like the fate of the Polish nation, deprived of its statehood for 123 years, has been complex. It is generally assumed that classical principles and institutions of public administration developed in the nineteenth century, and in the next century, they were enriched by new solutions and only partly modified, primarily due to the consolidation of new views on the position of the citizen and chan- ges in management techniques (Izdebski & kulesza, 1999: 57). Meanwhile, Poland lost its independent existence in 1795 and regained it after the end of w orld w ar I. Short functioning of Polish administration in the interwar period was interrupted on September 1, 1939. After w orld w ar II, Polish sta- tehood had limited sovereignty, and its administration was modeled on the political system of the Soviet Union. This raises the question of what histori- cal experiences could have been used in the process of transformation of the political system in Poland, including administration, after the year 1989. Historians of public administration assume that the period of public law State – public law Monarchy (1320−1764) played an extremely important role in shaping the Polish state. The enthronization of władysław Łokietek (the Short) in 1320 was an expression of not only the revival of royal power but also the unity and sovereignty of the Polish state. This meant the rejection of the patrimonial character of the monarch’s power and acceptance of the cons- truction of the Crown of the Polish k ingdom. The powers of the Crown were associated with the state and not with a particular ruler, which meant that the leading role was played by the public law factor and not by private law. It should be emphasized that in this period, i.e. in 1569, a real Union with Lithuania was concluded in Lublin. A federation Republic was founded with a common monarch, common parliament, common foreign policy, and mone- tary system. The tradition of this statehood of the two nations is still alive in Polish society. How did administration function in the state at that time? It can be generally divided into central offices, local, and land offices. The first group encompassed those who later obtained the title of ministers and included the Chancellor and Vice Chancellors, the Treasurer of the Crown and the Trea- surer of the Court and the g rand Marshal of the Crown and the Court. The 144 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Chancellor and Vice Chancellors administered the royal chancellery. Their task was to conduct diplomatic correspondence (the nucleus of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs). Moreover, letters concerning internal affairs and royal pri- vileges passed through the chancellery. The main book of the chancellery was the Crown Register. Identical offices were established in Lithuania, and the book of that chancellery was called the Lithuanian Metrica (Ćwik, 2002: 50). It is worth noting that the territorial division into provinces and districts, and the offices of the province governor and the district governor were formed at that time, which in the self-government version will determine the public administration sub-system in Poland after 1989. The province governor direc- ted officials in provinces. Royal officials in the area became district governors, whose offices, in Poland, were popularized by the king władysław Łokietek (the Short). It should be added that in Poland at that time the local govern- ment administration sub-system began to take shape, i.e. municipal councils – made up of councilors and equipped with administrative, judicial, and le- gislative powers. Mayors were appointed from among them, who in turn, as „chairmen,“ chaired council meetings. During these appointments, the will of district governors or province governors as representatives of the kings was taken into consideration (Ćwik, 2002: 52-54, k ornaś, 2006: 110-111). The presented system of state functioning with the dominant position of the gentry and magnates (dignitaries) was characterized by a high decentrali- zation (often referred to as democracy of the gentry) because it was managed by territorially separate, partly enclosed organisms having a sense of nationwide and state bonds through the tradition, parliament and person of the elected ruler, not through a separate clerical state which would guard the power of the state. Reform attempts undertaken by the Polish rulers met with the resistance of the gentry, which led to the increasing weakness of the Polish-Lithuanian State exposed to the intervention of neighboring countries, especially Russia. However, in the second half of the eighteenth century, public awareness of the need for systemic and administrative reforms increased, and they were carried out in the years 1764−1795 with a huge interference of foreign powers in the affairs of Poland. Under their pressure, the parliament was convened in 1773 in w arsaw to prepare the partition treaties. As a result, the Commission of National Education, common for the Crown and Lithuania, and the Per- manent Council, performing the functions of government and administrative 145 Public Administr Ation in Pol And: reforms And s ystemic-o rgAniz Ation Al issues authorities, were created by the parliament. The Commission was considered the world’s first Ministry of Education. It organized the education system, including two universities in k rakow and Vilnius, higher schools and parish schools − rural and urban ones. In turn, the Permanent Council, established under the pressure of Russia, was a collegial government (consisting of 36 members) and was divided into five departments, the seeds of the ministries: Department of Foreign Interest, police department, military department, De- partment of the Treasury, and Department of Justice). The Council did a lot to regulate the affairs of the country but its subsequent submission to Rus- sia made it unpopular in society. It was given a rather uncomfortable term of „permanent treason“ (Ćwik, 2002: 77, kornaś, 2006: 112-113). Therefo- re, it was dissolved by the g reat Parliament that sat in sessions in the years 1788−1992. It was this parliament that could play a big role in the strengt- hening of the Polish state and building modern administration. It became famous mainly due to the enactment on May 3, 1791 of the g overnment Act, which in Poland is still the basis for national pride as the Constitution of 3 of May. Under this act, the reformers established a new body called the g uardian of the Laws. It was a central government, or the Cabinet of Mi- nisters, headed by the king who also presided over its sessions. g overnment commissions of „Two Nations“ (common for the Crown and Lithuania) of the Army, Police, Treasury and Education were subordinated to the g uardian of the Laws. They were jointly organized ministries, composed of members elected by the parliament. They were directed by the ministers not belonging to the g uardians (the exception was the primate, who was a member of the g uardians and directed the Commission of National Education). In the last years of the existence of Poland before the partitions, nu- merous actions to establish effective local administration were taken. Since 1765, the Commissions of g ood Order (boni ordinis) were established, first in w arsaw, then in other royal cities. These commissions were composed of the gentry but were also aided by townspeople and worked in many cities for a number of years, and did a lot to regulate municipal finance, internal regime of these cities, improve the economic situation. Under the g overnment Act of 1791, changes in the system of municipal self-government took place. Free (royal) cities were supposed to have so-called enacting assemblies composed of municipal proprietors (property owners), who carried out the selection of 146 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence executive offices – municipalities with the president at the helm. In accor- dance with the regulations on free cities – a higher level of local government was provided in the form of departments, grouping royal cities of individual provinces and lands. The country was divided into 24 departments (Ćwik, 2002: 79-81, k ornaś, 2006: 114-115). In 1789, a four-year parliament established administrative civil-military commissions, acting in the given territory, province, or district. władysław Ćwik (2002: 80) stressed that these commissions „rose to the role of Poland’s first modern territorial administration bodies.“ The delayed process of reforming the state aimed at creating good admi- nistration and the spurt of Poles during the kosciuszko Uprising did not produce the expected effect. Three countries: Austria, Russia and Prussia divided Polish lands between themselves, and for 123 years Poland disappe- ared from the map of Europe. It appeared on it again after w orld w ar I due to favorable conditions, including constant aspirations of Poles to implement the ideas of independence. In the interwar period, the state government system was based on three constitutions: the Little Constitution of February 20, 1919; the March Cons- titution of March 17, 1921; the April Constitution of April 23, 1935. They guaranteed the unitary character of the state and administration, although in the early years of the state authorities had to take action to unify various sys- tems of territorial division and various administrative systems inherited from the partitioning powers. Due to the lack of space for a wider discussion it should be emphasized that these issues were resolved, to a large extent, by the provisions of Article 65 of the Polish Constitution of March 17, 1921, stating that, for administrative purposes, the Polish State was divided by the legisla- ture into provinces, counties, and urban and rural municipalities, which were simultaneously local government units (Adamczyk & Pastuszka, 1985: 234). Thus, public administration (the term very often used at the time, especially in the scientific discourse) had two basic sub-systems: central and field go- vernment and local government. The main segment of central administration was the Council of Ministers representing the collective body of ministers chaired by the Prime Minister. It was appointed by the president, and its main task was to give general direction to domestic and foreign policy. Policies of individual ministers, who directed the relevant departments of public admi- 147 Public Administr Ation in Pol And: reforms And s ystemic-o rgAniz Ation Al issues nistration, had to fit into this framework (their number ranged from 16 in the initial period of the Second Polish Republic to 11 in 1939) (k ornaś, 2006: 22-123, Mróz, 1998: 200-206). Province governors and district governors were the representatives of the government in the field. The former ones coordinated the activities of government administration towards compliance with the political line of the state. They performed administration in the sphere of home affairs and their duty was to provide security and public order. They supervised local adminis- tration, and performed administration in the matters of religion, culture and art, industry and trade, agriculture and agrarian reforms, social welfare and job placement, as well as communication. It is worth noting that the supporters of the great role of local government in the reconstruction of Polish independence were largely taking advantage of the assumptions of the contemporary g erman school of local government, both in considering the local government units as corporations, but also in exposing the civil factor. Stefan Litauer (1918: 17) stressed that legislation should be characterized by the rule of harmonization of local government law with the state law, and also take into account the common good and the socio- national interests. He presented it as follows: „ w e reach this ideal only through genuine democracy: as g ierke (one of the founders of the g erman school of law of local government) formulates it – by reverting the state into the nation, by changing the state – the institution into the state – into the team.“ The presented idealism in the perception of the role of local government contributed to the fact that the March Constitution guaranteed that muni- cipalities, districts, and provinces would obtain a local government nature. However, the complicated process of integration of Polish lands led to the si- tuation in which, in practice, local government functioned only at the level of municipalities, which had rural and urban character. As a result of the adop- tion of the Act of March 23, 1933, the partial change of the system of local go- vernment was unification of the system of municipalities, meaning that rural municipalities existed – individual and collective ones composed of clusters. In both cases, the boards elected by the municipal councils were the mana- ging and executive bodies. The village mayor directed the board that was also composed of vice mayors, and two or three aldermen (Mróz, 1998: 253−255). In turn, the cities were divided into county boroughs, which had more than 148 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 25,000 inhabitants, and the cities with less than 25 thousand residents, which did not have such status. The governing and executive bodies in both types of these cities were city boards elected by the legislative and control bodies, i.e. the city councils. In county boroughs the boards consisted of president, vice presidents and aldermen, whereas in cities which were not county boroughs consisted of mayors, vice-mayors and aldermen. Competence of rural and urban local governments covered both their own and entrusted affairs. The former included, among others, public safety and the matters of health, construction, transport, trade, or municipal finan- ces. The latter concerned the tasks entrusted to the municipality by the go- vernment authorities, such as the civil status record, tax collection, statistical activities, cooperation in the conduct of state elections, support for the mili- tary (Mróz, 1998: 253-255). Moreover, during the interwar period in Poland district local govern- ments operated the executive bodies of which were district departments, elected by the district councils. Similarly to district councils, six member de- partments were headed by the district governors, appointed by the ministers of internal affairs, and subordinated to the province governors, which meant that districts were of state-local government nature. In practice, local govern- ment at the province level did not function then, except in the provinces of Poznan and Pomerania, which earlier belonged to the Prussian partition. There is no doubt that these pro-social threads of the self-government thought from the period of the Second Polish Republic have become, rather than centralizing tendencies, a kind of a matrix of the presented ideas in order to rebuild local government in the period of systemic transformation in Poland. This was possible only after long years of statehood completely dependent on the Soviet Union, and characterized by the omnipotence of administration and the exercise of its full control over all spheres of eco- nomic and social life. At the same time, a rapid limitation of powers took place, followed by a total elimination of local government modeled largely on the Second Polish Republic. Consequently, this led to the supremacy of the Polish United w orkers’ Party (this period of Polish history is referred to as the state – the party), state totalizm, or – as it is sometimes bluntly defi- ned – „casting the society into slavery of the state,“ of officials at all levels of local administration, i.e. into bureaucracy (Michałowski, 1999: 171–195). 149 Public Administr Ation in Pol And: reforms And s ystemic-o rgAniz Ation Al issues 5.4 .Determinants of Administration Reform after 1989 Twenty-five years of functioning of public administration in Poland is a sufficiently long period to ensure that you can ask questions about the philosophy of the realized reforms and the effects of their implementation. Answers to these questions are neither easy nor unequivocal. Starting the dis- cussion on this topic, it is worthwhile, however, to refer to the determinants of the presented philosophy of reforms. Thus, it is obvious that the main determinant is the starting plan, which is the political system of the Polish People’s Republic, characterized by the lack of democracy and the withdrawal of society from a broader activity in the public interest. The second determinant is permanent social memory of a Po- lish statehood history, and especially of the period of the independent Second Republic, and quite idealistic assessment of the role of local government and its political system. The third determinant is the shape of the political system in Poland after 1989, in which, after a short period of a great role of civic com- mittees created based on the structure of Independent Trade Union Solidarity, political parties regained the dominant role. Finally, it should be emphasized that the philosophy of decentralization of public administration in Poland is greatly influenced by contemporary trends in the reform of public administra- tion in Europe, i.e. its evolution towards an administration efficient in provi- ding services for society with the increasing activity of society itself. If we look at the philosophy of administration reform in Poland after 1989, we can assume with a certain reservation, that there are two philosophi- es of these reforms: the philosophy of idealists and the philosophy of pra- gmatists (realists). At the same time, we can determine time boundaries of shaping these philosophies. This first was formulated as early as in the times of the Polish People’s Republic, i.e. in the 70s and 80s of the twentieth century and during the first term of office of local municipalities and lasted until 1998, i.e. until the introduction of legal solutions related to the implementation of the second phase of decentralization of public administration. At this point, let us present only general assumptions of both philosophi- es. The main assumption of the representatives of the idealistic trend was that the manifestation of state administration decentralization would be primari- ly restoration of local government, i.e. the creation by society of local com- 150 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence munities in task and institutional terms. The sub-system of self-government administration was also to contribute to building participatory democracy (and not only representative one), and building of a civil society, and thus a strong state. On the other hand, pragmatists or realists called for a practical approach to the functioning of public administration itself, including its local government sub-system. They were prepared to accept decentralization of state administration in terms of tasks (not always in a wide range) but at the same time they treated self-government institutions (local government bo- dies) as elements of the political system, and thus the field to widen political competition, and as a result, also the executed power. w ith the current pictu- re of Polish political scene, this takes the form of – using the Ernest Skalski’s term (2008: 15) – „the battle for the ground.“ It should be emphasized that the philosophy of the idealists would have no reason to exist if not for the quite common spurt of society in 1980, and then the activities of the Independent Self-g overning Trade Union Solidarity, which quickly started to be called the construction of civil society. Leaders of the administration reform inherited from the Polish People’s Republic tied their fate with „Solidarity“, and with its ultimate support they realized their vision of reactivation of local government in Poland. Even before that they were organized in the Seminar „Experience and Future“ operating since 1978. In the document Basic principles of the local government reform in Poland, adopted on September 2, 1981 by the T eam of Local g overnments and Spatial Policy Instruments, operating at the Seminar and Social Committee of Eco- nomic Reform, we can find many thoughts, which were later practically ref- lected in the statutory decisions restoring a self-governing municipality. The one pertaining to the concept of local self-government emphasizes that it is based on the local community: an urban or rural municipality understood as a territorial entity and territorial corporation. The criterion for the isolation of these units is recognized as follows: „local interest, the existence of own specific needs, and satisfying them by the community itself in an autonomous way“ (Regulski, 2000: 61). Moreover, the future tasks of local government were determined from the perspective of the local community, which is the representation of its needs and interests, and the protection of a wider qua- lity of life. The „appropriately extensive“ range of activities and competences allowing to act as a good host of the territory was to be implemented thanks 151 Public Administr Ation in Pol And: reforms And s ystemic-o rgAniz Ation Al issues to having the administrative-legal subjectivity and legal personality (for the disposal of assets) (Regulski, 2000: 62–65). During the „Round Table“ proceedings, the restoration of local govern- ment was not considered a priority by the solidarity side, while the govern- ment-coalition side did not accept it because, as Jerzy Regulski wrote (2000: 59), free elections would mean a takeover of power in municipalities by the opposition: „The only possibility that was taken into account was the loss of the Communist Party in local elections.“ The author of this assessment did not hide his disappointment with the course of the „Round Table“ procee- dings, and at the same time he expressed the hope that self-government issues would soon be appreciated: „The restoration of self-government is necessary (...). It is obvious (...). Unfortunately, people in Poland do not know what self- government of towns and municipalities means, they do not understand its essence, they underestimate the importance. The sense of local interest has not evolved. Today, it is quite natural that self-government has been obscured by the upcoming parliament election. But these issues will surface and will become important“ (Regulski, 2000: 216–217). The determination of supporters of administration decentralization and the reactivation of genuine self-government brought effects quite quickly sin- ce it received the support of the higher chamber of the first term, which on July 4, 1989 appointed the Local g overnment Commission, and Jerzy Reguls- ki became its chairman. On July 29, the higher chamber passed a resolution on local government, which states, among others, that: „The higher chamber expresses its conviction about the need for genuine self-government of cities and municipalities as an essential element of the reconstruction of the politi- cal and legal system of Poland. The absorption of local government by the lo- cal organs of state power caused incapacitation of individuals and local com- munities, their total dependence on the arbitrariness of local representatives of state administration, paralysis of individual and group economic and social activity, hypertrophy of local administration and bureaucracy“ (k lein, 1998: 29). In the presented resolution, the higher chamber pledged to undertake the initiative to prepare relevant draft regulations, and obliged the Local g overn- ment Commission to present, in a short time, legislative work to significantly accelerate elections to local governments of towns and municipalities (k lein, 1998: 29). As a result, in the Act of March 8, 1990 on local government Article 152 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 1 on the creation of the local community by local residents by the rule of law was adopted (Journal of Laws of 1990, No. 16, item 95). The effective side of the first phase of decentralization was not univocally assessed because, as Jacek Pokładecki emphasized (2001: 26), in practice, the state theory of local government was applied as central authorities deliberate- ly limited self-government to the level of municipalities, and determined the division of powers between the municipal government and the government administration. g overnment administration gained an advantage in this divi- sion. w e must agree with this assessment because regional civil servants were not satisfied with the scope of decentralization since many evidently local matters remained in the hands of the central government, province gover- nors, or newly created districts (Nawrot & Pokładecki, 2007: 282). That is why, the municipal civil servants and their unions and associations (Association of Polish Cities, Association of Rural Municipalities of the Republic of Poland, Union of Polish Towns) conducted sharp disputes with the governments of the Third Republic about the transfer of real funds for the implementation of statutory tasks but also about broadening the scope of tasks delegated to them. At the same time, a part of municipalities joined the discussion about further planned reforms of administration, including the creation of district local government units. In other words, the system of local government quite quickly managed to find its place in the political system created in Poland at that time but it was subjectively limited to municipalities which, according to the preamble to the higher chamber draft law on local self-government, remained a form of deci- ding on public matters of local significance, the form which was embedded in the structure of the state, they were not opposed to government administra- tion but on the basis of laws they complementarily participated with it in the exercise of public administration (Nawrot and Pokładecki, 2007: 282). 5.5 .Assumptions, Goals, and Principles of the P AR in 1998 The introduction of municipal local government in 1990, and equipping it with legal personality showed that public tasks can be efficiently and effecti- vely carried out by the entities other than central government bodies. It tur- ned out, however, that there was a group of public tasks whose implemen- tation exceeded the capacity of a single municipality. There was therefore a 153 Public Administr Ation in Pol And: reforms And s ystemic-o rgAniz Ation Al issues need to create local communities with the supra-municipal range. In the first place, it was proposed to create self-government at the district level. Over time, however, the attention was paid to the need to establish self-government at the regional level (Chochowski, 2009: 71). In shaping the concept of public administration reform in Poland in 1998, in addition to many public consultations, also opinion shaping local government circles had a significant share, undertaking a variety of resolu- tions, presenting their position on the idea of the local government reform and its assumptions. Moreover, the achievements of science and the results of public opinion polls conducted by the country’s largest research centers (the Centre for Public Opinion Research and the Centre for Research of Pu- blic Opinion) were taken into account. The work of the Task Force for Regi- onal Development and the g overnment Plenipotentiary for the Reform of the Country’s Economic Centre constituted an important contribution to the process of formulating the objectives of the administrative reform. Based on the collected opinions and views the main objectives of the reform of public administration were formulated as follows: 1. Improving the functioning of the state, including greater efficiency of the executive. This consisted in the introduction of strong and efficient combined administration, and thus the liquidation of negatively acting ministerial administration. In the new system, the responsibility for a proper and effective performance of functions of the state (internal secu- rity, public order) was to be borne by a single public administration body – village mayor, mayor, or marshal. An important objective in this area was the introduction of a system based on cooperation and agreement negotiations and public consultations instead of a hierarchical system. 2. Building the institutions of democratic control of civil society at all levels of the major territorial division of the country. This would mean the introduction of community representation to new admi- nistrative units through the establishment of councils at the district and provincial levels elected in local elections. An important tool in this regard would be the institution of local referendum, and building of a legal basis for the so-called civil service. 3. Regulating the territorial system through the creation of additional tiers of local government; a district, which would perform tasks bey- 154 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence ond the capabilities of a single municipality, and a province, capable of conducting regional policy and executing the tasks of supra-local nature. The new self-government structures were also supposed to help in adapting the country to the EU standards. 4. Another objective was decentralization of public finances, so that the sum of the budgets at all levels of local government accounted for 25% of public expenditure. 5. Another important objective of the administration reform in 1998 was to adapt the country’s territorial organization and local government structures to the standards common in the EU, which would facilitate the use of legal and economic instruments of the EU aimed at the deve- lopment of regional and interregional cooperation. The establishment of a self-governing region would give a chance for effective cross-bor- der and interregional cooperation. This would allow to obtain signifi- cant funding under the equalization of economic disparities between the actors of regional policy (Słobodzian, 2007: 134−140). It is also important to indicate the most important principles on which the administrative reform was based. The new system of territorial admi- nistration in Poland was to be based on the principle of subsidiarity and the principle of the unitary character of the state. The principle of subsidiarity as a basis for the organization of the state regulated by the Constitution of 1997 meant that no government should interfere with citizens or social groups in setting and implementing their tasks. The aim of every govern- ment is to stimulate, mobilize, promote, and supplement the activities of entities that cannot cope with the given case. Subsidiarity contributed to the construction of local government structures by transferring tasks to be implemented independently to lower levels of local administration. The principle of subsidiarity was also to introduce the order of determining the rights and obligations of government entities, involving the division of cer- tain tasks between different forms of public authority (Słobodzian, 2007: 134−140). The other principle on which the public administration reform in Po- land was based was the principle of territorial integrity of the state. This principle was also guaranteed in the Constitution, Article 3, guaranteeing the full and exclusive sovereignty of the state as a whole. The realization of 155 Public Administr Ation in Pol And: reforms And s ystemic-o rgAniz Ation Al issues the principle of unitarity of the state was ensured mainly by 1) a single and uniform legal system created by the parliament, and not by the local govern- ment; 2) uniform citizenship associated with the state, and not with local government units; 3) uniform rules for the organization of public adminis- tration apparatus which would be responsible for the implementation of ge- neral national interests at every level of the territorial division; 4) statutory definition of systemic principles of local and regional government, pertai- ning to the system of bodies, their mutual relationships, composition, mode of appointment and supervision; 5) functioning of administrative courts in the system of supervision of local government which guarantee the pro- tection of citizens against unlawful decisions (Słobodzian, 2007: 144−146). The public administration reform of 1998 introduced in Poland a clear separation of functions of public authority among three main segments of the state administration system: 1) local government (in rural and urban areas and in districts) primarily responsible for meeting collective needs of local communities; 2) regional government (in provinces) responsible for regional development policy; 3) government and government administra- tion (central and local) responsible for nationwide matters, as well as for law enforcement and supervision of local government (province governors) in this area. In addition, the reform led to a number of sectoral reforms in va- rious fields, including in police, fire services, education, social welfare sys- tem, which as a result of the reform fell under the decentralized board. For the purpose of the reform of 1998, several basic laws of systemic character were introduced, among them the Public Finance Act and the Act on Civil Service. Moreover, nearly 200 laws in force were amended. In 2000, the Act on the Principles of Promoting Regional Development was adopted, which complemented the earlier regional legislation (k ulesza, 2000: 83). Following M. kulesza (2000; 83), we should assume that the admi- nistrative reform in the 1990s in Poland broke three major monopolies of the totalitarian communist state: the political monopoly of a single party, the already mentioned principle of unified state power, and the principle of a single state ownership fund, which were followed by the decentrali- zation of state administration and state finances. This resulted in a thorough reconstruction of the public sector – including, in particular, the principles of political governance, and the principles of organization and delivery of 156 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence key public services and execution of administrative tasks. The effects of the public administration reform of 1998 took place in several key areas of socio- economic life: − In the social sphere, there was an exponential growth of non-govern- mental organizations and initiatives, local media and other forms of self-organization of society (Sługocki, 2004: 395−398); − In the political sphere, local government became a very good democra- tic tool to shape new local and regional elites, which took control over the operation of numerous institutions of public life and public ser- vices, and accountability in this respect, and forged nationwide elites; − In the sphere of public property, a large part of state property was municipalized, which resulted in the development of real estate mar- ket, technical infrastructure was substantially expanded, and a base of rational management of public assets was created; − In the financial sphere, development of public fund management (both on the local and general scale) and of supporting institutions with the entire capital market, which allowed decentralization of regi- onal development policy (Niezgoda, 2009: 353−366); − In the administrative sphere, management mechanisms in many areas of administration and public services were decentralized, including in the sphere of public order protection and collective security, which was subjected, together with other areas, to the control of the civil power; − In the sphere of local government institutions, new planes for coope- ration of public, private, and NgOs partners were created in order to jointly establish local development; In the sphere of inter-state cooperation, development cooperation between Polish local government units and partners from other countries was established (k ulesza, 2000: 80). The reconstruction of the state administration system is usually a diffi- cult and complex process encountering organizational, legal as well as social, political, or economic obstacles on its way. w hen the administrative reform in Poland began in 1989, it was accompanied by a widespread acceptance of the idea of self-governance characterized by the formation of municipalities able to self-administer matters that are important to the residents. Over the 157 Public Administr Ation in Pol And: reforms And s ystemic-o rgAniz Ation Al issues next few years, discussions took place regarding the creation of an optimal model to realize this idea (Rączka, Szalewska & Jędrzejewski, 2000: 102−106). 5.6. Importance of the Concepts of Territorial Divisions in the Public Administration Reform w hat is crucial nowadays for the course and organization of the pro- cess of public management is a way of organizing field administration: lo- cal and regional, scope of its duties, powers, and competences. One of the essential elements of the organization of administration is the territorial division, which is set in order to achieve better organized and efficient rea- lization of public tasks. It can be assumed that functioning of independent territorial units, smaller than the state, with their own authority facilitates better understanding and identification of social needs, and more rational decisions and projects implemented by local officials in charge. The issue of the proper division of the state is very complicated. Num- ber of degrees of territorial division, size of individual units, size of their population, course of administrative boundaries are all the elements whose adequate planning and territorial distribution should contribute to the pro- per attendance of the population by public administration, and facilitate the process of stimulating local and regional development. Territorial division means a relatively permanent partition of a coun- try made with the use of legal norms in order to determine the territorial basis of activities of organizational units of the state and local government units. Territorial division plays an ancillary role to public administration. In making this division, usually geographical, economic, cultural, urbani- zation factors, etc., are taken into account but the most essential factor is the realization of the function of public administration (or functions of other public entities). Due to the dynamics of public administration, the territo- rial division can be characterized as relatively permanent because it evolves with changes in the way of functioning / action of administration (Tarno, Sieniuć, Sulimierski & w yporska, 2002: 20). In the practice of functioning of the state and its administration, there are three kinds of territorial divisions: major territorial division, auxiliary territorial division, and special territorial division. 158 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Following Zbigniew Rykiel (1993: 50−51), we can assume that in the history of Poland in the 20 th century four main political-systemic models of the state developed, and point out what role in each of these models was assigned to public administration, particularly to local government: 1. A temporary model, lasting from the 14 th century, in which districts appeared, and which finally formed in the 30s of the 20 th century af- ter the unification of administrative systems of the partitioning po- wers. Rykiel (1993: 50−51) argues that this model was a compromise between the model of self-government and the centralized model. This provisional and constantly criticized solution survived until the end of the 40s. 2. A totalitarian model, introduced in the 50s, which externalized the political system ideal of people’s democracy. 3. An authoritarian model, introduced in 1975, which externalized the political system ideal of a „developed socialist state.“ 4. A paternalistic model, which was introduced in 1990. This model was based on the creation of the municipality as the primary and, at the same time, only local government unit with an elaborate structure of central administration in the field. In the process of creating public administration units, in particular, at the level of district local government, certain conditions were taken into account. włodzimierz Zając (1999: 46) enumerates the following conditions, which guided the process of creating districts in 1998: 1. Establishing of and preserving supra-municipal functions in relation to the municipalities, which were to become part of the district (e.g. high schools); 2. Economic potential of the proposed district, which translates into the possibility of providing public services; 3. Historical and cultural conditions; 4. Acceptance of local communities regarding the district geographical coverage and its seat; 5. g eographical conditions, including the settlement network and its nature; 6. Number of municipalities forming the district on the assumption that there should be fewer than 5; 159 Public Administr Ation in Pol And: reforms And s ystemic-o rgAniz Ation Al issues 7. Population of the future district for which the lowest adopted limit was 50,000; 8. Area of the district. In addition to the major territorial division, there are also auxiliary and special divisions in Poland. The auxiliary division is such a territorial divi- sion, which is made for the bodies which are not independent in relation to major authorities (Nowacka, 1997: 65). This division is fully complementary in relation to the basic division because in its framework these tasks of local government units, whose performance in the major distribution is irrational, should be implemented. The creation of auxiliary units by municipalities, and thus the introduction of the auxiliary division is optional. The legislature also does not prejudge the extent to which municipalities can exercise the power to create auxiliary units. Municipality auxiliary units include village councils, estates, and neighborhoods. An auxiliary unit is created by a municipal council by reso- lution after consultation with the residents, or on the initiative of residents. Principles of the creation, merger, division, and abolition of auxiliary units are specified in the statute of the municipality. In turn, special divisions are made for the needs of certain public admi- nistration structures. They are carried out mainly due to the nature of non- combined government administration for which the main territorial division is not always sufficient (knosala, 2006: 103). Legal bases of special divisions are contained mainly in the laws governing the system of individual structu- res of government administration. It should be noted that although the majo- rity of cases of special territorial divisions are established for the needs of pu- blic administration, special divisions are also created for the benefit of entities not belonging to public administration (e.g. for the judicial system). 5.7. Structure, Organization, and Functions of Public Administration in Poland Public administration in Poland is divided into government administra- tion and self-government administration. g overnment departments consist of bodies (offices) and other public entities appointed to perform tasks in the field of public administration, subordinate to the supreme administrative bodies, 160 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence i.e.: the Prime Minister, the Council of Ministers, and individual ministers. g overnment administration is centralized through the hierarchical personal, organizational, and official subordination of lower level bodies to higher-le- vel bodies. In addition, superior bodies are entitled to exercise control and supervision of lower level units, and to obtain information on their activities. The Constitution does not divide government administration bodies into the supreme government administration bodies and central government adminis- tration bodies. However, relevant normative acts, i.e. laws and regulations, re- fer de facto to such a division (k ociubiński, 2012: 14−21). The diagram below illustrates the overall structure of public administration in Poland. Figure 5.1: Structure of Public Administration in Poland Source: own study on the basis of Act on Government Administration Ope- ration of 4 September 1997 (Journal of Laws of 1997, No. 141, item 943). 5.7.1. Government Administration Supreme government administration bodies are the bodies that are part of the Council of Ministers. The bodies, which are the supreme government administration bodies, occupy a superior position among the others, and are appointed by the lower chamber of the parliament or by the president. Central bodies of government administration are not part of the Council of Ministers, and their appointment does not require a decision of the lower chamber of 161 Public Administr Ation in Pol And: reforms And s ystemic-o rgAniz Ation Al issues the parliament or the president but only of a supreme body of government administration. There are two levels of administration: the central and local one. Supreme and central bodies of government administration constitute the central level. The local level is composed of local bodies of government admi- nistration subordinated to the province governor (combined administration) and local bodies of non-combined administration subordinated to the direct superiority of ministers or central government administration bodies. Prime Minister The Prime Minister exercises supreme official sovereignty over govern- ment administration employees. The activity of the Prime Minister in this respect involves nomination, inspection, and supervision of employees in the government administration sector. Several institutions are subordinated to the Prime Minister over which he/she exercises a direct supervision. His/her su- pervision covers the activity of Central Statistical Office, Polish Committee for Standardization, Office of Competition and Consumer Protection, Internal Se- curity Agency and Foreign Intelligence Agency, Central Anti-Corruption Bu- reau, and Public Procurement Office. The Prime Minister also oversees Central Commission for Applications and Titles, Public Opinion Research Centre, Fi- nancial Supervision Commission, National School of Public Administration, Polish Academy of Sciences, Polish Committee for Standardization, Council for Refugees, g overnment Security Centre, g overnment Legislation Centre, and Office of the Committee for European Integration. The Prime Minister is also the head of the civil service. The civil service includes people employed in the government administration structures. The essence of the civil service manifests itself mainly in delegating tasks to professionally prepared officials characterized by impartiality and total political neutrality. Other forms of so- vereignty of the Prime Minister are competences related to the appointment and dismissal of the Head of the Civil Service, and the obligation of the Head of the Civil Service to present the annual report. The Civil Service Council – an advisory body – is also subordinated to the Prime Minister. Council of Ministers Each minister, in addition to being a member of the Council of Minis- ters, is also an independent body of government administration. In terms of administration, the Council of Ministers directs overall government adminis- tration. This involves coordination and control of operation of both the entire 162 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence system of government as well as its individual components. Directing in this case is a form of government activity encompassing a series of steps aimed at ensuring uniform implementation of the policy determined by the govern- ment and by the entities located in the government administration sector in relation to which the Council of Ministers has a superior position with a hi- erarchical subordination. It also involves undertaking inspection activities. Inspecting the activities of subordinate entities means that the Council of Mi- nisters may, inter alia, request the Supreme Chamber of Control to inspect the indicated entities. Overall management, coordination, and control concern the central state administration bodies to which the Council of Ministers and the Prime Ministers are superior bodies. Ministers can be divided into two groups: ministers in charge of parti- cular departments of government administration, and ministers performing tasks assigned by the Prime Minister (i.e. the ministers without portfolio). The departments of government were literally mentioned in the Act on g overnment Administration and include the following departments: public administration; construction, spatial and housing management; budget; pu- blic finances; economy; maritime; water management; financial institutions; computerization; Polish membership in the EU; culture and heritage conser- vation; physical culture; communication; science; national defense; education and upbringing; job; agriculture; rural development; regional development; agricultural markets; fishery; Treasury; justice; higher education; transport; tourism; environment; family; internal affairs; religious denominations, na- tional and ethnic minorities; social security; foreign affairs; health. Central bodies of Government Administration Central bodies are directly subordinated to supreme bodies, and are appointed, dismissed, and supervised by these bodies. They are created on the basis of laws or regulations of the Council of Ministers. Therefore, central bo- dies do not have certain competences attributed to the ministers (the right to issue regulations for example). The tasks of central government bodies are laid down by the laws or regulations on the appointment of these bodies. The range of action of central bodies covers the area of the whole country. Central bodies are individual or collective bodies most often bearing names such as president, chairman, chief, chief inspector, and CEO. g overnment administration tasks (i.e. the matters for which the government is directly or indirectly responsible) 163 Public Administr Ation in Pol And: reforms And s ystemic-o rgAniz Ation Al issues are performed at the central level by over 100 units of varying statuses, sizes, organizational structures, and scopes of tasks. Among the most recognizable central government bodies are: Central Commission for Academic Degrees and Titles, President of the Central Statistical Office, Polish Committee for Standardization, President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Pro- tection, President of the Polish Patent Office, President of the Office of Public Procurement, Council for Refugees, g overnment Security Centre, Commis- sioner for Patients’ Rights, Head of the Internal Security Agency, and Head of the Intelligence Agency, Head of the Central Anti-Corruption Bureau, Na- tional Atomic Energy Agency, and Police Headquarters. Province Governor According to the Act of January 29, 2009 on the Province g overnor and g overnment Administration in the Province (Journal of Laws of 2009, No. 31, item 206) the province governor is a representative of the Council of Minis- ters in the province. The province governor as a representative of the Council of Ministers is responsible for the implementation of government policies in the province. He/she is appointed and dismissed by the Prime Minister on the request of the Minister of Public Administration. The Prime Minister and the Minister of Public Administration oversee the province governor’s activities, and make a periodic assessment of his/her work. This supervision is to ensure the compliance by the governor not only with law but also with the government policies, including instructions and guidance received from the Prime Minister. Any disputes between the governors and between the provincial governor and the member of the Council of Ministers or the central government administra- tive body are settled by the Prime Minister. The province governor performs the following functions: he/she is a representative of the Council of Ministers in the province; acts as a superior unit of combined government administration; is the supervisory authority of local government units; is a higher-level body; represents the State Treasury. The governor’s supervision of local government units lies in the fact that the province governor may waive all illegal resolutions adopted by every level of local government. In addition, the province governor is responsible for monitoring the performance of government administration tasks by local government bodies. In this regard, the province governor acts as an appeal body for decisions of the municipality, taken in matters of govern- ment administration commissioned to the municipality (gąciarz, 2006: 199). 164 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Combined Provincial Government Administration According to the Act of January 29, 2009 on the Province g overnor and g overnment Administration in the Province (Journal of Laws of 2009, No. 31, item 206) combined government administration encompasses the provincial governor (implementing competence with the help of the provincial office) and managers of combined services, inspections, and guards carrying out their tasks under the authority of the governor (offices, inspectorates, and units of these services are an apparatus which assists the managers). Combining per- tains to those bodies which are assigned with inspection activity, supervisory, and control functions. The budgets of combined provincial administration, including income and expenditure of the provincial budget of the combined organizational units of services, inspections, and guards, are included in the part of the state budget covering the budget of the relevant governor. The province governor directs the activity of combined government administration, and is responsible for the results of their actions. The province governor has a decisive influence on the cast of the most important positions in combined provincial administration. It is expressed in the fact that he/she appoints and dismisses managers of combined provincial services, inspections, and guards (except for the commanders of the police, and fire-fighters who are appointed and dismissed at the request of chief commanders of the police and fire service by the Minister of Interior, while the province governor only evalua- tes the candidates). The bodies of combined provincial government adminis- tration are: Provincial Police Commander, Provincial Fire Service Commander, Superintendent of Education, Provincial Inspector of Agricultural and Food Quality, Provincial Inspector of g eodetic Supervision, Provincial Inspector of Pharmaceutical Inspection, Provincial Inspector of Trade Inspection, Pro- vincial Inspector of Building Supervision, Provincial Inspector of Road Trans- port, Provincial Conservator of Historical Monuments, Provincial Inspector of Environmental Protection, Provincial Sanitary Inspector, Provincial Inspector of Veterinary Medicine, and Provincial Inspector of Plant Health and Seeds. The above-mentioned bodies of combined government administration in the province carry out their tasks and competences with the help of the provincial office. In order to make the activities of combined administration bodies more efficient, the province governor mayestablish delegation offices in the field that support them. A detailed organization of combined government administra- 165 Public Administr Ation in Pol And: reforms And s ystemic-o rgAniz Ation Al issues tion in the province is defined by the provincial office statute enforced by the governor (gąciarz, 2006: 199). Non-combined Local Government Administration Bodies According to the Act of January 29, 2009 on the Province g overnor and g overnment Administration in the Province (Journal of Laws of 2009, No. 31, item 206) non-combined administration bodies are composed of field delegations of government bodies, and are subordinated to ministerial de- partments. Non-combined administration bodies are established exclusively by a regulation, and are usually based on the principle of centralization. The appointment and dismissal of non-combined administration bodies takes pla- ce, however, at the request of the governor or with his consent. The province governor also has coordinating, consultative, and, in special cases, controlling competences in relation to these bodies. Non-combined administration bodies operating in the province are obliged to consult draft local laws with the pro- vincial governor, and ensure compliance of their activities with the instructions of the governor. Moreover, non-combined administration bodies are required to submit to the governor annual and current information about their activities in the province. Non-combined administration bodies include: commanders of military districts, heads of provincial military staffs, army recruiting comman- ders, directors of customs chambers, and heads of customs offices, directors of tax chambers, heads of tax offices, directors of fiscal control offices, directors of regional mining authorities and specialized mining authorities, directors of regional offices of measures and heads of peripheral offices of measures, direc- tors of regional assay offices, directors of regional water management boards, directors of maritime offices, directors of statistical offices, directors of inland waterways, border and district veterinarians, commanders of Border g uard di- visions, commanders of watchtowers and commanders of Border g uard units and squadrons, local inspectors of sea fishery, state border sanitary inspectors, and regional directors for environmental protection (gąciarz, 2006: 199). 5.7.2. Self-government Administration After the public administration reform of 1998 there is a major three-le- vel territorial division in Poland. It was established both for local government administration bodies and bodies of self-government units. The effective Polish territorial division is a consequence of the progressive decentralization of public 166 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence administration and the establishment of new territorial units with their own authority, tasks, finance, property, and legal personality (gąciarz, 2006: 199). This new three-level administrative division of the country into municipalities, districts, and provinces finally came into force on January 1, 1999, pursuant to the provisions of the Act of July 24, 1998 on the Introduction of the Three-Level Division of the Country (Journal of Laws of 1998, No 96, item 603). This Act introduced 16 provinces, 308 rural districts, and 65 city dis- tricts – townships (the city takes over the district’s powers and tasks, proper- ty, and resources necessary for the implementation of these tasks, there are no separate authorities for the district since the city authorities exercise these responsibilities) and 2,489 municipalities. Apart from government administration and local government units, there are also other entities having a specific meaning in the process of admi- nistration (some of them, however, do not belong to the so-called public sec- tor). In Poland these are, among others: • Public undertakings, • g overnment agencies, • Public foundations, • Economic self-government chambers, • Professional self-government chambers, • Agricultural self-government chambers, • Social organizations, associations, and others (Lenik, 2012: 64−66). 5.7.3. Regional Self-government Self-governance at the regional level, which was introduced by law on January 1, 1999 (the Act of July 24, 1998 on the Introduction of the Three-Level Division of the Country), determined the shape of new territorial division of the country, as a result of which 16 new provinces were established. The le- gislative action taken then might be called regional decentralization, resulting in the appointment of new authorities at the regional level without disturbing the structure of the state. Its essence consisted of granting the status of an in- dependent entity of spatial and regional policy to provincial self-governments. Because of the second phase of decentralization reform Mazovian Province was founded in the territorial and socio-economic space of the country – a region with the highest economic, population, and scientific potential, and a relatively 167 Public Administr Ation in Pol And: reforms And s ystemic-o rgAniz Ation Al issues high standard of living. It should be noted that the potential of Mazovian Pro- vince results primarily from the functions played by w arsaw metropolis distan- cing itself from other areas of the province (Struzik, 2008: 11−22). Provincial government operates according to the following regulations: Polish Constitution, Act on Provincial Self-government, Act on Principles of Development Policy, Act on Spatial Planning and Development, and so-cal- led Departmental Acts assigning specific tasks to self-government. The scope of provincial government operation is quite precisely defined by the Act of June 5, 1998 on Provincial Self-government. Provisions contai- ned therein determine the structure of province, competencies of province government bodies, matters of property and finance as well as international cooperation and supervision of the operations. It should be noted that in accordance with statutory provisions (Article 11, Paragraph 2 of the Act on Provincial Self-government) the primary duty of provincial government is to conduct development policy, which consists of the entirety of issues in the field of the impact of local authorities. The most important tasks of provincial government are as follows: • Creating the conditions for economic development in the province, including the support for technological progress and innovation, • Maintenance and expansion of provincial social and technical infras- tructure, • Shaping the environment and stimulating sustainable development, • Investing in the development of human resources – in the sphere of education, science and culture, • Initiating activities aimed at social integration and combating social exclusion (Struzik, 2008: 11−22). In general, the essence of self-governing province is thus reflected in the Act on Provincial Self-government. According to the provisions of this Act, provincial government should be understood as „a regional self-governing community and a relevant territory“, where it is noted, „in accordance with law whereas the residents of the province form a regional self-governing com- munity.“ Bodies of this self-government are the province council and the pro- vince board directed by the province marshal. The scope of responsibilities of provincial government comprises public tasks of provincial nature, which are not reserved, by law, for the government bodies. The scope of activities relates 168 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence generally to pursuing policy of regional development and providing services to the regional community (Jaźwiński, 2010: 21−26). 5.7.4 Essence of Territorial Self-government Territorial self-government is an association of the local population, which is separated in the structure of the state, established by the law, appoin- ted to exercise public administration, and equipped with material resources to carry out tasks assigned to it (Przywojska, 2014: 23). Currently, the municipality as the basic unit of local government was created by the law, i.e. a separated association of the local community – a ter- ritorial self-governing corporation, established to exercise part of public tasks (exercise public administration), and equipped with material means to carry out these tasks (Niewiadomski, 1999: 27). Zbigniew Niewiadomski (1999: 27) states that the separation of municipality has a dual dimension. On the one hand, it is an organizational separation manifested by the fact that the muni- cipality is a separate structure with its own elected authorities; on the other hand, this separation is reflected in a separate legal personality, which entails that the municipality can be the subject of property rights. Agnieszka korzeniowska and Ryszard krawczyk (2004: 26) define the municipality as a unit of local government, constituting a special kind of so- cio-economic system, a so-called territorial self-governing corporation of public law whose essential elements are: 1) residents creating local municipal community; 2) area occupied by the municipality – the territory; 3) authority exercised by democratically elected municipal bodies; 4) possession of orga- nizational units. To the essential characteristics of local self-government, Pio- tr Rączka also adds public administration tasks for the performance of which local authorities have been established (Rączka, 2003: 60, Prais, 1998: 1). Following Bogdan Dolnicki (2000: 154–158), it should be stated that a su- bject of local government is the local community living in the area, and organi- zed in a local government association. In addition, the legal personality, which the unit of local government has, constitutes the subject of local government. The essence of local government, in addition to the local community and the status of legal personality, consists also of the legal status of authorities of this unit. Local government authorities act through their bodies (Brunka, k u- morek & Łuczak-k umorek, 2003: 229). For example, pursuant to Article 8 of 169 Public Administr Ation in Pol And: reforms And s ystemic-o rgAniz Ation Al issues the District Act, district bodies are the district council and the district board. Although the Act on District g overnment does not give the status of the body to the district governor, he/she acts in such a role when he/she issues decisi- ons in individual cases in the field of public administration which belong to the competences of the district (Zieliński, 2004: 67). The essence of local government is also determined by the definition of its subject. The subject of the municipal government is, firstly, the territory of mu- nicipality, and, secondly, the tasks carried out by the municipality. The territory of local government is a key element of separation of a self-governing unit. It is a space delimited by boundaries of the major territorial division within which the sovereignty of local community extends (Jaworska-Dębska, 2009: 243–252). The other elements constituting the subject of local government are the tasks carried out by the self-governing municipality, district, and province. The tasks of local government are public tasks imposed by the law, and consist in satisfying the needs of local residents using statutorily and non-statutorily defined funds, and these tasks cannot violate the scope of activity of other local government units (Brunka and kumorek and Łuczak-kumorek, 2003: 391). The tasks of local government were settled, firstly, by the laws governing the operation of various local government units and, secondly, by the special laws (Journal of Laws of 2003, No. 207, item 2016). In general, the task of local government in Poland can be divided into two categories. On the one hand, these are the tasks listed in local govern- ment acts, and on the other hand, the assigned tasks in the domain of govern- ment administration (Leoński, 2004: 139–140). 5.7.5. Functions of Public Administration and tT erritorial Self-government Analyzing the functions fulfilled by the local government, we should pay attention to the general functions of public administration in the framework of which the activities of local government units fit in. Not always, however, are these functions identical. The concept of administration functions should be distinguished from the objectives of administration or its tasks, although the- se are synonymous concepts. A function is an intermediate term between the objective and the task (Dictionary of the Polish Language, 1995: 220, 580). Thus, for example, in planning local development as well as in the functioning of lo- 170 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence cal administration, the objectives (they can be, for instance, divided into main, partial, and operational objectives) are rather general categories constituting certain guidelines to be implemented by means of specific functions and tasks. Tadeusz k uta (1991: 7–8) defines administration functions as „mapping of the basic objectives, and assigning them intermediate objectives. This mapping is expressed in the activities of administration which are durable (continuous rat- her than one-off) and multi-agent, i.e. can occur in various sections of the orga- nizational structure of public administration, and may have a different subject.“ Tadeusz kuta (1992: 7–8) identifies three basic functions of adminis- tration. These are regulatory-administrative, organizational, and executive functions. The same author gives another division of functions of public admi- nistration: 1) political functions; 2) social and culture-generating functions; 3) functions in the field of organizing economic relations; and 4) regulatory functions. In order to comprehensively show the types of functions of public administration we should present another division made by Jacek w ojnic- ki. The author divides administrative functions into: 1) planning function (formulation of objectives, ways, and methods of implementation); 2) poli- ce function (administration protects generally accepted values, public order, and safety); 3) function of service provision; 4) economic function (direct business activity or support for private enterprises); 5) fiscal function (enfor- cement and collection of levies and taxes) (w ojnicki, 2003: 29). It should be noted that the last division of functions of public adminis- tration is closest to the specificity of local government operation. This does not mean, however, that we can ignore other classifications of functions. Ta- king into account a number of factors that determine the specificity of local government operation in Poland, we can differentiate the following functions: 1. Planning function; 2. Service provision function; 3. Executive-administrative function; 4. Economic function; 5. Political function. The fiscal function, that is very important from the point of view of mu- nicipal government, has no practical use for district government, of course, mainly because the district (except for city districts) does not have the right to enforce and collect local taxes in the structure of its income. 171 Public Administr Ation in Pol And: reforms And s ystemic-o rgAniz Ation Al issues The planning function is very important from the point of view of soci- al and economic development of local government unit. The plan (strategy – they mean the same in this case) should be understood as a document serving to the realization of local development that was created for the ne- eds of local government, and adopted by the resolution of constitutive body (Brunka and k umorek and Łuczak-k umorek, 2003: 378). Planning is the de- finition given to the objectives which the given local government unit should achieve in order to develop. These are the main, intermediate, and partial objectives (Domański, 1999: 31). In the framework of planning policy, which is a consequence of the implementation of the above-indicated functions of planning, local govern- ment prepares the following exemplary strategies and plans: 1. Economic development strategy; 2. Local development strategy; 3. Tourism development strategy; 4. Program of crime prevention and public order; 5. Program of combating unemployment; 6. Program of environment protection; 7. Eco-energy strategy; 8. Program of sustainable development and environmental protection; 9. w aste management program; 10. Investment programs. The above-mentioned documents are always adopted by the council of local government units by a resolution, thus should be included to the facul- tative and compulsory documents. The preparation of documents, such as an environmental protection program and waste management program, re- sult from the obligation imposed on local government by the Environmen- tal Protection Act, w aste Management Act. It is up to municipality bodies whether they prepare, for instance, an economic development program or a tourism development strategy. Another function of the district is service provision. Tadeusz kuta (1992: 20) makes a general division of services in the field of social security, education, culture, youth education, environmental protection, and public utilities. g enerally, the types of services (tasks) provided by the local go- 172 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence vernment can be divided into several groups. These include: 1. Social infrastructure, which includes public education, health care, and social assistance; 2. Technical infrastructure, which includes public transport and public roads; 3. Public order and citizens’ security which includes fire protection, flo- od control, and real assets management; 4. Organizational activities aimed at solving local problems, for exam- ple, in the case of district local government – fighting unemployment, activation of local labor market, consumer right protection, suppor- ting disabled people, and promotion of the district outside (Zieliński, 2004: 55–56). The executive-administrative function of local government consists mainly in the exercise of the existing law by the local government bodies, issuance of certain legal norms as well as managing and directing the municipality (kuta, 1992: 42). The issuance of legal acts focuses on acts which have a lower rank than a regulation, i.e. the acts of local law. Local government authorities are obliged to act based on the rule of law-abidingness, contained in the provision of Article 7 of the Constitution („The organs of public authority shall function on the basis of, and within the limits of, the law“), that is, to execute legal acts which concern them. Supervision over the activities of local government in terms of legality is exercised by the Prime Minister and the province governor (k isiel, 2003: 30). The local government’s business function manifests itself, on the one hand, in the possibility of conducting, under certain conditions, economic activity by the local government, on the other hand, in the role of local go- vernment in the development of entrepreneurship on its territory. Pursuant to Article 165 of the Constitution, the municipality possesses legal personali- ty and rights of ownership and other property rights. The Constitution is the guarantor of legally protected independence of local government (Journal of Laws of 1997, No. 78, item 483). These guarantees provide the basis for con- ducting economic activity by the local government. Another manifestation of the realization of economic function of local government is its role in the development of entrepreneurship. The basis for such activity is mainly created by the Act on Freedom of Economic Activity of July 2, 2004. For example, Article 8, Paragraph 1 of the Act states that „Public 173 Public Administr Ation in Pol And: reforms And s ystemic-o rgAniz Ation Al issues administration authorities shall support the development of entrepreneurship by creating favorable conditions for entrepreneurs to undertake and conduct economic activities, and in particular, they shall support micro, small, and me- dium-sized enterprises“ (Journal of Laws of 2004, No. 173, item 1807). The last of the analyzed functions is the political function of local go- vernment. From the point of view of the interests of local community and the effectiveness of tasks realized by the local government it is not the most important function but rather inherent in the operation of this level of public administration. The political function of local government is mainly connected to the issue of elections to district bodies. It concerns both direct election of members of constitutive bodies and the executive body in the case of the mu- nicipality. The discussed element is also connected with staffing, creating major personal positions and functions in the office and its organizational units. An important determinant of this function is also the issue of the functioning of local government bodies, namely the impact of political factors on the decision- making process. 5.7.6. Direct Democracy in Local Government In the process of execution of tasks entrusted to the local governments public authorities, constitutive and executive bodies play a key role. Re- sidents of municipalities, districts and provinces have been authorized to make decisions in the popular vote – elections and a referendum (direct democracy), or through the authorities of these units (indirect democracy – representative). Referendum is an important way of residents’ decision- making sanctioned by the Constitution of the Republic of Poland under the Article 170. It is also mentioned in the Act of September 15, 2000 on a Local Referendum (Journal of Laws of 2000, No. 88, item 985). It has a decisive, but not a consultative character. Through a referendum, members of the community express their will as to matters concerning their community. There are two types of referenda. The first of them is obligatorily organized in matters of self-taxation of residents for public purposes, and in cases of dismissal of a local government body which has been appointed in direct elections. This is a very important right as it gives the opportunity for dis- missal of constituting bodies of the self-governing municipality, district and province before the end of term. This way of dismissal pertains also to the 174 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence municipality executive body, but in this case, the referendum can be carried out on the initiative of the municipal council. The other type is optional, and can be carried out on any other matter concerning the local community in the range of tasks and powers of the given local government body. general elections are another manifestation of direct democracy. Constitutive bodies of all local government units have been elected in this way, and since 2002 also the municipal executive body. Principles and pro- cedures for holding elections to councils and the province council are speci- fied in the Act of January 5, 2011 on the Electoral Code (Journal of Laws of 2011, No. 21, item 112). Executive bodies of district and provincial govern- ments are chosen through indirect elections, e.i. by a decision of councils and local councils of these units (Przywojska, 2014: 24–27). 5.8. Public Finances Public finances are defined, firstly, as financial resource at the disposal of a public law entity, secondly, as a kind of mechanism which makes it pos- sible for a public law entity to use the financial resources (kępa, 1999: 73, Małkiewicz, 1999: 28–23). The Public Finance Act defines public finances in a similar way as processes connected with the accumulation and allocation of public resources. These processes, in particular, consist of: 1) collection of public income and revenue; 2) spending of public funds; 3) financing state budget the borrowing needs; 4) incurring obligations involving public funds; 5) management of public funds; 6) management of public debt; 7) settlements with the budget of the EU (Journal of Laws of 2009, No. 157 item 1240). Finance is the most important instrument of local public administra- tion operation. It would be impossible to realize any function without it. Public finance is closely related to the concept of financial activity of public administration, which involves collection and spending of financial resour- ces in order to take them over and distribute them to public tasks, which are largely determined by the political factors (Jastrzębska, 2000: 29−30). w e can distinguish four functions of financial activity in the public sector: 1. Fiscal function that is the accumulation of income; 2. Redistributive – distributive function consisting in the distribution of the gross domestic product; 175 Public Administr Ation in Pol And: reforms And s ystemic-o rgAniz Ation Al issues 3. Stimulation – stimuli function associated with the collection and spending of funds by the public sector; 4. Control-information function, which consists of automatic trans- mission of information on the regularities and irregularities in the area of financial activity (kępa, 1999: 73). Apart from the financial activities of public sector, it is also worth paying attention to the general principles of public finance system which, in particular, refer to the local government sector. E. k ornberger-Sokołowska (2001: 3) divides them into three groups. The first includes the rules on the form of legal fundraising system for the execution of local government tasks. This group includes the rules of: 1) stability and certainty of income sources; 2) adequacy of resources to to the completion of tasks; 3) effici- ency and flexibility of income sources; 4) territorial location of sources of income; 5) minimization of disparities in income levels; 6) granting local governments the power to finance, including tax power; 7) access to the capital market; 8) development of the forms of district income redistri- bution with the participation of representatives of local government. The second group contains the rules of: 1) independent management of col- lected resources; 2) modification of basic budget postulates pertaining to the management of public funds at the central level. The last group of rules relating to the control and supervision of financial management of local government includes the rules of: 1) statutorily limited intervention in the sphere of financial management; 2) diversification of the audit scope and criteria depending on whether local government performs its own tasks, or outsourced ones; 3) consistent financial control system taking into account the effectiveness of social and economic activities carried out with the help of the financial instruments (kornberger-Sokołowska, 2001: 78−79). The importantce of financial autonomy of local government in Poland will be analyzed in more details below. 5.8.1. Legal Guarantees of Financial Independence of Local Government Financial independence means primarily a constitutional transfer of the right to enact public revenues to local government. It also means the possibi- lity to finance expenditure from its own revenues. An extreme concept of fi- nancial independence is defined as the complete separation of central sources 176 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence of income from local ones, which also excludes the possibility of subsidizing local budgets which can be supplied only with the revenues allocated to them (Młynarczyk, 1999: 35, Chojna-Duch, 1998: 334−335). A. Bury divides financial independence of local government into income and expenditure independence. Income independence is associated with gu- aranteed possibilities to increase income, and obtain it from various sources and in various methods. In turn, expenditure independence means that each unit with given income is free in deciding on the method and type of spen- ding (Bury, 2000: 21). Financial independence of local government is close- ly connected with the level of decentralization. E. kornberger-Sokołowska (2001: 102) defines decentralization as: 1) transfer of public tasks to be im- plemented at the local level; 2) use by local authorities of the assets and rights that guarantee their independence, and ability to decide on public matters; 3) possession of adequate financial resources for the implementation of these tasks. Decentralization of tasks and competences, and transfer of assets are the basic premise of financial decentralization (Biley, 1999: 18−19, w right, 1997: 43−45), the level of which determines the level of financial autonomy of local government (k osek-w ojnar, 1995: 69; g lumińska-Pawlic, 2003: 44−59). Financial independence is also associated with the issue of so-called fi- nancial power which, in addition to legal power, is an essential attribute of territorial self-government. Financial power is connected with the ability of local governments to collect revenues according to its own will and discretion in order to carry out tasks of local government. It is expressed also in shaping of appropriate policies, e.g. in terms of income, using public authority means. Just like financial independence, financial power should be considered on se- veral levels: local government income, expenditure, budget, and creation of local government debt (Borodo, 2001: 134−136). In order to determine the level of financial autonomy of local govern- ment, it is necessary to analyze its grounds contained in the provisions of the Constitution of 1997 which, giving certain rights to local governments, also determines the level of their financial independence. These determinants are: 1. The right to possess legal personality (Art. 165, Paragraph 1); 2. The rights of ownership and other property rights (Art. 165, Paragraph 1); 3. The right to have public funds adequate to the tasks (Art. 167, Para- graph 1 and Paragraph 4); 177 Public Administr Ation in Pol And: reforms And s ystemic-o rgAniz Ation Al issues 4. The right to sources of revenues specified by statute (Art. 167, Para- graph 3); 5. The right to taxation power consisting in setting the level of local taxes and charges (Art. 168); 6. The right to supply local government budget with own revenues, ge- neral subsidies, and specific grants from the State Budget (Art. 167, Paragraph 2); 7. Determination of the principles and criteria of supervision and control over the financial activities of local government (Art. 171, Paragraph 1 and Paragraph 2) (k osikowski, 1997: 148−162, Miemiec, 1997: 212−218, Ofiarski, 2003: 121−140, kosikowski, 1994: 98−100, k omar, 1994: 94−97). The Constitution defined specific frameworks, rules governing local government finance, delegating the establishment of detailed regulations in this respect to ordinary legislation. w ith the introduction of the 1998 Local g overnment Reform, the system of public finance in Poland was also refor- med. Originally, local government finances were settled, firstly, by the Act of November 26, 1998 on Public Finances (Journal of Laws of 1998, No. 155, item 1014), and, secondly, by the Act of November 26, 1998 on the Income of Local g overnment Units for 1999-2000 (Journal of Laws of 1998, No. 150, item 983), and also, partially, in self-government acts (on municipal, district and provincial self-government). The Act on Public Finance, which regulated both the issues of central finance of the state and the local government, set basic principles characteristic of the system of local government finances. These principles are: 1. Principle of openness and transparency of public finances. The most important manifestations of this principle are: a) statutory require- ment of the budget debate and the debate on the report on the im- plementation of the budget; b) requirement to disclose, in the case of districts, the management report on the activities relating to incur- ring obligations and issuing securities; c) obligation to publish certain opinions of the regional chamber of auditors (gałkiewicz, 1999: 20). 2. Principle of reducing public debt. For local government it is connec- ted with the constraints in incurring liabilities, loans, and the intro- duction of precautionary procedures. 178 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 3. Principle of increasing responsibility for spending public money. It manifests itself in the increasing catalogue of situations where local authorities commit a breach of public finance discipline, and at the same time, in the increasing number of sanctions for such violations. 4. Principle of responsibility of executive organs of local government units for the conduct of financial management. An expression of this principle is the regulation, according to which, e.g. the district coun- cil, cannot, without the consent of the district board, increase the budget deficit by increasing spending or reducing revenues. 5. Principle of equality of rights of all operators on the local market car- rying out public tasks. According to it, any entity operating in the local area may apply for a grant from public funds for the implemen- tation of a public task after submitting an appropriate offer for its im- plementation (gałkiewicz, 1999: 20−23). The shape of local government finances after the Public Administration Reform in 1998 was finally established in the regulations of the Act of No- vember 13, 2003 on Income of Local g overnment Units, which according to its initiators, was aimed at: 1. Further decentralization of public tasks and funds and the increase of the share of local government units in the disposition of these measures; 2. Increasing economic responsibility of local governments by enlarging the level of their own income; 3. Stronger binding of the financial situation of local governments with the level of development of the national economy; 4. Expansion of the absorption capacity of EU funds by increasing the flow of funds and more flexible rules of financial management of local governments; 5. Creation of instruments to promote entrepreneurship and supply of human capital with high qualifications (g uziejewska, 2005: 62). 5.9. Civil Service The beginnings of the civil service system in Poland date back to the interwar period in which the fact that officials came from different parti- tions had different qualifications, and ethical models led to the lowering of 179 Public Administr Ation in Pol And: reforms And s ystemic-o rgAniz Ation Al issues the moral level and growing corruption. Some of the measures, which were supposed to prevent it, were the establishment of the Inter-Ministry of Quali- fication Commission and the adoption of the State Civil Service Act (w iater, 2015: 188). The first act, which comprehensively regulated legal and social status of the civil servant of the Second Republic of Poland, was the Act of February 17, 1922. This act, amended many times, was formally in force until December 31, 1974, when the Labor Code, adopted on June 24, 1974, came into force (Filak, 2016: 4). The Constitution of the Republic of Poland defines the basis for the functioning of the civil service in Poland. Article 153 of the fundamental law proclaims that a corps of civil servants shall operate in the organs of govern- ment administration in order to ensure a professional, diligent, impartial, and politically neutral discharge of the State’s obligations. The superior of the civil service, in accordance with Article 153 Paragraph 2 of the Polish Constitution, is the Prime Minister who appoints the Head of the Civil Service. In this context, we should also evoke Article 7 of the Consti- tution which states that public authorities function is based on, and within the limits of, the law. The civil service operates based on administrative law, i.e. the legal norms governing the organizational structure and conduct of government administration as a part of the state apparatus as well as of individual natural persons, unless other legal provisions apply. Detailed rules for the functioning of the civil service are specified in the Act of November 21, 2008 on Civil Ser- vice amended by the Act of December 30, 2015 amending the Civil Service Act and some other acts (Journal of Laws of 2016, item 34). The concept of civil service is defined as „a system of filling public posi- tions and performing the duties of a public official based on the principle of professionalism, political neutrality, impartiality, and legalism. In the objecti- ve sense, it means clerical corps is formed because of these principles and having special professional status in the country (stability of employment on the basis of the appointment, privileged wage, and pension regulations). In the functional sense, it means such rules of administration personnel hiring and management which guarantee their high qualifications and efficient exer- cising of public duties by the state regardless of the changeableness of the political sovereignty over administration“ (Filak, 2016: 2). The corps of civil servants is composed of persons employed in offici- 180 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence als’ positions and government administration offices. The civil service corps consists of employees and civil servants (the distinction results from the legal regulations which shape the employment relationship – respectively labor law regulations and the appointment pursuant to the Act on Civil Service). As of December 31, 2014, it consisted of 120,412 members, including about 7,675 civil servants (Filak, 2016: 2). A reference to the idea of the pre-war civil service appeared after the changes that took place in 1989. A manifestation of this was the establishment of the National School of Public Administration in 1991, and then passing of the Act on Civil Service on July 5, 1996. At the same time, this law applied only to officials appointed in the supreme and central organs of government administration and local organs of government administration. The situation changed with the adoption of a new Civil Service Law on December 18, 1998, the regulations of which applied to all government administration employees. Importantly, both Acts (of 1996 and 1998) in Article 1 referred to the prin- ciples of professionalism, reliability, impartiality, and political neutrality as binding for members of the civil service corps. Significant changes in the functioning of the civil service were introdu- ced on August 24, 2006 pursuant to the Acts on Civil Service, state human resources and high-ranking state positions. The Act on Civil Service exclu- ded senior posts in the civil service from the subjective scope, and in addi- tion, in accordance with Article 2 Paragraph 3, it provided for the possibi- lity that clerical posts can be taken by „persons delegated or transferred on the basis of separate regulations to perform tasks outside the organizational unit in which they are employed if the transfer results from a special interest of the civil service.“ The idea of an impartial and politically neutral civil service pertaining to all government administration employees returned with the Act of November 21, 2008. The latest significant changes in the civil service system were intro- duced by the Act of December 30, 2015 amending the Civil Service Act and some other acts (Journal of Laws of 2016, No. 0, item 34). The act introduced important changes to the functioning of the civil service: • Senior positions in the civil service will be staffed, by appointment, by the authorized bodies; 181 Public Administr Ation in Pol And: reforms And s ystemic-o rgAniz Ation Al issues • Change in the regulation of the status of persons holding senior po- sitions in the civil service, including the abolition of the obligation to perform their preparatory service to be evaluated periodically, sus- pension of their duties by operation of law for the duration of deten- tion, and finally, granting of a special duty allowance; • Allowing the possibility of appointing to the post of the Head of the Civil Service persons who are not members of the civil service by abo- lishing the requirement to have experience in government administra- tion (Journal of Laws of 2016, No. 0, item 34). It should be noted that according to some legal communities changes introduced in 2016 in the system of the civil service adversely affected the implementation of the principle of political neutrality of civil service corps. On the other hand, the authors of the reform are convinced that they allow a more efficient operation of public administration, and eliminate frequent fiction in the process of hiring public servants. 5.10. Openness and Transparency of Public Administration Operations: Public Participation Analyzing the key issues associated with the process of public adminis- tration reform, openness and transparency, it is initially worth emphasizing the issue of communication within the public sector. k rystyna Serafin (2013: 139−141) determined two levels of communi- cation processes in public administration. The first level is the level of go- vernment administration, while the second level is the level of local admi- nistration. According to the author, two-way relationships and two-way flow of information occur between these levels. The two levels send and provide information to the media and directly to citizens. At the level of government administration, a key element of internal in- formation is communication between the government press offices and the government representatives in the field. Unfortunately, their activity is direc- ted primarily at maintaining contacts with the media, and providing informa- tion to province governors coming both from the center and from the local media. Direct contacts with citizens are marginalized. Press offices discover their importance in times of crises and conflicts (Serafin, 2013: 139−141). 182 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Communication at the level of local administration has greater impor- tance and far more benefits, particularly for local communities. The applied communication methods, tools, and policy of local authorities determine the image of public administration, affect the development of civil society and the development of openness and transparency of public administration. At the same time, it eliminates the existing pathologies associated with the operation of local authority. The basis for the development of local democracy and civil society is the appropriate level of public participation. A. Janus (2004: 176) shares this view by claiming that institutionalized possibilities of social parti- cipation are conducive to the formation of civil society. The possibility of active participation of citizens in decision-making on the future ofterritorial unit is a sign of democratization of social life in Poland. Systemic changes in Poland in the early 90s of the 20 th century led to the forma- tion of local self-government as one of the basic elements of a democratic state. A municipality and a district were created, i.e. local government units with the authorities elected by the local community, the operation of which was suppo- sed, among other things, to bring the authorities closer to the citizen. More than 25 years of experience in the operation of local government in Poland has shown that the transfer of power to the local level was a very beneficial move, both in the economic sphere as well as from the social and political aspects. In many local governments, we can observe the mechanism of strengt- hening ties between the local community and the local power elites – the „authority“ which directs the structure of administration, and needs public support for the implementation of basic tasks faced by the given unit. A way to create the conditions for increasing public participation in the decisions taken by the local authorities is in the creation of mechanisms for two-way communication between the local government and its inhabitants. This is ma- nifested in mutual exchange of information between the office and the local community. Local government should widely inform the community about its actions as well as create the conditions for effective reception of infor- mation from the public concerning their opinions about, for instance, inves- tments, general policy of local government, acceptance of planned activities, and expression of their needs and demands. The local community acquires the skills of functioning in public life if it has the possibilities to co-participate in decision-making processes (Chlivickas & Raipa, 2002: 117−136). 183 Public Administr Ation in Pol And: reforms And s ystemic-o rgAniz Ation Al issues Citing J. Hausner (1999: 41), we can assume that public participation means participation of citizens in managing the affairs of the community that they are members thereof. In a broad sense, social participation is the foundation of civil society whose members voluntarily participate in public activities. In a narrower sense, this term means public partnership of local government and residents for taking actions in favor of local development (g órniak et al. 1999: 41, Horsman & Raynor, 1978: 239−253). Adapting this concept to our considerations, participation can be defi- ned as involvement which is associated with a process in which two or more parties cooperate in the preparation of plans, implementation of projects, and decision-making. w ith regard to local self-government, it manifests itself in expressing opinions, views in relation to actions taken by the local authorities through the institution of a local referendum, public debates, and meetings with the residents during which current problems are discussed. w ork and public consultation on, e.g. local development plans, fit in this trend (Szot- gabryś & Sienkiewicz, 2003: 128−130). Social participation in terms of the cooperation of public sector with the non-governmental organizations (NgOs) and private sectors means the in- clusion of NgOs, citizens, and local businesses in the process of solving local problems, and making key decisions concerning the local community. In this perspective, the representatives of local communities are co-authors of con- cepts and solutions pertaining to local policy. An effective program of public participation mainly means the application in practice of a two-way flow of information between administration and citizens, and the inclusion of local communities in the planning process. The scope of two-way communication and public participation in local government is connected with the specificity of local problems. In Poland, a number of model solutions in the field of social participation have been implemented which were, in many cases, initiated (e.g. in the framework of Local g overnment Partnership Program (LgPP) in 1999), and funded by the US Agency for International Development. The program pertained to pro- jects concerning social participation and communication in municipalities and districts with the participation of external consultants. The scope of the- se projects involved, among others, creation of organizational foundations of the system of social communication, and ensuring effective social com- 184 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence munication in the office, improving the flow of information between office employees and managers, preparation of a catalogue of services, improving information about the work of the office, development and preparation of a newsletter, improvement of direct contacts of local authorities with the resi- dents, external promotion, institutionalization of cooperation between local authorities and the NgOs. In practice, the process of participation is implemented in local govern- ment by creating plans of participation and communication, taking into account informing local communities, obtaining information from the com- munity, conducting public consultation and co-participation of residents in the decision-making process (Jakubowska, 2001: 1). 5.11. Conclusion One of the most visible trends in the evolution of political systems of the late 20 th century was a phenomenon often referred to as a revolution in public administration which manifested itself in the process of reforming the public sector of modern states, and called for, inter alia, transformation or moder- nization of administration. The process of reforming the public sector should be seen as a multi-faceted phenomenon in which socio-economic, political, cultural, or ideological factors occur (Herbut, 1999: 9−11). The pressure of such factors is conducive to this process, becoming the motivation for its adoption. In Poland, since 1989, i.e. since the beginning of the process of reforming administration, various categories of factors have affected individual stages of implementation of administrative reforms. The first stage of the reform, crowned with the creation of self-governing municipalities, was conditioned first by ideological or political factors. In contrast, at the core of the Public Administration Reform of 1998 were largely economic and social factors, and political factors to a lesser extent, which together defined the fundamental premise of this reform – the decentralization of public administration. An important factor was also the process of Europeanization of public adminis- tration and Polish integration inthe EU. The preparation of implementation of important reforms, particularly of systemic ones, should be done carefully in order to avoid frequently occur- ring risks, which a failed change could bring. Every administration reform is 185 Public Administr Ation in Pol And: reforms And s ystemic-o rgAniz Ation Al issues burdened with the risk of costs and damages to be borne by a citizen or a local community or the state after its introduction. w e should share g ołuch’s opinion that the currently functioning model of bureaucratic public administration is not able to meet the citizens’ expecta- tions. The form of the current model of public administration is a result of a number of reasons. One of them is the lack of a target concept of the State, which, as Adam g ołuch rightly says „[...] relied on earlier existing structures which have undergone a rather façade reconstruction on the basis of patterns found in European Union countries [...]“ (g ołuch, 2011: 150). Today, the process of development of public administration is determi- ned by the development of technology, globalization processes, and the de- velopment of modern management and marketing. w e have to agree with Bobińska’s thesis (2012: 53) that the development of technology has created new needs and necessities for new skills in making rational decisions, and the implementation of modern management and marketing concepts. It should be stressed once again that the analyses of the efficiency of public administration operation in Poland point to the existence of many problems having a negative impact on the implementation of the function of public administration, the satisfaction and quality of life of society. The studies conducted often show that a key issue is not, for instance, a bad admi- nistrative law or administrative proceedings but the moral level of officials and their approach to the given case. Frey (2007: 190−200) rightly says that an important role in this respect is played by mental conditions. According to the author, without changing the old, bad habits we will not be able to talk of positive changes in the sphere of relations between the administration office and the citizen in Polish administrative proceedings. The author also claims that the reason for this state of affairs is the fact that in Polish public adminis- tration offices attention is mainly paid not to the quality of service but to the number of cases handled by the functionary. The analysis of the assumptions and functioning of public administra- tion in Poland is undoubtedly related to the analysis of the implementation of objectives of the administration reform. They were supposed to consist in: • Expansion of mechanisms of civil society, democracy, and social control of actions; • Creation of political career path; 186 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence • g reater efficiency of institutions providing public services at the local level; • Standardization of costs and consequent increase in the rationality of public spending; • Reconstruction of public finance system in the direction of increasing its integrityand decentralization to achieve its better connection with collective needs; • Ordering competences of public administration, improving the infor- mation flow; • Creation of better institutional conditions for the protection of public order and collective security; • Acceleration of economic development (gąciarz, 2004: 109). Based on results of conducted research and analyses it can be concluded that the results achieved and indicators related to the functioning of public administration in Poland, in particular local government, do not allow unam- biguous confirmation of the achievement of these objectives. w e can agree with Michał kulesza who wrote: „in 1999, a structured three-level division was introduced in Poland. There are municipalities, dis- tricts, and provinces.“ However, despite many changes that have been intro- duced to the legislation and administrative practice in the last several years, the practice of functioning of the governmental and self-governmental sub- system of public administration shows that we can only partially agree with the next words of one of the founders of the concept of the reform (kulesza, 1999: 2): „And this operation is successful” . 187 Public Administr Ation in Pol And: reforms And s ystemic-o rgAniz Ation Al issues References 1. Adamczyk, M., Pastuszka, S. 1985. k onstytucje polskie w rozwoju dzi- ejowym 1791−1982, w arszawa. 2. Bailey, S. J. 1999. Local g overnment Economic. Principles and Practi- ce, Basingstoke/gB. 3. Bobińska, B. 2012. Marketing i zarządzanie jakością w administracji publicznej... jako procesy identyfikowania potrzeb klienta i doskona- lenia organizacji, Zeszyty Naukowe Małopolskiej w yższej Szkoły Eko- nomicznej w Tarnowie, T. 21, Nr 2, 53. 4. Borodo, A. 2001. władztwo finansowe samorządu terytorialnego – za- gadnienia ogólne, In: R. Mastalski (Ed.) księga jubileuszowa Profesora Marka Mazurkiewicza. Studia z dziedziny prawa finansowego, prawa konstytucyjnego i ochrony środowiska, w rocław, 134–136. 5. Brunka, M., kumorek, B., Łuczak-kumorek, E. 2003. Słownik samorządu terytorialnego, Zielona g óra. 6. Bury , A. 2000. Dochody powiatów i województw w świetle postanowień Europejskiej k arty Samorządu Terytorialnego, „Samorząd Terytorial- ny” , nr 35, 21. 7. Chlivickas, E., Raipa, A. 2002/2003. Administracja publiczna – zmia- ny i trendy rozwojowe, „Służba Cywilna” , nr 5, 117–136. 8. Chochowski, k. 2009. Subsydiarność i decentralizacja a reforma ustro- jowa administracji publicznej w Polsce, In: J. Parchomiuk, B. Ulijasz, E. k ruk (Eds) Dziesięć lat reformy ustrojowej administracji publicznej w Polsce, w olters k luwer Polska, 71. 9. Chojna-Duch, E. 1996. Teoretyczne i legislacyjne problemy decentra- lizacji finansowej samorządu terytorialnego, In: A. Piekara, Z. Niewia- domski (Eds) Samorząd terytorialny i rozwój lokalny, w arszawa, 293– 294. 10. Chojna-Duch, E. 1998. Teoretyczne i legislacyjne problemy decentra- lizacji finansowej samorządu terytorialnego, In: A. Piekara, Z. Niewia- domski (Eds) Samorząd terytorialny. Zagadnienia prawne i adminis- tracyjne, w arszawa, 334–335. 188 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 11. Chojna-Duch, E. 2003. Uwarunkowania reformy systemu finansowe- go jednostek samorządu terytorialnego w 2003 roku, „Przegląd Le- gislacyjny” , nr 3, 10. 12. Ćwik, w. 2002. Dawna Polska. Pierwsza Rzeczpospolita, In: w. Ćwik (Ed.) Administracja w systemie ustrojowym Polski X-XX w., Przemyśl, 50. 13. Dolnicki, B. 2000. Ewolucja pojęcia samorządu terytorialnego w pols- kich konstytucjach, In: Z. Niewiadomski, et. al. (Eds) Administracja publiczna u progu XXI wieku. Prace dedykowane prof. zw. dr. hab. Janowi Szreniawskiemu z okazji Jubileuszu 45-lecia pracy naukowej, Przemyśl, 154–158. 14. Domagała, M. 1996. Z zagadnień decentralizacji w państwie demokra- tycznym, In: J. Iwanek (Ed.) Oblicza decentralizmu, k atowice, 11–12. 15. Domański, T. 1999. Strategiczne planowanie rozwoju gospodarczego gminy, w arszawa. 16. Filak, A. 2016. Służba cywilna po zmianach, „Analiza” , 4. 17. Frey, T. 2007. Relacja urząd-obywatel a standardy dobrej adminis- tracji, „Biuletyn RPO – Materiały” nr 58, w arszawa, 190−200. 18. gałkiewicz, J. 1999. Podstawowe zasady nowego systemu finansów publicznych w samorządzie terytorialnym, „Finanse komunalne”, nr 1, 20. 19. gąciarz, B. 2004. Instytucjonalizacja samorządności. Aktorzy i efekty, w arszawa. 20. gąciarz, J. 2006. Organizacja i zasady działania administracji pub- licznej w Polsce, In: J. Hausner (Ed.) Administracja publiczna, w ydawnictwo Naukowe PwN, w arszawa. 21. g ilowska, Z. 1998. System ekonomiczny samorządu terytorialnego w Polsce, w arszawa. 22. glumińska-Pawlic, J. 2003. Samodzielność finansowa jednostek samorządu terytorialnego w Polsce, k atowice. 23. g ołuch, A. 2011. Administracja na rozdrożu – służba czy biurokracja, Zeszyt Naukowy „Apeiron” w yższa Szkoła Bezpieczeństwa Publicz- nego i Indywidualnego w k rakowie, nr 5, k raków, 150. 189 Public Administr Ation in Pol And: reforms And s ystemic-o rgAniz Ation Al issues 24. g órniak, J., k ołdras, S., Mazur, S., Paszkowska, R. 1999. k omunikacja i partycypacja społeczna, In: J. Hausner (Ed.), k raków, 41. 25. g uziejewska, B. 2005. k ontrowersje w ocenie niezależności finansowej samorządu terytorialnego, „Samorząd Terytorialny” , nr 7–8, 62. 26. Herbut, R. 1999. Zasadnicze przesłanki procesu reformowania admin- istracji publicznej, In: A. Ferens, I. Macek (Eds) Administracja i poli- tyka, w rocław, 9–11. 27. Horsman, A., Raynor, R. 1978. Citizen Participation in Local Area Planning: Two Vancouver Cases In Vancouver: w estern Metropolis, In: L. J. Evenden (Ed.), w estern g eographical series, vol. 16. Victoria: Dept, of g eography, University of Victoria, 239–253. 28. Izdebski, H., kulesza, M. 1999. Administracja publiczna, zagadnienia ogólne, w arszawa. 29. Jakubowski, M. 2001. Partycypacja społeczna w podejmowaniu decyzji publicznych, w arszaw. 30. Janus, A. 2004. Polityczna partycypacja lokalna wyborcza i referen- dalna, In: S. Michałowski, A. Pawłowska (Eds) Samorząd lokalny w Polsce. Społeczno-polityczne aspekty funkcjonowania, Lublin, 176. 31. Jastrzębska, M. 2000. Podstawy polityki finansowej jednostek samorządu terytorialnego, „Samorząd Terytorialny” , nr 7–8, 29–30. 32. Jaworska-Dębska, B. 2009. Powiaty w systemie samorządu terytori- alnego, In: J. Supernat (Ed.) Między tradycją a przyszłością w nauce prawa administracyjnego. księga jubileuszowa dedykowana Profeso- rowi Janowi Bociowi, w rocław, 243–252. 33. Jaźwiński, I. 2010. Samorząd województwa jako podmiot regional- nej polityki społeczno-gospodarczej, Zeszyty naukowe Uniwersytetu Szczecińskiego, nr 582, Ekonomiczne Problemy Usług, Nr 48, 21−26. 34. k asiński, M. 2011. współczesne problemy rozwoju administracji pub- licznej w Polsce, „Annales. Etyka w życiu gospodarczym” , vol. 14, nr 1, 215−226. 35. kępa, M. 1999. Finanse powiatu, In: M. Chmaj (Ed.) Leksykon sa- morządu terytorialnego, Lublin, 73. 36. k isiel, w . 2003. Ustrój samorządu terytorialnego w Polsce, w arszawa. 190 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 37. k lein, k. 1998. Relacje pomiędzy Senatem a samorządem terytorial- nym, In: E. Toczyska (Ed.) Podstawy reformy samorządowej, g dańsk, 29. 38. k nosala, E. 2006. Zarys nauki administracji, Seria Akademicka, k an- tor w ydawniczy Zakamycze, k raków. 39. kociubiński, k. 2012. Analiza porównawcza struktur administracji publicznej w Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej i Republice Federalnej Niemiec, w rocław, 14−21, Retrieved from: http://www.razemdlapogranicza.pl. 40. k onstytucja RP z dnia 2 kwietnia 1997 roku, Dz. U 1997, nr 78, poz. 483. 41. k ornaś, J. 2006. Administracja Publiczna w Polsce, In: J. Hausner (Ed.) Administracja publiczna, w arszawa, 109−110. 42. kornberger-Sokołowska, E. 2001. Realizacja zasady adekwatności w procesach decentralizacji finansów publicznych, „Samorząd Terytori- alny” , nr 5, 3. 43. k ornberger-Sokołowska, E. 2002. Samodzielność finansowa jednostek samorządu terytorialnego w aktualnym systemie prawnym w Polsce, „Studia Iuridica” , nr 39, 99. 44. k ornberger-Sokołowska, E. 2002. Zasady systemu dochodów jednos- tek samorządu terytorialnego, In: A. Piekara (Ed.) Samorząd teryto- rialny a jakość administracji publicznej. księga jubileuszowa w dzie- sięciolecie istnienia Centralnego Samorządu Terytorialnego i Rozwoju Lokalnego, w arszawa, 78–79. 45. kosek-w ojnar, M. 1995. The Reform of Local Self-g overnment and Financial Policy in Poland, „Emergo” , No. 1, 69. 46. k osikowski, C. 1997. g ospodarka i finanse publiczne w nowej k onsty- tucji, „Państwo i Prawo” , nr 11–12, 148–162. 47. k ulesza, M. 1991. Z powiatem należy się spieszyć, „ wspólnota” , nr 38, 12−14. 48. k ulesza, M. 1999. Siedem reform, „ wspólnota” , nr 47, 2. 49. kulesza, M. 2000. Transformacja ustroju administracyjnego Polski (1990−2000), „Studia Iuridica” , nr 37, 1−2. 50. kulesza, M. 2000. Transformacja ustroju administracyjnego Polski (1990−2000), „Studia Iuridica” , nr 38, 80. 191 Public Administr Ation in Pol And: reforms And s ystemic-o rgAniz Ation Al issues 51. kuta, T. 1992. Funkcje współczesnej administracji i sposoby ich real- izacji, „Acta Universitatis w ratislaviensis” Prawo, nr 217, 7–8. 52. Lenik, P. 2012. Organy zarządcze w administracji publicznej – kon- tekst obieralności, „ współczesne dylematy zarządzania, Prace nauko- wo-dydaktyczne” zeszyt 67, 64−66 Retrieved form: http://www.pwsz. krosno.pl/prace-naukowo-dydaktyczne-zaklad-zarzadzania. 53. Leoński, Z. 2004. Ustrój i zadania samorządu terytorialnego, In: S. w ykrętowicz (Ed.) Samorząd w Polsce. Istota, formy, zadania, Poznań, 114, 139–140. 54. Litauer, S. 1918. Obecny stan nauki o prawach samorządu miejskiego, „Samorząd miejski” , w arszawa, 17. 55. Lutrzykowski, A. 2009. Samorząd terytorialny a dynamika procesu przemian ustrojowych Polski w latach osiemdziesiątych XX wieku, In: A. Lutrzykowski (Ed.) Samorząd terytorialny, ale jaki?, Toruń, 10−25. 56. Małkiewicz, J. 1999. Podstawowe zasady nowego systemu finansów pu- blicznych w samorządzie terytorialnym, „Finanse komunalne”, nr 1, 18–23. 57. Michałowski, S. 1999. Państwo obywatelskie a przebudowa adminis- tracji publicznej, In: A. Pawłowska (Ed.) Administracja publiczna. Za- gadnienia wstępne, Lublin. 58. Michałowski, S. 2012. Społeczne aspekty filozofii samorządu terytorial- nego w Polsce. Od idealizmu do realizmu, In: S. Michałowski (Ed.) 20 lat samorządu terytorialnego w Polsce sukcesy, porażki, perspektywy, Lublin, 15−46. 59. Miemiec, w. 1997. Europejska karta samorządu terytorialnego jako zespół gwarancji samodzielności finansowej gmin – wybrane zagadnie- nia teoretyczno-prawne, In: S. Dolata (Ed.) Funkcjonowanie samorządu terytorialnego. Diagnoza i perspektywy, Opole, 212–218. 60. Młynarczyk, A. 1999. Zagadnienia samodzielności finansowej i po- datkowej samorządu terytorialnego, „Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Szczecińskiego. Roczniki Prawnicze” , nr 11, 35. 61. Mróz, w. 1998. Naczelne organy administracji, In: w. Ćwik, w. Mróz, w. w itkowski (Eds) Administracja w systemie ustrojowym Polski do 1939 r., Przemyśl, 200−206. 192 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 62. Nawrot, B., Pokładecki, J. 2007. Rewolucja samorządowa a zmiana lo- kalnych elit politycznych, In: k. Pałecki (Ed.) Elity polityczne w Polsce, Toruń, 282. 63. Niewiadomski, Z. 1999. Ustrój samorządu terytorialnego i administracji rządowej po reformie, w arszawa. 64. Niezgoda, A. 2009. Reforma systemu dochodów jednostek samorządu terytorialnego, In: J. Parchomiuk, B. Ulijasz, E. k ruk (Eds) Dziesięć lat reformy ustrojowej administracji publicznej w Polsce, w olters k luwer Polska, 353−366. 65. Nowacka, E. J. 1997. Samorząd terytorialny w administracji publicznej, w ydawnictwa Prawnicze PwN, w arszawa. 66. Ofiarski, Z. 2003. Zakres regulacji finansów samorządu terytorialnego w konstytucjach wybranych państw europejskich, In: A. g omułowicz, J. Małecki (Eds) Ex iniuria non oritur ius. księga ku czci profesora w ojciecha Łączkowskiego, Poznań, 121–140. 67. Pokładecki, J. 2001. Tradycje samorządu terytorialnego w Polsce, In: B. Nawrot, J. Pokładecki (Eds) w ieloaspektowość samorządności gminnej w Polsce, Poznań, 26. 68. Prais, P . 1998. Co to jest powiat?, „gazeta w yborcza Olsztyn” , nr 203, 1. 69. Przywojska, J. 2014. Nowe zarządzanie i governance w pracy socjalnej, w arszawa. 70. Rajca, L. 2010. Reformy samorządu terytorialnego w Europie Zachod- niej. In: L. Rajca (Ed.) Samorząd terytorialny w Europie Zachodniej, k ielce, 199−200. 71. Rączka, P. 2003. g mina, powiat, województwo – charakter prawny, In: Z. Bukowski, T. Jędrzejewski, P . Rączka (Eds.) Ustrój samorządu teryto- rialnego, Toruń, 60. 72. Rączka, P., Szalewska, M., Jędrzejewski, T. 2000. Perspektywy rozwoju samorządu w Polsce, „Samorząd Terytorialny” , nr 1–2, 102–106. 73. Regulski, J. 2000. Reforma samorządowa Materiały źródłowe 1980−1990, w arszawa. 74. Regulski, J. 2000. Samorząd III Rzeczypospolitej. k oncepcje i realizacja, w arszawa. 193 Public Administr Ation in Pol And: reforms And s ystemic-o rgAniz Ation Al issues 75. Rykiel. Z. 1993. Problemy restytucji powiatów w Polsce, In: M. Potrykows- ki (Ed.) Reforma terytorialna, układ powiatowy, z. 166, w arszawa. 76. Serafin, k. 2013. Skuteczna komunikacja w podmiotach administracji publicznej, „Studia Ekonomiczne / Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny w ka- towicach”, nr 141 g overnance – korporacje, instytucje publiczne, sieci, 139−141. 77. Skalski, E. 2008. Sami swoi, „gazeta w yborcza” 12 VII, 15. 78. Słobodzian, B. 2007. Cele i zasady reformy administracji samorządowej w 1998 roku, In: J. Marszałek-k awa (Ed.) Samorząd terytorialny. Studi- um politologiczne, Toruń, 134−140. 79. Słownik języka polskiego. 1995. t. 3, w arszawa, p. 838, t. 2, 220, 580. 80. Sługocki, J. 2004. Reformy administracji publicznej a partycypacja społeczna w administrowaniu. k ilka uwag o polskich doświadczeniach, In: J. Łukasiewicz (Ed.) Jakość administracji publicznej – księga pamiątkowa ku czci Profesora Marcina Jałowieckiego, Rzeszów, 395−398. 81. Sowiński, R. 2001. Reforma administracji publicznej – sukces czy porażka?, In: Z. Drozdowicz, Z. w. Puślecki, (Eds) Adaptacja przez transformację, Poznań, 227−236. 82. Struzik, A. 2008. Samorząd w ojewództwa jako Podmiot Zarządzania Regionalnego „Mazowsze Studia Regionalne” , nr 1, 11−22. 83. Surówka, k. 2009. Zakres samodzielności finansowej powiatów ziem- skich w Polsce w latach 1999–2008, „Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Szczecińskiego” , nr 526, 432–455. 84. Szot-gabryś, T., Sienkiewicz, M. w . 2003. Planowanie strategiczne jako czynnik rozwoju gminy. Aspekt partycypacji społecznej, „Annales Uni- versitatis Mariae Curie-Skłodowska” , Sectio k, Politologia, vol. X, Lublin, 128–130. 85. Tarno, J.P ., Sieniuć, M., Sulimierski, J., w yporska, J. 2002. Samorząd te- rytorialny w Polsce, Lexis Nexis, w arszawa. 86. Ustawa z dnia 2 lipca 2004 roku o swobodzie działalności gospodarczej, Dz. U. 2004, nr 173, poz. 1807. 87. Ustawa z dnia 23 kwietnia 2003 roku o działalności pożytku publiczne- go i wolontariacie, Dz. U. 2003, nr 96, poz. 873. 194 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 88. Ustawa z dnia 27 sierpnia 2009 roku o finansach publicznych, Dz. U. 2009, nr Dz. U. nr 157 poz. 1240. 89. Ustawa z dnia 7 lipca 1994 roku Prawo budowlane, Dz. U. 2003, nr 207, poz. 2016, z późn. zm. 90. w iater, M. 2015. Etyczne aspekty modernizacji polskiej służby cywilnej w świetle koncepcji New Public Management, „ Nierówności Społeczne a wzrost g ospodarczy, nr 43 (3/2015), 188. 91. w right, g. 1997. Role of g overnments, In: J. Nemec, g. w right (Eds) Public Finance. Theory and Practice in Central European Transition, Bratislava, 43–45. 92. w right, V. 1997. The paradoxes of Administrative Reform, In: H. Ol- szewski, B. Popowska (Eds) g ospodarka – Administracja – Samorząd terytorialny. Praca poświęcona 45-leciu pracy twórczej Profesor Teresy Rabskiej, Poznań, 551−558. 93. w ojnicki, J. 2003 Samorząd lokalny w Polsce i w Europie, Pułtusk. 94. wysocka, E. 1997. Regionalizacja kraju, decentralizacja władzy, samorządność terytorialna, „Człowiek i Środowisko” , nr 3–4, 322–326; 95. Zając, w. 1999. Zasadniczy trójstopniowy podział terytorialny Polski, w arszawa. 96. Zell, Z. 2001. k onkretnie o procedurach, „ wspólnota” , nr 29, 45–46. 97. Zieliński, E. 2004. Samorząd terytorialny w Polsce, w arszawa. 195 Public Administr Ation reforms in s lov Aki A 6. Public Administration Reforms in Slovakia Juraj Nemec, Beáta Mikušová Meričková, Maria Murray Svidronova, Peter Pisár 6.1. Introduction Slovakia is one of the youngest countries in the world. It has been esta- blished on January 1, 1993, as a result of splitting of former Czechoslovakia, thus becoming an independent sovereign, democratic unitary state based on the Rule of Law (Constitution of the Slovak Republic). w ith the exception of some short periods in early medieval times, Slo- vaks did not have their own state before 1918, and for more than 1000 years belonged to the Austrian and Austro-Hungarian monarchies. In 1918, the first independent Czechoslovak Republic was established as a unitary state of two nations − Czech and Slovaks. This state split as a result of Second world w ar developments into the „Protectorate of Czech and Moravia“and the Slo- vak Republic, dependent on fascist g ermany. A history of Czechoslovakia continued again from 1945 with an important shift from unitary to federal state in 1968. The split of Czechoslovakia in 1993 was an unavoidable result of the transformation processes but an excellent example of the democratic and friendly separation of two different partners looking for their own way to overcome all barriers of complicated transition. The Slovak Republic is situated in the center of Europe and covers an area of 49,034 sq km. The state borders with the Czech Republic, Poland, Ukraine, Hungary, and Austria are 1681,9 km long. The total number of in- habitants of the Slovak Republic is about 5.5 million. The largest city and the capital of Slovakia is Bratislava. The country is characterized by fragmented settlement with a total of almost 2900 municipalities, out of which about 2500 municipalities have fewer than 2000 inhabitants each (Statistical Yearbook, Slovakia, 2014). The Slovak Constitution was ratified on September 1, 1992, became fully effective on January 1, 1993, and changed in September 1998 to allow direct election of the president, and further amended on February 2001 to allow Slovakia to apply for NATO and the EU membership. 196 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence The head of executive branch is the President, elected by direct, popu- lar vote for a five-year term. The head of government is the Prime Minister. The Cabinet is appointed by the president on the recommendation of the prime minister. The legislative branch is represented by unicameral National Council of the Slovak Republic (“Narodna Rada Slovenskej Republiky”) with 150 seats; members are elected on the basis of proportional representation to serve four-year terms. The judicial branch is represented by the Supreme Court (judges are elected by the National Council) and Constitutional Court (judges appointed by president from a group of nominees approved by the National Council). The concept of public administration of the country is unclear and not defined by any existing official document. A very typical feature of it is over- legalization, i.e. the will to solve existing problems by legislative changes through the legal system. This, in combination with the use of many New Pu- blic Management (NPM) instruments, creates a very specific mix with several deficiencies, some of which are highlighted in the respective sub-chapters. In the following chapter we describe main public administration reform (PAR) trends and changes in Slovakia, and explain their character. The first chapter deals with the sequence and character of public administration re- forms in Slovakia. It describes the historical legacy of public administration reforms, realized reforms with their contents and character, and evaluates the character of PAR in Slovakia. The second chapter deals with the imple- mentation of selected NPM tools during the PAR. The focus is on marketi- zation of service delivery systems and agencification. The selected examples are as follows: scale and results of externalization in local public service de- livery, financing of education, competitive social health insurance system, and agencification. The third chapter presents the civil service reform. The creation of the Civil Service Office and its later abolishment, and current developments are described there. The last chapter highlights selected ele- ments of administrative services and procedures. The problem of inefficient administrative services, “red tape” , and complicated administrative processes still remain the target for future steps of PAR in Slovakia. Some visible im- provements include the recent ESO reform (one-stop shops are step-by-step being established to ensure contact between citizens and state administrative functions). 197 Public Administr Ation reforms in s lov Aki A 6.2. Sequence and Character of Public Administration Reforms in Slovakia 6.2.1. Historical Legacy of Public Administration Reforms The period of the first modern state of Czech and Slovaks was characte- rized by the democratic development of the civil service system in a market economy which became an integral part of the trends towards the develo- pment of democratic systems of governance in Europe, based on impartial and professional public administration – with some features inherited from the Austro-Hungarian public administration – like “w eberian” bureaucracy and legalism (For example, see Janas, 2007; or Sutaj, 2003). After the Second w orld w ar, Czechoslovakia was re-established as the unitary democratic state. The Communist Party played very important role in the political system, and won democratic elections in 1947. In February 1948, it had all powers of the state in its hands. February 1948 was the beginning of the period of centralized „socialist“ (post-Marxist) state, based on so-called „socialist democracy“ and planned economy. During this period, many principles of modern democratic public administration were ignored, and the system became the servant of the Com- munist Party. Real local self-government structures did not exist and were or- ganized together with local state administration structures in so-called natio- nal committees. Most important aspects of totalitarian public administration were (Nemec, 2001) lack of control of consumers/public over the civil service system, absence of consumer-generated quality control because of lack of accountability to the public, and loyalty to the political system instead, partial and also formal separation of executive and legislative powers (Federal As- sembly and Federal g overnment at the central level, and National Commit- tees that represented the system of combined state administration and self- government institutions at the local level), real dominance of political power of the Communist Party over all sub-systems of public administration (based on non-democratic elections, system of „nomenclature places“ in all sectors, and system of „party cells“ that influenced and controlled each important decision). This situation guaranteed that each institution of public adminis- tration and each public servant followed the directions, resolutions, and ins- 198 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence tructions of the Communist Party. The Constitution defined the Communist Party as „a leader of the society and the state“. Citizens were provided with a limited possibility to control the quality of public services as the system of „socialist democracy“ included some kinds of accountability of politicians and bureaucrats to citizens and specific rights of citizens to control the civil service system − but all within the Communist Party controlled mechanisms (system of Communist Party analyzed all kinds of appeals, and in the case of important malpractice of politicians or civil servants, concrete measures to improve their performance were undertaken). The fact that bureaucracy was not “classic” monopoly but servant of the Communist Party partly limited the possibility to abuse position of civil ser- vants for reasons of personal gain. The abuse of top bureaucratic and political position to get tangible benefits was also, in some way, limited by long-term perspective of remaining in this, or a similar position (most of them who came to top positions remained there for a whole life). This system was radically changed after the Velvet revolution but its selected features still influence the “quality” of public administration in the country (especially accountability, responsibility, and efficiency principles). 6.2.2. Developments – Realized Reforms and Their Contents and Character The first reform measures were orientated mostly at the local level, based on the conceptual document „Proposal for the Reform of National Commit- tees and Local State Administration“ , and discussed by the government of the Slovak Republic on June 6, 1990. Implementation of this first reform wave was oriented mostly toward creating real self-government institutions, divi- ding executive and legislative powers on all levels, changing the territorial structure of Czechoslovakia, and restructuring the central government and the system of control in the public sector (Bercik & Nemec, 1999). The government of the Slovak Republic decided by the governmental resolution of June 6, 1990 to abolish the system of national committees of December 31, 1990, create self-government structures in each municipality (including those which did not have national committees or became inde- pendent, by splitting for example), organize direct self-government elections in November 1990, split self-government and state administration functions, 199 Public Administr Ation reforms in s lov Aki A and organize new local bodies of state administration (general and speciali- zed bodies), apply vertical superiority and subordination, and create larger territorial areas instead of previous districts (due to the complicated reform process this last expected measure was not realized). Based on this decision, self-governing municipalities with a high level of independence were established by the Law No. 369/1990 Coll. on Municipal Administration of January 1, 1991. And based on this change, local self-go- vernments became fully-fledged policy decision-makers at the local level with their own budgets and bodies, equipped with the exclusive right to take deci- sions independently, and act in all matters pertinent to the administration of the municipality and its property, if a special law would not assign such acts to the State, other legal bodies, or natural person. The core responsibilities allocated to municipalities were: management of movable property and real estate in the ownership of the municipality, providing for public order in the municipality, local public transport in big cities, construction, maintenance management of local roads and parking places, responsibilities pertaining to public spaces, public green spaces, public street lightning, market places, cemeteries, local water resources and wells, water supply networks, sewera- ge and water cleaning establishments in small municipalities, construction, maintenance management of local cultural establishments, part of sport, lei- sure and tourist establishments, infant care homes, part of ambulatory he- alth service establishments, basic social service establishments, education support, nature and heritage protection, culture and creative hobbies, physi- cal culture and sports, humanities activities, municipal police forces and fire service (Nemec, Bercik & k uklis, 2000). Changes in state administration were governed by the Act No. 472/1990 Coll. on the Organization of Local State Administration. A new system of general local state administration implemented by 38 district and 121 sub- district offices was created. At the same stage of the reform many institutions of locally specialized state administration bodies were created, like school offices, health offices, environmental protection offices, fire departments, and many others. This division of local general and specialized state administra- tion became very soon the object of large criticism because of a divisionof local state administration into many separate, relatively independent units (Mesikova, 2008). 200 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence P AR Reforms in 1996 Because of critical political instability in the period of 1990−94 many measures of PAR were postponed. From 1990 to 1994 five governments were in place in Slovakia as follows: • from June 1990 under the Prime Minister Meciar, • from April 1991 under the Prime Minister Carnogurský, • from June 1992 under the Prime Minister Meciar, • from March 1994 under the Prime Minister Moravcík, • from December 1994 under the Prime Minister Meciar. The second wave of the PAR in Slovakia was based on government pro- grammatic statements of January 1995 but focused mainly on “organizatio- nal” changes − change from specialized to general local state administration, change of territorial and administrative structure of Slovakia, and creation of regional self-government structures (Machyniak, 2013; or k osorin, 2003). The Law on the Territorial and Administrative Structure of the Slovak Republic and the Law on Organization of the Local State Administration were adopted in 1996. They created a new territorial structure of the state with 8 regions and 79 districts, and new institutions of local general state adminis- tration − regional and district offices that deal with policy implementation in 32 policy areas (switched to the system of general state administration). Decentralization Reforms 2000−2005 The main idea of this period was a belief that decentralization would solve all inefficiencies in the public administration system (Strategia decentralizacie a reformy verejnej spravy, 1999). The start of the reform was postponed many times because of lack of political consensus between political parties, and only massive interventions of the Prime Minister Dzurinda in beginning of 2001 pushed the processes forward. After this, in very (too) short time all expec- ted basic legislation was approved by the Parliament: Civil Service Code, Pu- blic Service Code, Law on Creation of Territorial Self-g overnments, Law on Elections of Territorial Self-g overnments, Law on Transfer of Competencies of the State to the Regional and Local Self-g overnments, amendment of the Law on Municipalities, amendment of the Law on Municipal Property, Law on Property of Territorial Authorities, amendment of the Law on Budgetary Rules, and the law on Financial Control and Audit (Zarska & Sebova, 2005). The most visible change was the Law No. 302 of 2001 – valid since 2002, 201 Public Administr Ation reforms in s lov Aki A under which eight higher territorial units – self-governing regions were esta- blished, and started to work within the region borders as set in 1996. The Act on Municipalities was substantially amended, whereby the autonomous status of municipalities was significantly strengthened (Nemec & Bucek, 2012; or k o- vacova, 2010). The important Law on Transfer of Competencies defined the set of com- petencies to be transferred to regional and local self-governments. According to it a really large number of competencies has been transferred in the period of 2001−2002. Municipalities got new responsibilities in areas of road commu- nications, water management, citizenship  evidence, social care, environmental protection, education (elementary schools and similar establishments), phy- sical culture, theatres, health care (primary and specialized ambulatory care), regional development and tourism. w hile regional self-government became responsible for the competencies in areas of road communications, railways, road transportation, civil protection, social care, territorial planning, education (secondary education), physical culture, theatres, museums, galleries, local cul- ture, libraries, health care (polyclinics, local and regional hospitals), pharma- cies, regional development, and tourism. A large set of these competencies was re-allocated from direct ministerial responsibility (hospitals, education, etc.). The reform transferred massive set of responsibilities to local and regi- onal self-governments but did not introduce other crucial elements of de- centralization, mainly real fiscal decentralization − new responsibilities were financed by grants and not by the self-governments (k ozovsky, 2005). Furthermore, the “Project of Further Public Administration Decentrali- zation for 2003−2006” was adopted by the national government, focusing on two main aspects: a. Fiscal decentralization (massive transfer of responsibilities was follo- wed by changing of fiscal system of the country), b. Changes of state administration system (change of territorial structu- re of administrative bodies, and change from general to specialized deconcentrated state administration). Following given proposals, a new legislation was adopted in 2003 and 2004 (Niznansky & Hamalova, 2013). District state administration offices were abolished, and the system of local state administration diminished and converted from general offices (responsible for all competencies) to speciali- 202 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence zed offices (like school offices, social protection offices, etc.). The follow-up changes of 2007 built on a series of reforms implemented after the admission of the Slovak Republic to the EU in 2004. Pursuant to the Act 254/2007 Coll., regional offices of the sectoral scope of the Interior Minis- try were abolished as of September 30, 2007. The scope of their activities was passed to the sub-district bodies and relevant ministries (Machyniak, 2013). ESO Reform In their Program Declaration for 2012 −2016, the Slovak g overnment (SR) committed themselves to adopt measures to make public administration performance more efficient and advanced. The ESO Programme (Efficient, Reliable and Open State Administration) was approved by the government of the SR in April 2012. The changes in this phase included: a. Switch from specialized deconcentrated state administration into a general one. Pursuant to the Act No. 180/2013 Coll., the district offices of integrated local state administration were re-established in 72 locations (Bratislava and k ošice had one district office each with the territorial scope covering all the districts of these cities). Few spe- cialized bodies were preserved − Police Force, Fire and Rescue Corps, Mining Office Board, Labor Inspectorate, Financial Administration, Monuments Board, State Trade Inspection, Veterinary and Food Administration (Machyniak, 2013); b. Establishment of one-stop shops 2014–2015 (not finished yet); c. Optimization of administrative processes and administrative structures (including e-government development) for the period of 2014−2020. The structure of main goals indicates that the focus of this reform was not only on structural changes, but to some extend, also on the improvement of administrative services – e-government development supported by the EU funds, and creation of one-stop shops (we discuss this dimensions of the ESO reform in specific chapter later on) – as the reform vision (Office of g overn- ment, 2012) states: “ Any citizen or business is able to administer all specialized transactions with the state in a simple way and with minimum costs. In contacting the 203 Public Administr Ation reforms in s lov Aki A state any citizen or business is able to use electronic means and, if in direct contact with one office, there is no need to visit also other offices to obtain additional materials. State administration is simple, understandable, and accessible. State administration is “small”, flexible, sustainable, transparent, and functions with minimum costs” . 6.2.3. Summary – Character of Public Administration Reform in Slovakia The brief summary of changes implemented (it is difficult to speak about the reforms for some of the above-mentioned measures) provides the base for synthetic evaluation of the character of PAR in Slovakia. w e deliver this synthesis in more dimensions. Two Dimensions of PAR in Slovakia: Zigzag “Administrative” Reforms but Progressive Decentralization Changes At the level of state government, the entire period of 1990–2016 is mar- ked by non-systematic changes in the management from specialized to ge- neral deconcentrated state administration and vice versa (Table 6.1). These changes accompanied territorial changes, and did not bring a greater efficien- cy of its functioning nor significant improvement of public services provided to the citizens. Table 6.1: Zigzag “ Administrative” Reforms Ye ar Change 1990 Specialized deconcentrated state administration system established New administrative structure established (district and sub-district offices) 1996 g eneral deconcentrated state administration system established New administrative structure established (regions and districts) 2004 Specialized deconcentrated state administration system established New administrative structure established (district offices abolished) 2007 New administrative structure established (regional offices abolished) 2014 g eneral deconcentrated state administration system established New administrative structure established (district offices re-established) Source: own construction. However, during 1990–2006, a strong sub-national self-government sys- tem was created in Slovakia. Municipalities and self-governing regions were fully independent bodies equipped with powers to manage their own deve- 204 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence lopment (Niznansky, 2005). According to the recent 2016 Resolution of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities adopted by the Council of Eu- rope that is based on the monitoring visit in the country, it clearly states that the Slovak local self-government system is in almost full compliance with the principles of the European Charter of Local Self-g overnment. The mo- nitoring report highlights only really minor issues to be reflected in future – except of fragmentation. Role of New Public Management (NPM) in P AR in Slovakia The interesting feature of PAR in Slovakia is the fact that the reform wave 1998–2006 implemented by the right wing coalition significantly pro- moted private sector solutions in the public sector and decentralization. Many sectoral reforms were influenced by NPM ideology, for example in primary and secondary education “quasi market” with student vouchers and full plurality of all ownership forms were created. However, such NPM approaches were not consistent everywhere, and NPM was also never expli- citly mentioned by the government and reformers, as the ideological base for changes (Nemec, 2008). Left wing governments (i.e. Prime Minister Fico) formally and strongly opposed to private solutions in the public sector, and during the period of 1998−2006, some public sector changes were partly reverted or redesigned (abolishment of user fees in health care, ending of the establishment of new private universities, stopping privatization of hospitals, prohibiting profit for health insurance companies, more direct state control in utility sector, etc.) but most of NPM solutions remained without changes even until today (per- formance financing, program budgeting, public private mix in delivery of public services, or public private partnerships project in infrastructure area). External ideas, Pressures and Advice External ideas and pressures were only relatively important factor inf- luencing reforming of public administration system in Slovakia. Certainly, the most important was the EU accession process, even though public admi- nistration was not explicit independent part of negotiations. As a part of the accession process many general and sectoral changes were implemented in Slovakia, especially in following areas: − Creating of necessary regulatory agencies (see details below), − Improving the system of financial control and audit, 205 Public Administr Ation reforms in s lov Aki A − Establishment of the civil service system (see details below), − Fiscal decentralization and establishment of self-governing regions (see details above and below). In this part we only briefly mention the Law 502/2001 on Financial Control and Internal Audit. This law introduced major changes within the system of public sector control – especially by mentioning, for first time in Slovakia, that efficiency, economy, and effectiveness represent three core and interconnected pillars of evaluating performance of public sector orga- nizations. However, in its early stage, the law suffered from lack of unders- tanding of these principles – for example, effectiveness was defined as the “conformity of operation with the plan” (for more see Nemec, 2011). The EU allocated important sums of resources to support PAR in Slova- kia. In pre-accession phase Slovakia was allocated ECU 6.5 million in Phare assistance exclusively devoted to PAR in 1991−1997 programs (EC, 1999). This represented 3.8% of the total sum of ECU 173.5 million allocated to Slovakia for all Phare programs in this period. This allocation covered the following programs: SR9409 Public Administration (ending on 12/31/97) with ECU 2.0 milllion, SR9515 Public Agencies (ending on 7/31/98) with ECU 3.2 million, and SR9516 Public Agencies (continuum) with ECU 1.3 million. After the accession, Slovakia did not use any EU funds to cover costs of PAR in the post- accession phases. This changed in the previous and current programming pe- riod where allocations were requested and provided (see details below). To improve the capacity of Slovakia to implement PAR in pre-accession period the main supporting body was SIgMA-OECD program − Support for Improvement in g overnance and Management program represent a joint initiative of the OECD and the EU. Its key objective is to strengthen the foun- dations for improved public governance, and hence support socio-economic development through building the capacities of public sector, enhancing horizontal governance, and improving the design and implementation of public administration reforms, including proper prioritization, sequencing, and budgeting. SIgMA today focuses only on the EU Enlargement countries and the EU Neighbourhood countries but in the pre-accession period this body was the main source of know-how for all partial changes necessary to be realized before the accession (for example, already since 1992 SIgMA OECD supported the preparation of the public procurement laws – Slovakia 206 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence was the first CEE country with such a law in force since 1993). The other important fact to be mentioned is Slovak signature to the Eu- ropean Charter for Local Self-g overnment, thus accepting obligations in promoting subsidiarity principle and its realizations. All aspects of local and regional government are influenced by this signature – as already indicated, through the Slovak participation in activities of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe. Slovakia signed the Charter in 1999 (coming in force as the source of domestic law form in 2000 after rati- fication) – but with many reservations (Slovakia declared to be bound by the provisions of the Charter as follows: Article 2, Article 3, Paragraph 2, Article 4, Paragraphs 1, 2, 4 and 6, Article 5, Article 6, Paragraph 1, Article 7, Para- graphs 1, 2 and 3, Article 8, Paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, Article 9, Paragraphs 2, 3, 4 and 8, Article 10, Paragraph 1, and Article 11). The first monitoring report form of 2001 highlighted many deficiencies which were reflected step by step (especially by the decentralization reform), and such progress allowed full acceptance of the Charter (in 2002, Slovakia accepted Article 6, Paragraph 2; and on May 21, 2007. all other provisions). A great deal of foreign help was sought in preparing the first PAR, parti- cularly in the phase of analysis and need definition but rather less in the execu- tion phase (i.e. the preparation and implementation of concrete changes). The main foreign actors (except for the above-mentioned SIgMA OECD) were UNDP , w orld Bank, British k now-How Fund, and also a number of support programs from developed countries (like g ermany and Canada) were imple- mented. Some supportive programs (especially w orld Bank support to public financial management, health care, and pension reforms) were relatively libe- rally orientated and tried to implement several market type mechanisms into the public administration system in Slovakia (Nemec, 2008). “Elite-driven” Reforms Different from starting reform phase, where a lot of consultation was required, 1996−2006 P AR were very much elite-driven and top-down reforms. The reformers tried to hide this, for example by helding public meetings and discussions, but all decisions were clearly prepared and predefined, based on liberal ideology, by a small elite group. The main body behind the 2000−2006 reform was liberal think tank MESA10, clearly placed on the right wing of the political spectrum (Democratic Party), indirectly connected to the main 207 Public Administr Ation reforms in s lov Aki A political lobbies, and also supported by a lot of foreign finance focusing on promotion of “free market” solutions. A relatively small group headed by V . Niznansky prepared a basic concept of the reform. Proposed reform strate- gies were discussed at many public meetings, and consultations with foreign experts (supported by the comprehensive PHARE program) were also held. However, in practice different voices were not taken into the account. One of the main problems at this phase was exclusion of the Ministry of Interior (responsible for public administration) from the entire process. Under these circumstances, the political and parliamentary discussion about the reform strategy in Slovakia, as could be expected, focused mainly on political rather than factual aspects of the reform, with protracted debates on the number of regions and the election system (Nemec, 2008). Recent ESO reform has partly similar character – the only difference is the fact that the Minister of Interior is fully involved. Decentralization versus Fragmentation The territory of the Slovak Republic has been always highly fragmen- ted in terms of the number of municipalities. For instance, there were 3,473 municipalities in 1921 or 3,237 in 1961. The lowest total number of munici- palities (2,669 municipalities) in the Slovakia territory was in 1989 but this number increased up to 2,891 over the next following decades. The average municipality population size of municipality in Slovakia is only 1,870 inhabitants, and concerning an area size, the average Slovak mu- nicipality has approximately 17 km². Only two cities (Bratislava and k ošice) have a population size over 100,000 inhabitants, and seven other cities have a population size over 50,000 inhabitants. Almost 70% of all Slovak municipa- lities have less than 1,000 inhabitants (k limovský, 2014). The fact of large territorial fragmentation is significantly connected with the decentralization process problems. The theory (see for example the contents of papers from recent Istanbul conference on the topic – g yomen & Sazak, 2014) is not able to define any “optimum” size of municipalities, but it is obvious that too small self-governments have limited administrative capacity to manage a very broad set of allocated and delegated responsibilities (all of them are, for example, responsible for delegated state administration in prima- ry education or building permits – and such tasks require necessary capacities). Because the forced municipal amalgamation at the central level is still 208 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence politically impossible, the only viable option to cope with possible economic and implementation problems connected with municipalities, which are too small, is inter-municipal cooperation; however, this mechanism is insuffici- ently supported and promoted by the state (k limovský, 2015; or Tichy, 2005). The municipalities‘ right to cooperate has already been implemented in Slovakia since 1990. The basic legal provision on the IMC is explicitly mentio- ned in the Constitution of the Slovak Republic (No. 460/1992). More detailed legal provisions are written in the Municipal Act. According to the legislation each municipality is entitled (within the performance of their own powers) to cooperate with other territorial and administrative units as well as with the authorities of other countries which carry out any local functions. Municipa- lities also have the right to become a member of international associations of territorial units or territorial authorities. Despite the fact that there is no special law on the IMC in Slovakia, the Ministry of Interior of the Slovak Republic pu- blished a methodical instruction on establishing joint municipal offices in 2002. The main forms of inter-municipal cooperation are: agreement on the performance execution of task/s; agreement on the establishment of a joint municipal office; agreement on the establishment of municipal association; agreement on the establishment of a legal entity; and agreement on the esta- blishment of an association of legal entities (see for example k limovsky, 2014). Partnerships As seen in previous chapters, the PAR in Slovakia (except for its starting phase) is, to a great extent, based on the ideas of party policy, interest groups and elite-. This, together with other factors (like limited accountability – see for example Vesely, 2013) limits the “quality” of partnerships of the public administration bodies with all main stakeholders. Existing research clearly documents the fact that the will of all levels of government to involve stakeholders in decision-making and service delivery process is rather limited. This fact can be documented by the research of Vita- lisova (2015). She mapped the level of cooperation/non-cooperation of muni- cipalities with stakeholders. Despite the fact that answers of municipal repre- sentatives are certainly positively biased, half of municipalities claim that they do not cooperate with universities (universities are located in all parts of the country, so this is not territorial availability problem), only about 60% of mu- nicipalities cooperate with local businesses, and only 70% clearly showed the 209 Public Administr Ation reforms in s lov Aki A will to cooperate with local non-governmental organizations (the limited coo- peration between self-governments and the NgOs is also documented by our research – see for example Svidronova, Nemec & Mikusova Merickova, 2015). 6.3. “Marketization ” of Delivery of Public Services, and Agencification Before 1989 almost the entire organizational structure of public service delivery was ‘owned’ and operated by the socialist state. This system progres- sively changed during the respective phases of PAR, and the private (partly also non-profit) sector is today a major player in service delivery. The switch to public private non-profit sector delivery of many public services is not con- nected to the liberal reform period (2000−2006) as one might expect on the base of the previous chapter. Most changes happened already in earlier stages of PAR – we present the examples of local communal services, education and health care in the next three sub-parts of this chapter. The second wave of “marketization” is domi- nantly connected with the EU accession and agencification – its main aspects are described in the last sub-part. 6.3.1. Local Communal Services Delivery: Massive Externalization As indicated above, local public services represent a clear example of the mixture of all ownership forms participating in their delivery – and the main changes happened before 2000, where the existing data sets start. Majlingova (2005) mapped the system of municipal waste management (these data, with minor changes, are actual also today). The Table 6.2 shows the structure of service suppliers. Data presented by Majlingova (2005) show that externalization was rat- her frequent already at the beginning of this century but may not deliver cost savings (with the exception of municipal association performing really well). Our data provide the same picture. Table 6.3 documents the scale of contrac- ting selected local services to private producers by our research samples – contracting was realized in a massive way already in 2000, when our data start, and its scale remains more or less stable, depending on the sample (lar- ger municipalities contract more frequently than their smaller counterparts). 210 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Table 6.2: Profile of Organizations Providing w aste Management Services in Slo- vakia Ranked in Ascending Order of Cost to the User (situation in 2003) Institutional form / Size <1,000 <5,000 <10,000 <30,000 <50,000 >50,000 Municipality-owned (internal) Municipal house staff 4–5 11 3 2 Municipal budgetary org. 8 Municipal semi-budgetary org. 6 7 3 1 Municipal limited company 2 1 4 4 Municipal shareholder company 2 8 Publicly-owned (external) Public non-municipal budgetary org. 3 7 Public non-municipal semi-budge- tary org. 10 Privately owned (external) Private individual 4–5 9 Limited company 6 4 6 3 1 Share company 7 5 4 2 6 Mixed Mixed limited company 3 2 5 5 2 Mixed share company 3 Municipal association 1 1 5 1 Source: Majlingová, 2005: 98. Table 6.3: Percentage of Contracted Local Public Services Service 2001 2005 2006 2008 2009 2015 waste 49 64 69 80 80 75 Cemeteries 27 12 16 13 13 75 Public green areas 16 18 33 14 6 56 Communications 21 41 45 38 55 78 Public lighting 30 35 40 39 38 78 Source: own research. 211 Public Administr Ation reforms in s lov Aki A Table 6.4 calculates the index of production efficiency for each service category, comparing the costs of delivering services from contracting to in- ternal production. Using the average costs of internalized services as the base (= 100), the index scores are constructed by taking the ratio of costs for out- sourced services to costs for internalized services (measured per inhabitant per year), and multiplying by 100 to normalize the charts. Majority of index scores are above 100, indicating that the costs per inhabitant of service delive- ry were higher under contracting out arrangements compared to internalized production arrangements. Table 6.4: Comparative Efficiency Index for Contracting vs. Internal Production (Internal Form = 100) Service 2005 2006 2008 2009 2015 w aste management 94 125 184 60 210 Cemeteries 13 67 146 66 422 Public green areas 192 150 151 133 135 Maintenance of local communications 109 119 114 104 130 Maintenance of local lighting 138 128 156 127 81 Source: own research. The data collected indicate that contracting does not deliver clearly posi- tive outcomes (compared to the expectations in the existing NPM literature). The direct supply made by the public organizations is in many cases more efficient and (as our other own data document – see for example Merickova et al., 2010) of a higher quality compared to external production. However, we need to be aware of several methodological problems connected with our research. The core problems are the reliability of the data since the data col- lected from municipalities are imperfect because their cost monitoring is not sophisticated. They do not use cost centers accounting, and so cannot know the real cost of service delivery. w ith internal service delivery, the reported service costs only cover direct costs, and so are likely to be too low. However, all our research documents show that the results of in-house versus external production of local public services depend on concrete local conditions, atti- tudes, and goals of local self-governments, and not on NPM paradigm of the preference of private ownership. 212 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 6.3.2. Education – Student Vouchers at Primary and Secondary Level and Performance Financing of Higher Education From the point of ownerships, the education at all levels in both re- publics takes the form of a mixed system with public and private delivery, although the public sector is clearly the dominant player. The main pro- market feature is the method of financing − funding is currently based on a performance-based formula at all levels. Primary education is a mixture of own (original) and delegated res- ponsibility of municipalities (as the original responsibility municipalities finance local art schools and catering of all pupils), and the largest part of their expenditure. A formula-based funding system in which the number of pupils is the main determinant of resource allocation represents Slovak form of student vouchers financing system – resources follow the number of pupils / students enrolled. Existing private schools can charge fees but are also eligible for state subsidy. Secondary education is under the respon- sibility of regional governments, and is delivered under the same financial system. In higher education, public and private schools also co-exist but in a different way – private high schools are not eligible for state grants (thus may receive some support only in very specific cases) – their core revenue comes from the student fees (for more on this topic see for example Nemec & Sagat, 2007). The revenues of public higher education establishments in Slovakia consist of two main sources – public grants/transfers and their own inco- mes. From the beginning of this century, the allocation of public grants in the Slovak Republic is based on the formula used for performance system of financing of universities, as one of outcomes of public finance reform, namely of introducing of program budgeting. In its beginning, the system- was as follows: Program of Higher education, Science and Social Support to Students • Sub-program: Higher education – grant to finance accredited study programs; • Sub-program: Higher education science and technique – grant to finan- ce research and development; 213 Public Administr Ation reforms in s lov Aki A • Sub-program: Higher education development – grant to finance deve- lopment needs; • Sub-program: Social support for students – grant to provide support to students; • Sub-program: Targeted transfers. Source: Ministry of Education Universities transparently “competed” for public resources mainly in the first two sub-programs. In the first one the only factor used was the number of students (weighted by “unit costs per student” different for different uni- versities). Research grants were allocated by an open competition within the existing programs (mainly VEgA and kEgA programs). The results of the first phase with dominant focus on the number of stu- dents (Table 6.5) caused too important pervasive effects – we may argue that it acted against a better quality, and simply caused an increase in the number of students. Table 6.5: Public Transfers to Public Higher Education 2002–2006 (mil. Skk, current prices) 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 g rant to finance study programs 5,825 78.3% 6,660 80.1% 7,460 79% 8,023 77.5% 8,745 76% g rant to finance research & develo- pment 584 7.9% 638 7.7% 948 9.1% 1,066 10.3% 1,119 9.7% g rant to finance development needs 378 5.1% 370 4.4% 330 3.5% 450 4.3% 500 4.3% g rant to provide support to students 648 8.7% 650 7.8% 700 7.4% 810 7.8% 1,150 10% Total 7,435 - 8,318 - 9,438 - 10,349 - 11,514 - Source: Ministry of Education. All managements of public higher education establishments started to maximize the level of public grants by maximizing the number of accepted students. The outcome is visible in Table 6.6. 214 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Table 6.6: Number of Newly Accepted Higher Education Students in Slovakia 1990/91 1995/96 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 New full time students 13,404 20,809 24,279 24,270 26,974 24,150 32,488 35,542 % of new full time students from 18 (19) old population 15.9% 21.8% 27.2% 27.2% 30.4% 27.2% 36.7% 41.3% New part-time students 1,868 3,881 9,665 12,763 8,057 15,057 15,718 17,254 Total 15,272 24,690 33,944 37,033 35,031 39,207 48,206 52,796 Source: Ministry of Education. A significant increase of newly accepted students might be a positive de- velopment but since the total amount of allocated resources has increased very slowly, in fact just marginally “faster” than inflation, the outcome is sub- optimal – the grant per student has decreased significantly over the evaluated period. The outcomes were straightforward – overcrowded facilities, decli- ning level of entry examinations (or their full abolishment), and increasingly overworked staffs. The higher education law also envisaged the system of public grants to be complemented by a significant increase of own revenues. As indicates Table 6.7, this has scarcely happened. he The Table 6.7does not include unofficial sources, derived mainly from semi-legal fees paid by their part-time students through many different channels. Table 6.7: Public and Own Resources of Universities/Higher schools (thousands Sk) 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Public grants 5,845,870 6,472,289 6,816,340 8,631,711 9,831,900 10,349,388 Own resources 532,884 454,592 1,207,204 1,397,170 1,440,983 2,191,299 Total 6,378,754 6,926,881 8,023,544 10,028,881 11,272,883 12,540,687 Source: Ministry of Education. Politicians and managers of the system have come to appreciate some of these problems, and tried to cope with them. The main change was splitting the financing formula into two parts, i.e. providing the main public grant on 215 Public Administr Ation reforms in s lov Aki A the basis of two criteria – according to the number of students (approx. 60%) and according to the research results (40%). These changes (together with the changes in accreditation process) delivered certain positives, but also new per- vasive effects – especially inflation of low quality publication volumes (or focus on w eb of Science conference proceedings today). However, all the changes did not change the problem of over-supply: today many universities accept all candidates to fill in the existing capacities which present today about 130% of the maximum potential demands due to the decline in youth population. 6.3.3. Health Care Delivery: Competitive Health Insurance Financing and Plurality of Ownership Forms The objective of the pre-1989 health care system in Czechoslovakia had been to provide a comprehensive system of health care for all members of society. Under the old system both services and medicines were free for the patients. Despite of limited resources (about 5% of gDP), everyone was able to get necessary health care, when necessary, at a relatively good medi- cal standard. Most considerations of equity were achieved although special medical institutions provided higher quality care for high-ranking officials. The processes of reforming the Slovak health care system started immediately after the Velvet Revolution in 1989. They introduced impor - tant changes into the system – especially privatization, and a shift in finan- cing health care from general taxation to social health insurance. On the other hand, the state did not opt out from the principle of universality of access – according to the Slovak Constitution, based on an insurance sys- tem, citizens have the right to free medical care according to the provisions of complementary law (Law on Health Care). From the point of health finance, Slovakia switched to the so-called “Bismarck” system of social health insurance to replace the old general taxation system of financing health care. However, together with the Czech Republic, it decided to introduce a competitive/pluralistic social health in- surance (no other “post-soviet” country decided for such radical pro-mar- ket switch). The main laws on health insurance were passed in 1994 which created the base for establishing “competing” health insurance companies (two of them public). Most of these have disappeared since then from the ‘market’. In 2002, five health insurance companies existed but since 2010 216 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence only two private and one public remained (for more see Nemec, 2013). Changes in the health insurance system were supported by the typical arguments of plurality, independence, and competition. However, because the health insurance premiums were centrally defined, and the main package of services had to be delivered by all insurance companies for the price that was regulated by the Ministry of Finance, some level of plurality and com- petition was visible only during the initial phase of insurance system (for more see Medved, Nemec & Vitek, 2005). The introduction of a pluralistic health insurance system is frequently considered an imperfect state decision during the health care transforma- tion process in Slovakia. Arguments for a plurality of insurance providers, their independence from the government, and competition between them have been strongly questioned by several authors. Because the evidence for these doubts comes from the advanced market systems, it seems likely that their potential to improve health care in transitional countries may be even more limited. Simple data indicate that this reform idea did not achieve its objective. Many resources were withdrawn from the system when several private insurance companies collapsed, and better quality was not achieved. Privatization or denationalization of health service production began in the mid-1990s, mainly in outpatient care and pharmacies, and is almost completed (for more see Nemec & Lawson, 2005). In 1995, the state system accounted for 58% of expenditures in primary care, in 1996, it was only 8%, and by 2001, it was 5%. For the pharmacies the trend was similar: the pro- portion in the state sector decreased from 97% in 1995 to 5% in 1996, and 3% in 2001. Privatization of specialized ambulatory care was slower but, by 2001, the state sector accounted only for 26% of facilities (today only ambu- lances in public hospitals remain public). The process of hospital privatization began during the second term of the Dzurinda government. In 2002, the management of hospitals was de- centralized, and some hospitals were given self-governing status. By 2003, all regional hospitals had been transferred to regional self-governments or converted into non-profit bodies. The Ministry remained responsible for university hospitals. Although the latter were expected to be transformed into shareholder companies, such a transformation did not occur during the Dzurinda government period, and the Fico government terminated the 217 Public Administr Ation reforms in s lov Aki A idea. Table 6.8 displays the evolved structure of hospitals in Slovakia, and documents that the idea of plurality of ownerships forms (except for faculty hospitals) was achieved (the situation is more or less similar also in 2016). Table 6.8: Hospital Ownership by Region (2009) Ownership Western Slovakia Central Slovakia Eastern Slovakia Bratislava Total TT TN NR BB ZA PO KE State – Ministry of Health establishments 4 3 6 13 6 8 11 10 61 State – other state bodies 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 2 6 Public – regional or local self-governments 4 4 2 2 5 3 1 1 22 Other (profit and non- profit companies) 4 8 6 14 5 21 11 14 83 Total 12 16 14 29 17 34 23 27 172 Abbreviations of regions: TT – Trnava, TN – Trencin, NR – Nitra, BB – Bans- ka Bystrica, ZA – Zilina, PO – Presov, KE – Kosice; Source: Ministry of Health. From the point of patients’ direct financial participation in covering he- alth care expenditures, Slovakia belongs to the group of (developed) coun- tries with moderate to high patients’ participation – together with most new EU member states. Most all co-payments were introduced by the second Dzurinda government in 2004, and despite to the fact that most of them were abolished, this reversal did not impact the trend towards an increased priva- te financial participation, which shifted to the area of drug expenditures. To what extend a relatively high level of private payments limits the universality of access is bit unclear – there is no effective research on this topic in Slovakia. 6.3.4 .Agencification In the early phase of transformation, the agencification was connected only with financing of health care, pensions, and unemployment benefits. In 1993, three public agencies were created – Vseobecna zdravotna poistovna and Poisťovna MV SR for health care insurance, and Socialna poistovna for unemployment and pension benefits. 218 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence The main wave of agencification is connected to the reform measures of the liberal governments of 1998−2006 period, and to the EU accession pro- cess (for more see Nemec, Mikusova Merickova & Vozarova, 2011). Both fac- tors served as major catalysts of changes contributing to the creation of a re- latively comprehensive set of agencies, many of which enjoyed a very high de- gree of autonomy from the executive government. w ithout much (or almost no) discussion about the normative and practical aspects of privatization and agencification ideas (e.g. the split between policy and administration; more efficiency through specialization and expertise; depolititization) massive re- organization of the public sector occurred during the two Dzurinda Cabinets (between 1998 and 2006). Table 6.9 shows sectoral examples of the created agencies, and Table 6.10 main regulatory agencies. Table 6.9: List of Service Delivering Agencies (per Selected Sectors) in Slovakia Sector Legal Status of Providers Evolutions of Forms of Ownership Telecommuni- cations Slovak Telekom, shareholder company, owned by Deuts- che Telekom Ag Privatization of state body Slovenske telekomunikacie in 1999−2000 Postal services Slovak Post, shareholders company, owned by the state Converted from state enterprise in 2004 Production, trans- port and marketing of electricity Many licensed private companies. Largest body is Slovenske elektrarne, share- holders company Deregulated market, Slovenske elektrarne owned by the state (34%) and ENEL SPA (66%) gas transport anddistribution SPP distribucia – for delivery of gas to consumers and Eu- rostream – for international gas transport – both 100% daughter company of SPP Unbundling from 1. 6. 2006 Marketing of gas SPP – shareholders company, 51% state-owned, and 49% owned by Slovak gas Holding B.V . − consortium of E.ON-Ruhrgas and gaz de France Privatization in 2002 Railway transports of passengers Railways of the Slovak Re- public State enterprise, established on 1. 1. 1993 219 Public Administr Ation reforms in s lov Aki A Freight rail trans- port Cargo Slovakia From 1. 1. 2005 as the separate state shareholders company, before part of Slovak railways Regional and local transport of pas- sengers Railways of the Slovak Re- public, State-owned railway infrastructure company road infrastructure provided by licensed private companies Deregulation of road transport from the mid-2000s, regulated by sub-national governments Air transport Private companies After the split of Czechoslovakia, the federal airlines CSA became Czech body only. A few new pri- vate companies were established later. Attempts to create a national airline failed. Inland water trans- port Private companies Privatization of formed state body w ater and waste water Regional mixed or private companies Deregulation since 2006 Heating All types Privatization in 1990 Broadcasting State-owned nationwide pu- blic broadcasting organi- zation with three channels, private TV broadcasters, regional TV broadcasters Licenses for private TV stations issued Source: Nemec, Mikusova Merickova & Vozarova, 2011. The endogenous motives for agencification (there was no major political or public opposition to changes) were strengthened by exogenous pressure on policy makers – especially the need to comply with “the Acquis Communau- taire“ as the basic conditions for joining the EU. In 2006, the left wing government under the Prime Minister Fico was elected by the voters who were very dissatisfied with the perceived radicalism of previous reforms. This new government was not able but also not willing to revert previous agencification decisions (also because of the EU members- hip obligations) – compared to some other countries Slovakia did not even react to the fiscal constraints caused by the economic and financial crisis with cutting its staff or merging agencies. The same is valid for later Fico’s govern- ments (in power again from 2012 and re-elected in 2016). 220 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Table 6.10: Main Regulatory Agencies in Slovakia Sector Market structure Regulation modes Telecommuni- cations Liberalized Independent regulator: Telekomunikacny urad SR (www.teleoff.gov.sk) Postal services In the process of liberalization Independent regulator: Postovy regulacny urad (www.posturad.sk) Production of electricity Liberalized Independent regulator: Urad pre regulaciu sietovych odvetvi (www.urso.sk) Electric networks (transport anddistribution) Regional mono- polies Independent regulator: Urad pre regulaciu sietovych odvetvi (www.urso.sk) Marketing of electricity Regional mono- polies Independent regulator: Urad pre regulaciu sietovych odvetvi (www.urso.sk) gas transport- distribution Monopoly Independent regulator: Urad pre regulaciu sietovych odvetvi (www.urso.sk) Marketing of gas Monopoly Independent regulator: Urad pre regulaciu sietovych odvetvi (www.urso.sk) Railway transports of passengers Monopoly Semi-independent regulator: Úrad pre reguláciu železničnej dopravy (www.urzd.sk) Freight rail transport Monopoly Semi-independent regulator: Úrad pre reguláciu železničnej dopravy (www.urzd.sk) Regional and local transport of passengers Regional and local licences, normally given to one supplier Semi-independent regulator: Úrad pre reguláciu železničnej dopravy (www.urzd.sk) Air transport Liberalized Semi-independent regulator: Letecky urad SR (www.caa.sk) Inland water transport Liberalized Semi-independent regulator: Statna plavebna sprava (www.sps.sk) Hospital health services Mix of all types of companies and Ng Os Independent regulatory office: Urad pre dohlad nad zdravotnickou starostlivostou (www.udzs. sk) may represent agency (2). Ambulatory health services Mainly private Independent regulatory office: Urad pre dohlad nad zdravotnickou starostlivostou (www.udzs.sk) Higher education Dominated by sta- te/public schools, few private high schools exist Semi-independent Akreditacna komisia (www.akredkom.sk) Financial services Competitive market Independent regulator: Narodna banka SR (www.nbs.sk) may represent agency (2). Broadcasting Competitive market Independent regulator: Rada pre vysielanie a retransmisiu (www.rada-rtv.sk) Source: Nemec, Mikusova Merickova & Vozarova, 2011. 221 Public Administr Ation reforms in s lov Aki A De-agencification is not the issue today; however, the level of independen- cy of agencies from the central structures and politicians visibly decreased. As Beblavy (2002) states, depolitization in general and depolitization of agencies was never the real agenda of any Slovak government. However, the opposite might be true – just after creating agencies political parties started to unders- tand the benefits emanating from controlling agencies. As a result, the political fight for the “allocation” of agencies – either between coalition and opposition parties, or within political parties in power – is more and more visible. 6.4. Civil Service Reform Slovakia did not decide to pass the Civil Service Law in the earlier pha- ses of transformation. Only the pressure connected with the final phase of EU accession process forced the political elites of the country to accept the fact that civil service shall be regulated by special law, providing a guarantee for the existence of professional and politically independent civil service. The Act No. 312/2001 Coll. on Civil Service stipulated for the first time the legal relations in the Slovak civil service performance. This Act provided the legal framework for the civil service, and was aimed to establish profes- sional, impartial, politically neutral, efficient, and flexible civil service. The Act made a clear distinction between political (minister, state secretary) and apolitical posts (head of office, directors general of the sections, direc- tors of departments, and other civil servants at the ministries). The Civil Service Office was set up and was responsible for the implementation of the Act (for more see Staronova, Stanova & Sicaková-Beblava, 2014) – the Office sought to coordinate national service with two instruments: systemi- zation and central register of civil servants but it was not very successful. The simultaneously accepted Act No. 313/2001 Coll. on Public Service regulated the public service matters (teachers, part of staff of territorial self- government, and other public sector professional employees, without status of a civil servant). In addition, specialized laws, which established the civil service of mi- litary forces, policemen, customs officers and fire-brigades, were adopted during this period. By doing so, the legislative framework regulating the status of civil ser- 222 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence vants and other public sector employees has been created. However, soon after the EU accession in 2004, major regressive changes happened (Mayer- Sahling, 2009). The Civil Service Office that was politically independent, and its chair was not very popular amongst the whole spectrum of politi- cal parties (Staronova, Stanova & Sicakova-Beblava, 2014) operated only between 2002 and 2006, when it was repealed by the Parliament. Except for personal reasons, other factors determining the abolishment of the Civil Service Office were lack of law harmonization and lack of clarity of the law on the civil service which influenced the uncertainty concerning the role of the Civil Service Office as well as disseverment of individual service offices which hardly cooperated with that time newly established office. According to Meyer-Sahling (2009), Slovakia (together with Poland and the Czech Republic) represents a group of “destructive reform rever- sal” countries. Not only the Civil Service Office was abolished but most of main civil service principles are not well respected by the legislation. and especially the practice in Slovakia. Open competition for civil service posts is formally established but, in reality, patronage is the main principle for se- lection of new civil servants, especially in higher posts (Staronova, Stanova & Sicakova-Beblava, 2014, describe this phenomena in detail). Specific way to by-pass a real open competition are given by selection criteria – if exami- nations happen, they have, in majority cases, only oral form, thus allowing any kind of manipulation (Table 6.11 shows changes of the civil service se- lection process – and the fact that competition for permanent civil service post is not compulsory since 2009). 223 Public Administr Ation reforms in s lov Aki A Table 6.11: Civil Service Positions and the Selection Process thereof Preparatory civil service (1. 4. 2002 – 31. 3. 2004) Permanent civil service (1. 4. 2002 – today) Temporary civil service (1. 1. 2004 – today) Nominated civil service positions (1. 1. 2004 – 1. 11. 2009) Qualification examination (1. 4. 2002 – 1. 6. 2006) After passing this examina- tion, the status of permanent civil servant was achieved. x x x Nomination examination (1. 1. 2004 – 1. 11. 2009) x x x y Standard open competition (1. 4. 2002 – today) y Optional Optional x “g roup” open competition (1. 1. 2004 – 1. 11. 2009) x y (but not for the highest positions) x x Direct selection (1. 11. 2009 – today) x Optional x x Source: adapted from Staroňová – Láštic, 2011. The civil service in Slovakia is also far from the ideal of political neutrality – the legislation and the practice give virtually no guarantees to the senior civil service appointees, making these positions susceptible to political appointments and political pressure. Managers – from the top state secretary/deputy minister down to the head of unit/division – can be ‘relieved of their duties’ at any time and without any reason (Meyer-Sahling, 2009: 40). Another dimension involves performance evaluation and performance pay. The basic salary is fixed but the allocation of any non-predetermined premiums is fully arbitrarily, and varies in structure and number. For the majority of the authorities performance appraisal (if exists) is not at all related to remuneration, i.e. the link to a salary is missing, although the performance salary component is far from being marginal. Because Heads of service offices and Directors-general are occasionally paid the salaries (all premiums included) that are as high as the salaries of top managers in the private sector, such situation is alarming. 224 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 6.5. Improving Administrative Services and Procedures, E-Government As indicated above, most “reform” changes were of structural character, or promoting decentralization. None from all existing Slovak governments really directly addressed the need to deliver reliable, predictable, transparent, and efficient administrative services to the citizens and the private sector, and/or minimize “red tape” , and simplify administrative processes. As of to- day, administrative courts and/or tribunals are still not established; the same is valid for necessary systemic complaint mechanisms (except for some very recent steps within the ESO reform). 6.5.1. Improving Efficiency and Quality of Administrative Services For this topic we provide one short case study to document the situation (for more see Nemec, Medved & Sumpikova, 2005). w ith the support of Phare public administration reform program a comprehensive experiment with focus to improve the quality and effectiveness of performance of the deconcentrated state administration was introduced at the level of district and regional offices of state administration in Slovakia. The preparation of the experiment started in 1998, and the first year of operation was in 2000. The aim of this experiment was to try to assess and measure performan- ce of offices in the following four dimensions: 1. Professional quality of performance (the quality of administrative actions), 2. Client satisfaction, 3. Employee satisfaction, 4. Efficiency of performance – delivery of products. Already the starting phase of this experiment was problematic – because of many implementation problems, the experiment was realized in limited sca- le (contents), and on a very small sample of state administration bodies (size). During the period of 2000–2002, three of its four parts started to opera- te. Client satisfaction was measured by using a comprehensive questionnaire, filled in by the citizens coming to the office for any kind of administrative action. 23 quality target questions tried to obtain the data on the most impor- 225 Public Administr Ation reforms in s lov Aki A tant dimensions of service, including performance of personnel, premises, and process (all aspects of service design). Employee satisfaction was also measured by the questionnaire covering 39 questions about important fac- tors influencing the employee satisfaction. Issues like working conditions and environment, career planning and development, working relations, workload and rewards represented the most important parts of the questionnaire. The measurement of the efficiency of performance of public adminis- tration activities was based on data obtained from cost-center based ma- nagement and accounting. The cost-center approach was introduced as an experiment in one regional office of the state administration as a part of the Phare project, focusing on public administration reform since 1998. Later, the Ministry of Interior decided to use this approach as a compulsory method in all district and regional offices of the state administration. The data from cost-center based computerized system (using software IBEU) provided full information about the direct and indirect costs of the respective department. These data were processed further to obtain data per product as the pre-con- dition for future full-cost accounting. Despite of the potential of this approach, the project was suspended, espe- cially because of a lot of resistance from the offices. Regional and district offices complained that it was too complicated to obtain data, or they were not willing to provide it, being afraid of the consequences. Some of the complaints were realistic – for example that the calculation of costs per product was only partly based on the existing software IBEU but needed additional manual interven- tions. There were no interconnected information management systems within the offices of the state administration. Nor there were national information systems collecting the data automatically. The interface between IBEU and the central program to process the data at the level of the Ministry did not work well. In this situation the running of the system caused additional workload for all actors, thus limiting the success of the experiment. The group processing data at the Ministry was too small to be able to prepare comprehensive mate- rial summarizing the data obtained, and to draw the necessary conclusions. Cost-centers increased the workload but also achieved better transparency of performance data – something not appreciated by most offices. Positive elements from this experiment were not used in later stages of “reforming” the Slovak public sector. It seems that all involved stakeholders 226 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence do not want too transparent information about performance of public admi- nistration bodies – including citizens who do not demand it (the problem of non-reliability of existing cost data in Slovak public administration system is well documented by our studies on contracting and outsourcing: unit costs of in-house versus external production are not compared because they are not available – see for example Merickova et al., 2010). 6.5.2. Administrative Procedures: “Red Tape” Excessive regulation and rigid conformity to formal rules are the typical features of the Slovak public administration system. w e can document this fact in many cases. Two core purposes might lie behind this situation – g er- man legal tradition and politicization. In the Slovak conditions, the typical reaction of top politicians to any problem or scandal in the public (and also private) sector is changing the existing laws, or preparing a new legislation. In such conditions, for example Public Procurement Law is amended two or three times over some years, adding and re-adding new paragraphs and requirements (the first law was about 30 pages long, the current law is more than 200 pages long and not executable because of internal controversies). Regulatory impact assessment system was formally introduced in Slovakia as a part of accession and post-accession process, but as Staronova (2010: 124) states, it is just formal and does not have any impact on decreasing “red tape”: “The lack of a single unit in charge of RIA quality assurance in Slovakia de facto weakens the whole system, and makes the use of RIA only a symbolic exercise” . w e briefly introduce one interesting study documenting the issue. Ciz- marik (2013) tried to assess the compliance costs of taxation in Slovakia (cost that have to be paid by the tax payers for fulfilling legal tax obligations). He used statistically significant sample, and his results are really negative as shown in Table 6.12. Because the findings, especially the estimates of compliance costs for in- come taxation of physical persons, were very negative, he recalculated the results for the following possible biases – total tax revenues from income tax, real total number of legal persons, replacing average with median data, diffe- rent values of the coefficient “A”, and different monetary values of time as shown in Table 6.13. 227 Public Administr Ation reforms in s lov Aki A Table 6.12: Estimated Costs of Taxation in Slovakia in 2011: Income Taxation Subject: Legal form Avera- ge CC (EUR) Total number of tax subjects Total CC (EUR) Total tax revenues (EUR) Relative CC (%) CC to GDP (%) Self-employed 861 481,996 414,871,309 x x x Other physical persons 770 75,754 58,354,569 x x x Physical persons in total 473,225,878 56,402,000 839.02% 0.69% Limited companies 4,067 181,192 736,921,800 X x x Other companies 3,186 12,191 38,841,609 X x x Legal persons in total 775,763,409 1,645,905,000 47.13% 1.12% Total 1,248,989,287 1,702,307,000 73.37% 1.81% Source: Cizmarik, 2013. Table 6.13: Alternative Recalculations Alternative CC to tax revenues total CC to tax revenues physical persons CC to tax revenues legal persons Original results 73.37% 839.02% 47.13% Alternative „A “ 53.11% 242.29% 35.98% Alternative „B“ 62.36% 713.17% 40.06% Alternative „C“ 40.12% 637.04% 19.67% Alternative „D“ 61.36% 734.61% 38.29% Alternative „E“ 62.99% 599.71% 44.59% Alternative „A+B+C“ 24.69% 156.37% 12.76% Source: Cizmarik, 2013. To summaries the results – tax payers and physical persons have to spend minimum 1,5 EUR to pay 1 EUR taxes to the state, probably much more. Even with the most cautious assumptions, the compliance costs of taxation in Slovakia are higher compared to those in most other countries. The issue of rigid conformity to the rules is well visible on the example of public procurement or within the system of public sector control. Nemec, Orviska and Lawson (forthcoming) mapped the impact of the Supreme Au- dit Office on innovations in the public sector and the level of efficiency of its audit. The theory anticipates that accountability institutions, such as the 228 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence SAO, may create feedback loops supporting public innovations. However, their detailed checks on the concrete situation in the Slovak Republic confi- dently conclude that in Slovakia such a feedback loop barely functions. One of the core purposes for this situation is the way how controls function – most controls are compliance controls, and the main feature of controlling is “fear” . 6.5.3 .Transparency As regards transparency, the most important step was introducing of free access to information legal package (since 2001), progressively increa- sing access of citizens to any public data. Two core laws defining this field are the Law on Free Access to Information and the Law on Public Contracts. The Law on Free Access to Information is to large extend fully com- parable (or even more progressive) with the situation in most developed countries – formally any physical person can ask for all existing non-secret information – and public bodies must provide information about the access point (channels). Implementation gaps exist but are not too much limiting the functionality of this law. The Law on Public Contracts requires that all contracts signed by the public bodies (except for few secret exemptions and above fixed financial limit) must be stored in the central registry – and are valid only after they are stored and displayed. As a result, any interested party has a full access to all information on governmental purchasing but also many other types of public expenditures (like grants to non-profit sector bodies). Transparency is formally very well promoted, especially at the self-go- vernment level. For example, the city of Martin (Central Slovakia) received several awards for its project “Transparent City” from important interna- tional bodies – especially the United Nations Public Service Award in 2011 in category: Preventing and Combating Corruption in the Public Service. However, as the existing studies document, a really high level of transparen- cy in Slovakia does not prevent corruption. For example, g rega (2013) ana- lyzed public procurement in the above mentioned city of Martin. Thanks to transparency, he did not have any problems to obtain data documenting that many procurements are manipulated. 229 Public Administr Ation reforms in s lov Aki A 6.5.4. Accessibility and E-Government Except for very marginal improvements implemented especially at the local level (most progressive municipalities started to create client centers at the beginning of this century), not much has been done for a better accessibi- lity of administrative services prior to the ESO reform. Thanks to the available financing from the EU funds, the ESO reform in- cludes some visible improvements, especially the fact that one-stop shops were established step by step at the deconcentrated state administration level, to ensure contact of the citizens with the state administrative functions. One-stop shops operate within the organizational structure of district offices, and are expected to provide services like Trade Licences, Road Transport administra- tion, Environment, Registration of Vehicles, Commercial Register, Offences, Forest and Land Office, Labor, Social Affairs and Family in one place. The core limit for full operation of one-stop shops is the existence of thousands different administrative registers that are not interlinked – and probably cannot be in- terlinked in short or even medium time perspective. The principle that a piece of information is provided to the state only once cannot be respected in such environment, thus increasing administrative burdens to citizen and business. E-Government Electronic public administration, i.e. e-g overnment, became the visible is- sue less than ten years ago. The Strategy for the Public Administration Informa- tization 2007–2013 included the task to provide selected agendas in electronic way – providing e-services to the citizens and the private sector by using public administration information systems. However, also because of lack of resour- ces and technical problems with e-signature, communication, and transaction functions of e-government, it did not start to function on expected scale. The problem of limited resources was addressed by the creation of ope- rational program Public Administration Electronization as a part of recently finished EU funds programming period. The expectation was that all main state services will be electronized (especially job search, filing of income tax return, motor vehicle registration, or social security). This program allocated to various projects worth about one billion of euros in total, and its formal goals were specially (www.informatizacia.sk) the increase of satisfaction of citizens, businesses and other entities with public administration by reducing 230 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence the administrative burden on citizens in contact with the public authorities, and to simplify citizens‘ opportunities to participate in public affairs; intro- ducing of electronic devices in public administration processes through the creation of additional electronic registers for administrative operations and their connection to existing registers; ensuring their usability for legal acts, effective and efficient public administration through a functional system of e- g overnment; increasing of public administration competence by increasing the computer literacy of public servants. The 2013 survey carried out for the Ministry of Finance by a company g fk Market Research Institute Ltd. (www.informatizacia.sk) regarding the citizen satisfaction with e-g overnment services reveals some very interesting facts regarding the situation and possible achievements. The results confirmed the computer literacy of the population as well as the possibility of access to the Internet − up to 84% of surveyed residents used the Internet. The users were not only the younger age groups or groups of people with higher education but 57% of the elderly population aged 60 to 67 years used the Internet and up to 60% of the population with primary education could use the Internet. Use of the Internet by the citizens of the Slovak Republic is growing every year − since 2010 it rose from 60% to 72%. These facts suggest that Slovak citizens are prepared for e-g overnment, i.e. they expect growth in the volume of services provided electronically. In reality, however, electronic contact of citizens with public authori- ties in its simplest form, such as obtaining information by the citizens from public authorities, is still not intensive and also not improving (in 2011, 69% of citizens obtained information from the public authorities, and 54% used the forms downloaded from the websites of public authorities, while in 2013, only 53% of citizens obtained the information electronically, and only 40% of citizens downloaded the official forms). The dominant form of citizens con- tact with the public authorities is still a personal visit (75% of the citizens). On average, 48% of citizens considered information on electronic public services insufficient. Only 18% of citizens were aware of electronic public ser- vices directly from their providers − most citizens received information from the media, friends and relatives, and these data are incomplete (70% of citizens do not understand the principle of public e-service completely, regardless of age, education, or the size of the municipality). 54% of Slovak citizens never 231 Public Administr Ation reforms in s lov Aki A used any form of electronic contact with the public authorities. For citizens, who did use an electronic contact with the authorities, only 20% used a full electronic public service, the rest only looked up information from the website s or downloaded official forms but they received the service in person). Citizens do not evaluate e-g overnment services well − only 10% of citi- zens perceived that electronic public services fully met their needs. Most of them claimed that the only benefit of e-g overnment is time saving but issues like increased efficiency, service quality, and increased transparency were not perceived. 23% of those who wanted to use public e-services had to visit the office in the end. 6.5.5. Lack of Accountability and Responsibility Accountability and responsibility represent important problem in the Slovak public administration system – this fact is revealed by many existing studies. As Vesely (2013) states, the fact that the Slovak (and some other Sla- vic languages) is not able to translate these two terms properly indicates a lot. Because accountability and responsibility is not required by the citizen, and the tolerance to corruption is really high (Orviska & Hudson, 2003). In Slovakia nothing happens to a Minister, who publicly announces (www. pravda.sk): “Yes, our office did not follow public procurement rules. Maybe we will pay the fine as set by the Public Procurement Office; however, this is just the transfer from one state pocket to another one. But the most impor- tant is that we have necessary cars” . Nothing happens also to a hospital di- rector, who responds in a discussion on public procurement problems in his institution as follows: “The life of the patient is much more important than the Public Procurement Law. Our only concern is to provide the patient with maximum care. The patient does not care about the procurement of medica- ments; he just wants his/her drug. ” (www.stv.sk). 6.6. Conclusion The text of this chapter first shows the consequence of public admi- nistration changes in Slovakia after the Velvet Revolution in 1989. Its main goal is to assess all these changes from more global analytical perspective according to main selected comparative areas analyzed in this book. 232 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence The facts indicate that, except for first phase of reforms when all de- mocratic structures were created, frequent later changes deliver moderate impacts, if any. The core task for almost all governments was to change the administrative structures – this happened in zigzag way by switching from specialized to general administration and back (generating massive costs but with almost no benefits). On the other hand, some necessary steps were not recognized, or even reverted – the most visible example is Civil Service situation. Important positive achievements and results, however, do exist. Slovak self-government situation is one of the closest in Europe to the principles of the European Charter of Local Self-g overnment – except for too large fra- gmentation that is not well addressed on top-down line. The transparency and right for information principles are almost perfectly respected – legally but also in practical life. Recent ESO reform has ambitions to improve the quality of administrative services and processes for citizens and businesses – some important changes already happened (one-stop shops and e-g o- vernment services). w e argue that the core purpose for the limited capacity of all Slovak governments is over-politicization of the public life in the country – public administration is expected to serve the politicians, and the task for every new minister is to “reform” it. In such environment, in many cases, “ill re- forms are badly implemented” , and the need to change this – to switch form politic to policy is well stressed by the Strategy of the Development of the Slovak Republic (2010) – just needs to be implemented. 233 Public Administr Ation reforms in s lov Aki A References 1. Beblavy, M. 2002. Understanding the w aves of Agencification and the g overnance Problems They Have Raised in Central and Eastern Euro- pean Countries. OECD Journal on Budgeting, 2 (6), 121–139. 2. Bercik, P., & Nemec, J. 1999. The Civil Service System of the Slovak Republic. In: T. Verheijen (Eds). 1999. Civil Service Systems in Central and Eastern Europe Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishers, 184–212. 3. Cizmarik, P . 2013. Vyvolane naklady zdaneni. Brno: Masarykova Uni- versity. 4. European Commission. 1999. An Evaluation of Phare Public Adminis- tration Reform Programmes Final Report. Brussels: EC. 5. g rega, M. 2013. Analyza verejneho obstaravania vo vybranom slovens- kom meste v roku 2012. Acta aerarii publici, 10 (2), 25–38. 6. g oymen, k. Sazak, O. (Eds). 2014. The Centralization-Decentralization Debate Revisited. Istanbul: Istanbul Policy Center. 7. Horvathova, L. 2009. Dopad fiškálnej decentralizácie na miestne rozpočty v SR. Teoretické a praktické aspekty veřejných financií. Praha: Vysoká škola ekonomická. 8. Janas, k. 2007. Dejiny verejnej správy na Slovensku. Trenčín: FSEV TnUAD. 9. klimovsky, D. 2010. Territorial Consolidation and Inter-Communal Co-operation at the Local Level in the Slovak Republic. In Swianiewicz, P . (Eds). 2010. Territorial Consolidation Reforms in Europe. Budapest: OSI/LgI, 237–253. 10. k limovský, D. 2014. Inter-Municipal Cooperation in Slovakia: The Case of Regions with Highly Fragmented Municipal Structure, Novo mesto: Faculty of Organization Studies. 11. k limovsky, D. 2015. Slovakia as Decentralization Champion: Reality or Myth? Regions: The Voice of the Membership, 2 (298), 14–16. 12. k osorin, F . 2003. V erejná správa (koncepcia, reformy, organizácia). Bra- tislava: Ekonóm. 13. kovacova, E. 2010. Verejná správa na Slovensku. Úlohy a postavenie územnej samosprávy. Banská Bystrica: Bratia Sabovci s. r. o. 234 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 14. kozovsky, D. 2005. Otvorené otázky fiškálnej decentralizácie v SR. Decentralizácia verejnej správy Slovenskej republiky – otvorené otázky. Bratislava: Ekonomická univerzita. 136–145. 15. Lastic, E., Staronova, k. 2011. Regulácia politicko-administratívnych vzťahov na Slovensku v rokoch 1990–2010. In: Beblavý, M., Sičáková- Beblavá, E (Eds). 2011. k oaličná zmluva či zákon? Právna úprava a re- alita politicko-administratívnych vzťahov na Slovensku. Bratislava: Uk. 32–81. 16. Machyniak, J. 2013. Transformácia verejnej správy na Slovensku po roku 1989– výzvy a realita. Teória a prax verejnej správy. k ošice: Uni- verzita P . J. Šafárika. 29–41. 17. Majlingová L. 2005. Sposoby zabezpecovania sluzieb odpadoveho hos- podarstva v SR. Banská Bystrica: EF UMB. 18. Merickova, B., Nemec, J., Sicakova Beblava, E., Beblavy, M. 2010. k on- trahovanie služieb vo verejnom sektore. Presov: Adin. 19. Mesikova, E. 2008. Vývoj územného a správneho členenia na Slovens- ku. Politické vedy. 11 (3), 72–96. 20. Meyer-Sahling, J. 2009. Sustainability of Civil Service Reforms in Cen- tral and Eastern Europe Five Years after EU Accession, Sigma Papers, No. 44, OECD Publishing. 21. Medveď, J., Nemec, J., Vitek, L. 2005. Social Health Insurance and Its Failures in the Czech Republic and Slovakia: The Role of the State. Pra- gue Economic Papers. 14(1), 64–81. 22. Nemec, J., Bercik, P., kuklis, P. 2000. Local g overnment in Slovakia. In: Decentralisation: Experiments and Reforms. OSI/LgI Budapest. 297–342. 23. Nemec, J. 2001. The Local Response to Democracy and Bureaucracy: The Case of Slovakia. In: Baker, R. (Eds). 2001. Transitions from Autho- ritarianism. New Y ork: Praeger Publishers. 133–150. 24. Nemec, J., Lawson, C. 2005. Health Policy in Slovakia and the Outco- mes of Health Care Reforms 1989–2003. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis. 7(1), 49–72. 235 Public Administr Ation reforms in s lov Aki A 25. Nemec, J., Medved, J., Sumpikova, M. 2005. Ohodnotenie výkonnosti verejnej správy: teoretického východiská a skúsenosti z experimentu v SR. Politická ekonomie, 53 (1), 95–110. 26. Nemec, J., Sagat, V . 2007. Performance-Based System of Financing Slo- vak Universities: Selected Problems. Acta Aerarii Publici. 4 (1), 72–80. 27. Nemec, J. 2008. Public Management Reforms: Slovakia. In: Bouckaert, g., Nemec, J., Nakrosis, V ., Hajnal, g., T onnisson, k. (Eds). 2008. Public Management Reforms in CEE. Bratislava: NISPAcee. 287–316. 28. Nemec, J., Ochrana, F., Sumpikova, M. 2008. Czech and Slovak Lessons for Public Administration Perfomance Evaluation, Management and Finance. Ekonomicky casopis. 56 (4), 353–369. 29. Nemec, J. 2011. Modernizácia verejnej správy v SR ako nevyhnutná re- akcia na súčasnú krízu. In: Tokarova, M. (Eds). 2011. Aktuálne trendy v manažmente verejnej správy. Bratislava: Vysoká škola ekonómie a ma- nažmentu verejnej správy. 21–35. 30. Nemec, J., Mikusova-Merickova, B, Vozarova, Z. 2011. Agencification in Slovakia. The Current Situation and Lessons Learned. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences. Special Issue. November 2011. 140– 159. 31. Nemec, J., Buček, M. 2012. Local g overnment in Slovakia. In: Moreno, A.M. (Eds). 2012. Local g overnment in the Member States of the Euro- pean Union: A Comparative Legal Perspective. Madrid: INAP . 555–576. 32. Nemec, J. 2013. Health Reforms in Slovakia. In: Bjorkman, J. w. and Nemec, J. (Eds). 2013. Health Reforms in Central and Eastern Europe. Hague: Eleven International Publishing. 193–220. 33. Nemec, J., Orviska, M., Lawson, C. (forthcoming). The Role of Accoun- tability Arrangements in Social Innovations: Evidence from the Uk and Slovakia. NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy. 34. Niznansky, V ., Hamalova M. 2013. Územné a správne členenie Slovens- ka. Bratislava: VŠEMVS. 35. Niznansky, V. 2005. Decentralizácia na Slovensku – bilancia nekone- čného príbehu 1995–2005. Bratislava: Považská tlačiareň s. r. o. 236 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 36. Orviska, M., Hudson, J. 2003. Tax Evasion, Civic Duty and the Law Abi- ding Citizen. European Journal of Political Economy. 19 (1), 83–102. 37. Staronova, k. 2010. Regulatory Impact Assessment: Formal Institutio- nalization and Practice, Cambridge University Press. Journal of Public Policy. 30 (1), 117–136. 38. Staronova, k., Stanova, L., Sicakova Beblava, E. 2014. Systémy štátnej služby. k oncepty a trendy. Bratislava: Uk. 39. Statistical Y earbook Slovakia, 2014. 40. Strategia rovoja Slovenskej spolocnosti. Bratislava: EU SAV 2010. 41. Svidronova, M., Nemec, J., Mikusova Merickova, B. Dark Side of Co- Creation: Social Innovations Failures in Slovakia. Paper presented at 2015 EgPA conference. 42. Sutaj, Š. 2003. Dejiny verejnej správy na Slovensku. k ošice: FVS UPJŠ. 43. Tichy, D. 2005. Združovanie obcí ako predpoklad rýchlejšieho rozvoja samospráv a regiónov. Ekonomický časopis, 53 (4), 364−382. 44. Vesely, A. 2013. Accountability in Central and Eastern Europe: Concept and Reality. International Review of Administrative Sciences. 79(2), 310−330. 45. Vitalisova, k. 2015. Marketing vztahov v miestnej samosprave. Banska Bystrica: Belianum. 46. Zarska, E., Sebova, M. (Eds). 2005. Decentralizácia verejnej správy Slo- venskej republiky – otvorené otázky. Bratislava: NHF EU. 237 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory 7. Hungarian Public Administration: Last Thirty Years, Waves in the Story György Gajduschek, Tamás M. Horváth, Károly Jugovits 7.1. Introduction – Defining Models In this chapter, we 16 provide an overview of the Hungarian PARs, and try to analyze and assist understanding of these changes in the light of various models of PA. The chapter is divided into four main parts. In the first part, we attempt to define the type of approaches to PA, including the bureaucratic and the socialist model as well as the three identified reform-models. In the second part, we review major reform waves separately in various segments of PA: (a) structure (central and territorial organizations), (b) functioning (policy making, public service provision and administrative procedures), and (c) civil service. In the third part, we provide an overview of the Hungarian scholarly literature regarding PAR. Finally, we attempt to present a summary by interpreting the findings in the light of PAR models and answer to the qu- estions raised by the editors of the book. Hereby, we attempt to identify major reform movements in the Hun- garian public administration and to categorize them into a certain type of reform ideology, or reform type/style (hereinafter: reform-model or model). Regarding the potential models reflecting on the international literature, most importantly relying on Pollitt & Bouckaert (2004, 2011) and, to some de- gree, Ashworth et al. (2013), and specifically Hajnal & Rosta (2016), we iden- tify three major streams of reform-models, namely New Public Management (NPM), Neo-w eberian State (Nw S) and New Public g overnance (NPg) accor - ding to Pollitt & Bouckaert (2004). 17 Besides, these three models may have do- 16 The final version of this chapter is a result of a joint effort of the authors. Originally, the respon- sibilities for the sub-chapters were shared as follows: g yörgy gajduschek the models, central government, decision-making, administrative procedures and civil service; Tamás M. Horváth local government and public service delivery; k ároly Jugovits scholarly debates. 17 In the new edition of their analysis (Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2011) the authors introduced a new term: digital governance instead of NPg that refers to the impact of ICT on PA. w hereas this impact is crucial and largely changes the functioning of the public sector, especially administra- tion/management, we believe that this is a different dimension of the changes. 238 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence minated the mainstream international professional discussion on PA reforms in the past decades. 18 Our chapter will discuss the impact of these three impor- ted models but two other ‘models’ have also relevance in this study. Firstly, the communist-socialist model (we use the term ‘socialist’ as the Hungarian system could surely not be called ‘communist’), and secondly, the w eberian-bureaucra- tic model, as several Hungarian and foreign authors emphasize, it could have been better if the PA of socialist countries, at the first stage of transformation, had attempted setting up a full-fledged bureaucratic system (Hajnal & Rosta, 2016). The three reform-models are usually contrasted with the bureaucratic system, in the w est, whereas these three as well as bureaucracy may have appe- ared as an option to overcome the socialist past. 7.1.1. Socialist System Unfortunately, we could not identify one major volume that would provide a comprehensive systematic description of the communist-socialist system, its major mechanisms, and especially the role of government and PA within that. Nevertheless, several such elements are well known and can easily be enlisted (e.g. k ornai, 1986; Janos, 1996; g oetz & w ollman, 2001; Dimitrov, g oetz & w ollmann, 2006; Meyer-Sahling, 2009b). In this perfectly totalita- rian regime it is the government led by the communist party, i.e. led from the center (of the country and ultimately from Moscow), by one despot that controls everything, even the purest private (family) life of the citizens. No market functioning, no civic initiatives are accepted; on the contrary, even cruelly suppressed. In other words, it is an extremely etatist and centralized system. The state institutions are organized based on the officially advocated principle of “unity (as opposed to division) of power” serving also the pur- pose of central direction as opposed to checks and balances. All these had a major impact on the way of government functioning that has perhaps been less investigated and analyzed. Below we list those features that we believe are the most relevant for our study, discussed in a descending order in the literature. Etatism and centralization naturally have its impact on the gover- nance. Another crucial issue is the strict political control exercised by the Communist Party. This generates some crucial characteristics that may be 18 In fact the latter two (Nw S and NPg) are also discussed as „post-NPM” , or as Pollitt and Bouck- aert (2004) present them, an alternative adoption and adaptation of NPM in various parts of Europe. For our purposes this theoretically highly significant question is of minor relevance. 239 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory behind some features of present government attributes. The most important such elements may be: 1. The functions of policy formation and policy implementation were lar- gely divided between the party and the state apparatus. Major policy decisions were prepared and surely adopted in the offices of the Central Committee of the Socialist Party. 19 Ministries may have been respon- sible for the formulation of related laws and other activities, whereas local units carried out the work of everyday operative implementation. 2. Naturally, loyalty to the party, its ideology and leaders was a must that was enforced by the so-called nomenclature system that provided the prerogative to the party unit in the given field/level to evaluate and veto candidates to any relevant civil service positions. Furthermore, a party resolution set up quasi-official rules on the selection for ci- vil service position that named political loyalty as the first criterion, followed by professional qualities. Though, from the late 1960‘s pro- fessionalism became more and loyalty less emphasized, this rule was valid as long as the regime existed (gajduschek, 2007b). 3. The administration was a kind of conveyor belt between central poli- tical decision-making and the society at large. Consequently, the key function and responsibility of the administration was to control the so- ciety. This exacerbated the suppressive, authoritative element of PA (or state administration as it was called at the time) over a service approach. 4. Most of the activities of the administration were based on the laws (though party resolutions hold a similar or higher status to that of laws). Laws, in this regard, however, hold a different position than in a system of rule of law, where the laws provide guarantees to the citizens against arbitrariness, unfair, and suppressive actions of the government. Laws, similarly to that of the Prussian Polizeistaat, are generalized orders from the center of the hierarchy to the lower levels. In other words, rules are to assure organizational efficiency. Uniformity is necessary to ensure that the will of the center is carried out precisely at lower levels but exceptions may also be created if the will of the center requires so. 19 According to official statistics of the time, the size of full-time party apparatus was 5793 (Hell, 2010). The size of the civil service (officials working in the offices of central and local government) was about 50,000. Additional units of the party organizations, such as the Social Sciences Institute, a kind of Think T ank of the Central Committee, are not included into the above-mentioned numbers. 240 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 5. State administration could rely on various instruments and methods to enforce central will against the society and its individuals. Frequ- ently, this was the application of laws, issuing of permits, adjudica- ting individual cases, monitoring activities, and sanctioning in case of infringement of laws by the citizens or other entities − a type of activity dominating the PA nowadays as well. Nevertheless, during the socialist period, the administration, and especially its managers, had much more methods at hand to enforce the will of the centrum (or their own personal interests for that matter). Most importantly: a. As the economy was dominated by the state-owned companies, and so-called civil organizations (including the unions) were also run by the government, the top managers of these organizations were – formally or informally – controlled via HR methods of appointment and lay-off, setting up salaries and other ways of remuneration, etc., by the government. b. Laws could be used selectively; one may have been sanctioned for something thousands of others have done without retribution (k ulcsár, 2001). In brief, the orders of the local party and state administration were car- ried out without resistance even if the laws did not support them as informal institutions offered the incentives 20 strong enough to regulate non-state ac- tors behavior in the direction expected from the higher positions in the hie- rarchy. Obedience in this system was easily assured through semi-informal sanctions and incentives. w ith the transition most of these well-functioning, widely and routinely used (though highly suppressive and arbitrary) governing techniques became obsolete. A perfectly different way of administrative functioning was neces- sary, techniques that were new needed to be learnt and put into practice, on individual and organizational level, and a perfectly new way of governance (relying on much more limited authority) was to be elaborated. This is a cru- cial issue in transition that has hardly been analyzed in the literature. Hungary, was specific, to some degree, for its so-called g oulash Com- munism that allowed somewhat more freedom in the private sphere, and 20 This fact may explain why the number of civil servants doubled after the transition, from below 50,000 in 1989 to over a 100,000 in 1994 (the first time the official data are again available). 241 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory even some market activities were allowed, a relatively large smallholders sec- tor existed, whereas the suppression of civil society was seemingly milder than in most CEE countries. A note on pre- and post-communism – the longer historical perspective Even though communism was ‘imported’ to the CEE region, it fits, in a certain way, to a longer-term history of – at least some of – these countries; it fits into the historical Eastern (Byzantine) model described by Szűcs (1983). Moreover, it may represent even an ultimate accomplishment of that model imported to Central Europe from the East (i.e. Soviet Russia). For instance, government control over every segment of the society, and authoritarian style of governing, both in political decision-making and administrative culture, are such historically overarching features (kulcsár, 1982, 2001). Other publi- cations that address the transition from a wider perspective (such as Elster, Offe & Preuss, 1998; Meyer-Sahling, 2009b) also point to the long run featu- res, like continuous disagreement on major values and political direction, fra- gile formal institutions, and frequent large scale changes both in the short run (after the elections) and in the long run (frequent regime changes), when the newcomers deny everything their predecessors did, and attempt to generate a 180 degree turn. This historic feature may also be a highly relevant historical feature to understand the societal, and within that, governmental functioning. 7.1.2. Bureaucratic Administration Description of the bureaucratic arrangement is typically traced back to Max w eber. w eber treated the phenomenon of bureaucracy mostly in two parts of his great work Economy and Society (w eber, 1978). Four attributes dominate the later studies of bureaucracy as an organizational phenomenon: 1. Division of labor (according to w eber: division of legal competencies / jurisdiction) and specialization; 2. Expertise (well-trained personnel with significant job experience, i.e. merit-based civil service system); 3. Rules, which define everything: structures, procedures, and individu- al responsibilities as well as the way the personnel (bureaucrats) get employed; and 4. Hierarchy; organizational units, personnel, and even the norms 242 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence applied are arranged in a vertical manner, e.g. chain of commands (down) and reporting and responsibility (up), while making infor- mation flow and accountability lines highly simple, and thus poten- tially transparent. It is generally accepted that specialization and division of labor direct- ly lead to increased productivity. Expertise, i.e. knowledge of how to deal adequately with issues at hand, has a similar effect. Rules may describe and enforce the one best way of handling cases; thus, they may also greatly contri- bute to an increased efficiency. Hierarchy assures coordination in the organi- zation. Beyond their primary function in directly increasing efficiency, rules may also serve as a tool of coordination (see k handwalla, 1974). This bureaucratic arrangement, as elsewhere was argued (gajduschek, 2003), assures the highest level of rationality, and most importantly, pre- dictability of procedures and outcomes. This, in turn, is especially relevant in PA operations to assure the rule of law, especially equity, equal treatment, etc. Furthermore, hierarchy and rule-based behavior is a key for democracy assuring that elected top government officials may determine and control the administrative functioning to the greatest extent possible. As for most of the new approaches, the new PA models have challenged exactly this bureaucratic model of PA. The NPM criticized its rigidity, mono- polistic arrangement (i.e. lack of competition among the providers and lack of choice for the consumers), and consequent lack of efficiency. The NPg can be conceived as a serious critique of rigid, somewhat aristocratic-style of decision-making in small professional-bureaucratic circles, lack of openness, and hierarchical arrangement vis-à-vis deliberative processes with the parti- cipation of interested / influenced but non-professional parties. The Neo-we- berian approach, at least in its original meaning (Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2004), referred to an approach that, while strived to retain several bureaucratic ele- ments, attempted to mix them with increased efficiency, client-orientation, openness, and participation. 7.1.3. New Public Management (NPM) New Public Management (NPM) has been analyzed extensively in the literature. In fact, this approach had dominated the discussion over PA (or in this context, strictly public management) for at least two decades before 243 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory 2008. The great economic crises, however, have largely undermined the ide- ological basis of NPM, which can be, in a somewhat simplified way, defined as: ‘government is a problem, market mechanisms (i.e. competition, private management techniques) are the solution. ’ Two main layers of NPM may be identified, as Pollitt & Dan (2013) point out, ideological one, praising market solutions, and heavily criticizing the size and the bureaucratic functioning of government, and another one dea- ling with various techniques that may solve or alleviate government failures. Critique is generally based on neoclassical economics, and especially, public choice theory (w eimer & Vining, 2011: 156−208). For instance, rigidity of financial or human resources management is severely criticized, and alterna- tive solutions are offered (Hughes, 2012). As it is said, the merit system that assures life-long employment, and sets up wages based solely on position, practically on seniority, does not provide incentive for high performance as it favors average or even minimum achievers. The solution could be giving up the merit system. Civil servants should be employed under the labor law and their remuneration be dependent on performance appraised by their man- agers. Methods of business management, like TQM, MBO, are also widely promoted by zealots of NPM. In the field of public services, they also prefer market organizations, or at least the competitive market mechanism that ranges from full privatization, through PPP and contracting out, to voucher system. From a structural point of view, they prefer independent agencies and devolution as these units may compete with one another. In brief, NPM is a reasonable tag for reforms that introduce market mechanism, competition, or apply organizational and management arrange- ments imported from the business to the public sector. The achievements are measured mostly in terms of efficiency and client satisfaction. 7.1.4. New Public Governance (NPG) Pollitt & Bouckaert (2004) introduced the term to describe a certain trajectory of adaptation, or rather reaction to NPM. The term clearly re- fers to the extensive governance literature (Peters & Pjeras, 1998; k ooiman, 1999; Rodas, 2000; Salamon, 2000; Sorensen & Torfing, 2016). The essence of this literature, in our view (gajduschek, 2009, 2015b), is that the govern- 244 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence ment is not able (anymore) to make, and especially to implement policies alone, but in interaction with various networks of the stakeholders’ groups (policy communities). These policy networks are formed in a mainly infor- mal process from/by social groups that are impacted by the given policy. g roups like interested businesses, civic organizations, experts and others bring their interest and resources (including knowledge and information) into this bargaining-like process. The role of government may range from the position of an equal participant, through that of a mediator, to a key, though still not dominating actor. In the classical terms of political scien- ce, “participation” could be used to describe this approach. The interested parties are involved, and the decisions are made with them in a deliberative process. This model appears typically in a CEE context as a normative model that is most widely known, in Hungary and in the region, as good gover- nance. g ood governance has been advocated by major international organi- zations as the appropriate way to organize government in the Non-w estern world. 21 Irrespective of the roots of the term, there has been, by now, a relative agreement on the basic elements of its content (k ovač, 2015). 7.1.5. Neo-Weberian State (NWS) The term first appeared in the second edition of the seminal work of Pollitt & Bouckaert (2004: 100), and was further elaborated in the third edition of the book (Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2011: 118−119). In both versions, Nw S seems to be an alternative reform trajectory followed mainly by the Continental European countries not subscribing to the hardcore NPM ide- ology and practice. The new (2011, 3rd ed.) interpretation of NwS is so- mewhat more specific, seemingly leaving out governance arrangement from this concept. It seems to be a variant somewhere between the w eberian state and NPM, embracing mostly the managerial (vs. market and competition) 21 The concept appeared first in the vocabulary of United Nations’ development activities (see UN ESCAP), wB documents in 1992, and IMF documents in 1996. However, for several years, only UN documents emphasized the importance of participation, consultation, transparency, and the rule of law as equally or more important than administrative and service efficiency. In the case of the wB, and especially the IMF, it appeared as a somewhat modified version of NPM with the above-mentioned elements working rather as a democratic façade covering the harsh pro- market approach. 245 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory elements of NPM. Referring back to their earlier volume of 2004, Pollitt & Bouckaert (2011: 19) sum up: “In essence, this was an attempt to moder- nize traditional bureaucracy by making it more professional, efficient, and citizen-friendly. It was particularly characteristic of the stable, prosperous, w estern European democracies which had sizeable welfare states − inclu- ding g ermany, France, and the Nordic group. ” In this vein, the authors pro- vide two sets of characteristics (ib.: 118−119) as explained below. The ‘w eberian’ elements are: (a) reaffirmation of the role of the state as the main social actor; (b) reaffirmation of the role of representative de- mocracy (central, regional, and local) as the legitimating element within the state apparatus; (c) reaffirmation of the role of administrative law regulating citizen–state relationship, including legal guarantees for the citizens; (d) high status and value of serving the public. The ‘neo’ elements embrace: (e) a shift from an internal orientation of rule-based action towards an external orientation towards meeting citizens’ needs and wishes by creating a profes- sional culture of quality and service (i.e. not through market mechanisms offered by NPM); (f) active involvement and participation of the citizens in decision-making; (g) changing laws and accountability mechanisms that, besides − not instead of − internal procedures output and outcomes are monitored and controlled as well eventually involving some performance management techniques; (h) professionalization by adding special experti- se besides legal knowledge, and increasing the importance of management skills as well as skills handling clients. Nw S has become a key concept of PA literature in CEE 22 . It regular- ly appears, for instance, in the publications of w olfgang Drechsler (2005a, 2005b), the leading PA academics in the region, and in the paper of Ran- dma-Liiv that provides an excellent summary on the drawbacks of NPM in CEE (Randma-Liiv, 2008). Seemingly, the concept has a special appeal in the region for various reasons. A relatively stable feature of various inter- pretations is that Nw S is typically conceived – not necessarily in accordan- ce with the original meaning – as a modern polar concept of NPM. 22 A simple search on g oogle Scholar yields 3,400 hits on ‘Neo-w eberian State’ compared to 659,000 on ‘New Public Management’ in the 2004−2013 period. However, if we look for the articles referring to Nw S or NPM, and at the same time ‘Central and Eastern Europe’ , we find that 42% (!) of the papers addressing Nw S refer, in some way, to the CEE region, whereas only 2.6% of papers on NPM. 246 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Pollitt & Bouckaert (2011: 120) call attention to the fact that “the pre- cision of the Nw S model, or the NPM for that matter, must not be exagge- rated” . This may be the reason that in several countries of the region, and in Hungary as well, Nw S has become a central tenet of government ideology requiring a “strong state” , centralization, and extensive regulation as opposed to autonomy, liberal arrangements, and reliance on market mechanisms. In other words, in the CEE region the term, as it is used in practice, frequently refers to etatist and centralist tendencies, and thus its denotation is closer to the bureaucratic, and to some degree, socialist model, and surely has not much to do with the neo (e-h) elements listed by Pollitt and Bouckaert. 7.2. On Major Governance Fields: Structure, Procedures, Personnel Below we will investigate three major fields or rather analytical layers of public administration as it is typically done by the Hungarian course bo- oks in public administration (Lőrincz, 2010), which are in fact almost solely administrative law (see Rixer & Patyi, 2014): (i) structure discussing separa- tely central, local, and municipal organizations, (ii) functions and procedures (identified typically by the Administrative Procedures Act), and (iii) civil ser- vice (Civil Service Act and related regulations). w e will, however, somewhat diverge from the typical Hungarian black letter law approach; we concentrate on the reality as much as we can encompass it. 7.2.1. Structure of P A Traditionally, the structure of PA is divided into two main fields: the cen- tral government with its hierarchical arrangement, including territorial units (altogether called államigazgatás or state administration), and municipal or- ganizations (called önkormányzat or self-government with both political-re- presentative and administrative units). Central Government Until 2011, the central government had been hierarchically organized as reviewed in Figure 7.1. 247 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory Figure 7.1: Simplistic Model of State Administration before 2011 Source: own research. On the top of the executive power is the Cabinet that consists of the Pri- me Minister and ministers heading also ministries (in some cases ministers without portfolio – especially in coalition governments). The President has no relevant role in the normal functioning of the executive. Formally, the Pri- me Minister is only primus inter pares, however, he has always played a cru- cial role, and his dominance has largely increased in the past decade or more. Researching the central organizational arrangement in the past quar- ter of a century, Hajnal & k ovács (2016a, 2016b) differentiate between three main stages. 23 The first (1989−1998) period would be centered around the establishment and consolidation of a new organizational arrangement that fits to the polity of a democratic government. This included the establishment of external control mechanisms over public administration, such as the ju- dicial control over practically every administrative legal actions, setting up a full-fledged National Audit Office (of the Parliament), ombudsmen, and one of the most powerful Constitutional Court in the world, last but not least the 23 Below we will greatly rely on these papers. However, we will use other sources as well which, at certain points, may be different from Hajnal and Kovács. 248 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence newly elected Parliament was to exercise severe control over the executive. The authors, referring to other publications as well, note that the control over the executive may have been too tight. w hile this was an understanda- ble reaction to the suppressive nature of the executive during the socialist regime, it has also jeopardized government activities in several fields, lea- ding to severe governmental anomalies that, in turn, may generated social distrust towards the rule of law (gajduschek, gajduschek, 2008b; 2015b). Beside the formation of ministerial structures, the creation of agencies was a quite stochastic process in the early ‘90s, and consequently, the legal status of these organizations was chaotic. This has gradually been solved, and three categories were formed that remained – with some legal changes – relatively intact for a longer period. The first category controls a larger social sphere that is not in the portfolio of a ministry; the second serving on a field that is within the portfolio of a ministry but enjoys relative indepen- dence; and the third category that is organized only for practical-technical reasons (e.g. handling large number of routine cases) as an independent unit, in fact it could be a division of the ministry as well. The list represents a descending order in terms of status and relative independence of these organizations. (A forth type depicted as independent agency on the figure was introduced later as mentioned below.) There are several likely reasons for the creation of a large number of these agencies. One reason is the consequence of democratic transforma- tion that created new tasks that would enlarge enormously the size of mi- nistries. In the same vein, with the disappearance of the Party apparatus the policy drafting shifted to the ministries, which then wanted to get rid of the regular-routine administrative tasks. Another reason may be the general pattern of agencification these times reflecting the NPM approach. A third, probably crucial reason lays in the centrifugal forces generated by sectoral independence efforts. Namely, ministries and agencies strived to control their own field without intrusion from above. This is a general problem in most post-socialist states (Verheijen, 2007) as emphasized by Hajnal & k ovács (2016b). The authors refer to several, failed attempts of the Cabinet to strengthen the overall coordination and control over the ministries who- se autonomy largely prevented the formation of successful cross-sectoral policies. 249 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory The next period spans from 1998 to 2010. This period may be cha- racterized, according to Hajnal and kovács, by a gradual preparation for the EU accession. 24 Another key feature of the period is strengthening of the position of the Prime Minister. The so-called presidencialization of the executive is a widely discussed issue in the Hungarian literature (Pakulski & k örösényi, 2013; Mandák, 2014; k örösényi, 2015). This process is manifested in gradual strengthening of the Prime Minister’s Office in terms of both size and legal status (becoming a Ministry). On one hand, this process, aims at increasing (some would argue establishing) effective political control over the administrative units, and on the other hand, aims at effective coordina- tion of these units. Several coordinating bodies (committees) were created directly under the Cabinet, and several new agencies were established with a similar purpose, e.g. in the field of government-wide HR management, or the EU funded development projects. Meanwhile, the overall number of agencies was radically cut by amalgamation of agencies, or bringing back some functions into the ministries. This became characteristic especially after 2006. In the period of 2006−2010, the position of administrative state secretaries has been abolished, and only one state secretary was appointed to each ministry, who was admittedly a political appointee. 25 At the same time, a new − though in the international practice well-known − agency 24 It may be surprising that hardly any periodization considers that Hungary’s EU accession was a key date, whereas in several other countries it may be considered so. Neither from structural, nor functional, or personnel point of view it has been considered as a major milestone for the Hungar- ian public administration, at least not for its internal arrangement. Similarly, András k örösényi, a leading Hungarian political scientist, in his recently published overview of the Hungarian political system in the past quarter century, set up the following periods: 1990, 1998-2006, 2010-date. The EU accession may have not become a milestone because Hungary started its preparation relatively early on administrative level, whereas the EU accession – at those times – was one of the few politi- cal issues that received unanimous support from all major political parties. Furthermore, the EU did not set up specific requirements towards the national system of public administration, and the Hungarian PA – at least on the surface – mostly met the general principles. 25 Previously, following the g erman system, there were a political and an administrative state sec- retary in each ministry. As the names suggest, the political state secretary was practically the deputy minister, who may act on behalf of the minister, for instance in the Parliament, whereas the administrative state secretary supposed to be a professional person, managing the apparatus and assuring the continuity. In reality, however, administrative state secretaries were also ap- pointed on the basis of political, or rather personal loyalty. I.e. an administrative state secretary remained in position for about two years only, as when a new minister got to the postion (even within the same party) the administrative state secretary had to leave as well (Staroňová & gaj- duschek, 2013). 250 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence type was created, namely an independent − or in the Hungarian version − autonomous agency that supposed to report directly to the Parliament. The third period starts in 2010. The essence of this period is a sharp etatist turn and radical centralization that may be captured well in the structural reform. Most importantly, in our view, the state is captured by the ruling party, or more precisely by the head of this political party, one person, Viktor Orbán. This has been achieved mostly through informal ins- truments or personal/personnel policies. Heads of almost all relevant go- vernmental organizations were appointed from a set of Orban’s personal allies – including the President, Head of the Parliament, Head of the Natio- nal Bank, Attorney g eneral – or persons from whom loyalty may have been expected – like Heads of the Judiciary, ombudsmen, members and the Head of the Constitutional Court, and heads of independent agencies, such as the one regulating the media. This led to empowerment of the executive and, on the other hand, decreased functioning, some argue practical termination, of control over the executive carried out by such institutions as the ombuds- men or the Constitutional Court. Checks and balances hardly function. In terms of formal structural changes, the number of ministries has been largely decreased to about eight in the period. For instance, health care, education, social services, cultural policy were incorporated into the Minis- try of Human Resources. Consequently, the internal ministerial structure has changed. The Cabinet is still composed of the ministers and the Prime Minister but key portfolios (like social policy or finance) are not directly present. The state secretaries within the ministries control these fields. Thus, beside the administrative and political state secretaries, state secretaries res- ponsible for a portfolio are appointed to the ministries. The number of these state secretaries depends on the number of major portfolios of the minis- try. These sectoral state secretaries are considered as political appointees, even by the law, whereas the administrative state secretaries and deputy sec- toral state secretaries (responsible for the sub-fields, e.g. higher education within education) are considered “professional” appointees, though they are appointed seemingly on a political-personal basis. The agency landscape has been under the reconstruction as well. In 2012, a new type of independent agency was created that is entitled to create statutory laws. This is a new element in the Hungarian system where this 251 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory type of regulatory agency was unknown, as a general principle was that laws might be made only by the entities that are legitimated by elections.Decrees (i.e. the laws made by the executive) may be issued by the Cabinet, individual minister, or representative body of local self-governments (valid for the citizens in the given territorial jurisdiction only). 26 Naturally, the heads of these “auto- nomous regulatory agencies” were also loyal to the Prime Minister. 27 In brief, an extremely centralized executive, or more generally, govern- ment system has been created relatively quickly after 2010. w hile it may be questionable if this arrangement meets the requirements of a democratic system, and it is surely deficient in controlling the executive according to the principle of checks and balances, it also gave – though a radical – answer to the challenges accumulated in the previous two decades caused mostly by the governmental system formed in 1990, largely as a denial of the socialist past. As we indicated above, the executive was controlled (through legal gu- arantees and constitutional organizations) to such extent that it was hardly able to carry out the basic functions like enforcement of laws or effective presentation of public interest over illegal personal or small-group inte- rests. Orban’s so-called political governance (k örösényi, 2015; Pesti, Farkas & Franczel, 2015) solved most of these problems and several others. Me- anwhile, professional aspects in government may hardly be voiced over the central political will. The ministerial apparatus is strongly discouraged to provide any professional feedback if that contradicts the intent of the poli- tical center (gajduschek, 2016). This, in turn, results in a bulk of erroneous Cabinet and ministerial decisions. Local and Territorial Government Local Autonomies and Administrative Units in the Hungarian System The scholarly literature differentiates between three major types of or- ganizations at the local level: administrative units subordinated to central agencies (in the Hungarian literature called also deconcentrated organs), 26 An exception to this rule may be the Decree of the Head of the National Bank which was on the level of Cabinet decree but could refer to a highly specific field, not directly setting up the norms for individual citizens. A brief overview of the Hungarian legal system is provided by Rixer (2012). 27 For instance, the first Head of the ’Media Authority’ was the well-known media expert of the Orbán's ruling party FIDESZ. 252 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence self-governments that function at the local and county level as well as non- traditional administrative organizations. The local level in Hungary means the level of settlements let this be a city (Budapest and the 23 so-called cities with county rights), towns, or villages (the smallest is with about a dozen ci- tizens). Every such settlement elects its municipal representative body and the mayor. The historically stable mid-level unit is the county. There are 19 counties plus Budapest, which is a local and county self-government at the same time. Local units of central agencies have been typically functioning at the county level. For a short period, such agencies operated at the so-called regional level (seven such larger territorial units were created in relation to the EU accession), and after 2013, at a smaller territorial level called “járás” (hereinafter: district). 175 such districts exist, and the 23 districts of Bu- dapest have an identical legal status. During the socialism, soviet-like councils were dominant below the central level (i.e. there were only a few agencies functioning at the sub- national level). These councils, while formally had a locally elected body, were, in fact, organized in a hierarchical manner. Local councils were su- bordinated to county councils, which conveyed the central will, while be- came themselves a kind of power node in the structure. During the 1970’s, roughly parallel to the process in the w est, larger councils were created by the amalgamation of several small village councils, typically against the will of citizens. The structure of the offices of these governments mirrored the ministerial structure of central government. This arrangement is depicted in Figure 7.2. 253 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory Figure 7.2: Schematic Structure of Soviet-Type Council System Central government Central unit responsible for Portfolio X Central unit responsible for PortfolioY Central unit responsible for Portfolio Z Local council County council Administrative unit responsible for Portfolio X Administrativ unit responsible for PortfolioY Administrativ unit responsible for Portfolio Z Administrative unit responsible for Portfolio X Administrative unit responsible for PortfolioY Administrative unit responsible for Portfolio Z Source: own compilation. The transition in this field was (also) motivated by the denial of the previous regime. The goal was to create highly autonomous local govern- ments, responsible for organizing the life of the town and providing most of the public services. Furthermore, taking into account the will of the ci- tizens, all settlements became entitled to launch their own local govern- ments. As a result, more than 3,000 local governments were created, though villages below 1,000 inhabitants were required to run a joint office. It was also hoped that a spontaneous cooperation would occur, and gradually lar- ger units would be formed. This did not happened in the past quarter cen- tury. Municipalities were established at county level as well. However, they 254 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence had no control function over local municipalities. They were responsible for services that local governments could not provide. There were three stages of the development so far. After the transi- tion, the consolidation and a relatively stable period occurred (1990−cca. 2004−05), a crisis emerged (2006−2010), and then radical institutional changes have been taking place since 2011. First, we address the structural arrangement of the first two decades, referring also to the deficiencies, and then we review the crucial changes that took place from 2010. In the first phase, high level of local autonomy was provided, in spite of the economic recession and crises coming with the transition, as several lar- ger revenues were generated for the municipalities. The revenue was created by selling the assets that earlier constituted an indivisible state property and that were passed to the municipalities, and the shares received in return for property rights. This was the case, for instance, in the gas network services. In addition, during the privatization of former state companies, local go- vernments could have the right to the value of the land of these companies. Some of the municipalities were farsighted enough to spend this money on development projects that might generate further revenues later, such as infrastructural investments serving the establishment of new enterprises, creating new employment opportunities, and so on. Some others, however, spend these extra sources on running costs. Nevertheless, smaller municipalities with less or none extra resour- ces may not be able to use strategic approach, as they had to tackle critical problems, such as bankruptcy. In these cases, extra resources were spent for current operational goals. In some cases, incompetent decisions led to prestige investments, such as football arenas. Another source of strengthening of the autonomy in that time was the increasing role of non-state actors in providing of public services as the local autonomy supposed to be based not only on state-involved institu- tions (such as elected bodies, their offices and budgetary schools, social care homes, etc.) but, directly, on communities of the settlements provi- ding various public services. These associations, foundations, and volunta- ry organizations involved in the provision of public services have an effect on the public service management as such. If the government counts on these actors as at least supplementary providers, its policies must be har- 255 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory monized with the non-state actors. For instance, this policy requires nor- mative grants for all actors. Consequently, the effect on the state sector is also visible in setting up more open, measurable criteria, and at the same time, much more independence was provided for the professional work of schools, cultural institutes, etc.The effect is also measurable from financial point of view. Quite a lot of resources arrived to foundations, non-profit organizations, and churches involved in different educational and social welfare activities incurred outside the general government expenditures (Horváth & k iss, 1996). Such services were organized so as to complement the functions of municipalities. In this way, the number of choices for the consumers and the users increased. Special services were also provided by these alternative actors for the users whose needs could not be adequately served by the traditional system. Thus, the option of choices became general among schools maintained by local governments, foundations, churches, and private undertakings (in the case of private schools). More than 3,000 communities authorized with a relatively wide set of rights, responsibilities, and financial resources created new foundations for the development of the whole public sector, including intergovernmental levels and their administration in Hungary. The greatest challenge facing the Hungarian local management system at that time was the need to create a proper mechanism for enhancing the relationships between particular au- tonomies. Independent units with tools of their own should recognize the connection among settlements, and face the regulation of linkages focusing on adequate institutional, financial, and service-providing instruments. Horizontal and regional intergovernmental relations became crucial in this arrangement. In a system where many small municipalities enjoyed substantial independence, special attention had to be paid to the coopera- tion among municipal and county governments. One of the opportunities was to form associations within them in order to fulfill their common tas- ks. In the first decade of new municipal development, local governments were quite reluctant to establish such joint structures. E.g. running jointly a secondary school, or an administrative unit dealing with special licensing, etc. The Act on Local governments enumerated different forms of such structures, however without any obligation to form them. Only indirect in- centives led to make administrative associations of official affairs and rural 256 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence joint offices. Because of the strong autonomy, it was difficult to reach the economy of scale either in organizing administration or providing public services. Municipalities were not eager to cooperate because of their strong feeling for independence, and they were not motivated enough either. Ur- ban areas, on the other hand, were traditionally ready for coordinated deli- very of certain services for an larger area. For instance, towns are responsi- ble for maintaining colleges for secondary school children attending from the surrounding smaller villages. It is a traditional task of towns. Later on, from the early 2000s, central incentives were introduced to strengthen coo- peration in and with rural areas, financing supplementary costs of this kind of re-organization mainly in administrative services. Another way of motivation in order to widen intergovernmental re- lations was managing regional relations. According to the original concept and its realization in the first 20 years of the development, there were three distinct types of organizations in PA at the medium territorial level. First type is the county self-government, which was not superimposed over the local governments. Secondly, there were deconcentrated organs and offices in each county responsible for coordinating these organs, but had a limi- ted success. Finally, special corporate bodies were working to fulfill various tasks under the control of delegated bodies, such as councils for territorial development and labor councils. Basically, the county government carried out the tasks serving several settlements or the entire county. There was also a possibility to take over some of the responsibilities that the local governments were not able to carry out (e.g. a town to run a secondary school). In this case, county level is only subsidiary way of management. Deconcentrated organs (administrative units of central agencies with a territorial, typically, county jurisdiction) carried out most of the admi- nistrative activities. Before 1990, only a few such organs (like land registra- tion offices) existed, whereas after 1990 dozens of such agencies appeared within a year. The most important reason may be the changed controlling power of central government organizations. In the socialist system, as it is depicted in Figure 7.2, administrative units of the councils, especially the county councils, largely reflected the structure of central government. Most central units (ministry or agency) had its parallel unit at county and 257 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory even at local level. These units functioned under so-called double control. On the one hand, they were responsible to the Executive Committee (e.g. the general secretary) of the council, and on the other hand, to the appro- priate central agency (e.g. consumer right protection). After 1990, as local self-governments, were not hierarchically subordinated to central agencies and they shaped their offices according to local needs, so the opportunity anymore for a hierarchical coordination was lost and other ways of coordi- nation have been alien, or even unknown to the Hungarian administrative culture (Hajnal & k ovács, 2013). Furthermore, central government units (either ministries or agencies) reasonably believed that local governments (especially the small ones) lack the expertise that is necessary to carry out these functions. As a reaction, they established their own territorial agencies. These county level agencies, while working in the same territory, hardly communicated with one anot- her, thus being unable to act in a harmonized way, let alone in synergy. Coordination of these agencies at the county level has been a continuous problem during the first two decades (Hajnal & kovács, 2013). There were also special corporate bodies at the middle level. They are characterized by the need to integrate traditional administrative functions and social involvement on delegated basis. Therefore, the representatives of local and county governments and the delegates of social organization were involved in these corporate bodies. These structures, such as Quangos, were based on that type of activity to draw various interest groups of society into the administration. One of the corporate bodies are county and regional development councils, which were established in 1996. Their function was to enforce the objectives of central government regional policy and to coordinate rela- ted tasks. Delegated persons of different ministries, involved counties and towns with county rights, representative associations of small settlements and other delegated members were involved. Councils’ managements ope- rated as non-traditional agencies. Long-term development concepts were elaborated by them, including financial plans. They were allowed to collect funds, and explore assets contributed by private stakeholders and entre- preneurs. County- and region-wide development projects were managed in this way in a result-oriented manner. 258 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence The other more important type of corporate bodies were county labor councils. They were established in 1991. Their most important tasks were to to allocate state funds for the purposes of promoting employment. In addi- tion, they enjoyed various rights to initiate and formulate opinions with res- pect to employment programs, and monitor effectiveness of labor market interventions. They professionally supervised the labor policy management in their territorial competence. The members of the council represented lo- cal governments, interest of employers and employees. Councils made their decisions about quite a crucial amount of financial resources on a consen- sual basis. The above-mentioned solutions on intergovernmental relations sho- wed openness to economic and social environment of public tasks. The mixed composition of delegates and decision-making bodies which com- prises the representation of central government, local authorities, chambers and other lobbies, by the law, gave expression to a wide variety of interests. Though these bodies were not key players in territorial administration, their role is especially crucial for our research as these entities represented an alternative to the classical, hierarchical, strictly structured organizatio- nal arrangement. In that vein, they may be considered as manifestations of an NPg-type of arrangement. (Their ‘early death’ could thus also be an indication of a poor chance of this approach in Hungary.) Since approximately 2006, a crisis occurred, or became evident. The tension between the small size of most municipalities and the wide range of task and high level autonomy have been addressed soon after the new system was established (Verebélyi, 1991), and then analyzed more in depth (Pálné k ovács, 2012; Horváth, 2016, 2000), including books issued for the tenth (Verebélyi, 2000) and twentieth anniversary (k ákai, 2010) of the es- tablishment of the municipal system. However, the given arrangement was favored to such extent by the citizenry, and a potential change would be opposed by so many local power holders that it seemed politically impossi- ble to change inefficient and dysfunctional elements of the system for more than a decade. The municipal system gradually revealed several deficiencies by the 2000s. Firstly, local and other autonomies (actors of governance instead of simply government) lost from their ethos. The role of interest groups incre- 259 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory ased, frequently capturing the local government. Secondly, municipalities remained relatively reluctant to cooperate in a more developed manner in spite of positive cases. Thirdly, administrative regions were not developed to representative regions (like in Poland for instance) but their position gra- dually weakened. Fourthly, in the budgets of municipalities central grants were devalued by that time generating a constant tension in education and healthcare. Consequently, the social trust had gradually lessened. The lack of well-trained personnel at municipal offices 28 caused insufficient adminis- trative capacity. Efficiency losses became evident because of the economies of – small – scale, and potential democratic deficiencies stemming from the very weak legal control of municipalities. w hereas several settlements profited from the functioning of their municipalities by finding specific lo- cal solutions to the local needs, a few others may have been run by a few families, suppressing local opposition, and misusing local resources. Some local leaders wanted to satisfy the electorate’s needs by accumulating large local debt as there was no central control over local indebtedness, whereas the central government was responsible for all government debt payments. In the third phase, as an answer on tensions of the former period, the Orban’s government (from 2010) replaced the emphasis of the territori- al system from local governments to the state administration. Enormous changes were brought in this field as well. w ith the establishment of the so-called County g overnment Offices almost all previously independent deconcentrated organs were integrated (some would formulate forced) into these Offices − a major exemption being the tax authority, presumably as it has a uniformed service unit as well. Somewhat later at the lower level, Dis- trict g overnment Offices were established. w hile these Offices (altogether 198) work at the lower level, smaller territorial jurisdictions, from a legal point of view, are a part of the Country Offices − they are not independent legal entities. The County government Offices are lead admittedly by a politician, the Cabinet Commissioner, and frequently a Member of Parliament of the 28 The fact that several municipal offices consisted only of 3-6 civil servants of which only the chief executive officer held a diploma was in sharp contrast with the fact that these offices were responsible for making various legally binding decisions, drafting and implementing policies regarding education, social and environmental issues, garbage collection, etc. 260 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence ruling party, thus the Offices function under a direct political control. The Commissioner is assisted with a country director who supposed to be a pro- fessional civil servant. This arrangement, while not unknown in the interna- tional practice, was surprisingly new in the Hungarian system. Previously, it was formally expected that professional career civil servants lead central agencies, and this expectation was stronger at deconcentrated organs (at a lower level of administration). This has radically changed in the new arran- gement where the political head has a veto power over any appointment to managerial civil service positions within his/her Office. In this way, the sub-national administration was placed under a direct political control, the political will from the center can be conveyed directly (prime minister – political county ‘commissar’ – specialized territorial administration) inste- ad of a much longer chain of command (prime minister – minister – central agency head – county agency head – specialized territorial administration). The longer chain that includes professional actors is less favorable for ‘poli- tical governance’ as the command may be distorted or even sabotaged, thus professionally and especially legally questionable orders may be blocked. A graphic summary of g overnment Office structure is provided in Figure 7.3. Arrows refer to the lines of controlling. Normal lines refer to so-called organizational control exercised most of all by the Cabinet Commissioner through HR and financial decisions on availability of resources to various units. Professional-administrative control over the county boards supposed to exercise control by the relevant central agencies (e.g. Consumer Right Protection Agency), whereas these county boards supposed to excises control over relevant functions of District g overnment Offices if such an activity is carried out at the level. (This arrangement is similar to the double control of the socialist council system depicted in Figure 7.2.). The Orban’s government has completely transformed the municipal system. w hile the municipal organizations (we may say the structural façade) have remained intact everywhere, the county municipalities practi- cally lost all previous relevant functions and existed as an empty shell. Local governments have lost several functions in public services as well. Most importantly, the elementary and secondary education (the largest chunk in municipal budgets) was re-organized under a central agency, the municipal role in health care system was abolished as well and some of the social ser- 261 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory vice functions were also terminated at municipalities. Furthermore, more than a half of legal functions (licensing, etc.), and the major tasks of muni- cipal offices were shifted to the District g overnment Offices. Villages with less than two thousand inhabitants had to join to a unified office. Figure 7.3: g eneralized Organogram of a County g overnment Office Source: own compilation. The Orban’s government seemingly favors centralization and hierar - chy over autonomy. All their radical reforms aim at strengthening the role of political center and minimizing any type of autonomy. Centralization means primarily a political as opposed to administrative centralization. In this regard, the reforms of the Orban’s government seem to be closer to the bureaucratic and – in terms of party control of administration – the socia- list model. In a wider historical perspective, the extreme centralization of the communist system was exchanged with a high level of autonomy imme- diately after the collapse of that system. One may argue that this was an extreme level of autonomy in an international comparison with hardly any control over municipal activities. After about two decades this system, that undoubtedly generated deficiencies besides the several success stories, was replaced again by an extremely centralized structure (e.g. where all schools of the country supposed to be managed centerally from Budapest). In other 262 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence words, the pendulum keeps swinging from one extreme to the other. Howe- ver, more time and information is needed to provide an in-depth analysis of the new structural arrangement at the sub-national level administration. 7.2.2. Functioning and Operation This aspect or dimension of government may be further divided into at least three main fields. The way governmental decisions are made, general features of public service provision, and administrative legal procedures. A general aspect of government functioning in the region but espe- cially in Hungary is the so-called legalistic nature of governance (Liebert, Condrey & g oncharov, 2013: 353). This may be captured by a high propor - tion of lawyers among civil servants, especially in higher positions (gajdus- chek, 2008a: 146–152), in the content of PA education (Hajnal, 2013), and in the general assumptions about the nature and function of PA (gajduschek, 2006, 2012). In this view, government activities are conceived in a legal as opposed to a policy setting. The function of the executive may be divided into two fields: making and applying (adjudication, monitoring and enfor- cing) laws. Some of the most important consequences of this approach may be the lack or distorted reflection of the social problems (as a starting point of the rational “policy cycle”), lack of precisely defined goals and lack of sys- tematic assessment of the expected outcomes Staroňová, 2010; gajduschek, 2016; Laws may be adopted for their own sake (not for any social purpose), whereas the implementation of these laws is somewhat sporadic, stochastic, or simply missing (Falkner & Treib, 2008; Hajnal & Ványolós, 2013). w e will not address this otherwise crucial characteristic here. Decision-making According to the official process laid down in the Resolution on the Procedures of the Cabinet, laws (and thus policies) are drafted by the mi- nistries. The next step is the consultation with other ministries and possibly with stakeholders. About ten days before the proposals reach the Cabinet meeting, they are discussed during a weekly meeting of the administrative state secretaries of the ministries. Most of the proposals become the Cabi- net Decrees or are submitted to the Parliament for legislation. The reality is highly different from this ideal. Based on the interviews Pesti (2000) described these differences, which may have largely exacer- 263 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory bated after 2010 (Pesti, Farkas & Franczel, 2015; gajduschek, 2016). Sum- ming up the Hungarian literature in this regard, the major distortions may be: (a) laws are not drafted by the ministries but frequently at law firms close to the ruling party; and several proposals are (b) submitted to the Parliament at a personal initiative of a Member of Parliament. In this way the professional and democratic scrutiny is completely excluded and the consultation is avoided as well. The method has been especially intensively used since 2010. The proportion of such submission of draft laws preventing any kind of transparency jumped to 34% in the first 2.5 years of the Orban’s government, and that is about the double of the previous periods, whereas the Parliament devoted only 34 days on average discussing an Act, that is a bit more than a half of the time devoted during the period of the previous Cabinet. In fact, the period devoted to preparing and drafting has always been very short. It is well known from the interviews that the laws are prepared on an ad hoc basis instead of a well-planned manner. In some cases, only a few weeks or even less are devoted to the whole process. The time has hardly ever been enough for other ministries to carefully read and comment the proposed draft laws. The Orban’s government typically and seemingly in- tentionally neglects the discussion with the stakeholders, or it is carried out with loyal stakeholders and so called gON gOs. There has never been sufficient policy capacity either (goetz & w oll- mann, 2001). There are practically no civil servants at the ministries trained in policy analysis methods. A highly legalistic nature of the administrative culture and a strong political intrusion into professional issues make im- possible to build such a capacity. Furthermore, the extremely short time and ad hoc nature of law making makes it impossible to assess the expected outcomes of laws (RIA) (Staroňová, 2010) and even the assessment of ne- cessary public resources (human, financial, technical, etc.) for their imple- mentation. These deficiencies have been present for a longer period, though they have exacerbated significantly since 2010. Public Service Provision The term ‘public services’ includes public utilities and communal ser- vices, a large and highly heterogeneous field from network industries provi- ded by the public companies (water, sewage) to gas and electricity companies 264 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence (frequently provided by the private companies), public transportation, gar- bage collection, and road maintenance that may be shared between private firms, national, and municipal companies. Another large segment of public services are so-called ‘human services’ , like health care, education, social ser- vices, most of which are typically provided by the municipalities. The Local g overnment Act (1990) was one of the first laws passed by the freely elected Parliament. Quite a wide range of services was delegated to the responsibility of municipalities. In the framework of infrastructural services the provision of healthy drinking water, public lighting, solid waste mana- gement, maintenance of roads and cemeteries became an exclusively local function. Additionally, urban settlements maintained public transport, sewer, district heating, etc. Among human services, every municipality was respon- sible for providing kindergarten services, primary education, basic health care, and basic social services for the elderly. In addition, cities maintained secondary schools, basic hospitals, specified elderly care homes, etc. The legal solution of discharging tasks ensured the equality of settlements as far as the extent of responsibility to fulfill public tasks is concerned. It was contradicto- ry that in spite of the fragmentation, functions were very wide and expensive. However, budget instruments were to follow the breakdown of responsibili- ties stemming from the discharging of tasks. Parallel to the devolution, a radical privatization process took place, in the meantime, led by the State Property Agency in the productive and the service-providing sector, thus reducing government functions. For instance, medicine, films, dairy companies, previously owned by the county councils, were mostly privatized. In the 1990s, various international programs (PHARE, USAID, British k now How Fund, wB programs, Soros Foundations OSI, and pre-acceding support programs of the EU like ISPA, SAPARD) focused (Horváth, 2007: 9–10) on either the development of democracy or the provision of public services at the municipal level. For instance, a countrywide network of in- tegrated landfills for solid waste was established with the support of US AID and ISPA. It means that the political and administrative transformation was extended to the functional profile of local authorities. From the functional aspects basic changes in public service provision (Horváth, 2015) took place as summarized in table 7.1. 265 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory Table 7.1: Basic Changes in Public Service Provision from the System Transition Stages of changes [(a)→(e) detailed in the analysis] Transformation → Liberalization → Realized model of privatization → Budgeting crisis → State-owned solutions → Utility services Re-structuring Unbundling / contracted pu- blic companies Privatization contracts Increase of fees and charges Public holdings, state-owned enterprises (SOEs) Human services Service de-cen- tralization Outsourcing / contracted pu- blic institutes Selling assets State-center solutions Re-centrali- zation Source: own research. Now, the main stages of the process are described in details. Transformation. The transformation of the utility sector (Fleischer, 1994: 9–15) began in the early 1990s. The first step was the restructuring of state monopolies. It meant the auditing of companies, then the trans- fer of ownership from the state to local governments. At this point, former budgetary companies were transformed. Firms became subjects of compa- ny law, while all their shares remained the property of municipalities. Anot- her precondition at this stage was unbundling, i.e. division of assets which can be sold or, if it is considered more beneficial, to be retained as a public property. After that, marketing of a certain amount of shares took place, if it was possible at all. Privatization under the policy of liberalization may have consisted at least of four phases (Horváth & Péteri, 2001). The first stage was communalization, i.e. transfer of state-owned property to municipalities. This process, among others, supported local governments to face the total real costs of services, and to identify the subsidies needed for their particu- lar activities. The second stage was corporatization as mentioned above, i.e. transformation of companies from the state budget under the corporate law. It meant 100% of shares owned by the municipalities at first. The third stage was privatization, if happened, inviting domestic or foreign investors with the aim to attract external capital. The fourth stage is that semi-independent regulatory agencies were established. w hile the trajectories may largely be different in various sectors, the 266 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence underlying process was similar. In the water sector, an extensive fragmenta- tion occurred with the creation of around 400 local government service or- ganizations and 5 state-owned regional companies in 1991−92 instead of the former 5 national and 28 regional companies. On the other hand, solid waste management became integrated and large scale enough company to operate services economically. In the service provision of district heating 290 local heat generation and distribution companies were transferred to 103 (urban) local governments (Horváth & Péteri, 2004: 309). After restructuring, semi- independent regulatory authorities were established for the energy sector (gas, electricity, district heating). For other service areas central state offices or mu- nicipalities had control over the operation and restricted prices to some extent. As far as human services are concerned, particular service − decentra- lization took place. Main characteristic elements of the process consisted of the following elements. The role of the NgO sector increased in the provision of social services. Churches and private charity organizations re-emerged in social care, maintenance of secondary schools and, to a lesser extent at that time, also in the area of basic education. Simultaneously, operation conditions of state-owned and municipal institutions also changed, allowing a spread of sector-neutral financing and quasi-market conditions in operations. Liberalization. After this kind of preparation of service providing in the sector, the liberalization process began to spread. This development started around the middle of the 1990s. In the public utility sector, it led to privati- zation. In the area of electricity, after restructuring the industry and service, delivery relationships of ownership became different in terms of productivity, maintenance of the distribution network and service provision. The Hun- garian Electricity Board (MVM) transformed into a commercial company, which remained state-owned. Shares of the six regional electricity trade com- panies were finally obtained by three big investors, like the g erman energy suppliers RwE and E.ON, and the French EDF . 25%+1 of shares of gas distri- bution companies remained state-owned according to the law. The Budapest gas w orks, which were traditionally linked to the capital, remained partially owned by the Budapest City g overnment after the transition. As far as the “outsourcing” of services is concerned, human services, especially in the area of elderly care, were increasingly being taken over by the non-profit organizations. The number of civil-sector organizations grew dy- 267 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory namically during the transition. According to comparative data (Civic Atlas, 1997), this figure was 430 per 1 million inhabitants in Hungary at that time (the second highest in the region was Czech Republic with 400). By the middle of the 1990s, the transfer of state-owned core assets to lo- cal governments was completed. Then two parallel stages followed. A part of the transformed companies managed to privatize, while others failed. At least three good reasons were responsible for the managed privatization of public companies by the decision-makers. Firstly, private capital seemed to be more efficient to economize than the public sector. Secondly, a price competition arose due to the privatization tender (which includes consumer pricing for- mulae over a longer time period). Thirdly, responsibility may be taken for lo- cal functions through private providing companies. On the other hand, large w est-European companies in the energy, water, and waste sectors were ready to enter in the open, regulated market in the 1990s and 2000s. These compa- nies and their investors, in general, naturally followed their own interests. The whole pre-accession process to the EU very much supported this progress. Simultaneously, other companies remained non-privatized for various reasons. Fees paid by the consumers may not cover costs, and subsidies are not defined clearly in advance by the normative regulations. Privatization of- ten needed to sell the infrastructure itself, apart from the right to provide the service. Separating the maintenance of network infrastructure and ser- vice supplement initially aimed at making providers interested in increasing efficiency. Acceptance of this aspect very much depends on the investors. Ne- vertheless, these companies were re-organized widely to increase their effecti- veness and efficiency. It is hard to say that this phenomenon concentrated on one type of servi- ce or another type. Indeed, the particular solution depended on the result of policy strategy in the specific municipality. For instance, in the water sector local governments chose very different options. Some of them even sold out the core local assets, like pipe networks, while others maintained their ow- nership directly supervising the providers’ activity, especially price setting. There are also examples of a shift in local strategy after the failure of direct and extreme privatization. Especially, in the city of Szeged the extreme rise of consumer fees led to a scandal, therefore the municipality made another contract out on a different basis. It was a much more controlled and publicly 268 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence regulated model of water service provision than it had been before. Privatization. g enerally accepted paradigm of privatization was as fol- lows. Shares were sold to the professional investors who were involved in the particular sector. For instance, water network services were announced to operating water companies, and not simply financial investors. Mainly large w est European-centered firms won the tenders, and their founded daughter companies started to provide services. Sometimes purely profit-oriented sta- te-owned enterprises operated these huge international networks doing it with long tradition. Consumer prices agreed upon in the privatization contracts were based on formulas for year-by-year basis. Because of the relatively underdeveloped regulatory control and not sufficient experience of even large municipalities, they could not create enough guarantees for longer period to keep conditions under control. However, it was accepted at that time, that the state aid should be stopped, and it was necessary to cover maintaining and development costs from user charges. This scenario was heavily criticized more than fifteen years later. Two main arguments were emphasized. Firstly, prices of public utility services in- creased continuously guaranteeing fixed and long-term profits for providers. Secondly, international owners were accused of distributing profits to abroad. Crisis. Severe budgetary crisis emerged in Hungary from 2005−2006. By that time, restrictions on overspending on social services became clearly visible to the public. School maintenance for every settlement, including the smallest one, seemed to be unsustainable. Some hospitals operated by smaller towns had to be closed in spite of the protests. In addition, although 63% of elderly care homes were maintained by the local government institutions, as well as 17% by churches, and 20% by NgOs, in the meantime, formerly equal rules and sector-neutral financing had been changed. Experts had been tal- king about the re-emergence of a state-centric role in service provision (g ye- kiczky, 2009) since that time. Budgetary institutions under state direction gained exclusive influence over the delivery of public services at the expense of NgOs or private bodies. A specific answer to the budgetary crises from the side of larger urban municipalities was the establishment of integrated institutions in human ser- vices. Similarly, municipally-owned companies were re-organized as holdings, 269 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory such as entities of corporate governance in public ownership. Some examples of re-municipalization took place in the early stages of this period. Then the bank crises deepened these conflicts because the local debt also increased. State-owned solutions. Since 2010, these phenomena strengthened into a clear tendency. Larger municipalities at first, and then later the central govern- ment started to get back shares of formerly privatized providing companies from private investors. The motivation was to control the increase of consumer fees in a direct way, and to limit investors’ profits. Municipal owners started to shift non-privatized companies into the direction of becoming multi-utility companies. Multi-utility holding companies were established from single-pro- file municipal companies in order to exploit options for synergies. At the same time, so-called in sourcing emerged in contrast to the formerly exclusively preferred model of outsourcing. This development was not independent from the changes in the EU legislation. Municipal corporate governance (g rossi & Reichard, 2008; g rossi & Thomason, 2011) emerged in Hungary similarly to what took place in other European countries. However, it makes a difference that the process was quite heavily promoted by the regulatory environment. Privatized companies are owned by foreign investors, i.e. west-Euro- pean groups of monopolistic providing companies, like the g erman RwE, E.ON, EnBw , the French gDF and EdF, the Italian Enel in energy sector; the g erman RwE, Berlin w asser, the French Suez, Veolia in water suppy sector; the Austrian A.S.A. in waste management, etc. There are crucial differences between re-municipalization or corporate governance on the one hand, and nationalization on the other. The Hungarian government of 2010 placed this issue at the center of its policy agenda. Some of the key dilemmas of the whole process in the region may be illustrated by the Hungarian case which repre- sents a rather extreme answer to the ongoing challenges facing Europe. The characteristic feature of the developments in the 2010s is the emergence of governmental opposition to the former process of privatization. Prime Mi- nister Viktor Orbán argued that private companies had abused their domi- nant position by overcharging for their services, and wanted to buy back the shares. This was one of the key motivations for changing the political system (Hajnal, 2014) and market relations, including public services provision. The national-conservative ideology paradoxically focuses on state-centered solu- tions for every conflicting social or economic issue. Market-orientation shif- 270 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence ted to state-centered defense of so-called national interests. The local government system has become highly centralized with the setting up of the County g overnment Offices and District Offices as descri- bed above. Maintenance of public schools, previously a task of self-govern- ments, was shifted to a central agency, whereas civil control over the edu- cation system ceased to exist. Institutions previously run by the county level self-governments, like social care homes, hospitals, and special schools, were centralized. Regional development was also centralized. District Offices took over most of the bureaucratic work of mayors’ offices. By 1 January 2013, an average urban government lost one-third of its public servants with their technical belongings, such as rooms, computers, furniture in offices, etc. Now, they are ‘state servants’ . The economic environment of public utility service provision has also changed since 2010. Several measures were undertaken to centralize profits from the energy, water, waste, and other public utility sectors (funeral, park maintenance, chimney sweeping services). Providers are now burdened with a central tax levied on public utility networks. A general cut in prices of user charges is required, and a new supervisory fee has been introduced. Munici- pal utilities previously exempted from some of the taxes are taxed now, ma- king costs of municipal units higher. Recent acts clarify that public service infrastructure created in the future may be publicly owned only, though management rights can be transferred to private companies to operate services. It is planned that the purchasing of shares of existing service providers shall be done with credit that companies will pay back from their profits. However, banks find risk too high and they are reluctant to finance this. Maintenance costs are covered by user charges; however, tariffs are defined by the Parliament and the government. The aim of the national government seems to be to shift public utilities to non-profit-ma- king services. In this case, the role of municipalities has not yet been specified nor the providers’ presumable counter-interests. It is easy to detect a change in the EU regulation regarding public servi- ce provision. It is also evident that a general change in this regard has occur- red in w estern Europe as well in the past decades that may be described as 271 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory a movement from public to private and from private back to public 29 service provision, though this does not mean a perfect reversal. Methods of han- dling problems raised by the private monopolies in the field may include regulation of profit-rate interest or increase transparency, renegotiation of expired service contracts, or in-sourcing. Instead of relying on a variety of methods, the Hungarian central government relies solely on hierarchical bu- reaucratic coordination as a means to handle this market failure. A comple- te refusal of privatization and most of other methods involving the private sector in this field is manifested in this simplistic solution. Functions were reallocated from private to public actors and within the public sphere, prefe- rably to the least autonomous ones. In terms of the models identified above a similar pendulum movement may be identified that we found regarding the structural changes. The first decade of transition may be characterized by an increased role of non-governmental, most of all business and civil-NgO ac- tors. This could be described as an NPM approach. However, one part of this tendency is due to the inevitable termination of socialist institutions, like privatization of companies previously owned by county council but being purely market companies, like dairy production companies. Others may fit well into the European tendency and even the EU requirements. Since 2006−2007 and especially after 2010, a sharp turn may be detected, which, in terms of models, may fit most – again – to the bureaucratic, possibly to the simplified Nw S or the socialist model. On administrative procedures 30 The first comprehensive Administrative Procedures Act 31 was adopted in 1957 (Act IV/1957), just a few months after the 1956 uprising against the totalitarian regime. Though the preparation and drafting of the law started in 1955, most commentators regard it as part of the consolidation initiated by the k adar regime of providing certain guarantees to the clients of adminis- trative processes. The law was largely amended in 1981, and of course, major amendment took place in 1990 providing increased level of guarantees for the clients, most importantly allowing a judicial review of all administra- 29 See w ollmann & Marcou (2010) about this problem throughout Europe. 30 An overview of the content and changes in the law up to 2006 is provided by Fazekas (2007). More recent overview in Boros (2014). 31 The law has been dealing only with the decisions applying to laws in concrete cases, not on ad- ministrative law making, which is regulated by different laws. 272 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence tive legally binding decisions (Darák, 2014). In 2004, a new Act (No. 140) was adopted based on the suggestions of a drafting committee. Though there were several new institutions in the law (e.g. administrative contract as a substitute to sanctioning, some new ways of appeal processes), these do not seem to work in practice. A further important element was a detailed regu- lation of administrative fees, determining the obligation of clients but also used as an immediate sanction towards administrative units not fulfilling their obligation (e.g. not completing the procedure by the deadline, the fee or twice its value must be paid back to the client). The new law in 2004 also reflected the Hungary’s accession to the EU regulating some, previously not covered, technicalities regarding the EU citizens as clients and administrati- ve cooperation with other EU countries. A permanent feature of the law since 1957 until nowadays is that it provides general rules in administrative adjudication and legal procedures. This method, that is quite typical in the European continent, usually sets up general rules or rather principles (like in most Scandinavian countries). The Hungarian law, however, is very detailed well over two thousand sub- paragraphs (about 60 thousand words). This design supposed to provide ci- tizens with overall guarantees and an easy-access source of their legal rights in this regard. However, exactly because of the high level of detail in the general law, there is an enormous number of specific rules in specific fields of procedures from issuing construction permits to tax rules, or competition controlling activities. For instance, if the Act specifies general deadline (30 days) to finish administrative procedures, there must be exemptions on such fields where the complexity of the issue and/or the required process (e.g. the cooperation of several other administrative units is needed) cannot be finished within the given deadline. As Fazekas (2007: 36) notes only about 5% of all procedures are based solely on the general procedures regulation. In this regard, the Act does not really serve as an information source of client guarantees. The Act also provided a high level of guaranties against administrati- ve arbitrariness, unfair, and unlawful procedures. Some of these guaranties seemed to jeopardize the operations and the enforcement of laws, as gajdus- chek (2015b) empirically proves it. 32 32 For instance, it seemed practically impossible to demolish illegally built buildings for there are so 273 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory The Act 140/2004 opened the opportunity for the interested parties to step into the process as clients (class action). This is most typical in case of larger construction works if the neighborhood resist the change or in the field of environmental protection. It seems that this type of rights has been largely curtailed after 2010. The Act 140/2004 contained several rules allowing the use of ICT in client-administration relationship. However, most of these rules were terminated before the Act got into power in 2005 as the technical basis did not exist. Most of these rules were reinstated in 2012 with the establishment of ne- cessary capacity in terms of hardware and software. Improvement of electronic government is a top priority of the new government, presumably as an effective instrument of control of lower administrative units and other social entities. It would be hard to identify the impact of any specific reform movement in this field. European accession undoubtedly generated some minor, rather technical amendments in the law. The impact of e-governance, if that is con- sidered as a reform direction, is clearly visible though. 7.2.3. Civil Service Regulation The civil service system of Hungary has been extensively discussed in the international literature by the Hungarian and foreign authors. Most impor- tantly, Jan Hinrik Meyer-Sahling studied the Hungarian system either in itself or in a comparative context (Meyer-Sahling, 2001, 2006a, 2006b, 2006c, 2008, 2011; Meyer-Sahling & Jáger, 2012). The civil service was a crucial issue in the accession process to the EU that has also generated several research projects (Bossaert & Demmke, 2003; Demmke & Moilanen, 2010). A relatively detai- led, descriptive study was published recently addressing both the law and re- ality in the field of civil service (gajduschek & Linder, 2014), whereas Linder (2011) analyzed the legal regulation in detail. Shocking similarities between two countries of the region are discussed by Staroňová & gajduschek (2013). The large number of studies allows us to concentrate specifically on the im- pact of various reform approaches. many guarantees that practically prevent the authorities to carry out their obligation against no- torious law-breakers. Similarly, for over a decade, administrative decisions could be implemented only after the judicial process initiated by the client was finished. However, judicial processes, especially if the client is interested in that, may take almost or even more than a decade, even in cases where the administrative process has to be finished in thirty days. This fact made the execu- tion of administrative decisions highly questionable, frequently impossible or simply inadaquate. 274 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence The Civil Service Act was adopted in 1992 (Act No. 23). This was the first comprehensive regulation in the CEE region. During the communist regime, so-called spoils system was in function. Civil servants were employed accor- ding to the Labor Code without any specific regulation to assure that the bu- reaucracy does not alienate from the masses. Naturally, this system required strict political loyalty even over professionalism. This approach has gradually weakened (gajduschek, 2007b), and leading scholars, from the early 1970s proposed an arrangement that was close to the merit system. By 1990, eve- ryone agreed the new merit system law was in a great need. The Act 23/1992 was intended to serve this goal. However, for various reasons, the real functioning was largely different (Nunberg, Barbone & Derlien 1999; V erheijen & k otchegura, 1999). In fact, po- litical or even personal loyalty was crucial at least in more important positions (gajduschek, 2007c). There seemed to be an honest devotion to build a profes- sional civil service on one hand and, on the other hand, the pressure has been constantly present to infringe this principle in individual cases. Still the quasi- merit nature of the Hungarian civil service gradually became obvious. A com- parative OECD study (Meyer-Sahling, 2009c: 37) found that, out of the eight CEE accession countries, Hungary scores the second worse in terms of merit based recruitment (ib.: 26, 30), promotion (ib.: 36), evaluation (ib.: 45), whereas political connections considered the most important for career out of the eight countries. In a concluding diagram the author finds that Hungary fits far worst to the European Principles of Administration (in this case a depoliticized, pro- fessional civil service system). Others, based on self-reporting on the authorities of the countries, reach a similar conclusion (Demmke & Moilanen, 2010). In 2001, among several other amendments, the performance appraisal sys- tem was introduced. The system has been applied on all civil servants, carried out by the heads of the administrative units (several of which employed over a hundred civil servants), and resulted in a quite significant (+/-20%, or even more in some time and some cases) wage divergence from the one stipulated by the law. This was clearly an NPM element, though may not be intended as such. In 2006−2007, a sharp turn was declared in the civil service policy expli- citly towards NPM direction. The merit system was criticized for its rigidity, lack of performance orientation, etc., exactly according to the NPM narrative announced by the newly appointed state secretary for CS; coming from the 275 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory business sector as an HR manager of a tobacco factory before. He increased the role of performance appraisal and performance bonus that could be as high as 50% of the normal salary. Other major changes were also introduced which, however – presumably unintendedly, or even against the conscious will of the designer – strengthened the merit elements of the system. Most importantly, a new central HR unit was established that – as originally was planned – would have carried out the HR activities for all the ministries. It was only during this short period that vacant civil service positions had to be widely announced, and – most importantly – a systematic selection procedure for new appointees was set up, including a generally obligatory and relatively difficult entry exam and a systematic selection based, at least partly, on the central HR unit. Before and after this period, the appointment of a new civil servant has been largely the arbitrary decision of the head of the administrative unit. The reform attempt failed within a few years, the ministries blocked some reforms and all major reforms were reversed by the new Cabinet in 2010. After 2010, as the Orbán’s Cabinet got into power, a new era started in the civil service as well. A large portion of managers was replaced by new loyal persons. In the senior civil service, hardly anyone remained in position. The Orban’s Cabinet made it quite explicit that unconditional loyalty is requi- red, and rewards and sanctions are dependent almost solely on this factor – somewhat similarly to the socialist era. A new Civil Service Act was adopted (199/2011) after a short period of making several major amendments on the existing law. The Act sharply differentiates between civil servants of the cen- tral government and that of the municipalities. Civil servants may be dismis- sed with only a two months’ notice with area son – for instance – of the “loss of the superior’s confidence” , which in fact makes firing of a civil servants ea- sier that non-professionals at a company. The above-mentioned arrangement that the political Head of County g overnment Offices where the majority of civil servants work has a veto power on appointments of civil servants, thus builds political criteria openly into the civil service regulation. Meanwhile, the analyzed period has been scattered by regular, though always unexpected initiatives to cut back the number of civil servants by 10−30+% within a few months after the initiation was announced. At least five such radical political attempts have been lunched in this period. 33 The 33 The last one, announced only a few month before this chapter is closed, targeted 150,000 people 276 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence experience tends to show that the real decrease is well below the planned proportion and – more importantly – the number of civil servants grew to the original volume or even above (gajduschek, 2008c: 112−114). These types of cuts obviously would be impossible in a merit system. In brief, the Hungarian civil service was hoped to follow the merit sys- tem ideal of the classical w eberian bureaucracy. However, this has never been achieved. Politicization has been present from the beginning of the transition and it has continuously increased 34 . Major elements of a merit system were attempted to be introduced during the reform program that aimed at exactly opposite − NPM-like ideals. After 2010, the new government reconciled law and reality as the law openly and effectively breaks up with the depoliticized merit ideal and allows direct political interference with civil service. In that re- gard, again, the Orban’s government seem to be closest to the socialist model. 7.3. Public Administration – Scholarly Debates over Models In this chapter, we attempt to answer to what extent the Hungarian scho- lars of various disciplinary origin address PAR generally, and various appro- aches to administration and reform-models (as identified to what extent in the first chapter of this analysis, and some other reform approaches) are presented. 7.3.1. Materials and Methods In order to attain the objectives set out above, we reviewed four major Hungarian journals, which may deal with PA from different perspectives. The main criteria of the selection was permanency (i.e. the journals have to publish on a regular basis, but at least four times a year, and be present in the analyzed period 35 ), relevance (cover the temporal focus of examining), and evident re- putation (scientific level and general acceptance in academic circles). w e also from the civil service, which amounted at that time around 114,000 indicating that the decisi- on-makers – presumably – cannot differentiate between ’civil servants’ and ’government-paid employees’ that may be around 800.000 (still indicating approx. 15% cut in a few month period). Retrieved from: http://www.origo.hu/itthon/20160128-csepreghy-nandor-allamigazgatas-kozi- gazgatas-leepites.html (Downloaded: 29.5.2016) 34 One may reasonably, but wrongly, expect that the large change took place when the first democrati- cally elected government got into power in 1990, and exchanged the communist cadre with its own people but then political appointments gradually ceased to exist. The opposite has been true. 35 Important journals that were published only in a shorter period are thus omitted. 277 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory attempted to find periodicals representing various research fields relevant to PA. Based on these requirements the scrutinized journals are: • Magyar Közigazgatás [Hungarian Public Administration, HPA], the best known and, according to the editorial preface, the most respected journal of administrative sciences in Hungary that has a long history. It has gone through numerous changes (in line with the prevailing regimes) from the 1884’s first volume to the recent volume in 2016; now HPA has kept almost nothing from its original form, even its title has changed in 1990 from Állam és Igazgatás [State and Administra- tion], and in 2006 to Új Magyar Közigazgatás [New Hungarian Public Administration]. For many years publishing of HPA was supported by different ministries, currently it is funded by an international compa- ny engaged in scientific publishing. Initially, for more than a centu- ry the journal was released monthly, but after being suspended for almost two year between 2007−2008 36 , from 2014 it is published in a quarterly format. • Közgazdasági Szemle [Economics Review, ER] firstly published in 1876, originally in g erman language during the years of the Aus- tro-Hungarian Monarchy. It is funded by the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (hereinafter: HAS), its principles of editing state that ER is mainly a theoretical journal in the area of economic sciences. The journal is published 11 times a year. • Politikatudományi Szemle [Political Science Review, PSR] was foun- ded in 1992 by the Political Science Association and the Institute of Political Sciences of HAS. PSR is publishing the studies from all fields of political science if those comply with the requirements expected of scientific publications, and contain original theoretical and empirical research. Since its release, the first volume of the journal has not chan- ged much, apart from the alteration of formal properties. It is publis- hed PSR quarterly. • Jogtudományi Közlöny [Jurisprudential Bulletin, JB] published as a journal of the HAS g overnment and Legal Studies Committee, is a fo- rum for both basic and applied researches. JB has a long tradition (its 36 As – naturally – this journal has published most of the relevant articles, this interim period can be seen quite well in the figures. 278 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence first volume was released in 1866) and good reputation among legal scholars, at all times, the most respected personalities are among hun- garian legal its editors. Over the last decades, the journal is generally published on a monthly basis. The reviewed period covers 27 years from the beginning of transition in CEE countries until very recently(1988−2015). Not all items published in these periodicals were analyzed. w e excluded a large number of research material, such as historical overviews or reports of already implemented changes in PA, foreign examples if they do not have expressed domestic conclusions, and quasi ‘case studies’ , or private specific experiences without generalizable consequence. w e excluded also ‘in honorems’ , introductory essays, published laws, etc. As a next step, we looked through the titles and abstracts to search for rela- ted content to PAR or any other reform-models. If a potentially relevant paper was identified, the entire paper was read looking for the relevant parts. For this exercise a more detailed and operationalized definition of the categories, espe- cially the five models was used. Thus the used categories are: Socialist or Com- munist, Classic w eberian State (as corresponding to bureaucratic administra- tion), New Public Management, New Public g overnance or g ood g overnance, and Neo-w eberian State. Additionally to these models, further categories were introduced to identify specific but relevant reform approaches. Europeani- zation (containing all issues related to the European Union, e.g. membership, requirements, and accession preparation, etc.), e-government (everything is heading to the e-state, and ICT in PA), and legal solutions 37 . In addition to the specific models, it was also reasonable to add an ‘other’ category for the purpo- ses of classifying the relevant but non-classifiable (value-free) contents. The majority of papers dealt only partly (sometimes only to a small ex- tent) with PAR. w e classified papers on a 1-4 scale regarding overall relevance for PAR. Furthermore, we assessed the percentage devoted to a certain model in the given paper as – naturally – several papers addressed more than one re- form-models. All these findings regarding any paper that had some relevance to our research was entered into a database which aggregated data presented 37 For some reasons, due to the traditionally legalistic nature (or Rechtstaat tradition) of Hungarian public administration and administrative science in particular (Drechsler, 2005a; gajduschek, 2012; Hajnal, 2013), a major part of the analyzed papers prefer conventional solutions realized by means of law. Consequently, it was appropriate to include this atypical reform category to the others. 279 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory below calculated from. Here, for the sake of simplicity, we will provide only a rough overview. For this reason, we take into account if a paper addresses cer- tain or probably more reform-models or not, putting aside how many words were devoted to that model. 7.3.2. Overview The outputs, in fact, came from came from four disciplines: administrative, political, legal, and economic sciences, each of which is represented by a journal. All of them are published in a (roughly) permanent basis during the concer- ned period, relevant to the examination, and have a considerable reputation. w e found 572 articles as a result of the reviewed 7,998 articlesn fact, came from. Consequently, the average hit rate is 7.15%, in other words, on average every 14 th article dealt with PAR, but the intensity of occurrences is varied, and different periods can be identified in it. This is exactly what Figure 7.4 illustrates below. Figure 7.4: Reform-based Articles in the Journals Source: own compilation. At first glance, it may seem that in each analyzed year most of the rele- vant articles were published in Hungarian Public Administration. Indeed, 429 of articles in total are about three quarters of the total amount. Political Science Review and Jurisprudential Bulletin come second with 87 pieces, followed by the Economic Review with almost equal 29 papers (value 27). Please note that HPA ’s publishing was suspended in 2007, and only two issues were published in 2008. 280 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence w e can see some clearly visible waves from the graph. It seems that, with some important exceptions, the with some important exceptions the in- terest in PAR, in most election years significantly drops (1994, 2002, 2014 seem such years). The first years after the transition are seemingly below the years before the transition took place. Furthermore, there is a relative peak in papers on PAR in the period of 1998−2006 that was described, from most findings, as the period of consolidation. The ‘political governance’ of the second and third Orbán’s governments may have discouraged scholars to deal with the administrative reform as these professional-administrative issues may have seemed highly irrelevant. In all the three presumed regula- rities the explanation may be that the technical questions of administrative functioning became less relevant if large-scale political issues dominated the given period. It also shows us how the four periodicals representing four disciplina- ry fields appear in the investigated period. The economics approach seems to be quite strong in the first few years of transition probably because of the enormous changes in the economic system that was strongly related, in several ways, with the government functioning. The legal approach seems relatively modest, presumably as the HPA is full of administrative law pa- pers, and thus it is considered as the journal publishing administrative law papers. A plausible statement may be that the more general legal approach becomes stronger when the rule of law became an issue in the early years of transition, the sharp decrease of the governing coalition‘s popularity be- tween 2006-2009, and the two-thirds government after 2010. 7.3.3. On Various Models of P AR The nine approaches that we analyzed in scholarly papers altogether appeared in a very different frequency as it is shown in Table 7.2. Papers that are encoded as “legal approach” are the ones that most frequently address PAR (note that this is largely because the legalistic nature is far most preva- lent generally in PA). The “others” category, includes papers legalistic nature addressing the issue of PA in a more general context, e.g. organizational studies and change, overall governmental category, includes and its change, social environment of administration, etc., that could not fit to any of the above categories. The EU accession and the requirements for administrative 281 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory change were widely discussed especially around the accession in 2004, whe- reas the e-government was a relatively stable though not widely discussed topic, which became more characteristic in the past decade. Regarding the five models, and especially the three reform-models, it is clear that NPM is far the most dominant, whereas NPg is hardly discussed, and even those cases are of questionable character. Table 7.2: Appearance of the Nine Approaches Model / approach Number of appearances New Public Management (NPM) 154 New Public g overnance (NPg) 11 Neo-w eberian State (Nw S) 39 EU-ization 63 E-government 51 Socialist 41 Classic w eberian 55 Legal 176 Other 156 Nevertheless, let us proceed to the trajectory of these approaches. Figu- re 7.5 shows only the distribution of the five major models discussed at the beginning of this chapter. Figure 7.5: Aggregated Distribution of Models 282 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence The early years of transition were characterized by the intensive discus- sion of the socialist system, and then the w eberian bureaucratic arrangement. From the second half of the 1990s, NPM seemed to dominate scholarly dis- cussion reaching its peak in the mid-2000s. Indeed, NPM is present to the highest quantity but also most continuously, i.e. NPM is the only reform-mo- del which can be found in most analyzed years, while other approaches occur only in certain periods. The categorization, as we indicated at the beginning of the chapter, is based on the content of the model. This is the reason why some publications were categorized as Nw S even before the term was coined. However, Nw S became relatively important only from 2009, and especially after the Orbán’s government got into power, as Nw S refers in this termino- logy to etatism, anti-liberal, anti-NPM sentiments as well as to centralization with a strict hierarchy and the smallest possible level of autonomies. NPg or g ood g overnance is discussed somewhat more intensively only in the past few years as the very term was used both by the left and right wing parties. The Orbán’s government even initiated a large-scale program (Magyary pro- gram) devoted to the creation of “g ood g overnment” , whatever it may mean in that context. Most items categorized as NPg may have been written in that vein while referred to the original model (Hajnal-Pál, 2013). An in-depth analysis of the content reveals some further findings. In the first period, the authors planned to implement the recommended reforms within the socialist framework. This is demonstrated by title selection of this era: ‘Solution of Organizational Decentralization: The Small State Businesses’ (Laky, 1988), ‘Financial Innovation in Market Socialism’ (Liska, 1988). w hen the transition started, the articles took a new direction: since then the reforms had already incurred a deeper intent of change in the articles. Once again, just based on the titles: ‘Limited Company and Reform’ (Hoch, 1990), ‘The New Model of Corporate Ownership’ (Sebestyén, 1990), ‘The Foundations of Constitutional System of Local g overnments and Directions of Development’ (Verebélyi, 1989). From this time forth, the articles contained more and more intensively the issues related to the changes of PA. During this period, HPA has also released several special thematic issues on PAR (e.g. 1993/11 in con- nection with the intended revision of the new Local g overnment Act). The next major change dated around the year 2000 when the papers rela- ted to the EU accession started to occur in a larger number. According to the 283 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory foreword of HPA in January 2000, the journal aims to provide (more) space in the future to the publications related to modernization of PA and preparation for the EU accession. The third and recent large change may have been provoked by the 2010 parliamentary elections. Due to the results, the election-winning party gained a two-thirds majority, and began to fundamentally transform public-legal fra- mework of the country at a rapid pace. This event seems to restructure the distribution of publications related to PAR in favor of NPg and Nw S appro- aches. Vast majority (more than 70%) of them has been published after 2010. The drop in relevant publications from 2014 occurred because HPA has been released from this date only on a quarterly basis. In view of the above-described, we can conclude that the previously identified three major breakpoints are related to three major political events: first, the transition in CEE and the newly formed democratic framework which allowed the authors, through ensuring freedom of science, to deal with and publish papers on state affairs; second, after a steady downward trend, consolidation between 1998−2006 (and partly the EU accession) re-launched interest on the subject, in addition the development of PA, at that time, was considered to be of a wider public interest due to the involvement of the scien- tific community; and third, from 2006 and particularly after 2010 once again, there was a drop in publications, and possibly the scholarly interest in PAR. 7.4. Conclusion: Stages and Models in Hungary with Further Considerations In this chapter, we attempted to provide a brief summary of PAR and its various segments. In this regard, we followed the Hungarian PA literature, dividing the topic in analytical terms into (a) structure (central and territorial PA organizations), (b) functioning (policy/law making, public service provi- sion, and application of laws), and (c) civil service system. Additionally, we also analyzed the Hungarian scholarly literature on PAR. The description of the trajectory served the purpose of determining major stages in the process as well as assessing the prevalence of various models of public administration. w e have predefined three reform-models that were widely discussed in the past decades in the international literature, and two models that served as a kind of ‘starting points’ against which these models may be interpreted − bure- 284 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence aucratic PA arrangement in the w est and the socialist PA model in our region. Regarding the periodicization. g enerally three stages were identified by most reviewed authors. The first period may be titled as the creation and initial consolidation of the new system characterized by a radical shift form the socialist system. On a macro level, this is described by the double tran- sition creating a democratic political system and the system of rule of law on one hand, and a market economy on the other. For the PA this required completely new ways of functioning, characterized most importantly – in our interpretation – by the loss of several administrative tools used before to enforce compliance from social actors. The new methods had to be learnt and that created great difficulties, and at least for this initial period loss in effectiveness, especially in the field of law enforcement. Naturally, this period brought large changes in the organizational structures as well with an incre- ased role of ministries (as the policy making function of the Party apparatus was terminated), creation of a large number of agencies and their territorial units (deconcentrated organs), and perhaps most importantly, establishments of a new highly autonomous self-government system with a wide range of competencies. The second stage, that stems roughly from the mid-1990s to 2006 or rather 2010, may be named as a period of fine-tuning with an incre- ased sense of difficulties inherent in the new system. The scholarly literature devoted most publications specifically to PAR in this period, and relevant, though not enormous, changes took place in various fields during this period. In a more pessimistic interpretation, this period may be described as actors getting accustomed to the positive elements of transition, while new pro- blems occurred but they were not really handled (especially if that required the change of constitutional setting), while disillusionment became widespre- ad among the professional and wider public. Somewhat strangely the EU accession hardly appeared as an impor- tant periodic point, presumably because the Hungarian PA was among the best prepared candidates, working on the accession for about a decade be- fore 2004. Still, the EU induced significant, though somewhat contradicting, changes, especially in public service provision. From 2010, a completely new PA system has been built in accordance with a larger transition detected in the field of political system, namely the illiberal state and all its attributes and the economy with an increased role of state in 285 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory terms of ownership and regulation. In a more general view, the story of the past 25 years may be described as movements of a pendulum, which started with the sharp, extreme deni- al of all attributes of the socialist regime. For instance, while the socialist system is characterized by the unity of powers with the primacy of the – communist party led – executive, the new arrangement set up several orga- nizational and legal institutions to control the executive to such an extent that, at some points, it was not able to carry out its key functions (i.e. enfor- cement of laws). The socialist system prefers centralization and hierarchy; the new system provided a sound autonomy and wide range of competencies for local governments leading to several other administrative autonomies. Illiberal state may be considered as the pendulum swinging back again to the extremes of centralization, hierarchy, party-run administration, and practi- cal elimination of checks and balances that reminds the observer to that of the socialist model. What models were followed in the various reform movements? First of all, we emphasize that we identify certain reform actions with a certain model in an objective manner if the act fits to the attributes of a pre-defi- ned model. In other words, we do not try to answer the question in a strict sense: “w hat the decision makers had in mind?” for several reasons. Most importantly, because we cannot identify the actors’ real will. This is a general problem of social sciences that is exacerbated in political science where the vested interest of the actors is frequently to hide their real motives. w e also detected that, in several cases, the proclaimed reform direction and the factu- al one may greatly differ even if the actors indeed wanted to follow the given reform agenda. This was most self-evident in case of civil service where per- formance appraisal (NPM) was introduced in a reform that aimed at reinfor- cing merit system, whereas the actual functioning was brought closest during this 25-year period to a real merit system as a result of an NPM-oriented PAR project (that otherwise attempts to terminate merit system). By all means, the fact that the attributes of NPM fit to the general ten- dency of the transition may be the reason that this reform approach seems to be the most relevant not only in the scholarly literature but also in reality. Agencitification in central structures and devolution in local ones may be interpreted this way. NPM has also appeared in civil service with the intro- 286 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence duction of performance appraisal and as an official ideology of reforms in the period of 2006−2009. Most clearly, however, NPM is manifested in the field of public service provision as several service providers were privatized at first stage as a result of transition, and in the second stage to a great extent induced by the – at that time NPM-oriented – EU regulation. The other two reform-models. New Public g overnance (NPg or g ood g overnance) and Neo-w eberian State (Nw S) appear both in practice and in the literature to a much smaller extent; in the literature, frequently, in a quite distorted, misinterpreted way. Some good governance methods, not reviewed here in detail, have appeared at the local level, in self-governmental functio- ning, most of all by involving local NgOs and civil society organizations in decision-making. However, this remained sporadic. One may argue that the involvement of NgOs in service provision and the sector-neutral financing that enabled this arrangement may be considered as NPg, even though most authors would categorize that under NPM. Furthermore, some units that existed at the territorial level (e.g. Regional Development and Labor Coun- cils) that broke up with the classical bureaucratic administrative model, and seemed to be more open to the cooperation with non-state actors may be considered as manifestations of NPg approach. The relatively small weight of these organizations and their short life, however, indicate the bad fate of this reform-model based on participation, cooperation and consensus-seeking, generally time-consuming procedures with less predictable outcomes, irres- pective of long-run positive effects of this arrangement. The Hungarian literature seems to largely misinterpret the meaning of this model as well as that of NWS. In fact, while Nw S may serve well as a descriptive model, it is quite vague and less robust as a normative model (i.e. how a Nw S arrangement would look like.) It seems that Nw S is rather a qu- asi-ideology in the region against NPM and intended for bureaucratic arran- gements. This is exactly what we see in Drechsler’s or Randma-Liiv’s quoted papers. In the Hungarian literature a clear, though not necessarily conscious, misinterpretation occurs that identifies Nw S with the endeavor of Orban’s Cabinet fitting to the illiberal state: etatism, high degree of centralization, and abolition of all kind of autonomies. Bureaucracy in this region appears differently to its interpretation in the w est. All the three reform-models are originated from the w est, and all 287 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory of them are formulated – to larger or smaller extent – against the w eberian bureaucratic model. NPM appeared explicitly as a denial of the bureaucratic administration, most of all its hierarchical arrangements (vs. competition), inward-looking nature (vs. outcome and client orientation), and relative ne- gligence to efficiency and effectiveness. NPg emphasizes transparency, ci- vic participation and informal, non-structured, network-like functioning as opposed to secrecy, administrative professionalism (that excludes dilettante though interested parties from the decision-making and implementation), and strict, pre-defined hierarchy. Nw S, while accepting the need for some bureaucratic solutions (vs. NPM), still vows that classical bureaucracy is not anymore feasible. In the CEE region, however, as most agree, classical w ebe- rian bureaucracy would have been a step forward from the socialist model with its politics-run mechanism, systematic lack of professional capacity, and considerations in decision-making and implementation. Though the analysis of publications may be confusing in this regard, the first period (was domina- ted mostly by the papers reviewing NPM, typically in a positive manner, and condemning classical w eberian model as outdated, sometimes even identi- fied with the socialist past. Later, however, more and more voices articulated the view that classical bureaucracy may have been a stage in development that cannot and/or should not be skipped to jump directly to NPM or other fashionable w estern models. This change can be clearly detected in the pu- blications in the region, so much that recently Pollitt and Dan (2013) argue against the view that NPM does not fit to the CEE reality, and classical bure- aucracy is needed to be established first − a view that they find dominant in the region. 38 Marketization sometimes brought to extremes, and privatizing public infrastructures that most of the leading NPM countries kept as government property seemingly failed to fulfill their promises. Prices typically went up as the market mechanism was introduced instead of dropping due to incre- ased efficiency. The customers frequently felt more defenseless facing large multinational companies than earlier with government-run providers. The ideology of the supremacy of market over the state may have been questioned 38 The fact that they assessed the general mood well is reinforced by the immediate reaction by Drechsler and Randma-Liiv (2015), who harshly criticized the proposed finding that “NPM can work” in the region. 288 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence by the fact that large part of the public infrastructure was privatized to w es- tern government-owned companies. g enerally, NPM, a pro-market appro- ach, was surely difficult to be mentally handled by a population socialized during the socialist regime. Furthermore, NPM was intensively advocated, frequently forced by the international organizations, most of all IMF , w orld Bank, and OECD in the first one or two decades, despite the increasingly clear negative effects. This raised suspicion if that endeavor served other purposes than the well-being of the countries (Stiglitz, 2002). In this way, NPM may generally exacerbate alienation form the transition which may be a mental basis of the illiberal turn. NPg is also originated from the w est. It is based on such structural and cultural conditions that are hardly present in most countries of the region; surely not in Hungary. NPg may function well if all major social groups can articulate their views, if they are relatively well organized, or at least able to organize themselves. The Hungarian society hardly meets these requirements. Large social groups are unable to voice their views and ne- eds. For instance, the Roma (about 10% of the population) have no effective representation neither at the central nor at the local level. The same is the case with the unemployed people. The unionization may be – according to our surveys – about 1-2%. Even local governments were unable to form a unified, and thus powerful association. Besides interest articulation, inte- rest aggregation is a key in NPg. However, though this is difficult to empiri- cally capture, the mental disposition for consensus seeking is very low. The debates are highly personalized (vs. issue-oriented) and conceived as a zero sum game that hardly allows mutually satisfying solutions. In brief, most models coming from the w est have been attractive and, at the same time, inappropriate presumably for the same reason: being w es- tern. The tension between rather Eastern reality and western ambitions are not new in the region (Szűcs, 1983), and may be captured in the PA system as well. The tension between foreign ideals and local realities became more self-evident as the ideals originated this time from the Anglo-American administration that was different not only from the reality but also from the historical ideals of g ermany and France in this region. Furthermore, ideals and models offered by the west sharply contradicted one another, exacerbating confusion and leading to the cacophony of PAR. By analyzing 289 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory the administrative reforms in a systematic manner, most authors concluded that no clear models can be identified during the past 25 years, or shorter periods within this time span (Rosta, 2015). However, in a recent study investigating the nature of sub-national level PAR in Hungary Hajnal and Rosta (2016) find that the reforms since 2010, while diverging from or even contradict the three analyzed models (NPM, NPg and Nw S), seem to form a specific, consistent model. This model, that they call ‘illiberal’ , is charac- terized by “radical rolling back of the market […], harsh downplaying of network-type coordination instruments, and degradation of rule of law” (ib.: 19). To these rather general governmental attributes, we added in this chapter some more PA-specific elements, most importantly: (a) elimina- tion of checks and balances, especially checks of the executive; (b) centra- lization, purely hierarchical coordination, and denial of autonomies; and (c) politically, party-driven PA (vs. professional administration). Regarding the potential cause, the authors presume that “western values of liberal democratic governance constitute some sort of an unintended error or an inability of the central power to exert control” (ib.: 19), which may have instigated the establishment of the illiberal state. Based on all the above, now, as an ultimate conclusion we attempt to answer the questions raised by the editors of this book. 1. It seems that for a long period of time there was not an administrati- ve reform-model specific to the region or Hungary. Instead, a caco- phony of reform directions may be detected. Most of these reforms were based on w estern, typically Anglo-Saxon, theories contradic- ting one another and, more importantly, the reality of transitional Hungary. However, from 2010, a new governmental and, as its part, PAR model may have been gradually formed. This model seems to be consistent, feasible, and adequate to Hungary and/or to the regi- on as similar tendencies may be identified in some other countries (e.g. Poland). This specific model, however, is based on the denial of w estern, liberal democratic governance and administration both in terms of its ideology and its practical solutions. In a brief and somewhat subjective manner: recently, Hungary has seemingly a country/region-specific PA model, though we are not necessarily proud of it. 290 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 2. Post-socialist transition narrative plays only ideological, propagan- distic role, whereas an in-depth analysis of socialist and transition governance is seemingly missing. As we already indicated, harsh anti-communist propaganda of the Orbán’s regime is accompanied with a governmental and administrative system resembling, in se- veral elements, the socialist PA model. 3. Europeanization has played only a minimal role in the Hungarian administrative reforms trajectory. The EU sets up general and vague requirements regarding the administration that has not generated a challenge, especially as Hungary may have been one of the best- prepared accession countries in 2004. 4. ‘Implementation gaps’ in the PAR have been present at least befo- re 2010. w e identified three major causes. First, the contradicting nature of reform-models may have prevented the implementation of any consistent strategic reform. This was exacerbated by the fact that various political actors followed various models, thus one got to power, and frequently annulled actions of the previous PAR befo- re it could have been accomplished. Second, the necessary capacity to carefully design a reform strategy, prepare a feasible operatio- nal plan, and carry out activities is largely missing. Furthermore, the time span is too short for implementing such projects. Third, as most analyst mention, the necessary political support is usually missing behind PAR project. PAR is rather a technical activity that does not yield many votes, espe- cially not in a culture where symbolic actions are preferred over factual ones. PAR of the recent Orbán’s government is an exception in this regard as well as it was mostly implemented. 291 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory References 1. Ashworth, R., Ferlie, E., Hammerschmid, g., Moon, M. J., & Reay, T. 2013. Theorizing Contemporary Public Management: International and Comparative Perspectives. British Journal of Management, 24 (Supplement 1), S1–S17. 2. Bossaert, D. & Demmke, C. 2003. Civil Services in the Accession Sta- tes: New Trends and the Impact of the Integration Process. Maastricht: European Institute of Public Administration. 3. Boros, A. 2014. Act on Administrative Proceedings. In: Rixer, Á. & Patyi, A. (Eds). Hungarian Public Administration and Administrative Law. Passau: Schenk Verlag. 419−445. Retrieved from: http://uni-nke. hu/uploads/media_items/book-review_hungarian-publicadministra- tion-and- administrative-law.original.pdf 4. Csanádi, M. 1989. A pártállam-rendszer szerkezete, kohéziója és szétesése Magyarország példáján. [The Structure, Cohesion and Disin- tegration of the Party-State] gazdaság] Economy, 23 (4), 32−51. 5. Csanádi M. 1987. A döntési mechanizmus szerkezetéről. [On Decisi- on-Making Mechanisms] Társadalomkutatás, 5 (4), 5−27. 6. Civic Atlas 1997. The New Civic Atlas: Profiles of Civil Society in 60 Countries. w ashington DC: Civicus. 7. Darák, P . 2014. Administrative Justice in Hungary. In: Rixer, Á. & Patyi, A. (Eds). Hungarian Public Administration and Administrative Law. Passau: Schenk Verlag. 219−229. Retrieved from: http://uni-nke.hu/ uploads/media_items/book-review_hungarian-publicadministration- and-administrative-law.original.pdf 8. Demmke, C. & Moilanen, T. 2010. Civil Services in the EU of 27: Re- form Outcomes and the Future of the Civil Service. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. 9. Dimitrov, V., g oetz, k. H., & w ollmann, H. (Eds). 2006. g overning after Communism: Institutions and Policymaking. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield. 292 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 10. Drechsler, w. 2005a. The Re-emergence of “w eberian” Public Admi- nistration after the Fall of New Public Management: The Central and Eastern European Perspective. Halduskultuur, 6, 94−108. 11. Drechsler, w . 2005b. The Rise and Demise of the New Public Manage- ment. Post-Autistic Economics Review, 33 (14), 17–28. 12. Drechsler, w . Randma-Liiv, T. 2015. In Some Central and Eastern Eu- ropean Countries, Some NPM Tools May Sometimes w ork: A Reply to Dan and Pollitt’s ‘NPM can work’ . Public management Review, 17 (10), 1−7. 13. Elster, J., Offe, C. & Preuss, U. k. 1998. Institutional Design in Post- Communist Societies: Rebuilding the Ship at Sea. Cambridge: Cam- bridge University Press. 14. Falkner, g. & Treib, O. 2008. Three w orlds of Compliance or Four? The EU-15 Compared to New Member States. Journal of Common Market Studies, 46 (2), 293−313. 15. Fazekas, M. 2007. Changes of Administrative Procedure between 1990 and 2006. In: Jakab, A., Tatham, A. F. & Takacs, P . I. (Eds). The Trans- formation of the Hungarian Legal Order 1985−2005: Transition to the Rule of Law and Accession to the European Union. Budapest: w olters k luwer Law & Business. 127–142. 16. Fleischer, T. 1994. Privatisation of the Urban Services in Hungary. La privatisation des services urbains en Europe. Recherches. La Décou- verte, Paris, June 3−5 June, 181−197. 17. gajduschek, g y. 2016. Előkészítetlenség és utólagos hatásvizsgálat hiánya [Ex-Ante and Ex-Post Regulatory Impact Assessment – A Mis- sing Element]. In: Jakab, A. & gajduschek, g y. (Eds). A magyar jo- grendszer állapota. [Status of the Hungarian Legal System] Budapest: Akadémiai k iadó. 18. gajduschek, g y. 2015. Critical Notes on Four Major Theories of Public Administration as They Appear in Central and Eastern Europe. In: k o- vač, P. & gajduschek, g y. (Eds). Contemporary g overnance Models and Practices in Central and Eastern Europe: Selected Revised Papers from the 22nd NISPAcee Annual Conference, May 22−24, 2014, Bu- dapest, Hungary, 157–174. Bratislava: NISPAcee. 293 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory 19. gajduschek, g y. 2015a. Measuring Cross-Sectorial Law Enforcement Capacity of Regulatory Agencies in Hungary. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, 44 (11), 108−125. 20. gajduschek, g y. 2015b. Critical Notes on Four Major Theories of Pu- blic Administration as They Appear in Central and Eastern Europe. In: k ovač, P . & gajduschek, g y. (Eds). Contemporary g overnance Models and Practices in Central and Eastern Europe: Selected Revised Papers from the 22nd NISPAcee Annual Conference, May 22−24, 2014, Bu- dapest, Hungary, 157−174. Bratislava: NISPAcee. 21. gajduschek, g y. 2012. A magyar közigazgatás és közigazgatás- tudomány jogias jellegéről [On the Legalistic Nature of Hungarian go - vernance]. Politikatudományi Szemle, 21 (4), 29−49. 22. gajduschek, g y. 2009. g overnance, Policy Networks – informális po- litikai szereplők a döntéshozatalban [g overnance, Policy Networks – Informal Institutions in Policy Making]. Politikatudományi Szemle, 18 (2): 58−81. 23. gajduschek, g y. 2008a. k özszolgálat. [Civil Service in Hungary. Laws and Data]. Budapest: kSzk. 24. gajduschek, g y. 2008b. Rendnek lenni kellene: Tények és elemzések a közigazgatás ellenoőrzési és bírságolási tevékenységéről [An Analysis of Law Enforcement in Hungary]. Budapest: kSzk. 25. gajduschek, g y. 2008c. k özszolgálat. [Civil Service in Hungary. Laws and Data]. Budapest: kSzk. 26. gajduschek, g y. 2007a. Politicisation, Professionalisation, or Both? Hungary’s Civil Service System. Communist and Post-Communist Stu- dies, 40 (3): 343−362. 27. gajduschek, g y. 2007b. Socialist and Post-Socialist Civil Service in Hungary. In: Jakab, A., Tatham, A. F. &, Takacs, P . I. (Eds). The Trans- formation of the Hungarian Legal Order 1985−2005: Transition to the Rule of Law and Accession to the European Union. Budapest: w olters k luwer Law & Business. 123−26. 28. gajduschek, g y. 2007c. Politicisation, Professionalisation, or Both? Hungary’s Civil Service System. Communist and Post-Communist Stu- dies, 40 (3): 343−362. 294 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 29. gajduschek, g y. 2006. Better g overnment! But w hat Is Better? In: Malíková, L., Staroňová, k. &, Sičáková-Beblavá, E. (Eds). k valita Ria- denia v Novom Európskom Administratívnom Priestore. Bratislava: Transparency International. Retrieved from: http://transparency.sk/ wp-content/uploads/2010/01/kvalitariadenia.pdf. 30. gajduschek, g y. 2003. Bureaucracy: Is It Efficient? Is It Not? Is That the Question? Uncertainty Reduction: An Ignored Element of Bureaucratic Rationality. Administration & Society, 34 (6), 700−723. 31. gajduschek, g y. &, Linder, V . 2014. The Civil Service System in Hunga- ry. In: Rixer, Á. & Patyi, A. (Eds). Hungarian Public Administration and Administrative Law. Passau: Schenk Verlag. 501−520. 32. g oetz, k. H. &, w ollmann, H. 2001. g overnmentalizing Central Exe- cutives in Post-Communist Europe: A Four-Country Comparison. Journal of European Public Policy, 8 (6), 864−887. 33. g rossi, g., & Reichard, C. 2008. Municipal Corporatization in g erma- ny and Italy. Public Management Review, 10 (5), 597−617. 34. g rossi, g. & Thomason, A. 2011. Jointly Owned Companies as Instru- ments of Local g overnment: Comparative Evidence from the Swedish and Italian w ater Sectors. Policy Studies, 32 (3), 277−289. 35. g yekiczky, T. 2009. Újraállamosítás. iIdősotthonok Magyarországon 1993–2008. [Re-nationalization: Social Care Homes in Hungary 1993– 2008] Budapest: g ondolat–DE ÁJk. 36. Hajnal, g y. 2014. Unorthodoxy at w ork: An Assessment of Hungary’s Post-2010 g overnance Reforms. IRSPM XVIII Annual Conference, 26 April, 2014, Ottawa, Canada. 37. Hajnal, g y. 2013. Re-visiting National Distinctiveness: A Survey of Pu- blic Administration Education in Europe. Sixth Trans-European Dia- logue in Public Administration (TED6), 6−8 February, 2013, Potsdam, g ermany. 38. Hajnal, g y. & kovács, É. 2016a. Hungary’s Central State Administra- tion 1990−2014. In: Špaček, D. (Ed.). 25 Years of Developments and Reforms in Public Administration in V4 Region. 295 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory 39. Hajnal, gy. & kovács, É. 2016b. Rendet teremtő trendek a kormányzatban? A magyar központi államigazgatás változásai a rendszerváltástól 2015-ig. [Order Creating Trends in g overnment? Changes of the Hungarian Central Administration from the Transition to 2015] In: Jakab, A. & gajduschek, g y. (Eds). A magyar jogrendszer állapota. [Status of the Hungarian Legal System] Budapest: Akadémiai. 40. Hajnal, g y. & Pál, g. 2013. Some Reflections on the Hungarian Dis- course on (g ood) g overnance. Iustum Aequum Salutare, 9 (2), 95−106. 41. Hajnal, g y. & Rosta, M. 2016. A New Doctrine in the Making? Doctri- nal Foundations of Sub-National g overnance Reforms in Hungary (2010−2014). Administration & Society, 18 (2), 229−252. 42. Hajnal, g y. & Ványolós, I. 2013. Hungarian Public Administration: From Transition to Consolidation. In: Liebert, S., Condrey, S. E. & g on- charov, D. (Eds). Public Administration in Post-Communist Countries. Former Soviet Union, Central and Eastern Europe, and Mongolia. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. 43. Hell, R. 2010. Adalékok a kádár-rendszer politikai elitjének vizsgálatához: Az MSZMP tagságának és függetlenített apparátusának összetétele a számok tükrében. [Researching the k adar Era Elite. Mem- bers and Employees of the Socialist Party] Jog, állam, politika, 2 (3), 117−137. 44. Hoch, T. 1990. Részvénytársaság és reform [Limited Company and Re- form]. k özgazdasági Szemle, 37 (1), 96−116. 45. Horváth, T. M. 2000. Municipal Autonomy and Intergovernmental Re- lations: The Hungarian Case. In Amna, E. & Montin, S. (Eds). Towards a New Concept of Local Self-g overnment. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget, 46−72. 46. Horváth, T. M. 2007. ‘Humpty Dumpty’: g lobalization Issues Illustra- ted by Local Self-g overnment Development. International Journal of Public Administration in Central and Eastern Europe, 1 (2), 2−19. 47. Horváth, T. M. 2015. Magasfeszültség. Városi szolgáltatások. [High Tension: Urban Services] Budapest: Dialóg-Campus. 296 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 48. Horváth, T. M. 2016. From Municipalisation to Centralism: Changes to Local Public Service Delivery in Hungary. In: w ollmann, H., k opric, I. & Marcou, g. (Eds). Public and Social Services in Europe: From Pu- blic and Municipal to Private Sector Provision. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Forthcoming. 49. Horváth, T. M. & kiss, J. (Eds). 1996. Aréna és otthon. Lakóhelyi szolgáltatások, városesetek és a ‘köz’ véleményei. [Arena and Home: Local Services, Urban Issues and the Opinions of ‘Public’] Budapest: Politikai Tanulmányok Intézete Alapítvány. 50. Horváth, T. M. & Péteri, g. 2001. Regulation and Competition in the Local Public Utility Sector in Central and Eastern Europe. In: Péteri, g. & Horváth, T. M. (Eds). Navigation to the Market: Regulation and Competition in Local Utilities in Central and Eastern Europe. Bu- dapest: OSI/LgI, 13−98. 51. Horváth, T. M. & Péteri, g. 2004. Threats of Transformation Failures: Local Public Utility Sector in Central and Eastern Europe. Society and Economy, 26 (2−3), 295−324. 52. Hughes, O. E. 2012. Public Management and Administration. Basings- toke: Palgrave Macmillan. 53. Janos, A. C. 1996. w hat w as Communism: A retrospective in Com- parative Analysis. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 29 (1), 1−24. 54. k ákai, L. (Ed.). 2010. 20 évesek az önkormányzatok: Születésnap, vagy halotti tor? [Local g overnments Are 20 Years Old. Birthday or Fu- neral?]. Pécs: IDResearch. 55. k handwalla, P . N. 1974. Mass Output Orientation of Operations Tech- nology and Organizational Structure. Administrative Science Quarter- ly, 19 (1), 74−97. 56. k lijn, E. & Skelcher, C. 2007. Democracy and g overnance Networks: Compatible or Not? Public Administration, 85(3), 587−608. 57. kooiman, J. 1999. Social-Political g overnance: Overview, Reflections and Design. Public Management: An International Journal of Research and Theory, 1 (1), 67−92. 297 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory 58. k ornai, J. 1986. Contradictions and Dilemmas: Studies on the Socialist Economy and Society. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 59. k ovač, P . 2015. Developing New g overnance Models and Administra- tive Practices in Central and Eastern Europe. In: k ovač, P. & gajdus- chek, g y. (Eds). Contemporary g overnance Models and Practices in Central and Eastern Europe. Selected Revised Papers from the 22nd NISPAcee Annual Conference, May 22−24, 2014, Budapest, Hungary. Bratislava: NISPAcee. 60. kovács, É. & Hajnal, g. 2016a. Hungary’s Central State Administra- tion 1990−2014. In: Špaček, D. (Ed.). 25 Years of Developments and Reforms in Public Administration in V4 Region. 61. kovács, É. & Hajnal, g. 2016b. Rendet Teremtő Trendek a kormányzatban? A magyar központi államigazgatás változásai a rendszerváltástól 2015-ig. [Order Creating Trends in g overnment? Changes of the Hungarian Central Administration from the Transition to 2015] In: Jakab, A. & gajduschek, g y. (Eds). A magyar jogrendszer állapota. [Status of the Hungarian Legal System] Budapest: Akadémiai k iadó. 62. k örösényi, A. 2015. A magyar demokrácia három szakasza és az Orbán- rezsim. [Three Stages of the Hungarian Political System (after 1990) and the Orban Regime].” In: körösényi, A. (Eds). A magyar politikai rendszer: negyedszázad után. [The Hungarian Political System: After a Quarter Century] Budapest: Osiris. 63. kulcsár, k. 1982. A bürokratizmus társadalmi összefüggései [Unders- tanding Deficient Bureaucracy in Social Context]. In: kulcsár, k. (Ed.). gazdaság, társadalom, jog. Budapest: k özgazdasági és Jogi. 64. kulcsár, k. 2001. Deviant Bureaucracies. Public Administration in Eastern Europe and in the Developing Countries. In: Farazmand, A. (Ed.). Handbook of Comparative and Development Public Administra- tion (2nd ed., rev. and expanded). New Y ork: Marcel Dekker, 941−952. 65. Laky, T. 1988. A szervezeti dcentralizáció félmegoldása: az állami kisvállalat [Solution of Organizational Decentralization: The Small Sta- te Businesses]. k özgazdasági Szemle, 35 (1), 49−63. 298 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 66. Liebert, S., Condrey, S. E. & g oncharov, D. (Eds). 2013. Public Admi- nistration in Post-Communist Countries. Former Soviet Union, Cen- tral and Eastern Europe, and Mongolia. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. 67. Linder, V. 2011. Balancing Between the Career and Position-Based Systems. Some Aspects of Recent Developments in Civil Service Le- gislation in Hungary. Acta Juridica Hungarica, 52 (1), 64−72. 68. Liska, T. 1988. Lehet, de minek! – Pénzügyi innováció a piaci szocia- lizmusban? [May Be, But w hy! Financial Innovation in Market Socia- lism?] k özgazdasági Szemle, 35 (11), 1358−1370. 69. Lőrincz, L. 2010. A közigazgatás alapintézményei [An Introduction to Public Administration]. Budapest: HVg ORAC. 70. Mandák, F. 2014. Presidentialisation of Politics and g ood g overnance in Hungary. In: kovač, P. (Ed.). Reflections on g ood g overnance in Visegrad and Beyond, 57−62. 71. Meyer-Sahling, J.-H. 2001. g etting on Track: Civil Service Reform in Post-Communist Hungary. Journal of European Public Policy, 8 (6), 960−979. 72. Meyer-Sahling, J.-H. 2006a. The Institutionalization of Political Discre- tion in Post-Communist Civil Service Systems: The Case of Hungary. Public Administration, 84 (3), 693−715. 73. Meyer-Sahling, J.-H. 2006b. The Rise of the Partisan State? Parties, Pa- tronage and the Ministerial Bureaucracy in Hungary. Journal of Com- munist Studies and Transition Politics, 22 (3), 274−297. 74. Meyer-Sahling, J.-H. 2006c. The Institutionalization of Political Discre- tion in Post-Communist Civil Service Systems: The Case of Hungary. Public Administration, 84 (3), 693−715. 75. Meyer-Sahling, J.-H. 2008. The Changing Colours of the Post-Com- munist State: The Politicization of the Senior Civil Service in Hungary. European Journal of Political Research, 47 (1), 1−33. 76. Meyer-Sahling, J.-H. 2009a. Sustainability of Civil Service Reforms in Central and Eastern Europe Five Years after EU Accession. SI- gMA Papers. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Retrieved from: http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/content/ workingpaper/5kml60pvjmbq-en. 299 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory 77. Meyer-Sahling, J.-H. 2009b. Varieties of Legacies: A Critical Review of Legacy Explanations of Public Administration Reform in East Cen- tral Europe. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 75 (3), 509−528. 78. Meyer-Sahling, J.-H. 2009c. Sustainability of Civil Service Reforms in Central and Eastern Europe Five Years after EU Accession. SI- gMA Papers. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Retrieved from: http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/content/ workingpaper/5kml60pvjmbq-en. 79. Meyer-Sahling, J.-H. 2011. The Durability of EU Civil Service Policy in Central and Eastern Europe after Accession. g overnance, 24 (2), 231−260. 80. Meyer-Sahling, J.-H. & Jáger, k. 2012. Capturing the State: Party Pa- tronage in Hungary. In: Mair, P ., k opecky, P . & Spirova, M. (Eds). Party Patronage in Contemporary European Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 81. Nunberg, B., Barbone, L. & Derlien, H.-U. 1999. The State after Com- munism: Administrative Transitions in Central and Eastern Europe. w ashington, D.C.: w orld Bank. 82. Pakulski, J. &, k örösényi, A. 2013. T oward Leader Democracy. London, New Y ork, Delhi: Anthem Press. 83. Pálné k ovács, I. 2012. Roots and Consequences of Local g overnance Reforms in Hungary. Revue D’ études Comparatives Est-Ouest, 43 (3), 173−197. 84. Pesti, S. 2000. A kormányzati döntéshozatal [Decision-Making in (the Hungarian) g overnment]. Századvég, Új Folyam, 18, 69−116. 85. Pesti, S., Farkas, A. &, Franczel, R. 2015. A kormány működési és szer- vezeti rendje (1990−2014) [Organization of Cabinet operations] In: k örösényi, A. (Eds). A magyar politikai rendszer: negyedszázad után. [The Hungarian Political System: After a Quarter Century] Budapest: Osiris, 109−135. 86. Peters, B. g. &, Pierre, J. 1998. g overnance without g overnment? Rethinking Public Administration. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 8 (2), 223−243. 300 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 87. Pollitt, C. &, Bouckaert, g. 2011. Public Management Reform: A Com- parative Analysis – New Public Management, g overnance, and the Neo-w eberian State. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 88. Pollitt, C. &, Bouckaert, g. 2004. Public Management Reform: A Com- parative Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 89. Pollitt, C. &, Dan, S. 2015. NPM Can w ork: An Optimistic Review Of the Impact of New Public Management Reforms in Central and Eastern Europe. Public Management Review, 17 (9), 1305−1332. 90. Pollitt, C. &, Dan, S. 2013. Searching for Impacts in Performance- Oriented Management Reform: A Review of the European Literature. Public Performance & Management Review, 37 (1), 7−32. 91. Randma-Liiv, T. 2008. New Public Management Versus the Neo-w e- berian State in Central and Eastern Europe. The NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, 1 (2), 49−71. 92. Rhodes, R. A. 2000. g overnance and Public Administration. Debating g overnance: Authority, Steering and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford Uni- versity Press. 93. Rixer, Á. 2012. Features of the Hungarian Legal System after 2010. Bu- dapest: Patrocinium. 94. Rixer, Á. & Patyi, A. (Eds). 2014. Hungarian Public Administration and Administrative Law. Passau: Schenk Verlag. 95. Rosta, M. 2015. Schizophrenic Public Administration Reform in Hun- gary: Tension between Anti-NPM Systemic and Pro-NPM Organi- zational Reforms. Society and Economy, 37 (2), 183−206. 96. Salamon, L. M. 2000. New g overnance and the Tools of Public Action: An Introduction. Fordham Urban Law Journal, 28 (5), 1611−1674. 97. Sebestyén, T. 1990. A vállalati tulajdon új modellje [The New Model of Corporate Ownership]. k özgazdasági Szemle, 37 (4), 425−441. 98. Sørensen, E. & Torfing, J. 2016. Theories of Democratic Network go - vernance. New Y ork: Palgrave Macmillan. 99. Staroňová, k. (2010). Regulatory Impact Assessment: Formal Institu- tionalization and Practice. Journal of Public Policy, 30 (1), 117−136. 100. Staroňová, k. & gajduschek, g y. 2013. Civil Service Reform in Slovakia and Hungary: The Road to Professionalisation? In: Neuhold, C., Van- 301 Hungarian Public administration: l ast tHirty years, W aves in tHe s tory hoonacker, S. & Verhey, L. (Eds). Civil Servants and Politics. A Delicate Balance. New Y ork: Palgrave Macmillan. 123−151. 101. Stiglitz, J. E. 2002. g lobalization and Its Discontents (Vol. 500). New Y ork: Norton. 102. Szűcs, J. 1983. The Three Historical Regions of Europe. An Outline. Acta Historica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, 29 (2−4), 131−184. 103. Tavares, R. 2012. Report on the Situation of Fundamental Rights: Stan- dards and Practices in Hungary (Pursuant to the European Parliament Resolution of 16 February 2012) (2012/2130(INI)). 104. Verebélyi, I. 1989. A tanácsi önkormányzati rendszer alkotmányos alapjai és fejlesztési irányai [The Foundations of Constitutional Sys- tem of Local g overnments and Directions of Development]. Magyar k özigazgatás, 39 (4) 289−311. 105. Verebélyi, I. 1991. A helyi önkormányzatok alapvonalai. Magyar k özigazgatás, 41 (9), 769−781. 106. Verebélyi, I. (Ed.). 2000. Egy évtized önkormányzati mérlege és a jövő kilátásai. [The First Decade of the Hungarian Local Self-g overnments]. Budapest: Magyar k özigazgatási Intézet. 107. Verheijen, T. 2007. Public Administration in Post-Communist States. In: Peters, B. g. & Pierre, J. (Eds). Handbook of Public Administration. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications. 108. Verheijen, T. & kotchegura, A. (Eds). 1999. Civil Service Systems in Central and Eastern Europe. Cheltenham, Uk; Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing. 109. w eber, M. 1978. Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive So- ciology. California: University of California Press. 110. w eimer, D. L. & Vining, A. R. 2011. Policy Analysis (5th ed.). Boston: Longman. 111. w ikileaks. 2008. Twenty Questions: Fidesz Turns 20. [w ikileaks Public Library of US Diplomacy]. Retrieved from: http://wikileaks.org/plusd/ cables/08BUDAPEST391_a.html. 112. w ollmann, H. & Marcou, g. (Eds). 2010. The Provision of Public Servi- ces in Europe: Between State, Local g overnment and Market. Chelten- ham, Uk; Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing. 302 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 8. Slovene Public Administration Reform: Europeanization as a Bridge over Traditional and Post-Socialist Legacies 39 Polonca Kovač, Primož Pevcin 8.1. Introductionary Characteristics of Slovenia and Its Public Administration Slovenia is a nation state, a parliamentary democratic republic, inde- pendent since 1991 with approx. 2 million population. It has about 20,000 km 2 , and lies between the Alps, Adria and Pannonian Basin; its neighbo- ring countries are Austria, Hungary, Croatia, and Italy. Today, Slovenia is mostly secularized with acknowledged heritage of mainly Catholic Church. The country’s official language is Slovenian or Slovene. As an independent state, Slovenia aimed at building a democratic society founded on market mechanisms. Slovenia is a full member of the EU since 2004, applies euro as a currency since 2007, and a member of the United Nations (1992), Council of Europe (1994), NATO (2004), and OECD (2010). Slovenia has been most often, especially before the economic crisis in the late 2000’s, considered as one of the most successful post-socialist or Central and Eastern European states that introduced the reforms in society, economy and public administration as well. It gained its independence after struggles within the former Yugoslavia leading to a break-up in 1991. As within the Yugoslav experience between 1918–1941 (i.e. State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs, later k ingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, renamed in kingdom of Yugoslavia in 1929), and 1945–1991 in “new” or “second” Yugoslavia, Slovenia has been a part of other state structures throughout the centuries before that. 40 Yugoslavia was under Tito one of 39 The authors acknowledge the financial support from the Slovenian Research Agency (research core funding of programme No. P5-0093, Development of an Efficient and Effective Public Administration). 40 Other Eastern European countries have gained their independence at least in a certain limited period or formally if not in a full meaning. This is not the case for Slovenia unless 303 Slovene Public AdminiS tr Ation reform: euro PeAniz Ation AS A b ridge over tr Adition Al And PoS t-Soci AliS t legA cieS the few countries in the socialist bloc as a socialist or communist mono- party state but not a part of the warsaw Pact, and hence not under the Soviet governance. Technically, the politico-economic system of the coun- try, although it was socialistic in its fundaments, differentiated substantially from the Soviet type, still it needs to be recognized that a uniform “Soviet type” of politico-economic system did not exist, and consequently, many political and economic differences existed even among the “Soviet-umbrel- la” countries (Šušteršič, 2003). Basically, the system in Yugoslavia was, in politico-economic terms, much more liberalized and pro-market oriented from the 1960’s onwards in comparison to other socialist countries, and the system was eventually transformed towards labor self-management rather than state socialism. Nonetheless, the common point with other former so- cialist countries was observed in the debt crisis of the 1980’s that was fueled by the growing need to stabilize the economy given the poor dynamic pro- perties of socialist politico-economic systems as well as by the incentives of w estern countries to use indebtedness as a tool to boost reforms in the socialist countries. Slovenia has therefore been developed until ww II predominantly un- der g erman and Austrian continental or Central Europe societal, political- administrative, and legal culture. This legacy has been upgraded by socialist system in Yugoslavia, expressing a capture of the state over society. PA in this respect had been seen as a purely instrumental structure for execu- ting politically set priorities of national policies within the socialist system. From this standing point, Slovenia underwent major development rather fast in few years after its independence (see Pirnat, 1993; Dujić, 1997; k ovač & Virant, 2011). However, such a legacy has had and still does influence public administration (PA) functioning and its reforms (PAR) since their taken into account the ”first Slovene state” , i.e. Duchy of Carantania in the 7th century, annexed to Bavaria in the 8th century. After a split with the former Yugoslavia, the fol- lowing countries have been established as recognized today: Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, Macedonia, and kosovo. However, already in 1974, the Yugoslav Constitution gave increased autonomy to these federal units, provid- ing a legal basis for independence of the federative constituents after 1991. Except Slove- nia and Croatia with Habsburg heritage, the former even more as a part of Cisleithania, other former Yugoslav states shared mainly Ottoman influence. If comparing Slovenia to Croatia, there was only so-called ten days’ war in Slovenia in 1991 while the war have gone on in Croatia for several years, heavily blocking the processes of modernization. 304 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence starting point anticipates a state that dominates a society with PA being un- derstood primarily through government policies and public law. The main characteristic of this system are: rule of law and Rechtsstaat, division of po- wers, division of public and private law and judiciary, and (lately neo-) libe- ralism (cf. Fink Hafner & Lajh, 2003; Statskontoret, 2005: 74–76; Peters & Pierre, 2005: 267 et seq.; cf. Raadschelders, 2011: 156–181; k oprić, 2011 and 2012). In this respect, the European Administrative Space and its principles played a significant role in Slovene PAR as well (OECD, 1999; Olsen, 2003; k ovač & Virant, 2011: 35; Petelin, 2013). PAR was a more or less systematic set of strategies and activities, which thus differs Slovenia to majority of CEE countries with overproduction or vagueness of different measures (cf. Dunn et al., 2006; k oprić, 2012; Vintar et al., 2013; Aristovnik et al., 2016). From economic perspective, Slovenia is one of the most successful countries in the group of Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries. It has now predominantly services-oriented economy, reflecting the shift from manufacturing orientation. However, the economy is rather small (around 186,500 registered companies) and export-oriented (g ermany being Slove- ne first trading partner, over 2/3 of goods are traded with g ermany). That leads, with some ups and rather sever downs due to global financial crisis, to approx. 18,100 EUR of gross domestic product (gDP) per capita in Slo- venia in 2014, i.e. 83% of EU28 average, and 9% of unemployment in 2015 based on the ILO methodology. Public finances have shown fiscal deficit problems in recent years as government spending increased during the last years to around 50% of gDP . Consequently, this has led to a mounting pro- blem of government indebtness, rapidly skyrocketing from slightly more than 20% of gDP in 2008 to almost 100% of gDP in 2016, according to the latest OECD (2016) data. Approx. 160,000 persons, i.e. 15% of overall acti- ve population, are employed in public sector, i.e. state administration and municipalities, police, public education, and health care institutions, etc., whereas state sector employs approx. 240,000 persons. After its independence in 1991, Slovenia has submitted its public admi- nistration mainly to the state government. Its origins and connections stem from former Yugoslavia and Eastern European countries. The transition of Slovene public administration from the previous Yugoslav setting saw no major obstacle since Slovenia had been relatively autonomous republic sin- 305 Slovene Public AdminiS tr Ation reform: euro PeAniz Ation AS A b ridge over tr Adition Al And PoS t-Soci AliS t legA cieS ce the mid-1970’s. Following independence in 1991, however, certain new structures had to be developed, such as new custom service and the ove- rall modernization of local self-government, whereby in accordance with the Constitution of 1991 the functions of municipalities (now 212 of them) were separated from those of state administration at the local level. In the next PAR stage after 1996, the emphasis was on the preparation and adop- tion of new laws aimed at Slovenia’s accession to the EU. In the years after 2000, the reform was intended to consist of constant modernization based on several pillars such as rationalization of structures aiming to decrease the share of public expenditure in gDP , reorganization of specific adminis- trative bodies, and introduction of a new common and unified wage system in the public sector. The structure of PA in Slovenia reflects its smallness, duality betwe- en the state and local self-government, and slow process of delegation of powers from central PA. PA is defined mainly functionally by conducting public tasks, both authoritative and public service tasks through: − State administration with ministries (around 11 to 15) and govern- ment offices (10), agencies within ministries (approx. 45), and lo- cal administrative units (58), together totaling to slightly more than 30,000 employees; − Local self-government within 212 municipalities with nearly 5,000 employees; − A few hundreds of legally autonomous entities in the form of pu- blic institutes, agencies, and funds, such as institutes for social insu- rances, regulators of energy, telecommunications, market security, schools and hospitals, etc., employing approx. 120,000 employees, taking into account that these entities are part of public adminis- tration/sector when conducting public tasks and/or funded at least partially through budgetarian resources; − Private bearers of public authority or providers of public services (through concessions) that had been delegated certain powers by the state or the municipalities. Regarding PAR, an important stage was the establishment of autono- mous Ministry of Public Administration in 2004 that has acted as a govern- mental and broader PAR coordinator since then. 306 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence In Slovenia, three main processes can thus be identified throughout the reform: (1) modernization in terms of political interests and, in substantive and technical terms, informatization, and (2) Europeanization (see in detail in kovač in Vintar, 2013; Aristovnik et al., 2016). The latter is sometimes seen as “false Europeanization” since the reforms were taken as a formal requirement of the EU (see k oprić, 2012). However, in Slovene case, it was proved that it acted as a valuable external incentive to support domestic changes. Slovene administrative reforms can be categorized under several targets: the prevailing rationalization and wish for a greater efficiency (mi- nimization) on the one hand, and the confirmation of the existing regu- lation (maintenance) on the other, which we can join up into omnipresent modernization processes. Politically speaking, the reforms of public admi- nistration were thus one of the most important projects of Slovenia. Finally, (3) process that shaped the reform were the emerging and, later on accu- mulated, fiscal crisis issues and problems since the early 2010’s onwards, which significantly shaped governance mechanisms and decision-making processes in the recent years − an issue that is further addressed in the pa- per. Nevertheless, there is still a need and possibility for developing good governance and good administration in terms of a modern European sys- tem, simultaneously enabling efficiency and democratization of political- administrative structures. Furthermore, the paper has a standardized structure consisting of two parts, whereas the second part represents its main part. Thus, it is subdivided into four parts, the first one representing changing paradigms and strategies in public administration reforms initiated and/or implemented in the country, the second part representing organizational, functional, and financial dimension of PA, the third part elaborating on the civil system characteristics, and the last one on good administration and good governance issues. Taking comparati- ve perspective, this chapter focuses on country-specific issues of PAR, and in this context, special focus is also given to the role of recent fiscal crisis in im- plementing reforms, as hence Slovenia was one of the most fiscally challenged countries in Europe, where the fiscal challenges of the country more resembled the problems of Mediterranean and peripheral European countries rather than former socialist countries. This represents a rather interesting dimension to as- sess and compare PA and its reforms. 307 Slovene Public AdminiS tr Ation reform: euro PeAniz Ation AS A b ridge over tr Adition Al And PoS t-Soci AliS t legA cieS 8.2. Mainstream P AR in Slovenia 1991–2016 8.2.1. Paradigms Shift in National Strategies on P AR in Slovenia In general, within PAR processes Slovenia undertook the path of re- volution (1990–1994), transition (1995–1997), and EU accession and inte- gration (1996–2004), further continuous modernization of political-admi- nistrative system through specific policies (2003–2008), and adjustments to cope with the economic crisis (2008–2015; similarly to other countries in the region; see Lane, 1995; Cardona & Freibert, 2007; koprić, 2011; Agh, 2013). The reforms have been designed through several governmental stra- tegies in a rather neo-liberalistic fashion under the New Public Manage- ment elements. Simultaneously, PAR has been carried out rather legalis- tically despite pursuing some good governance principles (e.g. customer orientation, or delegation of powers to regulatory agencies; see kovač & Virant, 2011; cf. k ovač & gajduschek, 2015: 10−12). In 2002, Slovenia enacted a package of what is known as the “reform laws”, including the State Administration Act, Civil Servants Act, Public Agencies Act, etc., unifying PA, civil service and pay system in overall pu- blic sector. The principles followed in these laws, umbrella strategies and ot- her measures within PAR were: PA depoliticization and professionalization, decentralization and deconcentration, rationalization, citizen orientation. Slovenia had to tackle the issues of apolitical orientation and culture, and develop professional strategic planning, such as public-policy design and participation of and with the citizens (more k ovač in Vintar, 2013; similarly in other EE countries; see Linz & Stepan, 1996; Dunn et al., 2006; Meyer- Sahling, 2009; k oprić, 2011: 14–20). However, mostly all reforms, legal, managerial, organizational, finan- cial, etc., have been at least at declaratory level run under the umbrella strategies (Table 8.1). On the other hand, almost no evaluations of earlier strategies have been prepared when adopting the next one since they mos- tly followed explicit political or macroeconomic goal (e.g. cohesion funds accessibility set out in 2015 Strategy, described in detail in Aristovnik et al., 2016). 308 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Table 8.1: Strategic Documents on Slovene PAR Strategy Ye ar of adoption Issuer and its political orientation Period Realization (authors’ evaluation) Strategy for EU Accession 1996 Parliament (left-wing dri- ven, but based on overall political consensus) 1997–99 Mainly Umbrella “reform laws” (Civil Servants, State Administration, Agencies, etc.) 2002 Parliament (left wing-driven, but ove- rall political consensus) 2000–03 Almost fully in structural, less in functional parts Strategy on Further De- velopment of the Slovene Public Sector 2003 g overnment (left) 2003–05 Mainly, again prevailing in structural aspects Slovenia’s Development Strategy 2004 g overnments (left & right) 2005–13 Partly, and rather decla- ratory Exit Strategy (from economic crisis) 2010 g overnment (left) 2010–13 Partly *Draft – The Origins of Further Development and Organizational and Normative Regulation of the Public Sector 2011* g overnment 2011–12 Partly as pursued prior and parallel to it Changed Jurisdiction of Ministries and Agencies & State Administration Act 2012 g overnment & Par- liament (right wing majority) 2012– Partly Strategy of Development of PA 2015 g overnment (central) 2015–20 / * Not adopted due to early parliamentary elections and new (left wing) government appointment in autumn 2011. In Slovenia, as in the majority of other countries in the region, the ove- rall basis for modern administrative reforms was primarily the paradigm of New Public Management. As time passed by, however, the understanding of NPM as the ultimate stage of development in the sense of a “Neo-w eberian” administration has been widely accepted was overcome throughout the world and in Slovenia (Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2011; Brezovšek, 2009; kovač & gaj- 309 Slovene Public AdminiS tr Ation reform: euro PeAniz Ation AS A b ridge over tr Adition Al And PoS t-Soci AliS t legA cieS duschek, 2015: 11). Considering the dilemmas expressed especially in CEE (see Randma-Liiv in Pollitt 2008/09: 70–77), Slovenia and its public admi- nistration have therefore been facing some general regional CEE problems, such as determining the proper scope of minimal vs. strong state with the level of de/regulation or non/marketization and developing democratic over technocratic values. In sum, among the elements assessed as highly achieved, we can emphasize (cf. Pollitt et al., 2008/09: 15): − “w eberian” elements: state as the main facilitator of societal problems and highly developed (traditional) principles of administrative law; − “Neo” elements: a shift from internal self-satisfaction of PA towards citizens’ and business orientation and rationalization of resources through their management. On the other hand, representative democracy, NgO involvement, deve- lopment of public service as a system of distinctive status and its professiona- lism are still to be analyzed and systematically supported. As in many political systems of the world, yet more often in less con- solidated social environments such as post-socialist countries (see Linz & Stephan, 1996; Dunn et al., 2006; Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2011; Vintar et al., 2013), in Slovenia, the reforms were often run merely in relation to a specific area or the priorities of the current government. This is mainly due to the lack of consistent and persistent coordination at the highest strategic level of government in relation to reform goals and activities, which results in oppos- ing measures taken by individual ministries (see examples in k ovač & Virant, 2011). Hence, PAR in Slovenia may − if evaluated top down − well be consi- dered successful in an operational or technical sense (e.g. use of TQM tools, elimination of administrative barriers), and less so in the most conflicting segments of the society, such as development of local government or privati- zation (see more in k ovač in Vintar, 2013). Moreover, an important factor shaping public sector governance mo- del in particular context of Slovenia in recent years has been related to the emergence and persistence of fiscal crisis. g overnance issues in this speci- fic context relate predominantly to the pre-crisis logic of public governance, where typically increased efficiency of public sector units was advocated, and this should be achieved with decentralization and competition among public sector units (Peters et al., 2011). Following the outline in Peters et al. (2011), 310 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence five areas of governance issues should be addressed: path dependence, coor- dination and coherence, time perspective, centralization, and politicization. Typically, the evidence suggested in Pevcin (2014) reshaped the prevailing go- vernance model in Slovenia by increasing the voters’ acceptance of public sec- tor reforms being implemented; it helped boosting the concentration of power within the Ministry of Finance; put pressure on the increased coordination of policies; shifted the political focus towards short-term fixes and quick solu- tions for existing problems; put additional pressures for centralization within the government; and caused that the politicians favor policies being implemen- ted by the ruling parties’ supporters rather than by “neutral” public servants. Similarly, the modes of governance have somehow changed in recent years, involving mainly politicization and coordination of policy-making, but also increased coordination within the public administration has been observed le- ading to the movement of certain political powers to the center of government. Interestingly, this to a large extent corresponds to the findings portrayed in the comparative literature (see e.g. Cepiku & Bonomi Savignon, 2012). If we would have to address the future trends in public governance models, it could be quite plausible to state that the mixture of New Public Management and Administrative State methodological principles are expected to be im- plemented. g overnments also promoted several “lean government”-oriented approaches which means that current crisis has actually promoted the intro- duction of NPM-based reform principles. However, also the opposite direction of influence could be argued, as hard pressures existed towards more centra- lized governance, which could be particularly observed in the functioning of the executive branch of government. For instance, a strong pressure existed to re-centralize several tendering systems where the main motive was related to achieve greater technical efficiency of the system. g overnment, supported by the parliament, started to adopt and implement legislation under the rule of urgent procedure, in particular in the year 2012, where greater efficiency of policy-making was seen as the main motive. In fact, it could be argued that government tried to downsize and recentralize the public sector of Slovenia. These recentralization pressures existed on macro as well as on micro level as there was a tendency to reorganize the sector and institutions within the sec- tor in the manner to ensure efficient work organization through specialization. Contracting out in the public sector was severely limited, in particular in re- 311 Slovene Public AdminiS tr Ation reform: euro PeAniz Ation AS A b ridge over tr Adition Al And PoS t-Soci AliS t legA cieS lation to consulting, vocational, and supporting activities. In fact, limitation of contracting out was perceived as one of the easiest way to reduce the operatio- nal costs of the sector. This was the cornerstone of the planned reorganization. This supports another argument: the focus was on achieving greater technical efficiency of the sector, whereas allocative efficiency of the sector − favored by NPM ideology − was neglected. Furthermore, both governments have also limited the autonomy of public organizations. This indicates that more centra- lized and institutionalized modes of functioning of public organizations have been introduced, and governments increased control on those organizations, in particular if the costs where under consideration. Namely, the austerity measures have actually prescribed the ability of public organizations to cover work-related costs of public servants, formulation of employment plans, deter- mination of salaries of public servants, framework for spending resources, etc. Following, it can be easily argued that one of the major factors shaping the public governance and politico-administrative decision-making model in Slo- venia in the future will be fiscal conditions of the country. The start of econo- mic downturn in 2008, with sharp recession in 2009, when gross investments decreased by almost a quarter, net exports by almost a fifth, leading to gross domestic product reduction by almost 8% in real terms (see data by SORS, 2013), was accompanied by a relatively long economic stagnation that ultima- tely contributed to the worsening of fiscal situation in the country. Subsequ- ently, governmental policies and decision-making started to resemble typical austerity and cutback management practices, particularly in 2012 and 2013. Interestingly, although Vintar et al. (2013) have recognized several potential opportunities for further modernization of public administration in Slovenia, like delegation of administrative tasks to non-classical administrative bodies, and possible further de-politicization of public administration, it might be argued that the outcome of cutback management in government was increa- sed by centralization and politicization of public administration. Moreover, it seems that one of the major threats recognized by Vintar et al. (2013), which is the prevalence of view that government represents actually a burden to society, materialized. Namely, the Table 8.2 below indicates that cutback measures in the main period of austerity were predominantly oriented at expenditure side of government accounts, which suggests that government was perceived as a burden to society, thereby imposing necessity to cut costs. 312 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Table 8.2: Cutback Management and Political Decision-Making in Slovenia, 2008−2014 Period Practice 2008−2011 2012 2013−2014 Fiscal consolidation overview Main category of public finance restoration Modestly needed Pre-emptive Market-pressure based Main type of fiscal consolidation Predominantly expenditure- based Predominantly expenditure- based Expenditure- and revenue-based Cutback management practice Main types of measures Relatively small measures Implementation of across-the-board and efficiency cuts Imported priori- tization of cuts/ consolidation Prevailing cutback decision- making Incremental, small and gradual steps, incoherent Political priority- setting, centralized, systematic Short-term quick fixes to ease market pressures, drastic decision-making Source: adapted from Pevcin, 2014. Furthermore, one of the main disadvantages plaguing Slovenia is the contribution of government and its efficiency to the competitiveness of the national economy. The figures in recent years indicate that the efficiency of government is actually one of the worst components of competitiveness, and in recent years, the ranking of this component dropped from place 38 in 2009 to place 56 in 2014 according to the w orld Competitiveness Y earbook (2014) where 60 selected countries are scrutinized. This reflects unfavorable develo- pment as within this component particularly the public finance (rank 60) and institutional system (rank 54) are perceived to be major relative weaknesses in international comparisons. Specifically, three indicators of governmental efficiency point out negative trends in decision-making patterns as the indi- cator of governmental policy-making flexibility exhibits rank 57, economic legal and regulatory framework rank 52, and the efficiency of implementa- tion of governmental decisions rank 57. In relation to the Table 8.3 below this indicates that the development of governance and political decision-making seem to be going in the wrong direction if the context of international com- parisons is taken into the account. 313 Slovene Public AdminiS tr Ation reform: euro PeAniz Ation AS A b ridge over tr Adition Al And PoS t-Soci AliS t legA cieS Table 8.3: Selected Indicators of g overnmental Efficiency, Values and Ranking in Eastern European Countries Indicator Flexibility of governmental policies Economic legal and regulatory framework Governmental decision-making efficiency Slovenia 1.47 (57) 2.79 (52) 2.22 (57) Estonia 5.47 (17) 5.61 (19) 5.36 (17) Latvia 4.78 (26) 5.13 (26) 4.42 (28) Poland 4.77 (27) 5.20 (25) 4.35 (29) Hungary 3.58 (40) 3.00 (51) 4.32 (30) Romania 3.56 (42) 3.52 (42) 3.75 (35) Lithuania 3.41 (43) 4.93 (29) 3.23 (45) Czech Republic 2.70 (48) 3.52 (43) 2.91 (48) Slovakia 2.42 (50) 2.69 (54) 3.57 (37) Bulgaria 1.86 (55) 3.22 (47) 2.11 (58) Croatia 1.38 (59) 2.31 (57) 2.74 (51) Source: World Competitiveness Yearbook, 2014. In sum, we can say for Slovenia, that good governance still stands as the declared but not fully realized objective of recent reforms. Moreover, it seems that practical evidence suggests that in recent years, due to predomi- nantly fiscal pressures, a deviation occurred that even hampered the efficient transformation towards better governance. In essence, cutback management principles seem to prevail in recent years where the managerial point of view stresses the necessity of fiscal normalization in order to continue the transfor- mation. Nevertheless, statically, so-called formal democracy (cf. Agh, 2013: 3) with some more in-depth results in certain (technical) areas is in place. In future, we should design reforms particularly addressing openness, participa- tion, and accountability of PA in order to upgrade to a stage of participative democracy in the European sense. An emphasis on the implementation is thus of utmost importance when planning and evaluating legal, managerial, and organizational measures, since − as analyzed in the following chapters − a respective gap to reforms in run insofar is present in Slovenia. 8.2.2 .Organization, Decentralization, Funding, and Functions of the P A Slovenia is among the group of countries with a relatively large public sec- tor as total general outlays typically range in the last few year from 45% to 50% of gDP, in 2013, they even amounted to more than 60% but this was due to the exceptional transfers delivered to the banking sector (see SORS, 2016). The 314 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence majority of outlays are transferred for the social welfare state purposes (almost 20% of gDP), which indicates welfare dimension of the country stated also in the Constitution. Nonetheless, the majority of revenues are generated through taxes, predominantly sales and income taxes, and the growing worry of PA is growing public debt which accumulated to 83% of gDP in 2015, almost re- latively quadrupling to 22% in 2008, technically transferring the country from low level of indebtedness to relatively large one in just few years. Slovenia is also relatively centralized country, both from fiscal as well as organizational tier dimension, which goes in line with the relative size of the country where substantial fragmentation on several tiers of the public admi- nistration is not expected. Besides to central government which consists of state government, central government departments, and local administrative units of central government (not to be confused with local self-government), it has only one tier of sub-national government, i.e. municipalities. Slovenia is also heavily centralized in fiscal terms, as approx. 90% of total government outlays are transferred through the central level. This reflects also historical issues as former socialist countries tended to be rather centralized for politi- cal and practical purposes. Interestingly, from the local perspective, it is not entirely uniform, what actually labels public sector, public administration, and government encompass, and so specific terminological issues should be taken into account when addressing this topic (see, e.g., Pevcin, 2002 for de- tailed elaboration on this issue). For instance, according to some local defi- nitions, public administration should encompass all organizations of central government, local self-government as well as public enterprises, but it should not incorporate political system, etc. For this purpose, when relating to the organization of public adminis- tration, we will follow gFSM (2001) approach, and distinguish governmen- tal institutions at the central and sub-national level and public corporations, which will be treated out of this context. Following, at the central level, go- vernment has currently 14 ministries, 12 governmental offices, 34 agencies within the ministries, and 30 autonomous agencies (see g overnment of RS, 2016). At the sub-national level, according to the Constitution, Slovenia is a unitary state with two tiers of sub-national government, i.e. regions and municipalities, but regions were not implemented yet. It should be noted that reforms (as well as discussions on reforms) of public administration are rat- 315 Slovene Public AdminiS tr Ation reform: euro PeAniz Ation AS A b ridge over tr Adition Al And PoS t-Soci AliS t legA cieS her intensive also at the local level, where the first major reform occurred in 1994 with the establishment of the first wave of “new” municipalities that started to operate in 1995. The process of formation of new municipalities in the last quarter of century had several waves, the first was the 1994 wave with the establishment of 82 new municipalities, the second one was the 1998 wave with the establishment of 47 new municipalities, 1 additional municipality was established during the 2002 wave, 17 new municipalities during the 2006 wave, and 2 new municipalities were established after the 2011 wave, the last one in 2014 with the decision of Constitutional Court of Slovenia. Evident- ly, the fragmentation occurred at this tier of government, the trend that was heavily opposite to the prevailing trends in the majority of others either old industrialized or newly transformed countries (see Pevcin, 2014a for detai- led discussion on this issue). Currently, 212 municipalities exist, of which 11 have so-called city status, that need to have, according to the Local Self-g overnment Act (2007), more than 20,000 residents, at least 15,000 working places, and they should also be in a sense economic, social, and cultural centers of specific “geographical regi- ons” , which means that they should have hospital(s), theatres, at least seconda- ry schools, etc. It is worth nothing that the number of municipalities increased by more than three times in last twenty years, and substantial variations exists in the size, both regarding the spatial size as well as the number of residents. In fact, the data might even indicate that excessive fragmentation occurred as more than half of the total number municipalities have less than 5,000 resi- dents, which is a legally prescribed minimum size of municipality allowed to be established, in fact, legal exemption becomes the rule. The reason for this is re- lated to the fact that many of them tended to be established for political reasons or exceptionality clause on historical, economical, and other reasons (legally) justifying the smaller size of particular municipality often used (see Oplotnik & Brezovnik, 2004). Besides, the same authors have also argued that cooperation and cost-sharing between the municipalities is very small since municipalities are not obliged (and consequently no incentives exist) to do that. The second major reform proposal was related to the establishment of the second tier of local self-government, i.e. regions. Administrative reforms in the 1990’s and the 2000’s also involved pressures to create intermediate tier of government, so-called regions (see Pevcin, 2015, on detailed historical 316 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence and technical report on this process). The reforms began in June 2006 when the Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia was amended in order to enable the transfer of responsibilities from central government to the second tier of sub-national government in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity. The main issue under consideration was to fulfil the existing gap between the central government and the very fragmented local level of government, whe- re very small municipalities prevail. One of the main issues associated with the implementation of regions related to their territorial size and number of residents. Several variants were delivered that involved introduction of 3, 6, 8, 12, and even 14 regions (Plut, 2004). It is worth noting that the models of the introduction of either six or either eight regions were among the most appreciated variants that ought to be introduced, when professional discussions took place. Namely, these two mo- dels tried to optimize the combinations of technical and allocative efficiencies, so that the preferences and attachment of residents to a particular region would be met but simultaneously cost inefficiencies would not be too large. Since the first model (three regions) would disregard, at least to some extent, allocative issues, these two models took into the consideration also the necessity to have polycentric model of development, spatial integration, and round up of regi- ons, and thus perceived greater regional affiliation of residents (SVLR, 2012). The whole issue of regionalization was actually plagued predominantly with the territorial and population size of regions − i.e. the number of regions. There were also two other extremes presented that further fragmented Slove- nia at the regional level. Those two proposals involved creating 12 and even 14 regions, and the allocative issues were the main backbone of those propo- sals. The main considerations within the discussions on the regionalization were related to two opposing views: should regions be the form of voluntary cooperation of municipalities, or should central government impose regions (and municipalities should subsequently find other frameworks for potenti- al cooperation). The political process of establishing regions started in 2006 when constitutional amendments related to the local self-government issues enabled the implementation of the second tier of sub-national government in Slovenia. The main focus was put on further decentralization of the coun- try, and strengthening of the subsidiarity principle when dealing with local issues. The original plan was to adopt all the necessary legislation in 2007, 317 Slovene Public AdminiS tr Ation reform: euro PeAniz Ation AS A b ridge over tr Adition Al And PoS t-Soci AliS t legA cieS and establish the regions during the year 2008. Ultimately, they would start to function in January 2009. From the political stakeholders’ point of view, it seemed that only mu- nicipalities (and their mayors) were somehow sceptical on the introduction of regions which could be contributed to the possible reduction in their available resources as some of the tasks would be transferred to the regional level (see Bačlija & Brezovšek, 2006). Nonetheless, the existing government tried to push the approval of the Act on Regions to establish 14 regions in the parliament in 2007 but the Act was not approved by the parliament. The process continued in late 2009 but the process terminated in 2010. The Act on Regions was not approved, and effectively this meant that the process of regionalization was over, at least for now. Namely, by 2010, it became evident that country was entering the period of increased fiscal stress, and numerous cutback strategies and measures started to be implemented. Effectively, since 2009 cutback management pushed for an increased centralization of politi- cal and public decision-making (see Pevcin, 2014) which turned the focused away from potential decentralization and regionalization of the country. However, it seems that we might be experiencing bottom-up trends in the form of regionalization as municipalities are establishing so-called joint municipal administration (JMA) bodies, which represent the form of inter- municipal cooperation. Namely, it became evident, not just due to the econo- mic downturn, that especially smaller municipalities are often faced with the problem that they are not large enough, or do not have sufficient resources in order to effectively and efficiently perform their tasks, and organize efficient service delivery. Currently, more than 90% of Slovene municipalities belong to some JMA bodies (Fonda and Žohar, 2015). Interestingly, the creation of JMA bodies could indicate those areas where potential, or better put, necessi- ty for the establishment of regions might be necessary. Regarding other forms of decentralization, there are: a. Territorial and functional deconcentration of state administration, and b. Agencification − the latter being the most important regarding the European (and global) trends − usually NPM driven (Peters & Pierre, 2005: 260; Bevir et al., 2011: 256; Verhoest et al., 2012). Regarding the state administration deconcentration, countries introduce measures on structure rationalization. Such attempts were present in Slovenia 318 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence as well, however unsuccessful. Moreover, one often forgets the importance of territorial deconcentration of state administration regarding its close linkage to decentralization of local self-government due to joined PA system in relation to common parties, especially in circumstances of fragmented municipalities as exist in Slovenia. As for Slovenia, we are facing with highly dispersed and uncoordinated structure of state administration. There are 58 local adminis- trative units; in our assessment, 8−12 of them would suffice. The establishment of today’s 58 state local administrative units in Slovenia took place in 1995. A simple political transfer of jurisdiction was made, taking into account both the employees and the users, and the then number of municipalities (k ovač & Virant, 2011: 60). For the most part, administrative units are too small for an economical organization of administrative procedures and, precisely because of this, decentralization of decision-making and supervisory functions is not possible at this level (Trpin, 1998: 259). Furthermore, constitutional disputes concerning the competences of municipalities on one hand, and (general) lo- cal state units on the other, were unavoidable. But more problematically, we face also other parallel structures organized through sectoral ministries, any of them with different territorial system, such as tax and customs offices, centers of social work, inspectorates, surveying and mapping authorities, social insu- rances, etc. Therefore, we need to critically assess Slovene PAR in terms of state PA (re)organization since a network has been purely copied from a system before the independence. Due to tradition, the system functions but potentials for a more efficient and responsive organization are left behind. As for agencies, in terms of executive and more autonomous regulatory ones, Slovenia has been conservative in changes. There is a ratio of 2:1 betwe- en executive agencies within ministries and independent public agencies. Comparatively, this is rather positive since other countries often face excessive agencification and all side effects (cf. Verhoest et al., 2012). Several models of autonomous entities have been developed with differing levels of autonomy based on umbrella Public Agencies Act and State Administration Act adopted in 2002. However, it si a benefit that these system laws include agencies within public administration based on their public tasks and public funding. In Slovenia, the idea of independent administrative institutions or regu- latory agencies was closely linked to the privatization of (economic) public services with coordination of general public and private interests. Consequ- 319 Slovene Public AdminiS tr Ation reform: euro PeAniz Ation AS A b ridge over tr Adition Al And PoS t-Soci AliS t legA cieS ently, the first agencies that were established in the 1990s were in the field of market security, insurance supervision, energy, telecommunications and postal services, etc. w ith the establishment of (state) public agencies, certain administrative tasks were delegated from state administration to more flexibly regulated and legally independent entities outside the constitutionally limited administrative bodies within the state itself. The process of agencification in Slovenia has intensified, and is still progressing, especially with regard to the aspects of (personal and financial) autonomy. In 2011, the g overnment even designed an explicit reform program regarding public agencies, institutions, and funds as a part of the general public sector reform program (more in k o- vač in Vintar et al., 2013). However, experts warn against misuse of this form especially in times of crisis (Pirnat, 2010). The delivery of public tasks can become more efficient because they are specialized, oriented to specific areas or sectors, and able to engage specific expertise. On the other hand, there are concerns as to their accountability, transparency, and technocratic risks. As regards agencies as independent regulators, there are frequent complaints about both political or sectoral capture, and characteristic of Eastern Europe as well as constitutional concerns about them breaking the principle of divi- sion of powers in a state. In sum, today there are 16 autonomous agencies, although some are not classical regulators, hence this form is not the most suitable. On the contrary, other institutions parallel to agencies might better function as regulators, such as pension institute. The figures for Slovenia indicate one regulatory agency established in 1994 and five in 2000, 16 in 2010 and 17 in 2012, with two less and one more in 2013. The majority of agencies fall under the scope of the Ministry of Econo- mic Development and Technology (five) and Ministry of Finance (four), some under the Ministry of Infrastructure and some under non-commercial sectors of science, education, culture and health (some agencies fall under the super- vision of two field ministries). The number of employees in agencies varies si- gnificantly (from 3 to 250; total about 800 in 2014). There are several phases of agencification. After 2000, the (moderate) proliferation of public agencies can be observed in Slovenia as well as in the region. The processes of transition and accession to the EU led to a rapid increase in the number of agencies in CEE in order to implement new or reorganized functions of democratic state, market economy, and EU MS. 320 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Table 8.4: Number of (Public) Agencies in Slovenia (Type 2, National level) over Time Ye ar s No. of new agencies In total –2000 (1994–) 1 1 2000–2004 7 8 *2005–2008 3 11 **2009–2012 6 17 2012–2015 -2 (1 new, 1 abolished, 2 merged) 16 * In 2004, Slovenia entered the EU. ** In 2009, financial crisis started to influence public sector funding. Source: own research. In certain elements, Slovene agencies seem to exceed the standardized autonomy required by the OECD if one did not simultaneously identify the implementation gap. Despite overall positive assessment of agencies in Slo- venia, there are respective gaps identified particularly regarding managerial (in)efficiency and political (non)accountability as analyzed for all national agencies in 2011−2014, following goals of PAR strategies (Virant & k ovač, 2011: 71–73; Pevcin et al., 2012: 166−172; k oprić et al., 2012/13: 40; k ovač, 2014). There is an especially vivid gap between declared and actual autono- my and professionalism in terms of setting and reaching goals as defined in theory and field legislation. One of the key problems seems also to be the lack of a systematic approach to agencification owing to non-coordinated governmental field policies but the situation is comparatively not proble- matic, especially following the EU sectoral requirements. In sum, Slovene agencies seem as a reasonable system and one of successful reforms, howe- ver, there is a room for improvement regarding more developed professio- nalism and better accountability of agencies. 8.2.3. Civil Service and Integrity System Main goals, regarding the European Administrative Space harmoni- zation as a base for PAR (see Cardona & Freibert, 2007: 57; OECD, 1999: 21–24, 2014; Olsen, 2003), have been related to professionalism, enhanced capacity and coordination within the civil service system, both generally 321 Slovene Public AdminiS tr Ation reform: euro PeAniz Ation AS A b ridge over tr Adition Al And PoS t-Soci AliS t legA cieS and also in Slovenia. A new umbrella Civil Servants Act was adopted in 2002, together with State Administration Act, w age System in the Public Sector Act, and other systemic reform legislation. Such an approach should enable real change, however, some of these laws entered into force imme- diately, and some with rather significant delay. Although the w age System in the Public Sector Act, for instance, had been adopted in 2002, the new system eventually began to apply only in 2008, after six years of negotiations between the government and public-sector trade unions, and was again partly amended in 2010 to reduce public expenditure. Consequently, one can detect several dysfunctions and incompliances among different laws and effects, particularly within parts of public sector that function outsi- de state administration (health, social care, education, etc.). For instance, when renewing the wage system in these sub-systems, their internal syste- matizations have been firstly redefined in order to enable employees to get higher wages. Or although the Civil Servants Act aimed at apoliticization and higher professionalism, particularly for the highest officials, the law was changed in 2008 to give grounds for political replacement of directors- general and other similar posts without fault-based grounds but purely “in- consist” with new minister in power in the period of six months. The focuses of Civil Servants Act in force since 2003 followed the SI- gMA recommendations, and built up on a rather stabile civil service as established in former decades (cf. Meyer-Sahling, 2009). Pursuant to the Civil Servants Act, the civil servants or civil-service jobs within the state, municipal, and judicial authorities fall into two major groups (Article 23) − officials and staff positions. These are differentiated according to their respective principal tasks and entry requirements (Articles 78 and 79, such as professional exams − but many of them were abolished in 2008), rights and duties, and HRM mechanisms. The first group consists of officials or positions of officials in five career classes and 16 ranks. For them implemen- tation of the core (mainly authoritative) tasks of administration is reser- ved, while the second group comprises support stuff or support-related jobs where, in addition to simple administrative tasks, it is mainly supportive clerical and technical work that is performed. The number of officials in 2011, according to the ranks and classes, indicated the following structure: in the first class approx. 3,400 officials were employed, in the second 3,600, 322 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence in the third 4,000, in the fourth 2,100, and in the fifth 12,000 (k orade Purg in k ovač & Virant, 2011: 119–147). Secondly, there are special rules for mana- gerial officials as opposed to expert ones). g enerally, the law offers grounds for (see Pirnat et al., 2004; kovač in Vintar, 2013): reorganization of human-resource planning and employment by integration in the budgetary procedure, decentralization of management to the level of individual bodies, greater internal mobility of staff (given that the employer is the same, i.e. the state), setting up top public management as an expert not political force, more objective system of selection, introduction of horizontal training and qualifications at the Administrative Academy un- der the Ministry of Public Administration, mechanisms to increase flexibility and rationalize operations (project work, reorganization, reassignment), soci- al partnership, etc. Nevertheless, as the most important characteristic of this law and its subsidiary legislation (especially, unified governmental Decree on Internal Organization and Systematization of w ork Posts in force since 2003 and Rules on HR Planning in force since 2006), one can emphasize its scope. Namely, the law applies to all employees (except functionaries) in overall sta- te administration, municipal administrations, and all types of public entities, such as agencies, funds, and institutes (e.g. schools, hospitals). This law hence acts as an anti-fragmentation tool joining up civil service as a professional for- ce providing public services, or issuing authoritative decisions regardless of a status of an organizational unit where civil servants are formally employed. Moreover, the Officials’ Council as a hybrid body consisting of 12 mem- bers 41 was set up in April 2003 with the primary goal (Pirnat et al., 2004: 418) 41 3 members out of 12 are elected by officials themselves, 3 members are appointed by the Presi- dent of the Republic from among the experts in the public sector, 2 are appointed by the trade unions of professions in the PA, and 4 members are appointed by the government as a general rule for a period of six years. This is therefore not a governmental body but an independent one aiming to enhance professionalism. See standards: http://www.mju.gov.si/fileadmin/mju. gov.si/pageuploads/JAVNA_UPRAV A/Uradniski_svet/STANDARDS_OF_PROFESSIONAL_ QUALIFICATIONS_2015.pdf. A research carried out in 2012 (k ovač & Virant, 2013: 137−158) among the candidates, selected top officials and Ministers as their political superiors revealed an overall efficiency of the Slovene selection scheme in the sense of restricted over-politicization and increased professionalism. Its outcomes lead to the conclusion that the selection system in Slovenia, owing to its two-phase based on strict standards and further political selection, is most adequate in terms of both regulation and practice since it takes into account the twofold role of top officials and civil service or public administration as a whole. But in relation to a higher level of professionalization, the OECD comparative survey (Meyer-Sahling, 2009) underlines the im- portance of defining top positions in PA as professional positions with only the very highest 323 Slovene Public AdminiS tr Ation reform: euro PeAniz Ation AS A b ridge over tr Adition Al And PoS t-Soci AliS t legA cieS of ensuring a professional selection of the highest administrative managers. For the latter the Act provides an open competition, particularly among the highest officials by adopting obligatory special criteria for their selection, combining professional knowledge and managerial competences, and furt- her training and promotion. This applies to the positions specified by Article 60 of the Civil Servants Act, such as directors-general, principals of bodies, and secretaries-general within the ministries, principals of government of- fices, and principals of administrative units. All together, the Act applies to around 150 official positions. In reality, these intentions have been realized only partially (more in k orade Purg in k ovač & Virant, 2011, and compara- tively in Meyer-Sahling, 2009: 21, 33). Despite a strong tradition of apolitical PA, Slovenia regulates its system more openly by replacing certain circles of top officials, i. e. about 50%, hence converging merit and spoil models, which is close to the French and g erman systems. Namely, most competitions for the highest public management positions took place in the years following parliamentary elections and changes of government. The number of competi- tions was extremely high in 2005 compared to other years, exceeding the ave- rage by 80%; a rise of 45% above the annual average could also be observed in 2009, and similarly in 2013. The politicization in appointing top officials in Slovenia is hence defini- tely a (post)socialism relict despite other rather successful reforms within the civil service system. However, politicization in PA is inevitable; administra- tion often interferes with political decision-making and politics (over)influ- ences administrative operations but this leads to several dysfunctions of the being political appointments. Also, the Slovene Constitution states in Article 122: "Employment in the state administration is possible only on the basis of an open competition, except in cases provided by law.” The competition procedure for the highest officials/managers is initiated by the principal of the future official. Candidates are first assessed in terms of formal requirements (e.g. education, work experience, special certificates); eligible candidates are then invited to ap- pear before the special commission established for each competition separately, and comprising at least one member of the Officials Council, a representative of the state administration and an outside expert. The commission examines the candidates' suitability in accordance with the standards, i.e. in terms of work and leadership experience, professional knowledge in the field covered by the body in which the candidate is applying for the head post, and management and communication skills, whereby candidates are entitled to legal protection. Finally, the politically superior official (as a general rule, the Minister) can take advantage of his political discretion to choose from among suitable candidates the one with whom he wishes to collaborate. The candi- date is appointed for a five-year term with possibility of re-appointment. 324 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence system − from democratic deficit to unprofessionalism and lower effective- ness (more in Peters & Pierre, 2005; cf. OECD, 1999: 21, on pursuing separa- tion between politics and PA with its merit system) − so there is a search for a balance that still needs to be establishedin Slovenia in the future. Overall, the Slovene reform in the field of civil service was mainly re- gulatory driven with further organizational and managerial measures, e.g. introduction of schemes of job satisfaction or establishment of special Admi- nistrative Academy (in 1997) as internal training unit. However, in practice, especially after 2009, the importance of continuing education and in-service training of civil servants has been underrated as proved by several analyses (k orade Purg, k ovač & Virant, 2011; cf. SIgMA Paper, No. 16, 1996). Today, the Academy acts mainly as a mediator between PA and private trainers in- stead of a policy unit. Consequnetly, there have been rare systemic initiatives, like development of holistic model of competences in PA in 2008−2011, but later not put in force due to lack of resources to verify these skills and ele- ments. In sum, it is not surprising to find in the 2015−2020 Strategy for Deve- lopment of PA almost the same goals and activities as known but not realized through earlier strategies since the mid-2000s, for instance professionalism, anti-corruption, decentralization, privatization, rationalization, higher capa- city, loyalty, etc. On the other hand, we can claim that for the Slovene system to be transparently regulated, sound grounds for further good governance- oriented principles of development should be offered. Regarding development of integrity, the Civil Servants Act introduced specific principles to be respected by all servants and officials explicitly. The Act provides ten principles common to all civil servants in the public sector (Articles 7–15a; the principle of prohibition of harassment was added with a subsequent amendment to the Act, and five principles applying to officials performing authoritative tasks in state and municipal bodies (Articles 27–32; the principle of protection of professional interests was deleted with a sub- sequent amendment to the Act). Moreover, national anti-corruption strate- gies and bodies have been set up, such as the anti-corruption commission provided by the 2010 Public Sector Integrity Act. The Act binds all public bodies to act transparently and ethically, and provides procedures before the Anti-corruption Commission, if contrary. The law also protects against the whistle blowers. Since, especially officials act as an authority or public service, 325 Slovene Public AdminiS tr Ation reform: euro PeAniz Ation AS A b ridge over tr Adition Al And PoS t-Soci AliS t legA cieS their work is guided by public law, including ethical principles. A violation of these is therefore considered unlawful conduct rather than just bad practice − only moral and legal norms together make up the integrity of the official. For example, pursuant to the gAPA, an official who is not impartial may not par - ticipate in administrative proceedings since this conduct – i.e. either refusing to recognize rights to a party whom the official is unfavorable to although the party meets the necessary conditions, or by recognizing excessive benefits contrary to regulations and public interest – is unethical as well as unlawful (k ovač, 2012: 29). In this essence, the Officials’ Council adopted the Code of Conduct in 2011, in a form of ten guidelines, based on a two-year analysis of existing codes in individual parts of Slovene and other PAs in order to encou- rage lawfulness and the respect for common good, and regulate the activities of Slovene officials in the European setting. However, not all guidelines can be regulated by the norms, therefore it is rather important for Slovenia also in the future, as emphasized among others by the Strategy until 2020, to de- velop a doctrine of integrity, and train public servants to express honesty and service-oriented attitudes. 8.2.4. Good Administration: Modernized Administrative Procedures and Transparency As in the EU in general, also through PAR in Slovenia, a concept of good administration has been developed (Rusch, 2014; Venice Commisssion, 2011; Staskontoret, 2005; k ovač & Virant, 2011: 208; cf. Art. 41 on the Right to g ood Administration of EU Charter of Fundamental Rights). Even though it may be said for Slovenia that the process has been conducted rather unsystematically and, again, more regulatory-oriented. Slovene g eneral Administrative Proce- dure Act as an umbrella field law for efficient and democratic procedures was adopted in 1999, and later on was subject to several further amendments. The latter were mainly devoted to removal of administrative barriers under the EU recommendations but the major reform was not introduced insofar contrary to most other countries, in w estern as well as in Eastern and Southern Europe (cf. Rusch, 2014: 4; k oprić et al., 2016). However, the gAPA has been recogni- zed as a rather modern law, based on Austrian legacy, in compliance with the European principles and requirements, even though its scope, in Slovenia, is limited to unilateral administrative decision-making. Additionally, the admi- 326 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence nistrative judiciary as well has been operating based on the long tradition ever since the creation of the independent state, initially under the general Supreme Court, and since 1998, as a specialized court (Administrative Court of the Re- public of Slovenia) enabling better accessibility for the parties and more focus on administrative matters. Although the gAPA was adopted already in 1999, while the related Administrative Dispute Act (ADA), amended Constitutional Court Act, and Tax Procedure Act (TPA; covering the most regulated spe- cial proceeding, and among other, also Civil Servants Act adopted in 2002), followed several years later, the remaining corpus of basic legislation concer- ning administrative procedure in Slovenia is consistent with the provisions of gAPA and its subsequent amendments in terms of Europeanization. Thus, for example, the ADA (applyed since 1 January 2007) takes account of the need for prompt finality and enforceability of administrative law relations, and upgrades the gAPA with the principle of two-level decision-making pending finality, thereby limiting the appeal in administrative dispute exclusively for the protection of constitutional rights and freedoms and the establishment of a different state of affairs in court (Article 73 of the ADA). In terms of reaso- nable time for decision, the provision of the same Act is rather crucial, stating that the appellant may invoke administrative silence regardless of the possible continuous performance of procedural actions before the administrative bo- dies if within three years no final administrative decision on the merits or no order to suspend the procedure has been issued (Article 28(3) of the ADA). Moreover, the Access to Public Information Act was enacted in Slovenia 2003, even broadening its scope in 2015. The gAPA and related laws (ADA, TPA) in Slovenia have, however, al- ways been integrated into, or at least mentioned in, the strategic documents concerning reforming public administration issued between 1996 and 2015, yet almost always only on the declaratory level and have never featured as a pillar of development (k ovač & Virant, 2011: 202; k ovač et al., 2012: 57). The greatest emphasis on the significance of administrative procedural law in this context was given by the 1996 Parliamentary Strategy aimed at reforming the Slovene public administration to meet the requirements of EU membership which defined the revision and adoption of the Slovene gAPA as a foun- dation of the democratic protection of individuals against the possible abuse of power (on the latter aspects see Ziller and Craig in Peters & Pierre, 2005: 327 Slovene Public AdminiS tr Ation reform: euro PeAniz Ation AS A b ridge over tr Adition Al And PoS t-Soci AliS t legA cieS 261, 271). Subsequently, the reforms mostly involved debureaucratization of regulations, for instance simplified notification or reduced legal remedies. On the contrary, some amendments even increased the level of rights of parties, such as the guarantee of the participation of interested parties, or the increa- sed right of access to one’s file and access to public information. Administrative procedure codification has been characteristic of the cur- rent Slovene territory since 1923 with a common heritage of Austrian law of 1925, old Y ugoslav law of 1930, and Y ugoslav gAPA of 1956. However, no radi- cal improvement was introduced comparing present law to these, except some minor simplifications. One of the reasons for this is also a successful realization of several organizational measures over the last 15 years with no re-regulation required to comply with the EU standards, such as data exchange within public databases, a one-stop-shop in some fields or developed e-government (more in Aristovnik et al., 2016: 93, 111 et seq.). The degree of protection of the parties’ rights has been traditionally high in Slovenia − with some gaps in practice, such as often excessive long proceedings. On the contrary, the need for (more) efficiency in the administrative procedure and work of public administration in general has been stimulated in Slovenia over the past few years mainly by the economy, either in the pursuit of greater national competitiveness, or in or- der to overcome the impacts of the economic crisis. Compared to the previous regulation, the modifications introduced by the new gAPA since April 2000 included, for instance redefinition of the basic principles (e.g. added discretion, supplementary examination of the party, definition of legal interest, suspended efficiency, transfer of completeness and finality, and use of language as a rule, new principle: the duty to tell the truth and fair exercise of rights); determina- tion of the (date of) beginning of the procedure and the procedural conditions for such; encouragement of participation of all persons with the status of party (including accessory participants and representatives of public interest) in the procedure; reduction of legal remedies (appeal and extraordinary remedies) and the reasons for that in order to improve legal certainty. The amendments adopted in 2002–2013 furthermore focused on the reduction of administrati- ve burden, such as exchange of information from official records held by the administrative bodies (2002); introduction of e-communication (2005); redu- ced deadlines for legal remedies (2005); more efficient delivery (2008); incre- ased competences of the internal administrative inspection (2010); etc. There- 328 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence fore, we can claim to have traditional protection of public interest and rights of the parties implemented, but in a rather formal way. Additionally, many effecti- ve and innovative approaches have been regulated already since 1999, such as the mutatis mutandis application of the gAPA in the delivery of public services and special administrative enforcement, which, inter alia, reduces the need to re-codify the general law, and enact special rules. On the other hand, present regulation in place overprotects the rights of parties, and rather neglects the efficiency of administrative procedures as a whole (kovač & Virant, 2011: 198; cf. k oprić et al., 2016). However, according to the Constitution, the rights and obligations of in- dividuals, particularly in their relations toward the authorities when interfering with the legal positions of the parties, can only be regulated by the law and not by a minor regulation as only in this manner it is possible to achieve the pre- dictability of relations (the rule of law), and perform a review of the constitu- tionality or legality of a regulation. The tendency of sector-specific (subsidiary) regulations that interfere with the status of the parties in individual administra- tive cases, as above, needs to be therefore critically evaluated, mainly because of their inconsistency with the gAPA when a different regulation is neither necessary nor justified. Over the last few years (of economic crisis), such at- tempts have been quite frequent in Slovenia (k ovač & Virant, 2011: 205), and were triggered by political pressures to shrink administration and by the need for an easier implementation of the rights of providers of economic activities (cf. OECD, 2014). Hence, when re-regulating through debureaucratization, one has to bridge the dilemma between efficiency (in economic terms) and lawfulness in order to realize good administration (k ovač et al., 2012: 38). This arises also from statistical data. Namely, around 10 million first-instance admi- nistrative decisions are issued every year in Slovenia, 3% of which are challen- ged by the appeal in administrative procedure. A further share of completed administrative acts – up to 4,000 per year – is challenged in administrative dispute, while the parties file around 500 constitutional complaints against fi- nal decisions in administrative matters; the number of appeals and suits varies, yet slows down over time. The success of the parties is, of course, much more modest – empirical data show that at all levels of legal protection approx. 20% of appellants or plaintiffs succeed. The main message of European- related (and not just the EU) changes must therefore remain to pursue the balance or duali- 329 Slovene Public AdminiS tr Ation reform: euro PeAniz Ation AS A b ridge over tr Adition Al And PoS t-Soci AliS t legA cieS ty of guarantees, both of public interest and the rights and legal interests of the parties and interested persons (Statskontoret, 2005: 78). To sum up, a new gAPA in Slovenia is required to continue a high level of protection of fundamental democratic principles but to support more towards the parties-oriented PA conduct while simultaneously ensuring efficient public policies. This law should be much shorter (presently with over 300 articles) and balanced, with a main benefit to broaden its scope according to most Eu- ropean countries (see Hofmann et al., 2014) to administrative legislation and administrative contracts. It should pursue modern institutes, such as alternati- ve dispute resolution. It might also incorporate overall legal protection, judicial too, as in the Netherlands. Such a model would (see more in k ovač, et al., 2012: 57–60) preserve the traditional foundation of administrative procedure, i.e. ba- lanced protection of the parties’ rights and public interest, and simultaneously represent the driving force of modernization of the Slovene PA. Regarding transparency, the access or right to information is a funda- mental principle in a democratic society as stipulated also in the Article 42 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. In the respective area, the degree of awareness of the need for an open and good administration governance is rather high in Slovenia, taking into account the EU guidelines, yet regu- lation alone does not suffice, and should be thus followed by effective im- plementation to overcome still undergoing processes of Europeanization and (post)transition (Pirc Musar in k ovač & Virant, 2011: 230). 42 It has been pro- ven (cf. Statskontoret, 2005: 35–43, OECD, 2014: 29, 60) that selected proce- dural institutions particularly contribute to “real” transparency. They are all guaranteed in Slovene law, such as time limits (to reveal the information in 20 days), and an appeal to an independent body (e.i. Information Commissioner in Slovenia since 2003 as a kind of special ombudsman) with judicial review (in administrative dispute). In Slovenia, the access to one’s file as regulated by the gAPA (1999) ispa- rallel to the Right to Information Act (RTI Act; 2003), providing grounds for a substantive right to access public information. Such a “double” protection 42 In general, the problem of (non) implementation of open democracy is particularly topical in countries burdened by the legacy of a captured state with no true participation, and economic transition. Y et the culture of openness and transparency is developing in this region based on the EU impact (Agh, 2013: 6, 11; k ovač, 2015: 186). 330 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence derives from the Constitution and fundamental administrative principles as set by State Administration Act, Civil Servants Act, etc. (k ovač, 2015: 194). The purpose of the gAPA is to inform the party – i.e. the person who’s right, legal interest, or obligation toward the authority is being decided on in the procedures – on the grounds for decision. The competent body must there- fore assess legal interest and related rights on a case-to-case basis under the concept of subjective affectedness. Yet the restrictions may only relate to the method of access, not the actual familiarization with the relevant procedural documents, and an explicit legal basis should be provided for exceptions. Li- kewise, a recognized right should not be restricted beyond the purpose in a disproportionate manner (e.g. in relation to costs). Quite different is the right of access to public information; according to the RTI act, given the ultimate purpose which is to ensure openness, and thus prevent any abuse of authori- ty and responsibility, the party is not required to demonstrate legal interest. However, the statistics show that there is an implementation gap regarding the latter, indicating approx. 50% of all appeals are made to the Information Commissioner‘s Office due to silence of liable administrative bodies. Legally speaking, a radical shift could be achieved with an integral understanding of the rights concerning information. In the future, it would be reasonable to combine the detailed, and almost formalistically defined systems of rights of the parties in administrative procedures to access the file of persons requiring public information into a single basic principle of the right to know (k ovač, 2015: 196; cf. Statskontoret, 2005; Hofmann et al., 2014). In this regard, over- detailed codification of administrative procedures and freedom of expression have a counter-productive effect, especially when combined with too formal culture (kovač & Virant, 2011: 220; cf. Bevir et al., 2011: 287). More focus should be placed, de lege ferenda, on proactive openness, broader participa- tion of several participants in the procedure, individual accountability, and service-mindedness in general (Pirc Musar in k ovač & Virant, 2011: 237). In the future, it must be recognized that, in Slovenia, especially trans- parency and administrative procedural law should not be underestimated as a part of the overall functioning and modernization of PA. Namely, it re- presents a key business process as a basic function of state administration, municipalities, and all fragmented bearers of public authority. Also, defining the regulation of administrative procedural law together with the rational or- 331 Slovene Public AdminiS tr Ation reform: euro PeAniz Ation AS A b ridge over tr Adition Al And PoS t-Soci AliS t legA cieS ganization of public administration and the public servant system as a sound reform, it largely implies the exercise of constitutional safeguards (cf. Peters & Pierre, 2005: 260; Statskontoret, 2005; k oprić, 2012; Aristovnik et al., 2016). In this respect, this area need definitely more attention in future PAR in Slove- nia, both in more proactively defined regulation as in more efficient practice. Therefore, the plans, as laid out in the 2020 Development Strategy addressing administrative procedures only as a part of deregulation efforts, do not suffice neither in contextual sense nor in terms of their role within PAR. 8.3. Conclusion Slovenia was historically a part of several different countries, mainly within central Europe, and in the period of 1945−1991, within the former socialist Yugoslavia. In this respect, it differs from majority of other Eastern European countries (together with Croatia) since it is characterized by g er- man-Austrian-oriented culture and “soft” form of communism compared to the Soviet satellite countries. Consequently, it is usually established that, in public governance, Slovenia (and Croatia) presently face a combination of g erman traditional values and post-socialist (rather than post-communist) transitional elements. In both areas, respective characteristics can be evalua- ted as positive than rather negative in terms of good governance and Europe- an convergence. Namely, due to g erman legacy, rule of law is highly regarded, however, presenting itself not rarely in a form of (excessive) legalism and for- malism. Socialism, on the other hand, introduced still a vivid capture of the state and lack of strive for efficiency in public management but offered more flexible approaches in public administration. Slovenia is a typical Central and Eastern European country facing a mixture of its own specifics due to certain cultural legacies and radical chan- ges aimed to internalize the European standards and principles in its public governance and administration. Consequently, we can identify radical chan- ges of previous governance approaches due to internal incentives but mainly based on Europeanization process in a decade since the mid-1990s. However, there were and still are certain implementation gaps from the start, parti- cularly in the areas requiring political consensus and democratic change as opposed to technical and operational measures. Nowadays, we can also detect some steps backwards if we compare aims and results of reforms after the first 332 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence years of full membership in 2004. Both side effects reveal the necessity for a further systematic top-down led strive for contemporary understood good Europeanization combining national specifics (e.g. its small size) and gover- nance modes as pursued at a European level. Moreover, it can be easily argued that fiscal crisis also substantially contributed to the changed modus of public governance in the country, where pre-crisis logic of decentralization and competition introduction was replaced by increased coordination, centralization, and politicization of decision-making. This evidence can further be supported with the lack of decentralization initiatives, including the introduction of the second tier of sub-national government as well as with the deagenticifation, although only modest, that occurred in the last 4 years. As for the future, if Slovenia is to pursue continuous system develo- pment, overall strategic orientation should be designed based on the vision of the role of Slovenia within its national society and international environment. The development of public administration through good governance princi- ples opens new possibilities for further development of Slovene democracy as well. As we can observe, the dynamic perspective is particularly viable, the- refore we should be focusing more on improving efficiency of governmental policies and decision-making as well as on operating framework as they are acting as one of the most important inhibitors in achieving national competi- tiveness. Besides achieving a better balance between legalism and manageria- lism that should be found through participative inclusion of different societal groups, the decision-making process itself should be streamlined and more strategically oriented. To finalize, as the evidence stated above might suggest, the following can be observed among others. First, fiscal crisis has changed substantially the modus operandi of the government as austerity and cutback manage- ment practices started to prevail from 2009 onwards. Typically, this has in- creased pressures towards recentralization and coordination in political de- cision-making, sharply redefining public governance practices. Second, the cross-national evidence might indicate that the quality of PA might be getting worse, in particular, if we observe its perceived contribution to the national competitiveness, therefore clear reforms of decision-making mechanisms in particular are needed. 333 Slovene Public AdminiS tr Ation reform: euro PeAniz Ation AS A b ridge over tr Adition Al And PoS t-Soci AliS t legA cieS References 1. Agh, A. 2013. Europeanization of Public Administration in the ECE: The Challenge of Participative Democracy and good g ov- ernance, IPSA (RC 32) 2013 Conference, April 4−7, 2013, CAAS, Dubrovnik, Croatia. 2. Aristovnik, A., k ovač, P ., Stare, J., Todorovski, L. (eds). 2016. Slov- enska javna uprava na razpotju strateških sprememb [Slovene Pub- lic Administration on the Cross-road of Strategic Changes]. Lju- bljana: Faculty of Administration. 3. Bačlija, I., Brezovšek, M. 2006. k atalog kompetenc in regije v Evropski uniji. Teorija in praksa, 43 (3/4). 4. Bevir, M. (Ed.). 2011. The SAgE Handbook of g overnance. Los An- geles, etc.: Sage. 5. Brezovšek, M. 2009. Demokracija in nova javna služba ter njun vpliv na javno upravo v Sloveniji [Democracy and New Public Service, and Their Impact on Public Administration in Slovenia]. Paper presented at the 16 th Days of Slovene Administration. CD compendium. Ljublja- na: Faculty of Administration, University of Ljubljana. 6. Cardona, F ., Freibert A. 2007. The European Administrative Space and Sigma Assessments of EU Candidate Countries. Hrvatska javna upra- va 7 (1), 51−59. 7. Cepiku, D., Bonomi Savignon, A. 2012. g overning Cutback Manage- ment: Is There a g lobal Strategy for Public Administrations? Interna- tional Journal of Public Sector Management 25 (6/7), 428−436. 8. Dujić, S. 1997. “Preobrazba sistema javne uprave v Sloveniji – izhodiš- ča, cilji in nekateri pričakovani problemi” [Transformation of the Pu- blic Administration System in Slovenia – Basis, g oals and Problems Expected]. Javna uprava [Public Administration] 33 (2), 211–232. 9. Dunn, N. w., Staronova, k., Pushkarev, S. (Eds). 2006. Implementa- tion: The Missing Link in Public Administration Reform in Central and Eastern Europe. Bratislava: NISPAcee. 10. Fink Hafner, D. & Lajh, D. 2003. Managing Europe from Home: The Europeanisation of the Slovene Core Executive. Ljubljana: Faculty of Social Sciences. 334 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 11. Fonda, M., Žohar, F. 2015. Predstavitev kart sodelovanja v skupnih občinskih upravah po posameznih področjih nalog. In Zbornik VIII. posveta Delovanje skupnih občinskih uprav v Sloveniji. Ljubljana: Fakulteta za upravo. 12. gFSM. 2001. g overnment Finance Statistics Manual. w ashington: IMF . 13. g overnment & National Assembly of the Republic of Slovenia. 1996. Strategy for Slovenia’s Accession to the EU with Strategy for the Imple- mentation of the Public Administration Reform (1997–1999). Ljublja- na: National Assembly Reporter, No. 48/97 and 48/I/97. 14. g overnment of the Republic of Slovenia. 2003. Strategy of Further De- velopment of the Slovene Public Sector 2003–2005. 15. g overnment of the Republic of Slovenia. 2005. Slovenia’s Development Strategy. 16. g overnment of the Republic of Slovenia. 2010. Exit Strategy 2010–2013. 17. g overnment of the Republic of Slovenia. 2011. Izhodišča za nadaljnji razvoj in organizacijsko ter normativno urejanje javnega sektorja [Ori- gins of Further Development and Organisational and Normative Regu- lation of the Public Sector]. Internal material. 18. g overnment of the Republic of Slovenia. 2015. Strategy of Development of Public Administration 2015–2020. 19. g overnment of the Republic of Slovenia. 2016. Facts. Retrieved from: http://www.gov.si/. 20. Hofmann, H. C. H., Schneider, J.-P ., Ziller, J. (Eds) 2014. The ReNEUAL Model Rules. ReNEUAL, www.reneual.eu. 21. k oprić, I., k ovač, P ., Đulabić, V ., Džinić, J. 2016. Legal Remedies in Admi- nistrative Procedures in w estern Balkans. Danilovgrad: ReSP A. Retrieved from:http://www.respaweb.eu/11/library#respa-publications-2016-7. 22. koprić, I. 2012. Managing Public Affairs in South Eastern Europe: Muddled g overnance. In: A.M. Bissessar (ed.). g overnance: Is it for Everyone? Hauppauge: Nova Science Publisher. 23. k oprić, I. 2011. Contemporary Croatian Public Administration on the Re- form w aves. Y earbook, Croatian Academy of Legal Sciences, 2 (1), 1–39. 24. koprić, I., kovač, P. & Musa, A. 2012/13. Agencies in Three South Eastern European Countries: Politics, Expertise and Law Agencies 335 Slovene Public AdminiS tr Ation reform: euro PeAniz Ation AS A b ridge over tr Adition Al And PoS t-Soci AliS t legA cieS between Expertise, Politics and Law: The Case of Countries in Transi- tion in South Eastern Europe. The NISPAcee Journal of Public Adminis- tration and Policy, 5 (2), 17–44. 25. k ovač, P. 2015. Contemporary Challenges of Access to Information in Public g overnance in South Eastern Europe. Lex localis, 13 (2), 185– 204.  26. kovač, P. 2014/15. Better Local g overnance by Integrative Reorgani- zation of State Administration and Self-g overnment (in Slovenia). The NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, 7 (2), 117–134. 27. kovač, P. 2012. Ethics of Officials in the Context of (Slovene) g ood Administration. The NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, 5 (1), 23–53. 28. k ovač, P . 2011. The Public Administration Reform Agenda in Slovenia: Two Decades of Challenges and Results. Croatian and Comparative Pu- blic Administration, 11 (3), 627–650. 29. k ovač, P ., gajduschek, g. (Eds). 2015. Contemporary g overnance Mo- dels and Practices in Central and Eastern Europe. NISPAcee Press. 30. k ovač, P . (Ed.), Rakar, I., Remic. M. 2012. Upravno-procesne dileme o rabi ZUP 2 [Administrative-Procedural Dilemmas in The Use of APA 2]. Ljubljana: Uradni list Republike Slovenije. 31. kovač, P., Virant, g. 2013. Balancing Professional Standards and Po- litical Discretion in Selecting Top Officials in Slovenia. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, 40, 137−158. Retrieved from: http:// rtsa.ro/en/files/TRAS-40E-2013-8kOV AC,%20VIRANT.pdf. 32. k ovač, P ., Virant, g. (Eds). 2011. Razvoj slovenske javne uprave 1991– 2011 [Development of Slovene Public Administration 1991–2011]. Lju- bljana: Uradni list Republike Slovenije. 33. Lane, J. E. 1995. The Public Sector. Thousand Oaks, New Delhi, London: Sage. 34. Linz, J. J., Stepan, A. 1996. Problems of Democratic Transition and Con- solidation: Southern Europe, South America, and Post-communist Eu- rope. Baltimore (MD), London: John Hopkins. 35. Local Self-g overnment Act. 2007. Ljubljana: Official gazette of the RS. 36. Mendes, J. 2009. g ood Administration in EU Law and the European 336 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Code of g ood Administrative Behaviour. European University Institute w orking Papers, Law 2009/09; Retrieved from: http://cadmus.eui.eu/ bitstream/handle/1814/12101/LAw_2009_09.pdf?sequence=3. 37. Meyer-Sahling, J. 2009. Sustainability of Civil Service Reforms in Cen- tral and Eastern Europe Five Years after EU Accession, Sigma Papers, No. 44. Paris: OECD. 38. Olsen, Johan P . 2003. Towards a European Administrative Space, Jour- nal of European Public Policy, 10 (4), 506–531. 39. OECD. 1998. Preparing Public Administrations for the European Administrative Space. Sigma Papers, No. 23. Paris: OECD. 40. OECD. 1999. European Principles for Public Administration. Sigma Pa- pers, No. 27. Paris: OECD. 41. OECD. 2004. Principles of Corporate g overnance. Paris: OECD. 42. OECD. 2014. The Principles of Public Administration. Retrieved from: http://www.sigmaweb.org/publications/Principles-Public-Administra- tion-Nov2014.pdf. 43. OECD. 2015. g20/OECD Principles of Corporate g overnance. Paris: OECD. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264236882-en. 44. Oplotnik, Z., Brezovnik, B. 2004. Financing Local g overnment in Slo- venia. Post-Communist Economies, 16, 483−496. 45. Petelin, D. 2013. Uvajanje principov Evropskega upravnega prostora v slovensko javno upravo. Ljubljana: Faculty of Administration. 46. Peters, B. g., Pierre, J. (Eds). 2005. Handbook of Public Administration. London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi: Sage. 47. Peters, B. g. et al. 2011. g lobal Financial Crisis, Public Administration and g overnance: Do New Problems Require New Solutions? Public Or- ganization Review 11, 13−27. 48. Pevcin, P. 2002. Analiza reforme slovenske državne uprave kot dejav- nika konkurenčne sposobnosti nacionalnega gospodarstva. Ljubljana: Ekonomska fakulteta. 49. Pevcin, P. 2012. Local g overnment in Slovenia: Structure, Size, and Expenditures. Hrvatska i komparativna javna uprava, 12 (3), 705−724. 50. Pevcin, P . 2014. Austerity and Cutback Management in the Public Sec- tor: A Case Study for Slovenia. Administrative Culture, 15 (1), 80−99. 337 Slovene Public AdminiS tr Ation reform: euro PeAniz Ation AS A b ridge over tr Adition Al And PoS t-Soci AliS t legA cieS 51. Pevcin, P . 2014a. Združevanje občin v Sloveniji: zunanji in notranji de- javniki procesa. In: Setnikar-Cankar, S., Stare, J., Pevcin, P . (Eds). Eko- nomika in menedžment v javnem sektorju v razmerah gospodarske kri- ze. Ljubljana: Fakulteta za upravo, 113−124. 52. Pevcin, P. 2015. Slovenia – Country Report on Regionalism. Brussels: AER, Retrieved from: http://www.aer.eu. 53. Pevcin, P. & Setnikar-Cankar, S. (Eds). 2012. Razumen in razumljen javni sektor v Sloveniji [Reasonable and Understood Public Sector in Slovenia]. Ljubljana: Faculty of Administration. 54. Pirnat, R. 2010. Državna uprava v času krize: breme ali motor [State Administration in Times of Crisis: Burden or Motor]. 17 th Days of Slove- ne Administration, 23–25 Sep 2010. Ljubljana: Faculty of Administration. 55. Pirnat, R. (Ed.). 2004. k omentar zakonov s področja uprave [Comments on the Acts Relating to Administration]. Ljubljana: Public Administra- tion Institute, Faculty of Law and Nebra. 56. Pirnat, R. 1993. Reforma uprave v Sloveniji: zakaj, kam, kako [Reform of Administration in Slovenia: w hy, w here and How]. Javna uprava 29 (1/2), 41–54. 57. Plut, D. 2004. Načela, kriteriji in regionalizacija Slovenije z vidika čle- nitve na pokrajine. In: Vlaj, S. (Ed.). Pokrajina druga raven lokalne sa- mouprave. Ljubljana: Faculty of Administration. 58. Pollitt, C., Bouckaert, g. 2011. Public Management Reform. A Compa- rative Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 59. Pollitt, C., Bouckaert, g., Randma-Liiv, T., Drechsler, w . (Eds). 2008/2009. The NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy. Special Issue: A Distinctive European Model? The Neo-weberian State 1 (2). 60. Rusch, w. 2014. Citizens First: Modernisation of the System of Admi- nistrative Procedures in South-Eastern Europe. Croatian and Compara- tive Public Administration, 14 (1), 189–228. 61. Schuppert, g. F. 2000. Verwaltungswissenschaft (Verwaltung, Verwal- tungsrecht, Verwaltungslehre). Baden-Baden: Nomos. 62. Sekarev, A. (Ed.). 2011. Public Administration in EU Eastern Partner Countries: Comparative Report 2011. Estonian Center of Eastern Par- 338 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence tnership (ECEAP), 10, retrieved from: http://www.eap-csf.eu/en/news- events/articles-analytics/comparative-report-on-public-administra- tion-on-eu-eastern-partner-countries/. 63. Sever, T., Rakar, I., kovač, P. 2014. Protecting Human Rights through Fundamental Principles of Administrative Procedures in Eastern Euro- pe. Danube, 5 (4), 249−275, DOI: 10.2478/DANB-2014-0014. 64. SORS. 2013&2016. SI-Stat Data Portal. Statistical Office of the Republic of Slovenia, Retrieved from: http://www.stat.si/. 65. SVLR. 2012. Modeli regionalizacije in decentralizacije Slovenije. Služ- ba Vlade RS za lokalno samoupravo in regionalno politiko. Retrieved from: http://www.arhiv.svlr.gov.si/si/delovna_podrocja/podrocje_lo- kalne_samouprave/pokrajine. 66. Statskontoret. 2005. Principles of g ood Administration in the MS of the EU. 67. Šturm, L. (Ed.). 2011. komentar Ustave RS [Commentary on Slovene Constitution]. Brdo: Faculty of State and European Studies. 68. Šušteršič, J. 2003. Tranzicija kot politično gospodarski cikel (post mor- tem analiza) [Tranzition as a Political Economical Cycle (Post Mortem Analysis)]. Ljubljana: Faculty of Social Sciences. 69. Trpin, g. 1998. Pokrajine in upravna teritorializacija [Regions and Administrative Territory Organization]. Javna uprava, 2, 251–262. 70. Verhoest, k., van Thiel, S., Bouckaert, g., Lægreid, P . (Eds). 2012. g o- vernment Agencies: Practices and Lessons from 30 Countries. Basings- toke: Palgrave Macmillan. 71. Venice Commission. 2011. Stocktaking on the Notion of g ood g over- nance and g ood Administration. Study 470/2008¸ CDL-AD (2001) 009. 72. Vintar, M. Rosenbaum, A., Jenei, g. & Drechsler, w . (Eds). 2013. The Past, Present and the Future of Public Administration in Central and Eastern Europe. Bratislava: NISPAcee Press. 73. Vlaj, S. 2008. Regionalisation of the Republic of Slovenia. Uprava 6 (2), 7–30. 74. w orld Competitiveness Y earbook. 2014. Lausanne: IMD. 339 Refo Rm of the CR oatian Publi C administR ation: b etween Pat Chy euR o Peanization and b umPy m odeRnization 9. Reform of the Croatian Public Administration: Between Patchy Europeanization and Bumpy Modernization Ivan Koprić 9.1. Introduction Croatia is a relatively small country situated between Central and Sout- heast Europe, i.e. in the north-western part of the Balkan Peninsula. It en- compasses the area of 56,594 km 2 in three geographical and climate zones, i.e. Pannonian Plains, Adriatic coastal zone, and mountainous area of Dinaric Alps lying in between the first two. Croatian Adriatic mainland coast is rather long – 1,777,3 km. Croatia‘s territorial waters encompass 18,981 km 2 with 1,246 islands and islets. The neighbouring countries are Italy (sea border), Slovenia, Hungary, Serbia, Montenegro, and Bosnia and Herzegovina. The population has been in decline after the census of 1991 when it peaked at 4,784,265 inhabitants. The next two censuses have shown a drop to 4,437,460 in 2001, and 4,284,889 in 2011. Real urbanization rate is 53.6% (DZS, 2011: 19). Majority of inhabitants are Croats (90.4%), and the largest national minority are Serbs (4.4%). Other minorities are Bosniaks (0.7%), Italians (0.4%), and Roma (0.4%). There is a growing group of inhabitants who perceive themselves as Istrians, i.e. Istrian regionalists (0.6%), although the “Istrian” nation does not exist. The largest religious group is Catholics (86.3%), while Orthodox po- pulation has a share of 4.4%. The average age of population is continuously growing, ranging from 30.7 years in 1951 to 41.7 years in 2011. During socialism, Croatia was one of the federal units of the Socialist Federative Republic of Yugoslavia. Although the regime was socialist, after the 1948 break with the Soviet Union, Tito’s leading group chose so-called third way. Such an orientation had internal and external consequences, ran- ging from self-management and “soft” socialism within the country to the establishment of the Non-Aligned Movement and overall country’s openness in international relations. 43 43 The Non-Aligned Movement was established in Belgrade in 1961. Yugoslavia was one of the 340 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence The first free, multiparty democratic elections were held in the spring of 1990, and the democratic Croatian Parliament was constituted on 30 May 1990. A referendum on independence was held on 19 May 1991, resulting in the declaration of independence on 25 June 1991. Croatia’s independence was recognised by the European Community on 15 January 1992. The Constitution of 1990 instituted a semi-presidential system with directly elected president of the Republic who had a very strong position following the model of the French Fifth Republic. The parliamentary system was introduced by the constitutional amendments of 2000. The Constitution retains directly elected President of the Republic, but his competences are significantly reduced. The Croatian Parliament (Sabor) has been unicameral since the Constitutional Amendments of 2001 which abolished the Cham- ber of Counties. Croatia is a unitary State (Constitution, Art. 1) with three governance levels: national, mezzo (20 counties; županija), and the local levels (428 mu- nicipalities and 128 towns, 17 of which have a special status of large town). The capital of Croatia, the City of Zagreb (790,017 inhabitants), has a spe- cial status, having the competences of both town and county, and a signifi- cant role in performing delegated state administrative tasks on its territory. Croatia is also divided into two statistical regions (Continental Croatia and Adriatic Croatia) for regional development purposes according to the Euro- pean Union NUTS rules. Croatia became a member state of the United Nations in 1992, and the Council of Europe in 1996. It joined NATO in 2009, and became a European Union member state on 1 July 2013. Last decade has been characterised by increasing influence of the EU liberalization, commercialization, and priva- tization policies regarding services of general interest. Croatia was hard hit by the global economic crisis in 2008. The largest gDP rate drop of -7.4 was experienced in 2009, followed by negative values until 2015 (-1.7 in 2010, -0.3 in 2011, -2.2 in 2012, -1.1 in 2013, and -0.4 in 2014). In the period of 2008−2014 gDP dropped by more than 12%, and unemployment rate grew from below 9% to more than 17% with rather high youth unemployment rate. The employment rate fell to 57.3% in 2013. Since leaders of this network. The Movement tried to promote a middle course between the western and Eastern Blocks. 341 Refo Rm of the CR oatian Publi C administR ation: b etween Pat Chy euR o Peanization and b umPy m odeRnization the beginning of the crisis, about 150,000 jobs have been lost. g overnment debt increased during the same period from 38.9% to 85.1% of gDP . At the end of the crisis, in 2014, the share of persons at risk of poverty and social exclusion was extremely high − 29.3%. In the same year, total number of em- ployed persons was 1,342,000. The prolonged recession lasted for six years. The beginning of economic recovery started only at the end of 2014, and is rather slow (EC, 2016; Petak et al., 2015). Croatia is in 50 th place with score of 51 on the 2015 Corruption Percep- tions Index list, improving its 67 th place of 2004, when it was confirmed as an EU candidate country. In 2015, Croatia was ascribed UNDP’s Human Development Index of 0.818, and was placed in the 47 th position on the list. g ross domestic product per capita in 2014 was € 10,162. After presenting the basic data about Croatia, its complex history, and current societal environment are delineated in this chapter. The basic institu- tions of the Croatian public administration are outlined and its post-1990s development is traced. Following the historical institutionalism pattern, four developmental phases are identified: establishment, consolidation, Europe- anization, and modernization phases. Main problems and attempts to solve them are systematised and analysed in the next paragraph as the problems of orientation, organization, motivation, and implementation, along with the relevant reform attempts. The five main reform concepts and processes in Croatia are identified on the basis of a comprehensive analysis of empirical data, various previous project findings, and our own research: a) democratization and decentraliza- tion, b) building transparent and open public administration, c) introducing modern human potential development and management, d) reforming ad- ministrative procedures and strengthening legal protection of citizens, and e) experimenting with public management. Three potential scenarios of future development are conceptually straight modernization, inertia, and – the least probable – chaotic institu- tional decline. The Croatian public administration reform has been con- ducted in a patchy manner, although continuously under the notion of Eu- ropeanization − a major part of dominant concepts is connected with good governance model with some elements of new public management. 342 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 9.2. Croatia as a Country Imbued with History Having a highly complex history does not make Croatia an exception among European countries, but its case is somewhat more specific than expec- ted. After the establishment of an early medieval Croatian state (845−1102), followed by a personal union with the k ingdom of Hungary (1102−1526), it became a part of the Habsburg Monarchy in 1527. Not only was the Cro- atian territory subjected to constant and serious Ottoman attacks, it was also used for the establishment of the so-called Military Border (Militärgrenze) and Military Zone. New settlers coming into this Zone, mostly migrants from Serbia and other areas conquered by Turks, were after some time granted autonomy with regard to the autonomous Croatian bodies (Sabor and Ban). 44 After political and administrative reforms during the second part of 19 th century, Croatia gained certain internal autonomy within Hungarian part of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy. Croatian autonomy was relatively limited, and its political position quite weak. Croatian regions were organized within the Austrian (Istria, Dalmatia, and Military Zone) and Hungarian parts of the Monarchy (Central and North Croatia, and most of Primorje). Croatian regi- ons lodged to Austrian part of the Monarchy did not have any internal autono- my. The majority of Croatian territories in the Hungarian part of the Monar- chy had internal autonomy, while the city of Rijeka and some other territories were ruled directly by the Hungarian authorities. The efforts to integrate the Military Zone with the rest of the country finally ended in 1881. However, Istria and Dalmatia remained within the Austrian part of the Monarchy. The development within a large and complex monarchy that had a well- known professional bureaucracy, cameralism as the dominant administrative doctrine, legalistic orientation in functioning of administration, and weak democratic standards had a deep impact on public administration in Croatia. The beginnings of professional administration date back to the period of po- litical absolutism. The first, unsuccessful attempt to establish a professional administration in Croatia during the reign of Maria Theresa was paralleled by the feudal organization below the level of central government institutions. There were counties with aristocratic self-government, royal boroughs, and rural communes. 44 One of the first important legal documents in that regard was Statuta V alachorum of 1630 issued by the Holy Roman Emperor Ferdinand II. 343 Refo Rm of the CR oatian Publi C administR ation: b etween Pat Chy euR o Peanization and b umPy m odeRnization A new attempt to create professional administration in Croatia was not made until one hundred years later, after the abolition of feudalism and the Revolution of 1848 that led to the reforms of Franz Joseph I. Counties and communes lost their feudal aristocratic autonomy during the wave of abso- lutism led by the Austrian Minister of the Interior, Bach. A vertical line of administration was created: Croatian vice royal (Ban) government – coun- ties – districts. The real commencement of professional state administration and modern local self-government in Croatia is connected to the reforms of Vice Roy (Ban) Ivan Mažuranić following the Austro-Hungarian Compro- mise of 1867 and Croatian-Hungarian Compromise of 1868. After w orld w ar I, Croatia became a part of the k ingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenians. Some parts of the Croatian territory (Međimurje and some others) were returned to and merged with the newly established state. Dominant Serbian political forces managed to turn the country into a uni- tary centralistic monarchy. After the royal dictatorship of k ing Aleksandar had been established in 1929, the country was renamed the k ingdom of Yu- goslavia. Yugoslavia was divided into nine large administrative provinces – banovina(s). Croatian territory was divided between two of those provinces. In 1939, Croatian and Serbian politicians agreed upon the establishment of Banovina Hrvatska, a political, administrative, and territorial unit within the kingdom of Yugoslavia that was projected to have a relatively high auto- nomy in relation to the central government in Belgrade. However, it never came into function. 45 During w orld w ar II, there was a collaborationist regime called the In- dependent State of Croatia (NDH) led by Ante Pavelić. The main collabo- rationist force was the Ustashe. However, as early as in 1943 the anti-fascist Y ugoslav Partisan movement on the liberated Croatian territory (ZAVNOH) established a new Croatian government. Both authorities, those of the pu- ppet NDH and ZAVNOH, continued to function until the end of the w ar. Affiliation to either Ustashe or Partisans incepted one of the main social and political cleavages in Croatia. The new Yugoslavia created after the world war II was a federation consisting of six republics. It managed to regain authority over the Croatian territories in the coastal zone, such as Istria, kvarner, and Zadar. Croatia 45 The territory of Banovina Hrvatska included Croatia and large parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina. 344 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence was given the status of a federal republic and kept it until Yugoslavia’s dis- solution. The provisions of the 1974 Constitution significantly strengthened that status. Along with the federative organization, the “new” Yugoslavia was characterised by a single-party system and an attempt at building socialism, which placed it among the socialist countries of Eastern Europe where the state was in charge of planning the economy, and the whole system was cen- tralised and politically monopolised by the single party − the Communist Party. w hat distinguished Yugoslavia from other socialist countries was an attempt to realise the concept of self-management. The state experimented with the idea of self-management in both economic affairs and territorial organization of the country. w orkers’ self-management was referred to as a kind of extremely developed type of industrial democracy. It was based on the concept of social ownership, which was considered to be “everybody’s and nobody’s” . The idea that those who worked simultaneously had a share in decision-making, i.e. that the workers managed their factories by them- selves, displayed certain motivational effects. Although the economic system was based on planning, market rules gradually gained more space. Those re- asons made economic development possible, even quite intensive and quick during some periods (Horvat, 1984). As far as territorial organization of the country was concerned, the idea of self-management was incorporated in the concept of commune. The no- tion of commune as a basic territorial unit was formed on Marx’s glorifi- cation of the 1871 Paris Commune as a prototype of ideal socialist political community (Šmidovnik, 1995: 153). The governance system in Croatia, si- milar to the situation in other Yugoslav federal units, was locally oriented with strong, autarchic communes that provided a wide circle of public ser- vices on their territory. At the end of the 1980s, the political system in Croatia was not as rigid as in other Eastern European socialist countries. Its economy moved towards the world business processes, trying to experiment with market principles, and was familiar with strong elements of industrial democracy. However, the privatization that followed during the 1990s was unnecessarily harsh and non-transparent, and did not respect any peculiarity of the social ownership and self-management system. 345 Refo Rm of the CR oatian Publi C administR ation: b etween Pat Chy euR o Peanization and b umPy m odeRnization The constitutional position of Croatia and other federative republics in Yugoslavia was quite strong. The first multi-party elections of 1990 and the transfer of power to the winners passed peacefully. The new Constitution of the Republic of Croatia adopted at the end of the 1990s enabled transition to market economy and multi-party democracy, and granted a wide range of human and civil rights. Referendum on the independence of Croatia was held in May 1991. Those elements constituted a firm basis for the Croatian Parliament’s decision on independence and secession from other parts of Yugoslavia adopted on 25 June 1991. International community recognized Croatia at the beginning of 1992. Transition to the new economic and political system happened under the complicated circumstances of intra-Yugoslav conflict between the re- publics that were in favour of democratization led by Slovenia and Croatia, while Serbia was striving for domination over all Y ugoslav federal republics. The war began in the summer of 1991, provoked by the aggression of the Yugoslav People’s Army and rebellion of the Serbian minority in the regions where the Serbs either were a majority of population or had a significant share in it. The war exhausted the country economically and politically, har - ming the political democratization in the process. The dominant governance concept during the 1990s was based on the paternalistic notion of the decisive role of a charismatic political leader. That notion was supplemented with the attitude that the majority had a full legitimacy and the right to make decisions by outvoting, regardless of the opinion of any minorities (national, political, social) and with the insistence on the principle of state sovereignty in its obsolete form. On the other hand, citizens’ patriotism was strongly stressed. The dominant type of culture was one of the unfavorable conditions that hindered further development of the new democratic institutions. Political, administrative, and general social culture was based on the authoritarian values (Pusić, 1992: XIV-XV; k asa- pović, 1996: 153−178). The 1990s were the years of strong etatization and centralization, whi- le privatization was connected with general transformation of the former social ownership into either private or state ownership. In the public sec- tor, privatization was delimited to certain services, like primary healthcare, telecommunications, or waste management, that followed the new public 346 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence management and EU privatization experiences. However, many services were retained in the public sector but under a strong control of central state bodies. Local government and its role in the service provision were signi- ficantly weakened. There existed vivid remnants of public esprit de corps . The main circumstances that outline societal environment for the de- velopment of the Croatian public administration are the following: − Croatia acquired independence after hundreds of years at the very beginning of the 1990s, which asked for and offered opportunity for building the whole public administration system in a modern way, − Development has not started anew, since public administration in Croatia during socialism had significant constitutional, legal, orga- nizational, and functional autonomy from federal (Yugoslav) bodies similar to other Yugoslav republics, − Certain important parts of state administration had to be developed from scratch, such as diplomacy, custom service, army, intelligence service, certain components of internal affairs, and police service, etc., − Self-management political and social experiment in the “second” socialist Yugoslavia (1945−1990) raised consciousness about public value, social welfare, and public participation in political decision- making, especially during the 1970s and 1980s, − Serb rebellion and war with the former Yugoslav Army and Serbian paramilitary forces postponed genuine democratization, and cau- sed significant economic and demographic loses in the period of 1991−1995, − There has been a strong need to strengthen the private sector in the course of transition from so-called social ownership economy to market economy, − Privatization of the former social ownership provided impetus for the introduction of the new public management doctrine in the pu- blic sector, − Europeanization of public administration, meaning harmonization with the acquis communautaire, court, and soft EU law, and entrance into the European Administrative Space, have strongly emphasised the issue of good governance. 347 Refo Rm of the CR oatian Publi C administR ation: b etween Pat Chy euR o Peanization and b umPy m odeRnization 9.3. Croatian Public Administration 9.3.1. Outline The Croatian public administration consists of state administration, local and regional self-government, and public services (services of general interest). These three fields are regulated separately. Moreover, public services are regu- lated in a fragmented manner by many sectoral laws. Apart from constitutional provisions, core public administration is regulated by two systemic laws, the Act on State Administration System (1993; 2011) and the Act on Local and Re- gional Self-g overnment (2001; previously Act on Local Self-g overnment and Administration of 1992). The civil service system has been regulated by three main laws, State Servants Act (2005; previously the Act on State Servants and Employees of 1994 and 2001), Act on Servants and Employees in Local and Re- gional Self-g overnment (2008), and Act on Salaries in Public Services (2001). 46 There are two levels and four types of state administrative bodies. At the central level, there are ministries, state administrative organizations, and state offices of the g overnment. There is also the g overnment’s Office mainly functioning as the g overnment’s secretariat with a rather weak position and narrow competences. The difference between the ministries and state admin- istrative organizations is in political importance and political influence as the ministers are members of the g overnment, and heads (ravnatelj) of state ad- ministrative organizations are not. These two types of bodies are in a way suc- cessors of former republic secretariats (transformed to ministries) and com- mittees (transformed to state administrative organizations) from the social- ist period. The state offices are in the closest relation with the g overnment, serving as a tool for improving g overnment’s efficiency. The smallest total number of central state bodies was 23 in 2003, while the largest number oscil- lates between 30 and 35. Currently, there are 31 central state administrative bodies, 20 ministries, 4 state offices, and 7 state administrative organizations. A clear distinction between different types of organizations at the central level does not exist either in systemic legal regulation or in practice. All three types of organizations – ministries, state offices, and state administrative organiza- tions – have similar types of competences, including public policies, drafting 46 It only regulates the pay system in public services financed by the State Budget. 348 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence legislation, administrative supervision, etc. In practice, the decision about the number of types, number of organizations and their classification with regard to the types is mainly a political one. There is a legal base for and widespread practice of establishing adminis- trative organizations within the ministries and state offices. One type of such “organizations within organizations” has even been established and regulated by special laws, such as the Tax Administration Act, Police Act, Financial Po- lice Act, etc. Another type has been established by the g overnment’s decrees on internal organization of the ministries and state offices. Regular types of administrative organizations within the ministries are administrations, com- mittees, and directorates, while sectors can be established within state offices. These “organizations within organizations” function in practice as pure internal organizational units within administrative bodies, except those that have been established by special laws – they are much larger, have greater importance, and a higher level of autonomy. w hen theoretical criteria apply (Verhoest, 2012), some 20 type-1 agencies (without legal personality as the administra- tive organizations with certain degree of managerial autonomy) can be identi- fied within the Croatian state administrative system (g overnment’s Offices and professional services, administrative organizations within state administrative bodies, state offices, and state administrative organizations). There are many other bodies at the central level, such as executive and expert agencies, independent regulatory bodies, other public bodies, and legal entities with public competences. All of them may be subsumed under the no- tion of public agencies. 47 Some of the agencies have this notion in their official name (“agency for …”), while others are called institutes, funds, offices, cen- tres, bureaus, etc. The process of agencification was at its peak in 2009 when 87 public agencies were identified. In the 2010−2012 period, 19 agencies and similar bodies were abolished but 7 new were established (Musa & k oprić, 2011; Musa, 2014). 48 47 Current scientific research throughout Europe tends to use common classification of administrative orga- nizations within national public administrations that has been developed in the course of a large scientific project by Sandra V an Thiel (see in V erhoest et al., 2012). 48 The Ministry of Public Administration collected information about 173 (2012) and 176 (2015) public agencies and other more autonomous bodies (MABs; comp. Pollitt, 2004; Musa, 2014) on survey basis, trying to institute the de-agencification process. However, the results of rationali- zation process are rather modest. 349 Refo Rm of the CR oatian Publi C administR ation: b etween Pat Chy euR o Peanization and b umPy m odeRnization On the first level, there are 20 deconcentrated offices of state adminis- tration, one on the territory of each county, competent for the first instance administrative procedures and other administrative tasks. w hile these first instance offices have 91 branch offices and 302 register offices, central admin- istrative bodies have 1,279 branch offices all over the state territory (Strategija, 2015: 44). 49 The practice of delegation of state administrative tasks to local gov- ernments, although legally possible, is almost non-existent. The only local gov- ernment granted with delegated state administrative tasks is the City of Zagreb, in which some ¼ of the city servants perform such tasks for the central state. The system of local and regional self-government consists of 428 munici- palities, 127 towns (17 of them with over 35,000 inhabitants have a special sta- tus of large towns), 20 counties, and the City of Zagreb (which has a twofold status of local and regional government). Municipalities in predominantly rural areas and towns in predominantly urban areas perform local affairs. Slightly less than 30% of population lives in rather small municipalities (2,964 inhabit- ants in average). A bit more than 70% of population lives in towns (17,529 in- habitants in average). There are 70.9% of local governments with less than 5,000 inhabitants (18 towns and 376 municipalities). The second tier governments are counties (174,744 inhabitants in average, if Zagreb is excluded). Counties are autonomous second tier governments, strictly separated from the offices of state administration in terms of organization, finances, and personnel. Croatian local government system has been characterized by the fragmentation process, whose course may be observed from the data presented in Table 9.1. Table 9.1: Fragmentation Process in Croatia 1991−2016 Ty p e Ye ar Communes Municipalities Tow ns Counties Total Index 1991 101 - - - 101 - 1993 - 418 68 20+1 507 502 1998 - 420 122 20+1 563 111 2003 - 423 122 20+1 566 101 2006 - 429 126 20+1 576 102 2016 - 428 127 20+1 576 100 Source: Author. 49 About 65% of state servants and employees work in branch offices, while only about 35% work in central units of ministries and other state administrative bodies. Less than 4.5% of state servants and employees, i.e. 2,642 of them work in the first instance offices of state administration. 350 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence The majority of public services are centrally financed. These are education, health service, social security, culture, science, and the like. Some of the public services are locally financed, like, for example, pre-school education and kin- dergartens, libraries and museums, utility services, etc. In the whole public sector, there are four categories of civil servants and other professionals whose status is regulated separately by a special legislation. There are approx. 59,500 civil servants and employees in the state administra- tion, not counting the military and intelligence service personnel and police of- ficers. In all local governments and counties, there are approx. 14,500 executive functionaries with professional status, civil servants, and employees. Centrally financed public services are employing about 180,000 people (including those in the agencies and other bodies), and locally financed public services addi- tional 26,500. The fifth category in the public sector comprises the employees of public companies whose status is regulated by the Labour Act, e.g. in utility services, state oil company, state postal service, state electric power industry, and the like. Total number of public personnel is shown in Table 9.2. Table 9.2: Number of Personnel in the Croatian Public Administration, 2016 Employed personnel in various parts of public administration Number of employed persons State administration 59,500 Public agencies at the national level 5,000 50 Local governments 14,500 Centrally financed public services 180,000 Locally financed public services 26,500 Total 285,500 Source: Author. 9.3.2. Development The development of Croatian public administration can be systematized in four phases (described below). The first, establishment phase started with independence gained in 1990 and finished with administrative reforms in 1993, when the second (consolidation) phase began. The third phase started in 2001 and was initiated with a new package of reform measures motiva- ted mainly by political decision to enter the process of Europeanization. The 50 An assessment. 351 Refo Rm of the CR oatian Publi C administR ation: b etween Pat Chy euR o Peanization and b umPy m odeRnization adoption of the first Strategy of State Administration Reform in 2008 denoted instigation of the new, fourth phase − the phase of modernization of Croatian state administration. • Establishment Phase The Constitution of 1990 introduced a semi-presidential system based on the French model. The g overnment was appointed by directly elected pre- sident of the Republic, and was accountable to him and to the Parliament. Before the first significant reform of the territorial administrative system, which took place in 1993, the development of Croatian state administration had been characterized by a number of frequent changes, and poorly con- ceived and executed reorganizations. The frequency of such reorganizations was caused by the necessity of creating new administrative organizations in a new State (foreign affairs, defence, customs service, etc.), and by political contingencies in governance system which was not fully stabilized. At the end of the socialist period, local units in Croatia were large monotypic communes with 42,339 inhabitants in average, having a substantial decision-making au- tonomy, a very wide scope of affairs, and high financial share in public reve- nues and expenditures (more than 40%). At the beginning of the 1990s, such strong communes either became the central government’s obedient servants, or established themselves as the focal points of a strong opposition, even re- sistance to the central government (almost all communes with Serbian ma- jority). The Serb rebellion and war started in 1991. Rigorous screening took place in the civil service based on political, national, and similar criteria, and subsequent hidden lustration changed the picture in the whole public sector. 51 • Consolidation Phase From 1993 to 2001, public administration in Croatia faced etatization, centralization, and politicization of an authoritarian type. An ever-increasing number of civil servants, insufficient level of professionalism, and politici- zation of civil service additionally encumbered the situation. Democratic po- litical values were repressed, public policies weak, and the rule of law was endangered. The lack of coordination in the administrative system was com- pensated for by arbitrary, ad hoc political interventions. g overnance system was closed and bureaucratised, imbued with the climate of secrecy. 51 Approx. 20% of state civil servants were replaced with newcomers as well as about 10% of people in public services (k oprić & Marčetić, 2000). 352 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence The first systemic law that regulated state administration was the Law on the System of State Administration of 1993. It determined the ministries, state administrative organizations, and county administrative departments as the state administrative bodies. A large proportion of public services provided in the communes as the powerful local governments until the end of 1992 were taken over by the central state bodies. It was a massive etatization, i.e. a process in which the central state appropriated public services from the for- mer local self-government units, followed by a tremendous redistribution of public revenues, responsibility, significance, and power. The reform at the local level was carried out in 1993 through the Law on Local Self-g overnment and Administration, and certain other laws. The old French centralistic model of state organization with a strong position of cen- tral executive was literary transplanted to Croatia in its most important cha- racteristics. The key role in the new system was given to the county level as a supervisory, and decreeing middle level between the central government and local units. The most powerful official was county governor, who was central state representative in the territory of the respective county approved by the president of the Republic on the proposal of the g overnment (for details see k oprić, 2010a: 110−111). 52 The State Civil Servants and Employees Act of 1994 regulated their status for the first time after the Croatian independence. The Act on the Salaries of 52 In comparison with other states on the territory of the former Yugoslavia, Croatia went through the most intense fragmentation process, increasing the number of local governments five times (from 102 to 556; 392% increase) and introducing counties as the second tier governments. In the group of former Yugoslav countries that went through the fragmentation process in the period 1990−2016 are also Slovenia and FYR Macedonia. Slovenia increased the number of local governments 2.5 times (from 62 to 212; 241.9% of increase), and Macedonia for 1.5 times (from 34 to 84; 147.1%; Macedonia had 123 local governments in the period of 1996−2003 but then reduced their number to 84). In the group of countries with moderate increase of the number of local governments are k osovo with 40.7% and Bosnia and Herzegovina with 30.3% increase. Montenegro with increase of 15% and Serbia with increase of 6.1% have experienced only a mild fragmentation. The largest average size of local governments is at kosovo (about 58,900 inhabitants) and in Serbia (about 55,800 inhabitants). Local governments in Macedo- nia and Montenegro have about 27,000 inhabitants, and those in Bosnia and Herzegovina have about 26,400 inhabitants in average. The smallest average size of local governments is in Slovenia (about 9,700 inhabitants) and in Croatia (about 7,700 inhabitants) (calculated on the basis of data in Osmanković, 2015). Only Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina have established second tier governments. In Bosnia and Herzegovina they are called cantons (10 of them), and only in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina they were estalished as one of the three federal units. 353 Refo Rm of the CR oatian Publi C administR ation: b etween Pat Chy euR o Peanization and b umPy m odeRnization Civil Servants and Employees in Public Services was passed simultaneously. Before that, the provisions of the Administration Act of 1978, which regu- lated civil servants’ status, applied on the Croatian state and local servants “accordingly” . Local civil servants remained in the same position during the period 1994−2001, since the laws of 1994 did not regulate their status. The number of employees in certain public services (research and development, culture, sport, art and media, health care, welfare and education) decreased at the beginning of the 1990s, while defence, police, finances and foreign affairs recorded a considerable increase of their personnel. 53 • Europeanization Phase The Amendments to the Constitution of 2000 were adopted following the first political change after 1990. They were prepared by the new, coalition, left-centre g overnment of Ivica Račan, and marked the beginning of the de- mocratization and decentralization processes. The previous semi-presidential system was substituted with the parliamentary one. Harmonization with the European Charter of Local Self-g overnment began three years after its ra- tification in 1997. The Constitution guaranteed transfer of many significant public affairs to local governments and counties. The lines of subordination of local governments to the central bodies were cut off by redefining the institu- tion of the county governor, and limiting or specifying the powers of the state administrative bodies over local self-government. County governor became local official elected by the county assembly. The first instance county administrative departments (175 of them) were merged, and reorganized to only one state administrative office per county. The number of state servants was reduced, particularly in defence, internal affairs, and in the first instance state administrative offices. The status of state civil servants was regulated by the State Civil Servants and Employees Act of 2001. The main intention of that Act was to replace the former career system with the classification according to job complexity − at least formally. Croatia was a latecomer to the Europeanization process, which started 53 There were 72,421 people in the army and police in 1998, counting for 7.20 % of the employed working force in the country. The whole public administration employed 243,983 people in the same year, while only 45,659 civil servants and employees were employed in the state (civil) administration. The employed working force in the country amounted to about 1,005,500 peo- ple. The most tragic situation was in research and development, where the number of employees in the period 1990−1996 decreased to 47.1 per cent (k oprić & Marčetić, 2000). 354 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence only in the third phase. By that time, the majority of former socialist countries had already advanced deep into that process. The first significant formal step in Europeanization was signing of the Stabilization and Association Agree- ment in 2001. Croatia was granted the candidate country status in June 2004, a month after the accession of 10 transition countries. The negotiation pro- cess was completed in summer 2011, after six years. The accession contract was signed at the end of 2011, and Croatia became the 28 th member state on 1 July 2013. The referendum on the EU accession was held in January 2012. There were 66.3% of citizens in favour of accession, but turnout was relatively low, only 43.5% of the electorate. One of the numerous tasks during the accession process was harmoni- zation of domestic legal system with the EU acquis communautaire. The who- le governance system dealt with this huge task. As many as 523 laws (out of 2,005, or 26.1%) were harmonized in the 2000−2011 period. Urgent legislati- ve procedure with only one reading was applied in about 80% of all “har- monized” laws, which was criticised by the OECD-Sigma and professional community (Vidačak & Škrabalo, 2014). A complex new institutional arrangement was established for accession negotiations. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration, Sta- te Delegation for Accession Negotiations, g overnment’s Coordination for Accession Negotiations, Accession Negotiation T eam and its Secretariat, wor- king groups for all negotiation chapters (35 chapters; over 1,800 experts, one third of whom were not from public administration), Chief Negotiator and his Office, and National Committee for Monitoring Accession Negotiations participated in this new network. Croatia’s progress in acquiring the European administrative standards, and building administrative capacities for effective implementation of the EU acquis communautaire was extensively assessed by the OECD-Sigma and the European Commission (koprić, 2014: 2−14). They both clearly stated serious reform problems and inadequacies in six regularly evaluated areas: democracy and the rule of law, civil service and administrative law, integri- ty, public expenditures management and control, public procurement, policy making and coordination. Croatia was a carefully monitored country during the accession decade. The OECD-Sigma alone submitted and published more than 40 reports on the progress in various administrative fields. 355 Refo Rm of the CR oatian Publi C administR ation: b etween Pat Chy euR o Peanization and b umPy m odeRnization The EU technical assistance, financial support, monitoring, and repor - ting significantly supported many and considerable improvements of the Croatian public administration. The EU invested about € 1.6 billion in admi- nistrative reform projects in Croatia (k oprić et al., 2012: 267−271). During the same period, additional projects were financed by other international or- ganizations, such as the w orld Bank or UNDP as well as by other countries through their international development organizations and funds (Denmark, the USA, the Netherlands, Sweden, the Uk, etc.). • Modernization Phase A sort of administrative modernization started parallel with Europea- nization. Modernization is, according to Pollitt and Bouckaert (2003), one of the administrative reform strategies, different from maintenance, marke- tization, and minimization. It intends “to make more fundamental changes in structures and processes, for example, by changing the budget process to an output rather than an input orientation; create new types of public sec- tor organization, such as autonomous agencies; or change the employment contract for civil servants” (Pollitt & Bouckaert, 2003: 23). Although signs of modernization efforts may be found even earlier, a de- cisive moment happened in March 2008 when the g overnment adopted the Strategy of State Administration Reform for the Period of 2008−2011. Among particularly desirable and, in the long run, potentially most productive mea- sures are those concerning administrative education and in-service training. 54 The indicators of implementation progress were broad and insufficiently pre- cise, which makes the monitoring and evaluation of its implementation diffi- cult. A body in charge of evaluation of Strategy implementation (the National Council for Evaluation of State Administration Modernization) was establis- hed in autumn 2008, and dissolved in summer 2009 without any significant output. Many reform measures have been defined only on the normative basis, i.e. amendments to the existing regulations, and enacting new regulations were promised but the principles on which these regulations were to be based had not been established. 55 There was neither financial plan nor funds for the im- 54 Many authors have stressed the importance of in-service training for the necessary change of administrative culture and public administration reform (see, for example, Rocha & de Araújo, 2007: 588). 55 That enabled as many as about 40% of measures to be achieved in some 15 months, according to the official data of the then Central State Office for Administration. Official assessment of the 356 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence plementation of the Strategy. There was an attempt to amend the Strategy in 2010 but it ended without results. At the end of the period, there was no further effort to adopt a new Strategy. Although the Strategy had only moderate influ- ence (for detailed review see k oprić, 2008a), it marked general modernization policy of the right-centre government of Ivo Sanader and Jadranka k osor. The new left-centre government of Zoran Milanović, elected in 2011, was rather reluctant to prepare a new strategy of public administration re- form. However, after long preparation, in June 2015 Croatian Parliament adopted the new Strategy of Public Administration Development for the period of 2015−2020, mainly because of the EU pressure. However, some participation of interested civil society organizations and representatives of academia in preparation of the Strategy was provided. The new strategy co- vers not only state administration, as the previous one, but also public agency model at the central level, and the local self-government system. Public servi- ces are still not included. It contains 17 goals with regard to better provision of administrative services, development of human potentials, and improved system of public administration. As many as 42 serious reform measures have been programmed for their implementation. 6 additional measures have been programmed, and a special institutional arrangement was invented for the Strategy implementation. The first Action Plan for the Strategy Implementa- tion in the Period 2015−2017 was adopted by the g overnment in September 2015. The end of mandate prevented the g overnment from starting a real implementation process, and even an institutional arrangement for imple- mentation was not established. After the parliamentary elections in November 2015, the g overnment of Tihomir Orešković was elected in the Parliament in January 2016. Instead of Strategy implementation and regardless of the 2015 Action Plan, the new g o- vernment adopted the Decision on Implementation of Reform Measures for Improving System of Public Administration in February 2016. This Decision Ministry of Public Administration included in the text of the new 2015−2020 Strategy stressed that about 89% of all reform measures were implemented, partly implemented, or in the course of implementation at the moment of the new Strategy adoption (Strategija, 2015: 4). Criticism on the formal normative approach and excuses can be found not only in academic papers but also in the Ombudsman’s Annual Report of 2009 (Pravobranitelj, 2009: 107): “It seems that there is expectation according to which new legislation might in itself prevail over all weaknesses in the system that cause the problems. ” 357 Refo Rm of the CR oatian Publi C administR ation: b etween Pat Chy euR o Peanization and b umPy m odeRnization reduced the number of reform goals to three: a) efficient and citizen-orien- ted public administration, b) development of human potentials for efficient public administration, and c) quality of ICT-supported administrative servi- ces. Three different commissions were established for coordination of reform activities: a) commission for modernization of public administration system, b) commission for development of human potentials in public administra- tion, and c) commission for improving ICT support to public administration. Because of the internal governing political coalition’s reasons, the Ministry of Public Administration with the minister from a minor coalition partner, lost the leading position in the reform process. The Ministry preserved its influence only in regard to overall administrative modernization. However, a few months later the Parliament passed a vote of no confidence in the govern- ment, and new elections were scheduled for September 2016, thus aborting the g overnment’s public administration reform efforts. 9.3.3. Main Problems and Attempts to Solve Them Croatian public administration has been burdened by numerous com- plex problems requiring solutions that meet high standards, firm and com- mitted pro-reform leadership, and professional monitoring and evaluation of reform implementation. The main problems may be systematized into four groups which tackle orientation, organization, motivation, and implemen- tation. Many other administrative problems can be added, witnessing that this simple classification may be used only as an initial analytical tool for the analysis of current situation. • Orientation Problems A traditional opinion inherited from the earlier non-democratic systems that politics and politicians exclusively look after public affairs and take care of public interest has led to great deficiencies in the capacity of public adminis- tration to formulate a long-term public interest. This interest goes far beyond a single political mandate and needs to be defined on the basis of a well-esta- blished and informed strategic planning (extensively in Brusis et al., 2007). The data on which the strategic plans are based must be reliable, and the plans themselves professionally prepared. The strategies must have in-built mecha- nisms of monitoring, control, and adjustment to changing conditions. Results have to be evaluated in a systemic manner. w hat seems discouraging in Cro- 358 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence atia can be called the paradox of “glass-strategies”: having much more than a hundred formally accepted strategies in various fields and with regard to various issues and problems, the country is still lacking strategic plans of solid quality despite certain improvements. Strategic goals are not clearly establis- hed, financial resources are not decided, performance indicators are vaguely defined, monitoring and control are either lacking or are defined in a forma- listic manner, etc. Moreover, even when strategies are well designed, there is a significant lack of political will to support implementation of adopted strate- gies. 56 The first significant step in improving the capacity of strategic planning was made in July 2000 when the g overnment’s Office for Strategy of Develo- pment of the Republic of Croatia was established. 57 Its main task in the period 2000−2003 was to serve as the organizational support for the project “Croatia in the 21 st Century”. The project gathered some 600 experts and resulted in the preparation of 19 strategic documents, out of which 9 were adopted by the Parliament (Boko et al., 2004). Further efforts regarding strategic planning were connected mainly with the EU accession. Based on the experience of the two functional review projects, which stated almost complete lack of strate- gic goals and poor practice of strategic planning (k oprić, 2006; Tišma et al., 2012: 56), the Budget Act of 2008 obliged the ministries and other central state bodies included in the state budget to prepare three-year strategic plans. The practice of preparing such plans started in 2009, for the period 2010−2012, un- der the guidance of the Ministry of Finance. Obligation of counties to prepare their development strategies was established by the Regional Development Act of 2009, and has existed from 2010 onwards. Closely linked to the problem of deficient strategic planning is the weak capacity of public administration to design high quality, long-term public policies. Public policies have been excessively influenced by day-to-day po- 56 Two strategies of public (or state) administration reform were adopted (2008, 2015) but a strategy of decentralization has not been prepared yet, although decentralization has been a topical issue since the end of the 1990s (for a plea for such strategy see Perko-Šeparović, 2010; comp. k oprić, 2008). In spite of the importance of services of general interest for the community, economy, and quality of life, there is neither a general policy document nor any general regulation on the basic issues of public services. There are only sectoral strategic documents which are not coordinated at all. 57 It continued to function until 2011 as the Central State Office for Development Strategy (2003−2006) and the Central State Office for Development Strategy and the EU Funds (2006−2011). In 2011, it was merged with the Ministry of Regional Development and the EU Funds. In such a way, it mainly lost its role as the g overnment’s tool for coordinating strategic planning. 359 Refo Rm of the CR oatian Publi C administR ation: b etween Pat Chy euR o Peanization and b umPy m odeRnization litical constellations 58 without sufficient participation of civil servants, citi- zens, civil society organizations, academia, experts, and other stakeholders. Political partisans’ “innovations” are dominant, while evidence-based poli- cies and learning from the past policies are highly neglected (comp. Petak, 2008: 449−451). Evaluation studies are missing. 59 In order to improve the si- tuation, the g overnment adopted the Code of Practice on Consultation with the Interested Public in Procedures of Adopting Laws, Other Regulations and Policies in November 2009. The 2011 Regulatory Impact Assessments Act introduced obligatory public consultations for new regulations. Central Internet portal for public consolations has been functioning since spring of 2015. Only 48 laws and regulations ( 1 / 3 ) underwent public consultations in the first year of application (2011), and 173 comments were received. In 2012, the number of regulations which were open for public consultation increased to 144 (4,786 comments received). The number increased further to 374 in 2013 (12,738 comments), 544 in 2014 (18,767 comments), and 608 in 2015 (15,411 comments). Other forms of stakeholders’ influence and participa- tion are working groups for the preparation of documents and regulations, consultative meetings, public discussions, etc. The g overnment’s Office for Associations collects data about these forms, and also prepares structured annual reports. Some of the local governments have started to use public con- sultation in the preparation of local by-laws. w hat is still missing is improved possibility for citizens and other interested subjects to influence identification of public problems and agenda setting. Furthermore, what Petak, Bartlett and Bönker (2015) stated about participation of academic experts is valid gene- rally: the citizen participation “is largely limited to the early phases of policy formulation, and does not extend to the final drafting of legislation, let alone the monitoring of implementation” (Petak et al., 2015: 20). Public policies often reflect on legal regulation. In the beginning of the transition process, the preparation of regulations and law drafting had been 58 Although since 2012 all government bodies prepare annual regulatory plans, there is a cons- tantly decreasing rate of realization, from 37.6% in 2013 to only 10.7% in 2015, indicating the g overnment’s fast changing political priorities (gLO, 2016). 59 For example, no systematic official or scientific evaluation of the 2001 Decentralization Reform has been carried out in the last 15 years, although it was one of the biggest intended public go- vernance reforms in Croatia. Lack of evaluative approach has been explicitly recognized in the 2015−2020 Public Administration Development Strategy (Strategija, 2015: 5). 360 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence seen as pure mechanic registration of ideas of politicians or members of di- verse interest groups. Although the role of legal professionals has improved, such practice continues until today. Law drafting is a complex task since each new regulation must be adequately placed within the constitutional and legal system, harmonized with the European acquis and other standards, written according to the principles and canons of legal technique, armed with effici- ent ways of application, etc. Their future impacts ought to be analysed (RIA − regulatory impact assessment). Unnecessary and obsolete laws and regu- lations must be eliminated, which requires a continuous attention of those who prepare new regulations (deregulation). In Croatia, the quality of law drafting is still not an issue which would attract attention outside the legal profession. After a scientific conference devoted to the state of legal system, the Academy of Legal Sciences in its Statement of 11 June 2014 warned about many deficiencies, problems, and “crisis of the Croatian legal system” after a decade of harmonization with the European standards. The Academy prepa- red and offered a project of improving the legal system and regulatory proce- dures to the Croatian Parliament but it has never been approved. Although the pursuit of better regulation is a part of general pro-reform public sector endeavours (comp. Musa, 2011), moderate success has been achieved only with regard to regulatory impact assessment. An attempt to promote deregu- lation can be noted but its results are rather limited. An ambitious project of regulatory guillotine (Hitrorez) started in 2006 with a significant support of international donors. The project was performed by the g overnment’s Spe- cial Unit for Simplification in cooperation with international experts. It las- ted ten months after which the Unit made their recommendations. Several thousands of regulations were considered, but at the end only 706 of them were recommended to be abolished and 865 to be simplified, mostly those of minor importance. The g overnment formally accepted 1,571 recommen- dations, and established the Office for Regulatory Impact Assessment. After two years only, 366 recommendations were implemented (23.3%) and the new Office was abolished (Musa, 2011; Petek, 2009). The RIA Act adopted in 2011 designated this task to the g overnment Legislation Office. In addition to RIA, which has to encompass the assessment of impacts on the econo- my, socially sensitive and other groups with special interests and needs, and on the environment and sustainable development, the g overnment imposed 361 Refo Rm of the CR oatian Publi C administR ation: b etween Pat Chy euR o Peanization and b umPy m odeRnization the obligation of assessing fiscal impacts of the new laws and regulations in 2011. In 2012, the g overnment adopted the Strategy of RIA and the Decree on RIA. Although the Legislative Plan requested that 61 laws out of 344 that underwent the legislative procedure in 2013 (17.7%) be accompanied by the RIA, the RIA was prepared for only 22 of them (6.4%), i.e. 33.4% of the laws planned for RIA procedure. 60 • Organization Problems Despite several reform attempts, state administration is still burdened with many structural and organizational problems. The criteria for esta- blishment of ministries, other types of central state bodies and public agen- cies at the national level are non-existent. The State Administration Act is in both versions (1993; 2011) based on the traditional model of state adminis- tration with big ministries whose number depends on ever-changing political will and the needs of coalition parties, some other bodies and agencies whose position is neither clearly defined nor is a result of a sound policy. Functional review, as a prerequisite for a more rational organization, was conducted in approx. a half of the state administration system (without agency model) in the mid-2000s but its results have never been formally adopted or implemen- ted. Only a minor number of recommendations have inspired certain reform efforts but some of them have not been implemented successfully. One of them is the recommendation to widen the competences, strengthen the capa- city, and reorganize the first instance offices of state administration in order to transform them and their branch offices (91 of them) into one-stop shops well prepared for reliable, fast, and integral provision of administrative ser- vices to citizens. There was an attempt in that regard in 2014 which was po- litically blocked by a small coalition partner (IDS) at the beginning of 2015. Simultaneously, the number of deconcentrated branch offices of various mi- nistries, other administrative bodies, and public agencies exploded, causing harmful and irreparable consequences for coordination in implementation of public policies and state regulations, administrative control, and accountabi- 60 In his report, submitted on behalf of OECD-Sigma, based on 10 regulatory impact assessments analyses, Donelan (2014) stated the following: “None explained the problem to be addressed su- ccinctly and none undertook a very satisfactory analysis of the costs or benefits of the different approaches. However, all of the RIAs undertaken followed the procedures laid down by the law. All made an effort to consider alternatives but quantification of alternative options were not addressed in a satisfactory manner. ” Low quality of assessments was also noted in Petak et al., 2015. 362 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence lity (comp. k oprić, 2015; for similar situation in Slovenia, see k ovač, 2014). There is a special problem with organizational fragmentation of inspections − they are organized in as many as in 60 administrative fields, half of them in the central bodies, a bit fewer in fragmented branch offices of central bodies, and only 3 in first instance offices of state administration. The agency model still functions in a grey legal zone with huge institu- tional and organizational obscurity (see Musa, 2013). There is not any pie- ce of legislation which regulates public agencies in general. Despite certain warnings from the OECD-Sigma and the w orld Bank about the overlapping competences between ministries and agencies, weak administrative coordina- tion, lack of accountability and poor agency performance, the first attempt to regulate the basic issues and overall position of public agencies was initiated by the Ministry of Public Administration only in 2012. The Ministry instigated the preparation of the new State Administration Act which was to regulate not only traditional administrative bodies but also public agencies and other forms of performing state administrative tasks (delegation, outsourcing, pu- blic-private partnerships, etc.). However, except an agreement about the new concept among the respective expert working group, that legislative proposal has never been prepared. Because of the lack of establishment criteria, Cro- atia experienced mushrooming of public agencies during the Europeanization phase as well as other problems, such as coordination with other parts of the public sector, poor functioning, wastefulness, miserable relationships with ci- tizens and societal environment, etc. Their streamlining is still an open issue. The system of local self-government, suffering from conceptual inconsis- tencies and organizational problems, fails to deliver an equal level of quality public services in cost-efficient manner. Huge differences in size and capacity of local governments cause significant regional and local disparities and de- mographic problems (k oprić, 2014a). The fact that most of the local govern- ments are either small or very small opens the issue of economy of scale in a dramatic way (Jambrač, 2016). g enuine regional governments have not been established, and counties function only as the second tier local governments, supplementing municipalities and towns with extremely weak capacities. Only a small number of towns, mainly large towns (those with more than 35,000 inhabitants), and several municipalities are able to perform their local tasks on their own. Since counties are too small and financially weak, they are 363 Refo Rm of the CR oatian Publi C administR ation: b etween Pat Chy euR o Peanization and b umPy m odeRnization not able to support regional development, although this is one of their main constitutional tasks. Support to regional development is centralised with the Ministry of Regional Development and the central Agency of Regional De- velopment as the main institutions. Beside them, two statistical regions have been established (Continental Croatia and Adriatic Croatia) as the NUTS II units. Low capacity of local governments to absorb money from the EU funds hinders local and regional development (koprić, 2012; koprić et al., 2014). On top of that, local governments have established about 4,300 forms of internal territorial decentralization (territorial committees, town districts, and city quarters) whose effectiveness in improving political participation of citizens is rather low (more in k oprić & k larić, 2015). • Motivation Problems The problems of civil service motivation are evident from local to na- tional levels. It is ruined by deep politicization, insufficient knowledge about and usage of motivation tools (see for example Bregn, 2008), deficient profes- sionalism of the civil service, and non-existent system of education for public administration, and authoritarian and bureaucratic culture. 61 Deep politicization is a continuous feature and one of the main pro- blems of the Croatian civil service. The problem has usually been approached in a formal manner, through amendments to the Law and reshapnig of the appointment procedure for managerial positions in public administration. One of the attempts was conducted in course of Europeanization under the pressure from the EU, when positions of assistant ministers, ministries‘ se- cretaries, deputy heads and assistant heads of the state administrative organi- zations, and some other positions in the Croatian state administration were “depoliticised”; on the grounds of the State Servants Act of 2005 political appointments in the period 2008−2011 were replaced with the public compe- tition procedure. However, since the procedure remained completely in the g overnment’s hands, and the professional and educational standards were diminishing, the real situation did not change significantly. In 2011, legal re- gulation changed once again, introducing stronger influence of politics on the appointments to managerial posts in state administration. Moreover, amen- 61 Problems with motivation are not specific for Croatia. They are one of the public administration features in the w estern Balkans, South Eastern Europe, and beyond (koprić, 2009b; koprić, 2012a; etc.). 364 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence dments to the State Servants Act in early 2012s introduced political advi- sors to the ministers. Although the Constitutional Court proclaimed these amendments unconstitutional at the end of 2015, similar regulation enabling employment of political advisors was once again proposed in spring 2016. Only political instability prevented reintroduction of this category into the Croatian state administration. Introduction of direct election of mayors in 2009 triggered legal innovations in local self-government system that intro- duced politicization of hitherto professional positions in local bureaucracy. The appointment procedure for managerial positions is only a pinnacle of the politicization problem in public administration. Much greater problems have been created by interfering of politics in everyday work of the civil ser- vice (even in individual administrative cases), open political activities of civil servants, etc. Politicization discourages professionalism of civil servants and devasta- tes tiny administrative capacities. Fast promotion of the obedient and politi- cally privileged servants sends a negative motivational message to the others. Education and competence turn out to be less important. Political criteria have sometimes been imposed even in access to professional training. Sound, coherent, and full-scale educational system for typical administrative jobs and positions at all levels, from clerks who carry out the administrative procedu- re to public managers on highest positions does not exist (more in koprić, 2013a; Marčetić et al., 2013). Classification of public administration studies within the category of vocational studies with continuous efforts to prevent public administration students from access to quality university studies cau- ses long-term damage to the profession. 62 The cooperation of public adminis- tration with universities is weak, and the educational and research capacities of domestic administrative science have not been used. Many domestic and technical assistance projects have ended up without any impact on practice. The situation regarding competence and professional standards is not good in the state administration, and is even worse in local self-government. In-ser- vice system is developing with moderate success. Instead of insisting on the quality and effectiveness of civil servants, the public discussion is focused on 62 One of the most grotesque haps in the field is the Constitutional Court decision of 2016 initiated by the University of Zagreb, which prevents access of public administration students to postgra- duate studies (after a five-year study), even to postgraduate studies in public administration. 365 Refo Rm of the CR oatian Publi C administR ation: b etween Pat Chy euR o Peanization and b umPy m odeRnization their number and salaries. 63 Human potential development and management system are developing slowly. The administrative culture is predominantly of an authoritarian and bureaucratic type (koprić, 1999; koprić, 2009b). It is still based on the cli- mate of formalism, secrecy, obedience, resistance to changes, and evasion of responsibilities. Top-down approach without the initiative and innovation of civil servants cannot be a driving force of administrative modernization. In addition, governments that do not have partnership with citizens are an anachronistic deviation from the good governance concept. 64 Efforts to im- prove openness and transparency have changed the situation. Croatia beca- me a member of the global Open g overnment Partnership Initiative in 2011. Both the National OgP Council and the first ever Public Information Com- missioner, appointed in 2013, have developed a lot of activities undertaken to fight against corruption as well as to open public administration and make its functioning more transparent. 65 • Implementation Problems The implementation of public policies is burdened by remaining unsol- ved problems of legality, ethical problems, bureaucratic resistances, and ina- dequate managerialism. Even the introduction of e-governance, which serves as an anchor of reliable, efficient, and effective implementation, carries the risks of petrification of administrative structures which still have not been rationalised. Sometimes the quality of information and communication equi- pment procured is questionable as well as the quality of software, which is expensive and often prepared without sufficient knowledge about adminis- 63 However, low salaries and poor remuneration are a real problem in most of the countries in the region, including Croatia. Civil servants and HRM managers perceive it as one of the two or three most serious problems (k oprić, 2009b). 64 Previous Croatian Ombudsman had continuous problems with the Croatian g overnment and the Parliament majority because he did not hesitate to criticize the members of the g overnment, and stress the problems of politicization, corruption, lack of competence, and others. His annual reports for 2007 and 2008 were not accepted by the Parliament. Consequently, his position was undermined by the establishment of other, specialised ombudsmen (for disabled persons, for gender equality, and for children), by squeezing finances, not resolving problems with basic facilities, etc. (Pravobranitelj, 2009: 112−115). 65 Despite these efforts and achievements, the IRM Progress Report for 2014−2015 states: “w hi- le significant progress was made in implementing the anti-corruption strategy and improving transparency processes in key sectors, access to information and open data reforms stalled due to a lack of political will. ” (IRM Progress Report, 2016: 2). 366 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence trative processes. On top of that, interoperability and digital divide are very important and present poorly resolved issues. Legal standards, i.e. the rule of law, begin at the level of legislation and continue to the level of implementation. Laws must be based upon the Consti- tution, and ratified international treaties harmonised with one another and cor- rect in a procedural sense. The EU law ought to be implemented and respected. The laws have to provide legal predictability and certainty. Moreover, they have to be derived from the basic principles of contemporary democratic state, such as the principle of subsidiarity, respect of human rights, protection of minori- ties, etc. Secondary legislation must be in conformity with the Constitution and laws. Local by-laws must not infringe higher laws and regulations. Activities, decisions, and acts of all state bodies in concrete cases must be based on state regulations in the substantial, organizational, and procedural sense. Local bo- dies must respect not only state regulations but also those adopted by the local representative bodies. Arbitrariness is not allowed to either state or local offi- cials and servants. The problems concerning legality of Croatian public admi- nistration are based on legal inconsistencies, modest quality of laws, and secon- dary legislation, partially outdated regulations, various meta-legal influences, weaknesses in legal control, low court capacities, and underdeveloped ethical and professional standards in implementation of regulations. The EU accession brought new problems, since the acquis communautaire is highly complex, and its implementation is a very demanding task (k oprić et al., 2012; k oprić, 2014). The ethical dimension has usually been highlighted through various claims about corruption within public administration. 66 Corruption at higher, political levels is the most dangerous type of corruption. Corruption at the level of civil servants is also dangerous, the more dangerous the higher their positions are. If corruption existed only at lower positions, it would be relati- vely easy to eradicate it by measures taken by the repressive machinery – the police, g eneral Attorney‘s Office, and similar bodies as well as courts. The perception is that corruption in Croatia is rather widespread, although anti- corruption efforts have produced moderately positive results. Several criminal charges of top politicians at the central, regional, and local levels are signs of 66 In the mentioned regional research, this is the opinion of 68 respondents (48.6%). At the same time, only 30 of them (21.4%) consider corruption as not so serious problem, while further 42 respondents (30%) see medium importance of the corruption problem (k oprić, 2009b). 367 Refo Rm of the CR oatian Publi C administR ation: b etween Pat Chy euR o Peanization and b umPy m odeRnization strong fight against corruption. Anti-corruption measures are predominantly of normative and institutional nature but the control system is not very effi- cient (koprić et al., 2016). Moreover, the commitment of high state officials to act impartially and in the long-term public interest is not clear enough. Little has been done through education and training, although strengthening of professional standards is firmly connected with education and the adoption of proper ethical standards. Numerous local units, overlapping competences, and very complicated structure of deconcentrated state administration open space for unethical behaviour. It seems that ethical problems are even worse at the local level (comp. k regar et al., 2016; Marčetić, 2013). 67 There is a strong resistance to changes and modernization of public administration among higher professionals. Unnecessary formalism, sticking to petrified practices, rejecting innovations in procedures and techniques, best practices and European standards, and resistance to administrative sim- plification are some examples of frequently observed bureaucratic resistan- ces. They are partly supported by the conservative groups within the acade- mic community. A wrong type of managerialism has shown up as a peculiar answer to bureaucratic resistances. The idea that the public sector is in no way different from the private one, and that it is desirable to manage it in exactly the same way has become very popular among certain groups of actors. In order to re- alise that idea, managers from the private sector, banks, large private compa- 67 The first Ethical Codex for state servants was adopted by the government in 2006, and was amended in 2008. The Ethical Commission started to function in May 2009. Associate profes- sor g ordana Marčetić from the Faculty of Law in Zagreb was elected president. A new Ethical Code of Civil Service was adopted in 2011. Citizens can report breaking of ethical standards in the civil service to the Department for Ethics in the Ministry of Administration but there were only 77 complaints with regard to ethical standards of state servants in 2008 and 2009 initiated through this Department. In addition, there were 296 commissioners for ethics appointed in state bodies in 2010 (data on the situation at the beginning of June 2010). As many as 355 ethical complaints were submitted in 2008. Only 2 civil servants have been fired on that grounds, and in 18 additional cases serious penalties have been imposed. In sum, disciplinary penalties have been imposed in only 20 cases, counting for only 5.6% of the reported ethical cases. Only 0.03% of civil servants have been sentenced for ethical offences. As many as 416 complaints were su- bmitted to these commissioners in various administrative bodies in 2009 (an increase of 17% in comparison to 2008). In 356 cases it was decided that complaints were not firmly grounded, in 19 cases disciplinary responsibility was initiated, and in 41 cases the procedures have not been completed yet. The number of submitted complaints was 275 in 2010, 272 in 2011, 492 in 2013, and 477 in 2014 (data for certain years are not available). 368 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence nies, etc., have been appointed to or employed in public administration. Simi- larly, a claim that there are no well-educated people for public administration has been overemphasized. However, at the same time, the initiatives for es- tablishing a high-quality university education for public administration have been systematically suppressed, ignored, and actively undermined in specific arrangements with the conservative groups within the academic community. The fluctuation between the private and public sectors is the most intensive at the level of high-ranking state servants and officials. The fact that it is a matter of a very dangerous conflict of interest capturing the state within the network of private interests and influences has been neglected. The danger lies in the fact that public administration can become an instrument of powerful private sector companies instead of being in service of the community and citizens. 9.3.4. Reform Concepts and Processes The South-Eastern European countries emerged on the territory of the former Yugoslavia have shown some common governance characteristics which may be explained by the notion of muddled governance. Muddled go- vernance is a governance type “with strong reliance on classical government with weak forms of inter-jurisdictional and third-party governance that arise when not very clear European ideas about public administration reform flow into shrinking domestic ideas on governance.” Apart from Europeanization and modernization, the framework for the development of such governance includes search for national identities and regional cooperation and learning process based on the common tradition developed during 70 years spent within the first and second Yugoslavia, and facilitated by speaking similar languages. Strengthening the political legitimacy, modernization of human potentials development and management, and improving legal protection of citizens in their relations with the state are the three basic common gover- nance processes in South Eastern Europe (more in k oprić, 2012a). However, the situation is not the same in each country on the territory of the former Yugoslavia. Firstly, there is a significant part of their histories that divides the two groups of countries according to the prevailing historical influences on their administrative institutions (Habsburg, i.e. Austro-Hunga- rian and Ottoman). Secondly, the development in the post-1990 period has followed different paths. Croatian situation is peculiar because of the rebel- 369 Refo Rm of the CR oatian Publi C administR ation: b etween Pat Chy euR o Peanization and b umPy m odeRnization lion, aggression, and war in the most sensitive period after dissolution of the former Yugoslavia. Moreover, in the very beginning the rebellion relied on the formal competences of strong communes inherited from socialist times. Parallel with these dramatic and profound changes, non-transparent, politi- cally influenced, and harsh privatization of the former social ownership oc- curred causing divided but predominantly bitter feelings about the role of the private sector. Such circumstances led towards the development of new social and political cleavages; dismantling strong local governments, centralization, etatization, building hierarchical structures of state government, and political authoritarianism. After some time the situation called for changes, and influ- enced main administrative reform processes and concepts. • Decentralization and Democratization Historical reminiscences of the communes as powerful local govern- ments with substantial decision-making autonomy, very wide scope of affairs, and high financial share in public revenues and expenditures were still vivid during the 1990s. Until 1990, communes had been able to ensure the whole life circle, meaning almost all public services, social welfare, employment possibilities, cheap housing, leisure, etc., with formally high level of citizens and workers’ political participation (k oprić et al., 2016a). Decentralization claims were rather strong at the end of the 1990s. The basis for the construction of a decentralization strategy was professionally elaborated in the project Legislative Frameworks for Decentralization in Croa- tia (1999−2000). Although its results (published in k oprić, 2003a) inspired the g overnment’s reform efforts, that project had never been translated into an official decentralization strategy. Similar destiny hit another large project, Decentralization of Public Administration, financed by the Open Society and the Croatian g overnment in 2000−2003. Its results were not adopted by the g overnment either. Simultaneously, the g overnment’s Programme for the period 2000−2004 offered firm political basis for decentralization, announcing wide decentraliza- tion, strengthening of local autonomy , especially that of large cities, introduction of general clause and subsidiarity principle, increase of financial autonomy of local governments, and possible and gradual territorial reform (Program VRH, 2000). Decentralization was perceived not only as an instrument of strength- ening local autonomy but also as a prerequisite for further democratization of 370 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence society and abandoning nationalistic politics of the 1990s. Decentralization policy guided the Constitutional amendments of 2000 and amendments of the general local self-government legislation of 2001. After the adoption of new general legislation on local and county self-government in April 2001, several sectoral laws created fresh legal foundations for decentralization in four policy areas: education (primary and secondary), health, social care, and firefighting. However, because of the fragmented structure and low capacities, only the counties and 33 towns were able to take over these services. A significant part of finances for these services was ensured by the central budget. These 33 towns represented only 6% of all local governments in Croatia, indicating that local budgets were rather weak and unable to endure the burden of de- centralization. Subsequent Croatian governments have also, at least formally, committed themselves to decentralization and indicated some reform direc- tions. 68 The only result in later period was the design of large towns, i.e. those with more than 35,000 inhabitants, by the legislative changes in 2005 which were entrusted with only two additional public tasks: 1) maintenance of pub- lic roads, and 2) issuing building permits and other documents necessary for the construction and implementation of spatial planning documents. Because of weak local capacities, after decentralization attempts in 2001 and 2005, further decentralization efforts have refocused from widening local responsibilities and autonomy to the promotion of citizens’ political partici- pation at the local level. The new orientation was conducted mainly in incre- mental manner. Legislation was changed several times to attract the interest of citizens to local participatory institutions, such as referendum, citizens’ initiative, sub-municipal councils, occasional consultative meetings, youth councils, public consultations, national minorities’ councils, etc. Direct elec- tion of mayors was introduced as a major innovation in 2009, with a possibil- ity to recall the new, more powerful local executive officials (koprić & k larić, 2015; k oprić & Vukojičić Tomić, 2013; k oprić, 2012: 34−35; k oprić, 2009). • Building Transparent and Open Public Administration Effort to build open and transparent public administration has been one of the main reform processes in Croatia, which was, to a large degree, 68 During this time, several technical assistance projects were financed by the EU and other inter- national donors. They were also intended to support further decentralization steps (CARDS, 2007; Mikelsons, 2007). 371 Refo Rm of the CR oatian Publi C administR ation: b etween Pat Chy euR o Peanization and b umPy m odeRnization facilitated by the harmonization with the EU standards and fuelled by the conceptual considerations about good governance. Transparency means ma- king public data and information accessible to the public by efforts of public bodies, while openness means enabling citizens’ feedback, comments, propo- sals, and criticism (comp. Musa, 2011). Although the prevailing purpose of transparency and openness is fostering citizens’ participation in public life, other purposes are also important, such as protecting the rights of the citizens in their relations with public bodies, strengthening control of public admi- nistration, reuse of open data gathered by the public bodies in other sectors (economy, etc.), and others. The first Croatian Right to Access Information Act was adopted at the end of 2003, and was amended in 2010. The right to access public sector in- formation was proclaimed a constitutional right by the Constitutional Amen- dments of 2010. A number of cases initiated on citizens’ request have been more or less constant after the first high wave. The highest number of requests was in 2004 – 19,600. There were 4,499 requests in 2005, 4,357 in 2006, 3,670 in 2007, 2,730 in 2008, and 3,173 in 2009, 12,340 in 2010, 51,930 in 2011, 53,521 in 2012, 24,330 in 2013, 21,078 in 2014, and 18,007 in 2015. A new step in developing transparent public administration was made by the appointment of the first Croatian Public Information Commissioner in 2013. The Commissioner has a task to provide legal protection of the right to public sector information and reuse of such information (open data), and monitor and promote these rights. In one of her reports (23 September 2014), Public Information Commissioner, Anamarija Musa, stressed that the largest number of appeals have been submitted because of the silence of adminis- tration (practice of not responding to the citizens’ requests for public infor- mation), and that only 15% of appeals are refused, which means that 85% of appeals have firm legal grounds. The number of requests for usage of open data is rather low, witnessing that the usage of such data for economic and other purposes in Croatia is at the very beginning. According to the 2015 Report, in the newly established Registry of Pu- blic Bodies there were data about 6,045 bodies and about 4,425 information officers in such bodies. At the beginning of 2016, an Internet application was established for reporting of all public bodies about their realization of right to public information. By mid-February 2016 as many as 4,539 public bodies 372 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence submitted their reports. However, there were 23.6% of public bodies that resi- sted reporting, and about 20% of bodies have never appointed their informa- tion officers. In 2015, the mentioned 4,539 bodies received 18,007 requests for public information and 898 requests for reuse of public information. Public bodies have replied positively to almost 85% of requests, mostly within legal deadlines (Izvješće, 2016). Improvements indicate better effectiveness of the institutional fra- mework for public sector transparency, upgraded preconditions for access to public sector information (better design of websites, easier Internet access, better structured information, etc.), and stronger trust in the public sector. Continuous efforts and measures to plan and support realization of e-govern- ment, e-administration, and open government concepts have also contribu- ted to transparent and open public administration. Introducing Modern Human Potential Development and Management Human resource management (HRM) as a new, modern concept connec- ted with the new public management doctrine tends to replace the traditional, more w eberian-like, public personnel concept. The accent of HRM concept is on flexibility and managerial discretion, decentralization and/or devolution in managing civil service structures, pay for performance, performance measu- rement and performance management, greater flexibility in civil service law, “normalization” or even abolishment of special civil service status, application of regular labor law to civil servants, shrinking civil service, etc. Human poten- tials development is a kind of softer approach to human capital in the public sector which is more oriented to the development of skills, competences, and knowledge of the civil servants, to proper use of their talents, training and education, improvement of organizational culture, etc. Human potentials de- velopment is used to express the standpoint according to which people in the public sector are worth developing and are not “pure bureaucrats” , while HRM implicates that people in the public service are mostly a passive organizational element that should be connected with other elements, such as financial and material resources and the like, for results to be produced. Both approaches may be combined in order to avoid their main obstacles. Despite the lack of a really well-informed debate, except in academia, and some inconclusiveness in legal regulation, Croatia has opted for human potentials development model shyly enriched with several elements of HRM 373 Refo Rm of the CR oatian Publi C administR ation: b etween Pat Chy euR o Peanization and b umPy m odeRnization concept. Elements of the traditional concept of personnel administration have persisted as well (Marčetić & Musa, 2013). The situation is similar in the whole region of South Eastern Europe, probably because such a civil ser- vice model has been advocated by the OECD-Sigma which is in charge of assessing various elements of public administration reforms in the accessing countries. Regional cooperation in the civil service field, promoted through the Regional School of Public Administration (ReSPA) and the w estern Bal- kan Human Resources Management Community of Practitioners (wB HRM CoP) has also contributed to that. If common administrative tradition is ta- ken into account, it is not surprising that both the problems and the prospects for improvement in whole region are very similar (k oprić, 2012a; 36−38; k o- prić, 2009b; k oprić, 2010). The State Servants Act of 2005 provided for a more modern civil service practice. The Ministry of Public Administration is the main competent body. Job analysis is one of the most complex tasks performed on the basis of that Act with numerous problems, misunderstandings and resistances (Ratko- vić, 2008). w ork plans are still not common in administrative organizations. Performance measurement has been regulated but it still does not function properly. Pay for performance has never started to function neither at the national nor at the local levels because of the tight budgetary framework and lack of political will (Manojlović, 2016). Strategic approach towards deve- lopment of civil service was promoted by the Strategy of Human Potentials Development in Public Administration for the period 2010−2013. The new registry of civil servants has been established recently, including state, local, and public servants. Annual personnel planning, new public administration ethics system (comp. fn. 35), and system of in-service training are the main three novelties which can be positively assessed. Central state institution for in-service training started to function in June 2005. It operated as the Civil Servants’ Training Centre within the Cen- tral State Office for Public Administration (until 2009) and the Ministry of Public Administration (from 2009 until 2011) when it was merged with the Academy of Local Democracy into a new institution called the State School for Public Administration. During 8 years, these institutions performed 1,075 training programs with 46,758 civil servants participating in them (Bošnja- ković, 2015). Along with that, many training programs have been organized 374 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence by other institutions, such as the Diplomatic Academy, Judicial Academy, Tax Administration, Customs, Ministry of Regional Development, etc. Reforming Administrative Procedures and Strengthening Legal Pro- tection of Citizens There was a long tradition of general administrative procedural law and court control over public administration in the former Yugoslav territory. They were the components of the system of legal protection of citizens. Such a system was a complex and interdependent group of legally regulated ins- titutions which consists of procedural protection within public administra- tion, national and international court control over administrative acts and actions, court protection of constitutional rights (mostly in the constitutional courts), ombudsman protection, guarantees of open access to public sector information, protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms (the Eu- ropean Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, etc.), and some others. All the countries on the territory of the former Yugoslavia took over the Yugoslav g eneral Administrative Procedures Act (gAPA), which was a federal law, in the beginning of the 1990s. During the 2000s, almost all of them amended their general administrative procedural laws, and started to prepare new ones (see more details in k oprić et al., 2016b). The Yugoslav gAPA was known as the longest administrative proce- dural law. It offered fairly good protection of citizens’ rights. It guaranteed the right to appeal and the right to be heard; it offered several other procedural guarantees; established duties of state bodies to find out true facts; equip an administrative act with written explanation of grounds and deliver it to the concerned party(ies); etc. However, it was casuistic, court-imitating, and too complex, with many possibilities for ministries, state prosecutor’s office, and other central state bodies to intervene in the final administrative act. Becau- se of the underdeveloped administrative justice system, it was possible for administrative practice to neglect certain procedural rules and guarantees, and weaken the protection of citizens. Real modernization of administrative procedural regulation started in the second half of the 2000s, with Croatia as a forerunner, under strong Eu- ropean influence and with expert assistance of the OECD-Sigma. Better le- gal protection of citizens’ rights, simplification of administrative procedure, regulation of modern information and communication technology usage in 375 Refo Rm of the CR oatian Publi C administR ation: b etween Pat Chy euR o Peanization and b umPy m odeRnization the procedure, and better efficiency of procedures are among the main goals of current administrative procedural reform efforts in South Eastern Europe. Changes of general administrative procedures simultaneously enable and call for changes in the administrative justice systems. If court supervisi- on of administrative actions becomes more effective, there is more room for designing administrative procedures to be much faster and efficient in issu- ing decisions in individual administrative cases. Ratification of the European Convention of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR), judica- ture of the European Court of Human Rights, and spreading of the common European model of administrative justice (w oehrling, 2006; w inkler, 2007) are the main reasons for current reforms of administrative justice in many countries. The standards from Article 6 of the European Convention of Hu- man Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR) require a two-tier system of administrative justice with administrative dispute of full jurisdiction, public hearing, right to appeal to the higher court, and protection of issuing admi- nistrative decisions within a reasonable time. The Croatian Parliament enacted the new g eneral Administrative Pro- cedures Act in 2009 and the new Act on Administrative Disputes in 2010. The former entered into force on 1 January 2010 and the latter on 1 January 2012. Since then, the system of administrative justice has been organized as a two-tier system with four administrative courts of first instance (in Zagreb, Split, Rijeka, and Osijek), and the High Administrative Court which decides, in principle, on the appeals filed against first instance administrative court decisions. Despite certain criticism which raises the issue of hesitating mo- dernization (koprić, 2009a; Đulabić, 2009), there is no doubt that Croatia is well on the reform path in the field of legal protection of citizens in their relations with public administration. 69 • Experimenting with Public Management Solutions from the new public management repertoire are springing up here and there. The Croatian public administration displays a whole range of reform measures, from privatization and liberalization, through establishment of public agencies, to performance and quality management. However, the im- portance, frequency, and success of such measures are very different. 69 Croatia was the first republic of socialist Yugoslavia which established a separate Administrative Court in 1977, forerunning in that regard even during the socialist period. 376 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence One of the persistently pronounced measures is privatization. Privati- zation and liberalization with increasing role of private sector providers, even multinational ones, have not been a reform measure pertaining only to the services of general economic interest (telecommunications, postal service, energy supply, transport, highway construction and management, etc.) but also in healthcare, eldercare, education, communal utilities, pension system, culture, and the similar. There is a wide variety of forms for including private sector subjects in the provision of services, such as concessions and delegation to private sector subjects, public procurement of services, outsourcing, pu- blic-private partnerships, etc. (comp. k oprić et al., 2016a). However, the 2014 attempt to outsource supplementary and technical services in public adminis- tration was not successful. Although the g overnment prepared a sound plan of outsourcing cleaning, technical jobs, washing, ironing, preparation of food and drinks, transport, and protection of facilities for which there were some 26,500 employees in state-financed public bodies and institutions, the plan was not successfully implemented. A large number of trade unions (17) ini- tiated a referendum against the plan and collected 624,000 citizens’ signatures. Under such pressure, the g overnment withdrew its plan. The bombastically announced policy of public-private partnership had a similar destiny. After the adoption of the g uidelines for Application of Contractual Forms of Public- Private Partnerships by both the g overnment and the Parliament in 2006, and a strong political push in that direction, the number of such partnerships has remained rather small (18 approved and registered projects until 2015). Apart from the agency model at the national level, public agencies have also been sprouting at the county and local levels. They are mainly established in the development (economic, regional, and rural) and energy sectors, and some other sectors are represented as well. At the end of the 2000s, Musa found about 40 agencies at the sub-national level established during the Eu- ropeanization process (Musa, 2014: 474−480). Along with the companies for delivery of utility services, local governments and counties currently own almost 400 companies established for different purposes (economic develo- pment, radio broadcasting, sport infrastructure, culture, etc.) (k oprić et al., 2016a). In 2016, the number of entities called “agency” and established by the local governments and counties in the Registry of Public Bodies of the Public Information Commissioner is 56. The total number of public institutions es- 377 Refo Rm of the CR oatian Publi C administR ation: b etween Pat Chy euR o Peanization and b umPy m odeRnization tablished by sub-national governments in the same registry is 2,471; there are also 675 companies, 694 associations, and 4 foundations. Performance and quality management practice is not well developed, but there are some positive cases and trends. Although the establishment of pu- blic agencies asks for performance management mechanisms, such practice is almost non-existent, and the main accountability tool is the agency report. An empirical research conducted in 2014 shows that when performance is measured what is actually measured are outputs, while impacts, quality, and cost-effectiveness are neglected dimensions with quality as the most neglec- ted one. Performance measurement is rather rare but more frequent at the national level than at the local level (Manojlović, 2014: 250−253). Even worse results were shown in another research conducted in 2013 with regard to qu- ality management as only 38 out of 128 towns (about 30%) reported usage of some quality improvement instrument. Their number has increased to 41 in 2016. There is no legal obligation for public bodies to use such instruments. There is some evidence that simple quality improvement instruments are em- ployed at the national level but the best instruments are almost not known – there are only 4 national administrative organizations and 1 town registered as interested for application of the Common Assessment Framework (Džinić, 2014; Džinić & Manojlović, 2016; Musa, 2016). 9.3.5. Future of Croatian Public Administration: Modernization, Inertia, or Decline Croatia is on the track of modernising its public administration. Moder- nization of the Croatian public administration is knitted by doctrinal influen- ces of new public management and good governance, and fuelled by the EU conditionality policy. The EU inspires the waves of administrative reform in doctrinally inconclusive manner, combining the elements of good governan- ce with clear liberal policy in certain sectors and issues, and with the elements of public management model. The influence of the OECD-Sigma employed by the European Commission in assessing the capacity of public administra- tion to effectively implement acquis communautaire is also visible in Croatia. The OECD-Sigma has been a proponent of moderate modernization but only after completion of the w eberian public administration model. Despite huge steps in consolidating and codifying of the European administrative stan- 378 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence dards during last two decades, it is still not completely clear what the elements of “European model of public administration” really are. In any case, the EU leaves much room for domestic political priorities. Post-socialist transition has coincided with spreading of the new public management doctrine throughout the world. The new public management requires more freedom in decision-making of public managers. Since many administrative positions have been filled with politically influenced persons, freer decision-making opportunities in reality mean additional space for po- liticization of public administration, not necessarily for better management. That is why public management in post-socialist societies, lacking properly educated public managers and civil servants, very often enables further and deeper politicization. In such circumstances, the Croatian public administration reform has been conducted in a patchy manner, although continuously under the notion of Europeanization. Dominant politics has had a decisive role, while profes- sionals and academia have been neglected. The basic principles of European good governance model and European Administrative Space have been wide- ly accepted. Citizens and civil society have some influence on the processes as well. w hat may also be concluded from the previous analysis is that a major part of dominant concepts is connected with good governance model: de- centralization, political legitimacy, and democratization; transparency, open- ness, and participation; better regulation and legal protection of citizens; and human potential development and management. Despite continuous efforts of domestic business community and well- known international organizations (world Bank, International Monetary Fund, etc.) hard neoliberal reform measures, such as shrinking of the public sector, dismantling the welfare institutions, imposing savings and budgetary cuts, privatization or normalization of the civil service, have not been accep- ted by domestic political actors, at least not in their radical forms. Other ele- ments of public management model have been widely accepted but only mo- derately realized. Instead of building a consistent public management model, Croatia has experimented with public management instruments. Although privatization is one of the most popular concepts, Croatia has still a relative- ly big and strong public sector. Resistance to public-private partnerships or outsourcing is still strong. Certain reform steps have been made, such as re- 379 Refo Rm of the CR oatian Publi C administR ation: b etween Pat Chy euR o Peanization and b umPy m odeRnization gulation of more flexible civil service arrangements, introduction of internal financial control and external review, competition and public procurements, charging real prices of public services, etc. Having in mind that Croatia is a latecomer to real democratization and the EU accession with a decade of delay in comparison with other post-so- cialist countries which have joined the EU, mainly because of the war and consequent authoritarianism, it can be concluded that public governance si- tuation is precarious. At least two scenarios are possible, an optimistic and a pessimistic one. External circumstances can be decisive. g lobal recovery of the economy, smooth development of European integration, positive resolu- tion of current conflicts can become grounds for the realization of the opti- mistic scenario. A new economic crisis, institutional crisis of the EU, deadly terrorism, and massive migrations can lead to the realization of the pessimis- tic scenario. A number of domestic circumstances, which can lead in at least three directions, can be added to this mixture: − These complex circumstances can direct the Croatian public adminis- tration towards more conceptually straight modernization, − They can leave it on the path of hesitant development, which means random and patchy changes dependent on accidental ideas of influ- ential domestic actors, bureaucratic hesitations, or pressures of domi- nant foreign organizations, or − They can push the country to the path of chaotic institutional decline. w hile the first direction is the most desirable, the last one seems the least probable. However, from the Croatian standpoint, for the reform to be more successful it is necessary to further clarify and make a sounder professional basis of the reform concepts and measures. 9.4. Conclusion The basic components of the Croatian public administration were es- tablished in the beginning of the 1990s in parallel with the processes of de- mocratic transition, managing independence, and transformation of the for- mer social ownership. Rebellion and aggression followed by the four-year war had many unfavorable economic, social, political, administrative, and other consequences. Democratization, decentralization, and Europeanization of the country were delayed to the beginning of the 2000s. During the Europe- 380 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence anization phase, Croatia started to change its traditional w eberian model of public administration by incorporating and developing the elements of good governance model. Then, at the end of the 2000s, the modernization phase started, although some signs of modernization could be found even before. Although the accession to the EU was a widely accepted goal, Europe- anization of the country’s public administration, in the sense of accepting European standards, was patchy. Croatia defended what was proclaimed as the elements of its national model of public administration in many cases, claiming they are part of its tradition, even when it was obvious that accep- ting the European standards would have improved situation in some relevant regards. In addition, the situation with administrative modernization is a bit disappointing, because in spite of a relatively broad and persuasive moderni- zation narrative, the real road to modernization has been rather bumpy. Public administration reform in Croatia has been a component of wider societal changes of post-socialist transition. The post-socialist transi- tion is a complex systemic transformation – much more complex than pre- vious democratic transitions in South w estern Europe (Spain, Portugal), Latin America, and other parts of the world, as the span of the transition process is wider. Previous transitions were focused on democratization, while the post-socialist transition tackled almost every aspect of social life. That makes the administrative changes and reforms of public administra- tion even more demanding, complex, and harder to be achieved than they have been in other countries. Many processes have to be steered in parallel with public administration reform while, at the same time, many decisi- ve circumstances are hardly controllable. In such conditions political and societal attention as well as the efforts of the whole community could not be concentrated only on the administrative problems and their resolution, because other urgent problems also needed to be addressed, some of them even before the administrative ones. Finally, the political system has not been stabilized which significantly undermines its ability to choose the agreed reform concept and its capacity to steer the public administration reform. Additionally, similar to some other transitional countries, Croatia faced the issue of managing state independence which itself is neither an easy nor a simple task. On top of that, due to particularities of soft-socialism in the 381 Refo Rm of the CR oatian Publi C administR ation: b etween Pat Chy euR o Peanization and b umPy m odeRnization former Yugoslavia, a radical break up with the inherited institutions was not seen as the prerequisite for successful transition. Such conceptual thinking prevented radical administrative reforms and caused bureaucratic inertia in many regards. New political and social elites did not intend to break up with the inherited public administration but only to conquer and capture it. Once they had succeeded, they became interested in preserving, not in reforming it. The size of the public sector, its history, administrative tradition, and other administrative particularities in combination with the existence of a number of relatively influential trade unions do not encourage deep administrative reforms. Internal bureaucratic resistance to changes is quite a normal phenomenon. This has to be analysed in connection with a relatively low capacity of society to accept the changes since tradition and normal inclination towards stabilization anchor societies, and allow mainly slow and incremental chan- ges. There was additional and strong exertion of this capacity caused by the huge task of Europeanization. The process of Europeanization started in a top-down manner only a few years after the war which, in some parts, of- ficially ended only in January 1998 when the UN Transitional Administra- tion in Eastern Slavonia, Baranja and w estern Sirmium was replaced by the Croatian institutions. It is not to be expected that a country whose battle for independence was so long, bloody, and difficult would easily and without any resistance accept many new compromises imposed during formal Europeani- zation by means of the EU conditionality policy. All of these circumstances in the societal environment show that the particularities of public administration reform in post-socialist countries can be explained only if the theory of transition is taken into account. However, since the logics of big systems and institutional development have to be taken into account, the neo-institutional theory, system theory, and organizational theory also need be consulted in order to build a complex, composite the- oretical frame for understanding, researching, and explaining public admi- nistration reform in post-socialist countries. However, it is too ambitious to think that a theory of administrative reform in the post-socialist world may be easily developed (comp. Caiden, 1969/2009). 382 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence References 1. Boko, H., Vojnić, A., Carić, A. 2004. “Hrvatska u 21. stoljeću”: iskustva u izradi strategije razvitka RH. Ekonomski pregled, 55 (3−4), 360−373. 2. Bošnjaković, D. 2015. Stručno usavršavanje hrvatskih državnih služ- benika u Centru za stručno osposobljavanje i usavršavanje službenika i Državnoj školi za javnu upravu. Završni specijalistički rad. Zagreb: Sveučilište u Zagrebu. 3. Bregn, k. 2008. Management of the New Pay Systems in the Public Sec- tor – Some Implications of Insights gained from Experiments. Interna- tional Review of Administrative Sciences, 74 (1), 79−93. 4. Brusis, M., Staroňova, k., Zubek, R. (Eds.) 2007. Strategic Policy Ma- king in Central and Eastern Europe. NISPAcee Press. 5. Caiden, g. E. 1969/2009. Administrative Reform. New Brunswick, Lon- don: Aldine Transaction. 6. CARDS. 2007. Fiscal Decentralisation in Croatia. Zagreb: Human Dy- namics. 7. Donelan, E. 2014. Review of Policy on RIA and Legislative Drafting Capacities of Republic of Croatia. Paris: OECD-Sigma. 8. DZS. 2011. The Model for the Differentiation of Urban, Rural and Semi- Urban Settlements in the Republic of Croatia. Methodological g uideli- nes 67. Zagreb: Croatian Bureau for Statistics. 9. Džinić, J. 2014. Utjecaj instrumenata unapređenja kvalitete na organi- zacijsko učenje u upravnim organizacijama. Doktorska disertacija. Za- greb: Pravni fakultet. 10. Džinić, J., Manojlović, R. 2017. Evaluating the Impact of Decentrali- zation on Local Public Management Modernization in Croatia. In: k o- prić, I., w ollmann, H., Marcou, g. (Eds). Evaluating Reforms of Local Public and Social Services in Europe: More Evidence for Better Results. London: Palgrave Macmillan (forthcoming). 11. Đulabić, V. 2009. Novi hrvatski Zakon o općem upravnom postupku kao poluga modernizacije javne uprave. Hrvatska javna uprava, 9 (2), 307−316. 383 Refo Rm of the CR oatian Publi C administR ation: b etween Pat Chy euR o Peanization and b umPy m odeRnization 12. EC. 2016. Country Report Croatia 2016. Commission Staff working Document SwD (2016) 80 final/2, Brussels, 3.3.2016, Retrieved from: http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/pdf/csr2016/cr2016_croatia_en.pdf. 13. gLO. 2016. Izvješće o provedbi procjene učinaka propisa za razdoblje od 2013. do 2015. godine. Zagreb: Vlada, Ured za zakonodavstvo. 14. Horvat, B. 1984. Politička ekonomija socijalizma. Zagreb: g lobus. 15. IRM Progress Report. 2016. Independent Reporting Mechanism (IRM) Progress Report: Croatia 2014−2015. Retrieved from: http://www. opengovpartnership.org/sites/default/files/Croatia_2nd%20IRM%20 Report_pub%20comm_ENg.pdf. 16. Izvješće. 2016. Izvješće o provedbi Zakona o pravu na pristup infor- macijama za 2015. godinu. Retrieved from: http://www.pristupinfo.hr/ izvjesce-o-provedbi-zakona-o-pravu-na-pristup-informacijama-za- 2015-godinu-povjerenika-za-informiranje/. 17. Jambrač, J. 2016. Ljudi, ekonomija, država: perspektiva lokalne samou- prave u Hrvatskoj. Zagreb: Izvori. 18. kasapović, M. 1996. Demokratska tranzicija i političke stranke. Za- greb: Fakultet političkih znanosti. 19. k oprić, I. 1999. Struktura i komuniciranje u upravnim organizacijama. Zagreb: Pravni fakultet. 20. k oprić, I. (Ed.). 2003. Legislative Frameworks for Decentralisation in Croatia. Zagreb: Faculty of Law and the Croatian Law Centre. 21. koprić, I. 2006. Razvoj metodologije i provedba pokusnog projekta funkcionalnog pregleda. Hrvatska javna uprava, 6 (1), 21−28. 22. k oprić, I. 2008. Upravljanje decentralizacijom kao nov pristup razvoju sustava lokalne samouprave. Hrvatska javna uprava, 8 (1), 95−133. 23. k oprić, I. 2008a. Managing Public Administration Reform in Croatia. Hrvatska javna uprava, 8 (3), 551−565. 24. k oprić, I. 2009. Directly Elected Mayors on the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia: Between Authoritarian Local Political Top Bosses and Citi- zen-Oriented Local Managers. In: Reynaert, H., Steyvers, k., Delwit, P ., Pilet J.-B. (Eds). Local Political Leadership in Europe: Town Chief, City Boss or Loco President? Brugge: Vanden Broele & Nomos. 384 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 25. koprić, I. 2009a. Novi Zakon o općem upravnom postupku – tradi- cija ili modernizacija? In: k oprić, I., Đulabić, V . (Eds). Modernizacija općeg upravnog postupka i javne uprave u Hrvatskoj. Zagreb: Institut za javnu upravu & Društveno veleučilište. 26. k oprić, I. 2009b. Attracting and Retaining the Best People in the Pu- blic Service. Bratislava: UNDP . 27. koprić, I. 2010. Managing Performance in the w estern Balkan Civil Service Structures. Bratislava: UNDP, Retrieved from: https://www. academia.edu/10349941/Managing_Performance_in_the_w estern_ Balkans_Civil_Service_Structures. 28. k oprić, I. 2010a. T eritorijalna organizacija Hrvatske: stanje, kriteriji za prosudbu racionalnosti i prijedlog novog sustava. In: Barbić, J. (Ed.). Nova hrvatska lokalna i regionalna samouprava. Zagreb: HAZU. 29. k oprić, I. 2012. Lokalna samouprava u Hrvatskoj: pokvarena igračka u rukama politike. In: 1. Forum za javnu upravu. Zagreb: Friedrich Ebert Stiftung & Institut za javnu upravu. 30. koprić, I. 2012a. Managing Public Affairs in South Eastern Europe: Muddled g overnance. In: Bissessar. A. M. (Ed.). g overnance: Is It for Everyone? New Y ork: Nova Science Publishers, Inc. 31. k oprić, I. 2013a. g overnance and Administrative Education in South Eastern Europe. Croatian and Comparative Public Administration, 13 (1), 5−39. 32. k oprić, I. 2014. Prilagodbe hrvatske javne uprave europskim standar- dima. g odišnjak Akademije pravnih znanosti Hrvatske, 5(1), 8−38. 33. k oprić, I. 2014a. Problemi s decentralizacijom ovlasti – između ustav- nih načela i stvarnosti. Croatian and Comparative Public Administra- tion, 14 (1), 133−148. 34. koprić, I. 2015. Teritorijalna organizacija Hrvatske: prema novom uređenju. In: Nova upravno-teritorijalna organizacija Hrvatske. Za- greb: HAZU. 35. koprić, I., Marčetić, g. (2000). k riza socijalne države, reforme jav- ne uprave i hrvatsko upravno osoblje. Hrvatska javna uprava, 3 (2), 25−82. 385 Refo Rm of the CR oatian Publi C administR ation: b etween Pat Chy euR o Peanization and b umPy m odeRnization 36. k oprić, I., Musa, A., Lalić Novak, g. 2012. Europski upravni prostor. Zagreb: Institut za javnu upravu. 37. koprić, I., Vukojičić Tomić, T. 2013. Lokalni politički sustav nakon uvođenja neposrednog izbora načelnika – stanje i prijepori. In: k oprić, I. (Ed.) Reforma lokalne i regionalne samouprave u Hrvatskoj. Zagreb: Institut za javnu upravu & Pravni fakultet. 38. k oprić, I., Marčetić, g., Musa, A., Đulabić, V., Lalić Novak, g. 2014. Upravna znanost: javna uprava u suvremenom europskom kontekstu. Zagreb: Pravni fakultet. 39. k oprić, I., k larić, M. 2015. New Developments in Local Democracy in Croatia and Its Neighbouring Countries. Croatian and Comparative Public Administration, 15 (2), 389–414. 40. koprić, I., Crnković, M., Lopižić, I. 2016. Control of Local g overn- ments in Croatia: Many Components, Still w eak Control. In: Control and Supervision of Local g overnments (University of Lille 2, col- lection of papers, forthcoming). 41. k oprić, I., Musa, A., Đulabić, V . 2016a. Local g overnment and Local Public Services in Croatia. In: w ollmann, H., koprić, I., Marcou, g. (Eds). Public and Social Services in Europe: From Public and Munici- pal to Private Sector Provision. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 42. k oprić, I., k ovač, P., Đulabić, V ., Džinić, J. 2016b. Legal Remedies in Administrative Procedures in w estern Balkans. Danilovgrad: Regio- nal School of Public Administration. 43. k ovač, P . 2014. Better Local g overnance by Integrative Reorganization of State Administration and Self-g overnment (in Slovenia). NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, 7 (2), 117−134. 44. kregar, J., Marčetić, g., g rubišić, k. 2016. Etika u politici i javnoj upravi. Zagreb: Novi informator. 45. Manojlović, R. 2014. Utjecaj odabranih organizacijskih varijabli na mjerenje učinka upravnih organizacija. Doktorska disertacija. Zagreb: Pravni fakultet. 46. Manojlović, R. (2016) Preduvjeti za funkcioniranje sustava upravljan- ja radnim izvršenjem službenika. In: k oprić, I., Džinić, J., Manojlović, 386 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence R. (Eds) Upravljanje kvalitetom i učinkovitošću u javnoj upravi. Za- greb: Institut za javnu upravu. 47. Marčetić, g. (2013) Etički kodeksi i etika javnih službenika. Croatian and Comparative Public Administration 13 (2), 499−539. 48. Marčetić, g., Musa, A. 2013. Europeizacija službeničkog prava: usklađivanje hrvatskog zakonodavstva s europskim standardima. Zbornik Pravnog fakulteta u Splitu, 50 (3), 725−756. 49. Marčetić, g., Lalić Novak, g., Džinić, J. (2013). Public Administration Education in the Twelve Post-Socialist Countries and Croatia: Is The- re a Convergence? Croatian and Comparative Public Administration, 13 (1), 123−160. 50. Mikelsons, M. 2007. A Decentralization Paradigm and the Legacy of USAID’s Local g overnment Reform Project in Croatia. Hrvatska jav- na uprava, 7 (3), 595–604. 51. Musa, A. 2011. Croatian Public Administration on the Road to the European Union: w hat to Expect while Expecting? Études Européen- nes, 14 th December 2011, Retrieved from: http://www.etudes-europe- ennes.eu/images/stories/A_look_at_Croatia/ENA-Anamarija_Musa- 7_Sept_2011301111js_FINAL.pdf. 52. Musa, A. 2013. Institucionalni i pravni okvir za dobro upravljanje u hrvatskim agencijama. Zagreb: gON g, Retrieved from: http:// www.gong.hr/media/uploads/institucionalni_okvir_i_za_dobro_ upravljanje_u_hrvastkim_agencijama.pdf. 53. Musa, A. 2014. Agencijski model javne uprave. Zagreb: Pravni fakultet. 54. Musa, A. 2016. Common Assessment Framework (CAF) u lokalnoj samoupravi i javnoj upravi. In: koprić, I., Džinić, J., Manojlović, R. (Eds) Upravljanje kvalitetom i učinkovitošću u javnoj upravi. Zagreb: Institut za javnu upravu. 55. Musa, A., koprić, I. 2011. w hat kind of Agencification in Croatia? Trends and Future Directions. Transylvanian Review of Administrati- ve Sciences, Special Issue: 33−53. 56. Osmanković, J. 2015. Promjena teritorijalne organizacije na lokalnoj razi- ni. In: Nova upravno-teritorijalna organizacija Hrvatske. Zagreb: HAZU. 387 Refo Rm of the CR oatian Publi C administR ation: b etween Pat Chy euR o Peanization and b umPy m odeRnization 57. Perko-Šeparović, I. 2010. Strateško planiranje modernizacije lokalne sa- mouprave. In: Nova hrvatska lokalna i regionalna samouprava. Zagreb: HAZU. 58. Petak, Z. 2008. Javne politike i problemi modernog upravljanja. Hrvat- ska javna uprava, 8 (2), 443−462. 59. Petak, Z., Bartlett, w ., Bönker, F. (Coordinator). 2015. Sustainable go - vernance Indicators: 2015 Croatia Report. g ütersloh: Bertelsmann Stif- tung. 60. Petek, A. 2009. Policy mreže i regulatorna reforma RH. Magistarski rad. Zagreb: Fakultet političkih znanosti. 61. Pollit, C. 2004. Castles Built on Sand? Agencies in Latvia. In: Pollitt, C., Talbot, C. (Eds). Unbundled g overnment. London: Routledge. 62. Pollitt, C., Bouckaert, g. 2003 Evaluating Public Management Reforms: An International Perspective. In: w ollmann, H. (Ed.) Evaluation in Pu- blic-Sector Reform: Concepts and Practice in International Perspective. Cheltenham, Northampton: Edward Elgar. 63. Pravobranitelj. 2009. Izvješće o radu pučkog pravobranitelja za 2008. godinu. Zagreb: Pučki pravobranitelj. 64. Program VRH. 2000. Program rada Vlade Republike Hrvatske za raz- doblje 2000−2004 od 8. veljače 2000. Retrieved from: http://markobo- zac.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/program-vlade.html. 65. Pusić, V . 1992. Predgovor. In: Bobio, N. Liberalizam i demokracija. Za- greb: Novi liber. 66. Ratković, k. 2008. Analiza poslova u hrvatskoj državnoj upravi. Hr - vatska javna uprava, 8 (4), 867−882. 67. Rocha, J. A. O., de Araújo, J. F . F . E. 2007. Administrative Reform in Por- tugal: Problems and Prospects. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 73 (4), 583−596. 68. Strategija. 2015. Strategija razvoja javne uprave za razdoblje od 2015. do 2020. godine. Narodne novine No. 70/15. 69. Šmidovnik, J. 1995. Lokalna samouprava. Ljubljana: Cankarjeva založba. 70. Tišma, S., Maleković, S., keser, I. 2012 Methodological Applicability and Practical Use of Functional Analysis for Public Administration 388 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Reform: The Case of Croatia. Public and Municipal Finance, 1 (2), 51−60. 71. Verhoest, k., Van Thiel, S., Bouckaert, g., Lægreid, P. (Eds). 2012. g overnment Agencies: Practices and Lessons from 30 Countries. Ba- singstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 72. Vidačak, I., Škrabalo, M. 2014. Exploring the Effects of Europeani- zation on the Openness of Public Administration in Croatia. Croatian and Comparative Public Administration, 14 (1), 149−187. 73. w inkler, R. 2007. Administrative Justice in Europe: The EU Acquis, g ood Practice and Recent Developments. Hrvatska javna uprava, 7 (4), 887−911. 74. w oehrling, J.-M. 2006. Judicial Control of Administrative Authorities in Europe: Toward a Common Model. Hrvatska javna uprava, 6 (1), 35−56. 389 Public Administr Ation reform in r omAni A After 25 YeArs 10. Public Administration Reform in Romania after 25 Years Călin Emilian Hințea, Tudor Cristian Țiclău 10.1. Introduction This chapter aims to offer an overview on the specifics of Public Admi- nistration reform (PAR) introduced in the last 25 years in Romania. Although changes have been rather slow, the public administration is significantly different then the system inherited after the 1989 Revolution. This chapter is structured in 5 sections: the first section offers general information about the political and administrative system; the second section is focused on the main elements of reform – crucial factors influencing pace and impact of change, specifics of PAR in Romania and some considerations on where the system is headed; the third section discusses the specifics of the civil service, including the issues of autonomy, decentralization, budgeting and major problems and challenges; finally, the chapter ends with a set of general conclusions. we have used the term public administration in a broad sense referring to both central and local government but we do not include stateowned companies here (as they are referred specifically as such). w ith regard to agencies, we refer to public authority bodies that are directly subordinated to the central government (executive). 10.2. General Information about Romania’s Public Administration Romania is a semi-presidential republic, 70 organized in accordance with the separation of the main three powers: legislative, executive, and judiciary. The legislative power is represented by the national Parliament (bicameral – Senate and Chamber of Deputies), members being elected through a list vo- 70 Semi-presidential character is given by relative power of the President who is directly elected and designates the Prime Minister. The President also heads external policy matters, and has “the power of appointment” for several high level judicial positions (but this is part of a more complex procedures involving other state powers). 390 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence te. 71 The judiciary is represented by the High Court of Cassation and Justice and is built on a three-tier level: local courts, county courts, and courts of ap- peal. Constitutional matters are dealt separately by the Constitutional Court (CC), which is the main and only authority in matters concerning the funda- mental law. The CC is made up of 9 judges who are politically appointed by the Chamber of Deputies (3), Senate (3), and the President (3). The executive power is split between the President and the Prime Minister. The President is directly elected for a five-year mandate, for a period of max. two manda- tes. Main responsibilities refer to foreign relations (foreign policy), national defense (head of army), ensuring Constitutional compliance and mediator role between state powers. The Government, headed by the Prime Minister (PM), is concerned with general domestic policy. The PM is nominated by the President, while the g overnment is voted into office through a majority (confidence) vote in the Parliament, thus making it politically accountable to the legislative. The central public administration is made up of the central government (headed by the PM), executive central agencies (headed by secre- tary of states in most cases, and directly subordinated to the central govern- ment), and other autonomous central agencies (that are part of the central administration but are not directly subordinated to the government – e.g. Ombudsman, National Bank, Supreme Council for Defence – but are accoun- table in most cases to the legislative and usually have regulatory powers). The central government is represented locally by deconcentrated public services which are governmental branches of each ministry organized locally along with a Prefect, 72 and named by the Prime Minister in each of the 41 counties and the capital Bucharest. Local public administration is two-tier, currently divided into county and local (town, city), structures. Starting from 2004, the Prefect is part of the general body of Senior Civil Servants. Mayors are elected directly in a one round ballot, while for Local and County Councils, members 71 Between 2008 and 2016, the MPs were elected through direct uninominal vote; electoral law has changed in 2016, reversing back to a list system, used between 1990−2008. For local public administration, mayors are elected through a majority system in one round winner takes all, while for councils (local, county) the list system is used. At the county level, Presidents of Coun- ty Councils are elected by the members of the Council (previously were directly elected by the citizens). This shift increases political party control over the Council (through the use of a list and by indirect vote for the President of the County Council). 72 Local administration structure is mainly inspired by the French system with a Prefect representing the government and heading local “deconcentrated/devoluted” services of the central Ministries. 391 Public Administr Ation reform in r omAni A After 25 YeArs are elected based on a party list. The members of the Council elect the presi- dent of the County Councils. These entities have administrative and financial autonomy, 73 but no political autonomy. The Mayor and the President of the County Council represent the executive power, while the Local and County Councils are the local legislative bodies. Starting with 2004 (Law 315/2004), the 41 counties and the capital of Bucharest were divided up into 8 develo- pment regions (NUTS II level). The regions (made up of voluntary associa- tion of counties) represent a territorial unit relevant in the framework of re- gional development policy in Romania. The regional structures are Regional Development Council (consultative structures made of representative county authorities, 74 whose main responsibility is coordinating and monitoring of regional policy development) and Regional Development Agencies (public, non-profit, non-governmental legal entities responsible for drafting regional development plans and implementation of regional development policies). Both of the two bodies do not have a legal personality. 75 10.3. P AR in Romania. Challenges and Changes In this section, 76 we discuss the major reforms that the Romanian admi- nistrative system went through in the last 25 years. The focus is on the factors had a substantial impact on both the pace and impact of reform (including specific country elements). we try to link the changes to the broader the- oretical framework of NPM/Nw S/NPg (New Public Management (NPM), Neo-w eberian State (Nw S), New Public g overnance (NPg)) as defined by Pollitt and Bouckaert (2011). Public administration reform in Romania should not be understood through a linear logic. It is comprised of a series of reform sequences that are intertwined and form a complex administrative framework, difficult to un- derstand and analyze through a traditional approach. A traditional approach 73 Law 215/2001 established 5 major principles upon which local public administration is organi- zed and functions. 74 Prefect, County Councils, deconcentrated public services, academic institutions, social and eco- nomic stakeholders. 75 Source: ec.europa.eu, retrieved from: https://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/regional-and-local-deve- lopment-romania_en. 76 Information included in this section has been previously published in Hințea, C.E. 2011. Reform and Management in Romania. Strategy and Structural Change, Revista de Cercetare si Interventie Sociala, 34, 177−196. 392 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence to such an analysis starts from the premise that there is a clear starting point (objective to reach), and a measurable result (of the reform) with the effecti- veness given by the difference between the two. Romania represents a case where the meaning of a ”successful reform effort” has never been clear with reform efforts sometimes seeming almost incoherent, contradictory, or even opposite from the previous ones. In this context, a key question is whether efforts and resources spent on reform have brought an overall positive change in the public administration and increased well-being of the citizens it serves. As reform seems to be a recurrent and never-ending effort, it is natural to have a certain feeling of fatigue which becomes accentuated when the expec- ted positive results of these efforts take long to be felt. w e will try to point to the distinctive elements of the Romanian PAR process that have shaped the administration into the unique profile it has today. 10.3.1. Communist Legacy The communist legacy is probably one of the most influential and most enduring factors that have shaped PAR in Central and Eastern Europe. The transition towards a post-bureaucratic model of administration (after the fall of the communist regime) implied a general change regarding the concept of public administration as a whole, an attempt that tried to eliminate ”the com- munist mark” at all levels: administrative structure, procedures, organizational culture, strategic perspective, organizational climate, attitude towards change, relationship with the political sphere, relation with citizens, etc. However, this process took place in a unique environment. At political level, Romania lacked a political elite with a clear direction regarding the modernization of the State, most leaders being either former communist bureaucrats, or former commu- nist party members with little to no experience regarding coherent public po- licy (Mungiu-Pipidi, Ioniță, Munteanu, 2003). At society level, lack of trust in public institutions and widespread corruption, a preference for informal per- sonal networks over formal institutions (Hall, 2004), and high predisposition for ”rent-seeking” for those occupying official power positions (ibid., 2004) were also indirect effects of the former communist regime. From a cultural perspective, the communist legacy is (in a way) still present in the adminis- tration with civil servants displaying high power distance in group collecti- vism, and low future orientation and performance orientation (Țiclău, Hințea, 393 Public Administr Ation reform in r omAni A After 25 YeArs 2016), which points to a body of bureaucrats with high tolerance for unequal power distribution, little support for excellence, focus on immediate gratifi- cation, and high valuation of family and close friends. Thus, any attempt in un- derstanding the evolution of PAR in Romania should consider the communist legacy as a major factor of influence on the overall administrative system. This makes Romania’ s transition quite unique − a common communist background similar to the East European countries but with specific cultural and historical elements that interacted to form a particular evolution. Although the post- communist paradigm is not the only key in which the current administrative framework should be understood, it is impossible to ignore it. After 25 years from its fall, one legitimately raises the question – how relevant it will still be in explaining future trends of reform. Because PAR is a continuous process, it is both limiting and inappropriate to use the communist legacy as the sole key for understanding the reform. It still has a print on Romanian society but a fa- ding one, as demographics, technology, human mobility, migration, economic development are factors that gain importance. 10.3.2. Motivation for Reform – External vs. Internal Pressures The next question to ask ourselves when looking at PAR is: “motivation for reform?” , evidently with no simple answer. Is it the general need for change being pushed by the political elite to keep up with a fast evolving society, or are the demands coming from international stakeholders or internal pressure from within (due to extraordinary events or accumulated discontent), maybe just a marketing mechanism used in political discourse to have better chances of occupying office? This is an essential question as the reason behind reform will probably have a great impact on the shape, design, and effectiveness of reform. If it is political marketing, then reform will be more about political dis- course than actual policy, while an ideologically motivated reform with poli- tical elites behind it will definitely have more success. After 1989, reform was a constant of political discourse (and given the ruthlessness of the previous regime, it is no surprise) but the motivation behind its front stage appearance was different. g eert Bouckaert and John Halligan (2008: 13) note that in w es- tern countries, reform movements were stimulated by two major factors: (1) economic factors (high public deficits, high expenditures of the state, level of taxation), and (2) public distrust in the government, double internal pressure 394 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence coming from both the market and citizens. Are these factors also present in the case of Romania? The 2006 Eurobarometer depicts an interesting picture with citizens showing high levels of trust in the EU (67%) but much lower trust in national state institutions – 27% g overnment, 24% Parliament, 12% Political Parties (EC 66, 2006). A more recent national study 77 from 2011 regarding citizens perception of local public administration shows a rather pessimistic picture – when asked to evaluate the level of satisfaction regarding the activity of the local authorities of respondents said they think civil servants follow per- sonal interest before the public one (60.5% ), are not professional (40%), lack integrity (42%), authorities are not able to solve their problems fast enough (50%), and are not efficient in their activity (42%). This is indeed an undesira- ble combination: a citizen that believes that the public administration decisi- ons have a major influence on his or her life but, at the same time, feels he or she can do little to influence them. This lack of trust in the capacity of public institutions to solve community problems is maintained even at present time. A recent national representative survey found that less than 20% of citi- zens trust the representatives of local public administration compared to 77% of citizens who had trust in firemen, or 74% in athletes or doctors (IRES, 2016); also more than 90% of people feel that the level of corruption is un- bearable, and 65% feel the responsibility for this lies within the political class (ibid. 2016), while three major causes for the lack of trust in the Romanian State are according to the same study: (1) high levels of corruption, (2) inequ- ality or privileges for certain categories of citizens, and (3) lack of fair compe- tition. Looking at these numbers we can certainly conclude that corruption and lack of trust in public institutions lead citizens to believe that the admin- istration is rather a source of problems rather then a solution. From inside the system, change has been gradual and incremental at best with civil servants either not understanding the purpose of reform, classifying it as ambiguous, or not being familiar with its content (Tripon, Șandor, 2008; Andrei, Profiroiu, Turturean, 2006). Thus, internal pressures for reform were rather week. The main stimuli for reform, in Romania’ s case, usually came from outside. The desire to be part of the EU and NATO has made governments, 77 „Studiu privind corupţia din administraţia publică locală” RAPORT COMPREHENSIV , avail- able online at: http://www.portalbn.ro/cj/Lists/Stiri/Attachments/74/RAPORT%20COMPRE- HENSIV .pdf. For full information please consult the reference section. 395 Public Administr Ation reform in r omAni A After 25 YeArs starting with 1997, very open and perceptive to reform proposals coming from international stakeholders. This phenomenon had two types of effects: • A positive effect: high levels of popular support regarding accession to the EU or NATO which gave governments little room to maneuver regarding adoption of reforms, especially those essential for accession. In many cases, the external pressures were the only ones. However, as in other EU countries, the leverage of international bodies reduced after accession, and implicitly, their potential influence (as catalyst) on national reforms. • A negative effect: being promoted by external factors, some reforms were adopted just because “they had to be adopted” but were never fully implemented and internalized by both political leaders and the administrative apparatus, leading to incremental or superficial change with little results. One specific example for this is the creation of ins- titutions at the explicit request of international bodies (National Ins- titute of Administration, National Agency of Civil Servants) without the necessary managerial capacity and resources needed to run effec- tivelly and serve their true purpose. External pressures for change also led to the onset of a “correct langua- ge” for PAR – increasing administrative capacity, improving quality of services, creating a European State, or the alternative adopting European standards, pro- fessionalization of civil servants – a language which has been used (especially by politicians) to mask lack of progress of reform. 10.3.3. Reform Coherence (or Lack of It) Beyond the language, lack of coherence or strategic approach in reform proposals has been a constant shortcoming. This led to a mostly incremental change process with small changes in different areas of the system (procedures, relations between central or local organizational structures, restructuring of central administration, creation of new institutions) but without a system-wide logic and a long-term perspective. Some initiatives taken recently (creation of an organizational structure inside the Ministry of Development and Public Administration responsible for government-wide strategy, and coherent public policy process in 2008) aim to offer such a (strategic) perspective but their im- pact is rather minor (a series of strategic documents at best). 396 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence This lack of coherence has been more prominent before the EU integra- tion (lack of a strategic approach to PAR, sectorial reforms initiated without a strategic vision, low administrative capacity for reform implementation – EC Country Reports 2000, 2001, 2002) but has remained a challenge even af- ter the accession. Between 2007 and 2013 a number of 40 sectorial strategies concerning public administration have been approved by the g overnment without taking into consideration other policy initiatives. This trend is sustained even today with the existence of over 35 78 ”na- tional strategic documents” but no comprehensive country strategy 79 aligned with the Europe 2020. This abundance of strategies is unfortunately not translated into actual results – evaluations of the yearly National Reform Plans 80 indicate that only about 27% of the proposed objectives were actu- ally achieved during the allocated time frame (2011−2013 period). Finally, a good proxy for lack of coherence is legislative stability and predictability, which has been signaled as a major shortcoming in numerous reports (CSM Report, 2015 81 ; Fiscal Council Report 82 , 2013, 2015; EC Country Report, 2014, 2015; CEPA, 2014) referring to different sectors but most often regar- ding justice, fiscal legislation, environment, and energy sectors. The practice of using urgency ordinance as a tool for public policy decisions is a fur- ther sign of limited strategic approach 83 (see Table 1 below), although this practice has been steadily decreasing in the last years. This decrease in the number of urgency ordinances should be taken with a pinch of salt, the press signaling a new practice where more initiatives are put together inside one ordinance, so the government would avoid the critique of abuse of urgency 78 Only the documents concerning the national level are counted in 2015 reference year. 79 As Romania had a loan agreement with the IMF and the EC between 2009−2014, the g overn- ment released yearly or bi-yearly strategic plans called National Reform Plans (2011−2013, 2014 and 2015) but these were constructed in agreement with the IMF and the EC and had the pur- pose to guide the g overnment’ s efforts to advance the reforms in exchange for the loan. This falls in the category of must do reforms discussed in the next section of the chapter. 80 Yearly or 2-year plans developed, starting in 2013, in agreement with the EC aiming at develo- ping public policies for the Europe 2020 country targets. 81 Superior Magistrature Council (CSM) – Report on the State of the Justice System for year 2015, available online at: http://www.csm1909.ro/csm/index.php?cmd=24. 82 2013 annual Report by the Fiscal Council (FC), available online at: http://www.consiliulfiscal.ro/ ra-2013.pdf, and http://www.consiliulfiscal.ro/RA2015%20ro%203iunie2016%20c.pdf. 83 Legally, this is a measure the executive can (and should) use only in situations of utmost urgency but has been a practice of all political parties when getting into office to promote their agenda in a ”faster” tempo. 397 Public Administr Ation reform in r omAni A After 25 YeArs ordinances while retaining the power of immediate appliance of its initiative (2015). 84 Figure 10.1: Number of Urgency Ordinances Source: Chamber of Deputies (Parliament). This type of approach to reform without a strategic perspective and vision has major drawbacks in the long term as it brings “artificial” change to the system that is not fully adopted and internalized – different elements of the system are changing without a bigger picture and a clear thought out direction – and contributes to the increasing feeling of ”random reform” . One solution would be to adopt a strategic approach to the reform process based upon the correct identification of key strategic factors (more on this in Hințea, 2011) that will have significant medium to long term impact on the system. One pressing question is whether such an approach (mostly focused on sectorial change) can have positive results, and can truly bring systemic change. Naturally, specific change initiatives are simpler and easier to ”sell” , imply less risk, and sometimes have a ”quick fix” nature that is appealing both to politi- cians and public. However, focusing only on operational problems can lead to substantial long-term problems: ignoring structural problems does not make 84 In one such situation, in 2015, the government adopted in the body of 1 urgency ordinance no less than 26 initiatives from the field raging from sports to state-owned companies – see OUg 2/2015. 398 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence them disappear but rather increases their negative impact and there is a certain point when tackling them becomes inevitable. This approach based on the be- lief ”if you ignore a problem it will also ignore you” is surprisingly widespread 85 10.3.4. Magnitude and Approach. Sectorial Policy vs. Structural Reforms w hen talking about PAR, another relevant question is the ”nature of change”. Are we talking about structural, system-wide change that implies major political risks, or are we referring to specific, sector or policy change which is focused on fixing limited or specific problems? Combining the issue of motivation with that of magnitude of reform, we end up with 4 cases: • ”Must do”structural reforms – these refer to major changes that focus on the system as a whole, and mostly have come from external pressu- res. This is the case of the major reforms that took place during the EU accession period (1999−2007) which implied the adoption of the Acquis Communautaire and changes to satisfy the conditions, and close all the 35 chapters; the case is similar regarding the NATO accession, although in this case the reforms were more narrow, involving mostly the area of defense and intelligence. Another example of must do structural re- forms are the major changes that took place between 2009 and 2012 (see Boc, 2011) as a reaction to the financial crisis – their main pressure coming this time from the IMF and the European Union. • Structural ideological reforms – this category refers to reforms that have an internal source, are politically motivated, and aim at changing and shaping the administration according to the ideology held by the political leaders. Unfortunately, in Romania, few reforms (if any) have been promoted and implemented because of ideological beliefs. One such attempt could be considered the Education Reform (law 1/2011) which was ideologically motivated (strong political support from the governing party for the minister who promoted it) had a comprehen- sive character, and redefined the notion of public education. However, it proved to be short lived, the change of government in 2012 brought immediate and successive amendments to the law in the next two ye- 85 A good example of this is the g overnment‘s main concern regarding the pension system towards the transfer of pensions for senior citizens on bank cards but leaving the problem of budget deficits which is structural (see Dragotă, Miricescu, 2010; Ciuraru-Andrica, 2013). 399 Public Administr Ation reform in r omAni A After 25 YeArs ars after its introduction, suffering more than 20 changes 86 which re- versed or eliminated most of the changes (Nature, 2013). 87 • Specific ”policy” reforms – these are fairly common, and refer to sector reforms that have an ideological base or come from a positi- ve past experience in solving similar problems. They usually focus on procedures, programs, or internal mechanisms of a specific part of the administrative apparatus; they do not have system-wide impact and do not imply a change of paradigm. The most obvious example is changes of the fiscal code which are in most cases ideologically driven (depending on the political orientation of the government) but do not imply a general change in the entire administrative system. • ”Must do” specific policy reforms – these are probably the most com- mon types of changes, and are focused on operational issues, in most cases negotiated with or solicited by external stakeholders. They appe- al to the political leaders as they can pass the responsibility to external factors – the traditional discourse is they are ”EU requirements” or ”the IMF requirement”. Unfortunately, in most cases, these changes have little long-term impacts and, sometimes, lack of internal support even from the political leaders, thus leading to poor implementation with little to no positive results 88 . The side effects of these poor results (dangerously) lead to a reform fatigue in public opinion. Another specific characteristic, regarding the actual framing of reform proposals, is their legalistic character. This paradigm stems from the assump- tion that adoption of new legislation is the solution for public problems (see Figure 10.2). 86 For detailed information on the nature of the changes consult ”Doi ani de la intrarea in vigoare a legii Educatiei Nationale. Cum au modificat-o cei 6 ministri si jumatate din ultimul an” Hotnews ar- ticle from 12 february 2013 available at: http://www.hotnews.ro/stiri-esential-14212979-doi-ani-in- trarea-vigoare-legii-educatiei-nationale-cum-modificat-cei-6-ministri-jumatate-din-ultimul.htm. 87 Both local and international press have been highly critical of the modifications meant to reverse or reduce the impact of changes brought by Law 1/2011. In the next two years after its intro- duction, it was modified more than 20 times, and it has been one of the most modified pieces of regulation. For more on this see Nature, 500, 22 august 2013: 388−389. 88 One such example is the reforms implemented starting with 2009 in State Owned Companies (SOC). External pressures for privatization from the IMF and the EC led to introduction of private management to SOC but with poor results as the legislation change still permitted high levels of political influence. For more information see Expert Forum Policy Brief No. 11, 2012; See also Marrez, 2015. 400 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Figure 10.2: Linear Logic of New Legislation This belief of solving policy problems through adoption of new legislation is not specific only to Romania (Liebert, Condrey, g oncharov, 2013). It stems from the view that the administrative apparatus is an institutional extension of administrative law, thus any problems related to it can be fixed through new regulation. An important caveat of this approach is that its promoters (usually political leaders) do not consider the implications of regulation on the actual enactment of reform, leaving out any consideration on issues of administrative or managerial capacity. The consequence of this is legislative instability as there is never a shortage of problems that need fixing, which leads to constant modifications of the legal framework that, in turn, lead to ambiguity and uncertainty. This is doubled by a cultural paradigm that public management is more a question of instinct or hobby, one does not need a spe- cial training, and the main criteria for success is sufficient political support. The legalist culture, along with a general disregard concerning managerial professionalism inside the administration, are two important factors that have contributed to the reduced effectiveness of reforms in Romania. Finally, it is worth mentioning that, while in w estern countries the market has been a very strong source of pressure for the public sector to become more effici- ent and cost-effective, its role in Romania has been reduced (the free private market is less developed, and has a history of less than 15 years in Romania) 10.3.5. Pre-Bureaucracy towards Post-Bureaucracy One common problem with analyzing and understanding reforms in Central and Eastern Europe is the applicability of w estern type reform mo- dels. Can they be imported? Do they work? Do they bring the same benefits as in w estern Europe? Evidently, there is no straightforward answer; as the contextual factors are immensely important for the success of such initia- tives, the major challenge is the adoption of post-bureaucratic measures in a pre-bureaucratic administrative system. Post-bureaucratic reforms stem 401 Public Administr Ation reform in r omAni A After 25 YeArs from the general idea that the traditional administrative model is obsolete and incapable of solving the complex problems of modern society. Pollitt and Bouckaert (2011) classify these post-bureaucratic reform movements in three major categories – New Public Management (NPM), Neo-w eberian State (Nw S), and New Public g overnance (NPg). Being a reform approach of the „1980s” , NPM is the only reform movement that has already been eva- luated both in Europe and Romania. NMP type changes started mainly after Romania‘s EU accession process initiated (1997), and were mostly focused on public administration organization and functioning − civil service reform, decentralization process, cost-saving measures, reducing state apparatus, and more recently, reform of the education system 89 (Dan, 2015). NPM type initiatives regarding the health system (especially regarding co-payment and a more prominent role of the private sector) did not find too much support from the public. It is difficult to evaluate the impact of these reforms 90 – on the one hand, the most recent ones have coincided with the financial economic crises, thus especially cost-cutting measures and downsizing were inevitable, while on the issues relating to effectiveness, efficiency, quality of services, it seems that Romania is still falling behind – with international reports indicating major issues regarding poor management of state-owned companies, EU funds absorption, and poor public governance (EC Country Report, 2015; CEPA 91 , 2014). Referring to to the other two paradigms – Neo- w eberian State and New Public g overnance – they are relatively new even on a theoretical level, with continuous debates regarding their form and content, indicating no universal model at least regarding NPg (Pollitt and Bouckaert, 2011; Torfing and Triantafillou, 2013). A recent research on the influence of cultural antecedents on civil servants (Țiclău, Hințea, 2016) in- dicates a higher preference for Nw S structures in administration with ”fol- lowing organization rules, guidelines, and orders” and ”conducting business in an impartial way” − seen as the most important elements of an ”ideal” 89 Law 1/2011 with a clear focus on budgeting based on the results and performance, although it has been changed immediately after the 2012 elections and instalment of a new government. 90 Measures with the highest impact were taken during the crisis period (2009−2011) and were focused on reducing the public deficit through cost-cutting measures across the board, inclu- ding a 25% reduction in salaries for public officials, along with a general downsizing of the state apparatus – 223 executive agencies were reduced to 112. For more on this see Boc, 2011; Mora, Țiclău, 2012; Hințea, 2011. 91 Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA). For full report please see reference section. 402 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence administrative system (ibid. 145). However, further research on the topic is needed, and would offer a more accurate picture of which of the three mo- dels is preferred by civil servants. The historical evolution of Romania (including the communist period) has placed the administrative system in a situation where it needs to over- come two major challenges linked both to the ideal model of a bureaucracy and to the modern approaches of PAR: (1) reducing political influence and professionalization of the civil service, and (2) adopting specific managerial principles (cost standards, budgeting by objectives, performance manage- ment, TQM, benchmarking, Program Planning Budgeting Systems) along with maintaining the ethos of the public sector (fairness, representation, equitable treatment, non-discrimination). This is a complex task with which the Romanian public administration struggles to both understand and im- plement. Compared to its w estern counterparts, Romania did not have the “luxury” of organically developing its bureaucracy (because of its communist past), hence the challenge is much more difficult. It has to transform a pre- bureaucratic system into a modern post-bureaucratic one while skipping the bureaucratic phase, and (paradoxically) retaining the positive elements of the w eberian model (professionalization, competence, impartiality). This is probably the biggest challenge faced (and still facing) by the post-commu- nist Romania (Hințea, 2011: 182). 10.3.6. Context of Reform Finally, context is another specific factor that must be thoroughly ana- lyzed in order to understand PAR and its chances for success. In the case of Romania, several elements are noteworthy: • Macroeconomic evolutions: In a certain sense of irony, the most am- bitious reforms have been adopted in the period of economic crisis when resources were scarce and the sectors seemed untouchable until then (restructuring of central administration, financial restructuring, educational reform, pension system reform – see Boc 2011, Mora, Țiclău, 2012). On the other han, the period of economic growth has been marred by the lack of strategic vision regarding development – in 2011, Romania had over 40,000 investment projects that already 403 Public Administr Ation reform in r omAni A After 25 YeArs started but have not been finalized yet 92 – adoption of modern finan- cial tools (multi-annual budgets) remains an ambition, investment in innovation and research to develop competitive advantage being reduced or stagnating at best. 93 A simple explanation for such a sharp contrast is best described by the aphorism necessity is the mother of all motivation. • Socio-cultural evolutions: Understanding the cultural paradigm, and especially the specifics of both national and administrative cul- ture, is essential for the reform process as this is directly linked to the success of the reform (March, Olsen, 1995). Trust between citizens and public authorities, and between the state institutions themselves is a cultural specific factor. In Romania, this relation is characterized by reduced public trust in the capacity of the state to solve citizens problems (IRES, 2016), while the administration does not see citizens as partners but rather as ”administered” beneficiaries, leading to a vicious circle of suspicion − a problem which cannot be resolved just through regulation. Lack of trust translates into poor communication and specific behavioral changes where bending rules, finding loopho- les, or directly not complying with the rules becomes acceptable on a large scale. An example of this (Preda, g rigoraș, 2011) is the establis- hing of disability pensions – their number has exploded from 208,000 in 1990 to 892,000 in 2008 (430%); moreover, in some counties over 30% of pensions were granted as disability pensions while in other counties their percentage was much lower, i.e. between 6% and 8%. This indicates systemic problems regarding how these benefits (cri- teria being too lax) are given combined with a development of fraud networks and tolerance of rule bending. Migration has also been an important influence on PAR. Positive effects range from large finan- cial capital sent back by migrant workers 94 combined with higher 92 Declaration of Mugur Isărescu, Head of Romanian National Bank at the Cgg Economic Forum, Bucharest (2011). Full declaration can be found at: http://economie.hotnews.ro/stiri-finante_ banci-8373912-mugur-isarescu-are-nevoie-aceasta-tara-nu-bani-antreprenori.htm. 93 According to EUROSTAT, R&D financing has been decreasing in the last 3 years (2013-2015), reaching a meagre 0.38% of gDP , thus being in last place at the EU level, although Romania has enjoyed economic growth. 94 In 2014, 4,2 billion euro have been sent back to Romania by Romanian migrants working in 404 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence expectations regarding public service quality because of exposure to public services in the w est, while there is a downside to increasing the number of children left to be cared for by other people than their parents. Romanians working or living abroad have had a major influ- ence on the last two presidential elections (2009 and 2014): in 2009, while in country votes indicated one candidate as winner, the addi- tional votes coming from Romanian expatriate voters changed the result, while in 2014, the news that people were waiting for more than 12 hours to vote caused a public outrage regarding one of the candi- dates, increased public participation to vote in the second round, and basically provided the victory for the opposition candidate. 95 • Political factors: they are diverse and mixed. Lack of strategic pers- pective regarding reform, with the notable exception of accession to NATO and the EU an objective that found support through the entire political spectrum (this is a reflection of high public support for a w estern direction of development in an attempt to brake away from the communist past). High politicization of the public sector mani- fested throughout the entire administrative apparatus (central admi- nistration, local administration, state-owned companies, and central agencies) has led to major deficiencies in management quality of pu- blic organizations, high instability of human resource, lack of strate- gic perspective, low motivation of civil servants (wB, 2011, 2013). • Technology: Although Romania is still playing catch-up regarding e-government and access to online public services, its evolution has been dramatic. The number of Internet users has more than tripled between 2002 and 2013, from 1,7 million users to 6,4 million in 2013, and 8,8 million in 2015. Moreover, Romania ranked 6 th worldwide in 2015 according to Techinsider 96 regarding average peak Internet speed. A major impact is also felt in the labor market where more than 75,000 people work for 14,000 IT companies with revenues of the EU, mostly in Italy in Spain, a figure larger than total net foreign investments according to Romanian National Bank. 95 Public participation to the second round of the Presidential election was 57% in 2000, and 55% in 2004, 58% in 2009, and 64% in 2014 (source: National Electorate Bureau). 96 Ranking available online at: http://www.techinsider.io/akami-global-internet-speeds-ran- kings-2015-9. 405 Public Administr Ation reform in r omAni A After 25 YeArs over 4 billion euro in 2014 (Euractiv, 2015). 97 The context analysis implies the understanding both the evolution of these factors and how they interact and influence reform (considered toget- her). It is a difficult, complex but necessary analysis, in its absence, resistan- ce to change is almost impossible to overcome. In Romania, resistance to change has been strong and diverse, and the anti-reform discourse has been growing from two arguments: • In essence, reform is desirable and positive but is not appropriate at present as there are more urgent issues that need resolution; • Romania is a special case where w estern ideas and policies of reform should and cannot be applied. Regarding the local context, political support and technical (or manage- rial) capacity for reform are indispensable for ensuring success. Romania has had in most situations one of the two unfortunate combinations: (1) politi- cal desire for change but without the necessary technical know-how, or (2) well-documented policy proposals that lack the necessary political support. Although most of the blame for failures or limited success of reforms is commonly placed on politicians, low managerial capacity for reform imple- mentation (present at all system levels) contributes to these letdowns. Lack of a managerial culture inside the public sector, lack of technical expertise in both local and central government, low number of think-thanks able to offer policy expertize, low involvement of the academic sphere (universi- ties) in providing know-how on specific policy issues are some of the causes for the overall low managerial (or administrative) capacity. Even though the administrative system does not have sufficient managerial capacity it is also not very open to bring in such expertize from other fields. A recent study (Hințea, Profiroiu, Țiclău, 2015: 37) indicates that universities are the least involved partners in strategic planning initiatives at the local level with less than 20% of local administration involving representatives from the acade- mia in different stages of the planning process (compared to the business sector which goes as high as 60% individual citizens which are involved in almost 90% of the cases). 97 Article available online at: http://www.euractiv.ro/economic/industria-it-din-romania-14.000- de-companii-75.500-de-angajati-si-venituri-totale-de-4-mld.-euro-2722. 406 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 10.4. Specifics of the Administrative System. Civil Service, Decentralization, Agencification, Public Funding In this section, we analyze the evolution of the administrative system in the last 20 years. Special attention is given to the civil service, process of decentralization, agencification, and public financing of administrative appa- ratus. Our purpose is twofold: (1) highlight the specifics of the system, and (2) point to the key reforms that shaped it into what it is today. 10.4.1. Civil Service Romania can be considered a slow starter 98 regarding civil service reform as legal establishment of a formal civil service came through the adoption of the Law No. 188/1999 on the Statute of Civil Servants − a com- prehensive law regulating most facets of the organization and functioning of the civil service. Coupled with the adoption of the Law  No.  7/2004 on the Code of Conduct for Civil Servants, hereinafter referred to as: the Code of Conduct, focused on professional conduct and integrity criteria, they represent the backbone regulation for the civil service. The first piece of regulation, divides civil servants into three major categories (based on res- ponsibility/hierarchic position): 99 − Execution civil servants – lower level civil servants with execution positions (high school degree; − over 90% of all civil servants), − Managerial civil servants – middle management positions in the lo- cal or central administration (need a undergraduate university de- gree; − approx. 11%), − Senior Civil Servants (SCS) – highest ranked civil servants occupying highest non political positions, mostly central government (need a undergraduate university degree + graduation of the specific pro- gram for SCS − approx 0.15% of civil servants, or between 240 and 260 in absolute numbers). 98 Introduction of Civil Service Statute in other EEC: Hungary in 1992; Estonia in 1995; Poland in 1998; Bulgaria, Lithuania, Albania in1999; Latvia in 2000). 99 Part of the information included in this section has been previously published in Hinţea, C., Ţiclău, T., ”Training of Senior Civil Servants In Eastern European Countries. The case of Romania” , In: Montgomery V an w art, Annie Hondeghem, Erwin Schwella (Eds), Leadership and Culture. Com- parative Models of Top Civil Servant Training, Palgrave Macmillan: 103−118, 2015. 407 Public Administr Ation reform in r omAni A After 25 YeArs All civil servants are appointed through a general public contest while SCS positions are filled through a special national contest. Likewise, all public acti- vity of civil servants must be in accordance with the principles of legality and impartiality, transparency, efficiency and effectiveness, accountability, orienta- tion towards citizens, stability and hierarchical subordination. This can be seen as a combination of values, like fairness and social justice (legality, impartiality, transparency, and accountability), orientation towards results (efficiency and effectiveness, orientation towards citizens), and bureaucratic values (stability and hierarchical subordination). However, legality or adherence to the law seems to be the top priority of civil servants (of any class) as the obligation to obey the law expressed through policies and procedures specific to their positions supersedes other loyalties to- wards either their institution or their superior as they can refuse to execute an order if that order is not according to the law (Art. 45, Law 188/1999) with the condition to motivate their decision in writing, and at the same time, signal the unlawful order to a superior. This was latter reinforced through the introduction of a specific model of conduct (Art. 6, Law No. 7/2004 on the Code of Conduct) – loyalty towards the Constitution and the Law. The responsibility regarding im- plementation, evaluation, and general monitoring of code of conduct infringe- ment falls in the jurisdiction of the National Agency for Civil Servants (NACS) which is the main institutional body responsible for the full management of the civil service (raging from regulation, control, and enforcement). The National Agency of Civil Servants (NACS) is a central agency under the Ministry of Public Administration, and ”is responsible for formulating the policies and strategies concerning the management of public positions and civil servants, drafts and advises normative acts concerning public positions and civil servants, monitors and controls the implementation of legislation concerning the public position and the civil servants, etc. ” (g overnment Order No. 1000/2006). NACS is also responsible for the annual development plan for public functions in the central administration, and regulates the appointment, promotion, and dismissal of civil servants as well as any situation of conflict or breach of ethics. Lastly, NACS has full responsibility regarding training and professional development programs for civil servants in general, including SCS. Management of the public function is based on a National Development (or Occupation) Plan which defines the maximum number of public positions for 408 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence each category and for each type of recruitment or employment (promotion, external selection, appointment, creation, etc.). Regarding ethics and integrity, Romania represents one of the most pro- gressive civil law jurisdictions to attempt to regulate civil servants’ conduct re- garding ethics and integrity (Bryane, 2008), with the main piece of legislation being the Code of Conduct, although some provisions are overlapping with other laws. 100 The Code of Conduct aims at promoting ethical values within the civil service in order to help civil servants provide “excellent” public services (Art. 5), establishing a set of principles of professional conduct, loyalty of civil servants towards the law, their agency and public interest, regulates communi- cation with the members of the public, and re-iterates the prohibition against taking gifts and bribes, similar to many of the provisions found in other EU ethics laws (Bryane, 2008). Figure 10.3: Areas Regulated by the Code of Conduct for Civil Servants Chapter I: Field of Application and General Principles Article 1: Field of Application                                                  Article 2: Purpose Article 3: g eneral Principles                                                    Article 4: Terms   Chapter II: General Norms of Moral and Professional Conduct for Civil Servants Article 5: To provide a high quality public service                    Article 6: Loyalty to the law Article 7: Loyalty to public authorities and institutions              Article 8: Freedom of opinion Article 9: Public activity                                                             Article 10: Political activity Article 11: Use of image                                                  Article 12: Relationships Article 13: International relations                                                Article 14: Restrictions on gifts Article 15: Participation in decision making                                Article 16: Objectivity Article 17: Use of political prerogatives                           Article 18: Use of public resources Article 19: Restricted participation in public contracts      Chapter III: Institutional Arrangements Article 20: The public institution in charge                                Article 21: Notification Article 22: Settling the case                                                       Article 23: Publicity on reported cases Chapter IV: Final Provisions Article 24: Accountability                                                          Article 25: Harmonization of internal rules Article 26: Publicity                                                                  Article 27: Enforcement Source: Bryane, 2008: 305. 100 Law No. 188/1999 on the Statute of Civil Servants or recent orders of the NACS. 409 Public Administr Ation reform in r omAni A After 25 YeArs As expected, implementation, evaluation, and general monitoring of ethics code infringement is mainly the responsibility of NACS. Through the Law No. 50/2007, 101 the positions of ethics counselor was introduced, named by the head of the institution from the HR department, with twofold res- ponsibilities at the institutions level: (1) offer consultancy and support to other civil servants regarding issues of ethics and integrity, and (2) monitor and report on the application and conformity with the Code of Conduct. w hereas in w estern countries (the US, the Uk, Holland), the main focus is on counselling and offering support, in Romania the main focus (judging by the detailed regulation) is on monitoring and reporting. 102 Though the NACS is mostly responsible for collecting complaints regarding ethics issues and following up on them, the ethics counsellors are the ones who actually need to constantly monitor this activity inside the institution, and report directly to the head of the institution who, in turn, forwards these reports to the NACS. A unitary way of reporting has been adopted since 2008 (Order No. 4500/2008 of the President of NACS). A recent change made in 2015 offers ethics councilors the possibility to report directly to the NACS using an online platform. The National Anti-Corruption Strategy 2012−2015 103 requires a self- evaluation regarding the use and effectiveness of anti-corruption measures for each public institution. The NACS activity reports for 2013 and 2014 mention that around 822 institutions (representing about 60% of civil ser- vants) have submitted reports regarding these measures. The conclusion drawn from them is that ”too little attention was given to identifying the causes of ethics and integrity infringement” . Sanctions applied each year for breaching the Code of Conduct vary from 500 to 550, which means around 0.004% in total of approx. 130,000 civil servants have breached the Code of Conduct, and have thus been sanctioned. 101 Law No. 50/2007 amending the consul of Conduct, available online at: http://lege5.ro/g ratuit/ geydomjqhe/legea-nr-50-2007-pentru-modificarea-si-completarea-legii-nr-7-2004-privind-co- dul-de-conduita-a-functionarilor-publici. 102 For a comparative analysis on the role of ethics councilers see Laura Ștefan – Scurtă analiză com- parativă a statului și competențelor consilierilor de etică, avăilable online at: http://www.anfp. gov.ro/R/Doc/2015/Proiecte/Incheiate/PHARE%202005%20017%20553%20010301/Scurta%20 analiza%20comparativa%20-%20consilieri%20de%20etica%20final.doc. 103 National Anti-Corruption Strategy 2012−2015, available online at: http://sna.just.ro/sna/ sna20122015.aspx. 410 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence An important influence in this area has come from the National Anti- Corruption Directorate (DNA) which has intensified its activity in the last years, leading to more then 50% of the Presidents of County Councils being investiga- ted for corruption while the DNA ’s 2015 report 104 states that public acquisition sector is plagued by generalized corruption. Other numbers are also alarming: 1,250 individuals indicted for high and medium corruption (from which over 100 mayors and presidents of county councils); sums coming from bribes re- ached 430 million euro (similar sum was allocated for the national highway program for 2016−2018) while the number of dignitaries sent to trial (27 in total) is 5 times higher in 2015 compared to 2013. Clearly, corruption is one of the major (if not the biggest) problem facing Romania also in 2016. 10.4.2. Reform and Decentralization Process Decentralization is one of the six basic principles of organization and functioning of thee local public administration. 105 The actual meaning of de- centralization is defined more clearly in Law No. 195/2006 which states that it is the transfer of administrative and financial competence from central to local administration or private sector. Two elements are worth noting here, i.e. only financial and administrative competence are transferred (not political ones), and they can be transferred including to the private sector. Decentra- lization of authority should be done in respecting the following additional principles: principle of subsidiarity; principle of ensuring resources adequate to the competences transferred; principle of responsibility of local govern- ment authorities in relation to their powers; principle of ensuring a process of decentralization that is stable, predictable, based on objective rules and criteria; principle of equity that involves ensuring access of all citizens to pu- blic services and public utility services; principle of budgetary constraint pro- hibiting the use of special transfers or subsidies by the central government to cover the final deficits of local budgets. Other aspects worth mentioning are: (1) introduction of cost and quality standards regarding public service provision (established by the central government and adopted starting from 2009); (2) classification of exclusive, shared, and delegated competences, and 104 Available online at: http://www.pna.ro/obiect2.jsp?id=248. 105 The 6 principles according to the Law No. 215/2001 (Art. 2) are: local authonomy, decentraliza- tion, deconcentration, legality, eligibility, and consultation of citizens in issues of public interest. 411 Public Administr Ation reform in r omAni A After 25 YeArs (3) transfer of competences based on the level of administrative capacity, and only after an objective and comprehensive evaluation (Carp, Sienerth, 2014). All these are meant to increase the quality of the process and link decentra- lization to another essential element − administrative capacity. In this sense, the central government has to do a prior evaluation of the capacity the local authorities have before competences are transferred, and this happens only if local authorities have the necessary administrative capacity to actually take on new responsibilities. Economic efficiency regarding public services deli- vered in a decentralized manner, and the size of territorial areas where the public services’ beneficiaries are located are also the criteria used in decisions to decentralize (Dragoș Neamțu, 2007: 645). Finally, the obligation of pilo- ting before actually transferring competence towards local authorities (done by the central government in collaboration with associative structures of the local authorities) is meant to offer empirical evidence for sectorial decentrali- zation proposals that they are viable. Although the 2006 Law brings important improvements and clarity regarding decentralization, it still fails to take into consideration a series of European principles contained in the European Charter of Local Self-g o- vernment of the Council of Europe, ratified already in 1999 by Romania (law No. 199/1999). A more thorough comparison between national legislation and the EU Charter (Carp, Sienerth, 2014, p 1221) point to the following 2 principles not being included in national legislation: (1) consultation of local authorities on decisions that affect them directly, and (2) proportionality of administrative control and intervention from central government. In 2013, a new law was passed by the Parliament which intended to further decentra- lize a series of central competences in the field of agriculture, environment, health, pre-universitary education, culture, sports, and specific competences regarding metro in Bucharest. However, the law was declared unconstitutio- nal by the Constitutional Court (Decision No. 1/2014 of the Constitutional Court), whereas the most important reason being that the proposal was not respecting several principles imposed by the Framework Law On Decentrali- zation No. 195/2006. Decentralization has been a constant topic on the PAR agenda, being set as a priority in all official reform initiatives in the last 15 years (see Table 10.4 below), and started with the adoption of Law No. 215/2001 on Local Public 412 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Administration, and continued with the adoption of the first Framework Law On Decentralization No. 339/2004 (replaced by the Law No. 195/2006). 106 Figure 10.4: Public Administration Reform Strategies in Romania Ye ar Reform strategy Type of reform approach (NPM/NWS/ NPG) Decentrali- zation as a stra- tegic objective 2001 g overnment Strategy for the Accelera- tion of Public Administration Reform, 2001–2003 Nw S mostly Ye s 2004 g overnments Updated Strategy for Pu- blic Administration Reform 2004–2006 NwS Ye s 2007 National Plan for Development 2007–2013 107 (NPD), National Strategic Reference Framework Mostly NPM Not directly 2011– 2015 National Reform Program 2011–2013, 2014, 2015 NPM mostly Partially 108 2014– 2020 Strategy for consolidation of public admi- nistration 2014–2020 Mixed (NPM&NPg) Ye s 109 The first PAR Strategy (2001) was focused on four major pillars: (1) structural reform – better regulation of central and local administration res- ponsibilities along with regulation of interactions with citizens; (2) decen- tralization process; (3) professional civil service and better public services (reduced political influence, professional development); and (4) open admi- 106 The first Framework  Law On Decentralization No. 339/2004) was replaced by the Law No. 195/2006 without even actually being put into practice (see more on this in Carp, Sienerth, 2014). 107 After the accession to the EU, Romania had to develop strategic plans in accordance to the EU priorities in order to access financing. Thus, although these plans, including the NPD, had refer - ences regarding public administration, their main objective was to fulfill the EU legal require- ment and facilitate the EU funds absorbtion by offering necessary legal framework in accessing these funds. This is in line with our previous evaluation regarding lack of strategic, ideologically driven reforms. 108 Decentralization is not defined as a clear strategic objective but is referred to as a priority in the sectors of public administration (capacity development in corellation with decentralization), education, health care. 109 The current reform decentralization has moved from a general strategic objective to a specific objective, specifically focused on financial decentralization. 413 Public Administr Ation reform in r omAni A After 25 YeArs nistration and citizen oriented services (NPM element). The adoption of the strategy also lead to institutional changes with the notable introduction of the Central Unit for Public Administration Reform (UCRAP) which had the role of coordinating and monitoring of all PAR measures which later introduced the Common Assessment Framework (CAF) as a pilot study in 2005 (for more see Băcălă, Bibu, 2013). The second PAR Strategy (2004) was a continuation of the first one but reformulating the priorities, such as (1) reform of the civil service (profes- sional development), (2) reform of local public administration through de- centralization, and (3) better public policy process (increased managerial capacity to implement public policy). Adopted in 2004, it offered continuity but actual results were mediocre with little progress made (according to the European Commission’s annual report in 2005). 110 After the EU accession, Romania adopted the National Plan for Develo- pment (NPD) 111 and the National Strategic Reference Framework (NSRF) 112 which were very comprehensive strategic planning documents aimed at deve- loping the necessary structural instruments for EU fund absorption. Although not PAR strategies per se, they both featured a special section on PAR with the main focus on development of administrative capacity. A specific Operational Programme was introduced with two priority axis (NSRF , 2007: 147−148): • Priority Axis 1. Structural and process improvements to the public policy management cycle (with the objective of developing policy formulation capacity, better regulation, strategic planning, and in- ter-institutional partnership working; improving accountability and overall organizational effectiveness); • Priority Axis 2. Improved quality and efficiency of the delivery of public services on a decentralized basis (with the aim of developing structural and process change arising for decentralization initiatives and impro- ving the quality and efficiency of delivery of public services locally). 110 European Commision − Romania 2005 Comprehensive Monitoring Report, available online at: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/archives/pdf/key_documents/2005/sec1354_cmr_master_ro_ college_en.pdf. 111 Available online at: http://arhiva.fonduri-structurale.ro/Document_Files//PND/00000051/ txs06_PND_2007_2013.pdf. 112 Available online at: http://arhiva.fonduri-structurale.ro/Document_Files//docutile/00000049/ txp84_CSNR_final_EN.pdf. 414 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence In short, the focus was on developing managerial capacity to manage the EU financial resources and improving overall effectiveness of services. During the 2011−2014 period, the financial crisis was the major factor that shaped the g overnment actions, including the measures it took in the field of public administration, i.e. a series of national strategic documents (called National Reform Programs) which had the role of guiding the central g overnment throughout the crisis period. The structure of these documents was based on the Europe 2020 strategy, but PAR was not specifically defined as a priority. However, all of these documents included PAR-like measures as most of them focused on further developing administrative and manage- rial capacity, better and more effective regulatory process, improved public policy process, increased administrative efficiency and transparency. These were measures taken under the pressure of international partners (European Commision, w orld Bank, IMF) in exchange for financial assistance during this period. Measures taken in the field of public administration were adopted grounded on a series of functional reviews done by the w orld Bank. 113 Most of the measures can be included in the NPM category with increased transpa- rency and accountability entering the NPg type of measures. The last PAR Strategy, adopted in 2014 (Strategy for Consolidation of Public Administration 2014−2020), was developed starting from the Europe 2020 priorities. Based on a thorough analysis of previous international re- ports (wB, EC) but also different internal reports, six key problem areas for intervention were identified: (1) influence of politics in PA/politicization, (2) poor resource allocation from the national budget, (3) ambiguous and overlapping responsibilities between central and local government, (4) lack of transparency of governmental activity, (5) lack of trust in state institu- tions, and (6) low professionalization of the civil service. Thus the strategic objectives of the strategy were: • Clear institutional mandates both centrally and locally (adapted to the citizens’ needs); • Increased managerial capacity and professionalization of the civil ser- vice; • De-bureaucratization and simplification of regulation; • Increased local autonomy and decentralization of services; 113 For full information please see reference section on the wB reports. 415 Public Administr Ation reform in r omAni A After 25 YeArs • Increased access and higher quality of public services (cost effective- ness). It is still early to evaluate the impact of the last strategy but there are po- sitive signs regarding transparency and simplification of regulation with the new g overnment 114 (headed by a technocrat Prime Minister), adopting an online free public access platform 115 with full disclosure and public spending of both central and local government. As recently as June 2016, a new set of measures was adopted aimed at cutting the bureaucratic burden on citizens by reducing the number of documents solicited for different services and pro- viding them only once no matter what services they access (drivers licence, passport issueing, ID issueing, taxes payment) along with a series of measures that, increase the digitalization of the administration. 116 The measures were taken based on direct citizen input through an online platform opened speci- fically for this purpose. 117 Looking at these measures we can definitely see both NPM type changes (effectiveness, cost-cutting, de-bureaucratization) but also the NPg ones (in- creased transparency, openness to citizens and partnerships with civil society to develop better services, digitalization). 10.4.3. Public Funding and Agencification One important element of decentralization is the transfer of financial resources from central to local budgets. Fiscal decentralization means each local authority has its own budget, local budgetary resources being made up of (in descending order): VAT amounts, shares from income tax, other local revenues, subsidies, local taxes, and donations (g yorgy, Câmpeanu, g yorgy, 2011). Through decentralization, local authorities have received supplemen- tary ”financial responsibilities (the primary and secondary education, social assistance services, the decentralized cultural institutions, public health ser- vices, etc.) but did not receive full financial autonomy for these assigned res- ponsibilities as the state budget allocates amounts as quotas from the state 114 The current technocratic g overnment took office in December 2015 after a fire killed 64 people which lead to massive protests against the left-wing led government which was in office between 2012 and 2015. 115 URL of the online platform: www.transparenta-bugetara.gov.ro. 116 For more on these measures please consult: http://ithub.gov.ro/. 117 The platform is available online at: http://maisimplu.gov.ro/. 416 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence budget revenues – mainly from VAT and the income tax- toward the local budgets” (Dincă, Dincă, 2009, p.107), this being a certain limitation regar- ding financial autonomy, as these quotas need to be approved both by Minis- try of Finance and Parliament (state budget law). Although the Local Public Finances Law (Law No. 273/2006) introduced clear criteria regarding budget distribution and quotas, there are still certain ambiguities of the legal framework that lead to unfavorable effects regarding budget distribution. Distribution of financial resources for local public servi- ces (deconcentrated) is in most cases done based on subjective criteria as the law defines the general amount that will be offered for those services but not the criteria local authorities (county level) should use in order to distribute these resources, ending up with a system based on subjective, mostly politi- cal distribution of financial resources (Constantinescu, 2015). Along with the transfers from the national budget, the other two financing sources for local authorities are local taxation (local authorities have a 20% up/down margin of change) and credit (loans) that can go up to 30% of total local incomes. Overall, in 2014, local administration has contributed 25% of revenues for the national budget and 23.1% on budgetary expenditures. 118 Another important issue is self-financing capacity of local authorities – the capacity of local authorities to finance the costs of their activity through their own resources. Unfortunely, self-financing capacity is quite low as data from the Ministry of Development and Public Administration for 2014 show that, on average, only 43.2% of local authorities revenues (city/town halls and county councils) come from own generated sources while the rest of almost 57% come from transfers from the state budget. As expected, big cities and in general more developed urban areas are able to contribute with own reve- nues to their budget in a higher percentage. The biggest problems are found in rural areas where only in 9 counties (out of 41) 119 town halls are able to fully generate the financial resources necessary to support basic personnel expenditures. This evidently drastically limits the level of autonomy that these local authorities have, leading to massive migration (political clientelism) of 118 Source: National Institute of statistics. 119 A synthesis of this analysis is available online at: http://www.analizeeconomice.ro/2016/04/cat- din-cheltuielile-de-personal-ale.html, while full data are found on the official website of the Ministry of Regional Development and Public Administration, online here: http://www.dpfbl.mdrap.ro/sit_ven_ si_chelt_uat.html. 417 Public Administr Ation reform in r omAni A After 25 YeArs mayors towards the party that comes into power in central government. Surprisingly. this was intentionally encouraged by the central govern- ment through a series of measures: an increase of funds allocated by the cen- tral government through the Ministry of Regional Development towards local administration and a change in legislation 120 that offered mayors the chance to change the party they got elected with without losing their mandate (as the law provisioned until then). A thorough study (EFOR Policy Brief 45, 2016) done for the 2012−2015 period reached the following conclusions: • Increase in funds destined to local administration 121 from the Minis- try of Regional through the National Program for Local Development in 2013 coupled with the possibility to change parties for mayors and local or county councilors led to a migration of 552 mayors (approx. 17% out of a total of 3,181 mayors), 4,607 local councilors and 184 county councilors; • 60% of the funds went to communes/town halls in rural areas; • Probability to get financing doubled if mayors were in the same party in central government; • Level of resources increased during the election years, and they were spent by local authorities on projects that were not urgent or remained unfinished after the election; • Major factor leading to this is discretionary allocation of these funds as there are no legal criteria defined regarding how they will be allo- cated. In the light of this, financial decentralization is more present formally through legal provisions, and has had a positive impact mainly on bigger communities (municipalities), the rural areas being unable to generate suffi- cient funds to cover own personnel and basic functioning costs. Recent efforts made by the central government to increase transparency by launching an online platform where the public can access openly information about budge- tary execution (see previous section on reform) and public expenditures of almost all public institutions 122 is a step in the right direction. 120 The g overnment adopted an urgency ordinance (OUg) 55/2014 that was declared later uncon- stitutional by the Constitutional Court. 121 This was done through a urgency ordinance (OUg 28/2013). 122 The online platform can be accessed at: http://www.transparenta-bugetara.gov.ro. 418 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Although decentralization in Romania played an important role in PAR and had a positive overall impact, several issues have troubled the process and minimized the potential positive effects: • Inconsistency, lack of coherence, and strategic approach of the process have led to major problems relating to coordination of policy at local le- vel (Dragoș, Neamțu, 2007), overlapping competencies between different administrative levels, or poor transfer of competencies (new responsi- bilities but without the necessary financial resources) (ibid., 2007: 639); • Quality of services and general quality of the local governance process were very differentiated between local authorities, with the mediating variable being administrative capacity, especially decentralized finan- cial capacity to finance public services (Bondar, 2014); • Lack of coherence and strategic approach to the process has lead to ambiguity and misunderstanding regarding the purpose of the reform by civil servants (Profiroiu, et al., 2006) which in turn has seen higher resistance from inside the system toward PAR. Regarding governmental agencies, Romania has approx. 125 of them, with their number dropping from 225 in 2009 when, amidst the fiscal crisis, the government promoted a bill that abolished, merged agencies or transfor- med them into departments (Hintea, Hudrea, Balica, 2012: 313). Their formal inclusion as part of PAR started in 2001 with the g overnment Strategy on Accelerating Public Administration (gASPA) reform which focused on cen- tral government reform with clear elements of NPM –clear separation between political and administrative fields, and focus of central government on policy formulation and coordination (gASPA, 2001: 13). However, besides general re- marks on the need of a more effective central government, no specific decisions or subsequent policies were adopted. It was not until the adoption of the Strate- gy for Better Regulation in Central Government (2008−2013) which specifically targeted central agencies that the focus was on improving legislation regarding organization, functioning, and regulation of central government agencies. 123 The EU played an important role in the agencification in Romania, both through requirements during the accession process, regulations or require- ments for specific agency type structures to manage or regulate certain policy areas (Hințea, Hudrea, Balica, 2012: 316). The relation between parent minis- 123 Measure 7.1 from the Strategy for Better Regulation in Central g overnment (2008−2013). 419 Public Administr Ation reform in r omAni A After 25 YeArs tries and agencies, with respect to autonomy and control, is characterized by (adapted from Hințea, Hudrea, Balica, 2011, 2012): 1. Concerning autonomy − agencies have a quite high level concerning policy decisions on ”how” to provide goods or services, medium le- vel of autonomy regarding personnel management (higher levels of autonomy on operational decision but consultation with the parent ministry on strategic ones), and lower levels concerning financial ma- nagement (with some influence on setting prices of goods/services but only with prior consultation with the parent ministry); 2. Concerning control − agencies tend to establish objectives with less control from the parent ministries as they mostly exercise ex-post control through evaluation of results and audits, and have a high level of (financial) resource dependency. Lack of coherence and strategic approach is also found in the case of agencification process, lack of strategic vision regarding their role and evolu- tion being a clear characteristic of the process (ibid. 2012: 321). 10.5. Conclusion PAR in Romania is a complex and atypical process that did not follow a linear path with different stages that evolved at different speeds, influenced by quite divers factors. Our analysis points out to at least four major stages (Hințea, 2011: 180): • Legislative reform: more prominent in the first years after the Revolu- tion but still present today. There are two reasons for this: the real need for a coherent legal framework specific for a democratic society, and a functioning state and a strong legalist tradition (which we documen- ted earlier in this chapter); • Reforms focused on structures and procedures (Baba, Chereches, Ticlau, Mora, 2009): new organizational forms, redefined adminis- trative relations between institutions, new administrative procedu- res. Decentralization falls into this category with continuous redefi- nition of central-local government relations (Dragos, Neamtu, 2007), including mechanisms of control, level of autonomy, evaluation and performance measurement. Documents adopted starting from 2007 (see section 10.4.2) and even the current PARStrategy devotes a major 420 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence section on structural adjustments, redefinition of institutional roles, responsibilities, along with better internal procedures. • Reforms focused on public policy: these include specific policies in- troduced to resolve problems related to human resource management (HRM), financial allocation mechanisms, regulation reform, trans- parency, etc. They have been the most common form of changes (as expected) because of the limited costs implied, quick effects, and po- tential political capital gains for their promoters. • Structural reforms: aim to bring a paradigmatic change, with a redefi- nition of the role, organization and functioning of the state, the purpo- se being an improved”rationalization” of state activities or actions. w e point to the educational reform initiated in 2011, and the major chan- ges taken between 2009−2011 mostly because of the financial crisis. At present, Romania finds itself at the beginning of a new (fifth) stage of PAR – the adoption of a managerial paradigm of w estern inspiration focused on two essential elements: quality of services and performance management. There are several initiatives that signal this paradigmatic shift. Although they still lack the ”structural” character, they are encouraging signs – one such example is the introduction of the city manager as a specific public position in the local institutional framework; introduction of mechanisms meant to sti- mulate strategic planning efforts at the local level; adoption of ITC in order to increase transparency and public access to services (see financial monitoring mechanisms for budgetary execution adopted in 2016). 124 Concerning general state reform, Romania is facing at least three stra- tegic problems (Hințea, 2011: 192): − Predictability and coherence (it is impossible to develop long-term strategies and policies because of frequent and unpredictable chan- ges at the political, administrative, and legislative levels), − Managerial performance (low managerial culture, and implicitly low quality of public management in governmental institutions), − Rational use of public resources (linked to the first two, the is- sue being primarily how resources are used (subjective, irrational, corrupt conduct) not necessarily the lack of resources). By time-framing the PAR efforts, we can distinguish: 124 The online platform is available at: http://www.transparenta-bugetara.gov.ro. 421 Public Administr Ation reform in r omAni A After 25 YeArs • The first strategic reform initiatives were adopted between 2000 and 2006 (section 4.2) mostly stimulated by the external pressures co- ming from the EC during the accession process. • A second stage between 2007 and 2012 had more structural charac- ter, aiming a broader change (in large part due to the pressures of the economic crisis). This period has been characterized by a bigger comprehensive attempt to change key sectors of the state: education (new law on education), central government agency restructuring (reduction and re-organization of central agencies), labor market (adoption of a unitary public pay system to reduce inequality in pay inside the public sector), justice, pension system (new taxation rules and inclusion of social contributions also for retired citizens), fiscal management and budgeting (creation of Fiscal Council, attempts at making multi-annual budgets), and health care (which actually led to the fall of the government).The main drivers for these changes were again external (wB, IMF) in the context of the economic crisis. • Finally, the third stage, starting with 2014, where a new Strategy for Public Administration Reform has been adopted along with a my- riad of sectorial strategies. This is a major attempt from the govern- ment to translate Europe 2020 objectives and guiding directions into national policies. The purpose is twofold: (1)this new approach pri- marily aims to harmonize and reduce the gap between Romania and its w estern counterparts with regard to the functioning of the state, and (2) offer the necessary guiding framework for local administra- tion to implement local strategies in a coherent framework. The examples mentioned above, (both those referring to structural re- forms or sector specific ones) were selected because they showcase the speci- fics of Romania’s PAR efforts in the last 25 years − a constant concern regar- ding the legal framework or a continuous ”obsession” to professionalize the civil service and increase administrative efficiency. This combination (Hințea, 2011: 193) of bureaucratic objectives (professionalization, legal framework) with post-bureaucratic ones (performance standards, rationing of expenditu- res, open and transparent administration, stakeholder representation) illus- trates very well a difficult challenge that the administration faces to create a system with both bureaucratic and post-bureaucratic features. 422 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence References 1. Andrei, T., Profiroiu, M., Turtureanu, M. 2006. Local Public Adminis- tration Reform. The Romanian Case, Theoretical and Applied Econo- mics, 2 (497), 55−64. 2. Baba C., Cherecheș, R., Țiclău, T., Moa, C. 2009. Organizational Dia- gnosis − A Management Tool for Change. Case Study in Satu Mare County Hospital, Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, 25 E, 32−39. 3. Băcălă, M., Bibu, N. 2013. Considerations Regarding the Application of Management Tools in Public Institutions − CAF (Common Assess- ment Framework) in a Romanian Regional Context” , Review of Inter- national Comparative Management, Vol. 14, Issue 5, 746−754. 4. Boc, E. 2011. The Reform of the State in Romania (2009-2011), Tran- sylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, No. 34 E/2011, 5−21. 5. Bondar, F. 2014. Quality of g overnment and Decentralization in Ro- mania, International Review of Social Research, 4 (1), 5−25. 6. Bouckaert g., Halligan, J. 2008. Managing Performance. International Comparisons. London: Routledge. 7. Bryane, M. 2008. Issues in Anti-Corruption Law: How Can Code of Conduct Laws Be Drafted in Order to Reduce Corruption in a Public Sector like Romania’s? European Law Journal, 18/2, 289−322. 8. BTI Transformation Index. 2016. Romania Country Report, Retrieved from: https://www.bti-project.org/fileadmin/files/BTI/Downloads/Re- ports/2016/pdf/BTI_2016_Romania.pdf. 9. Carp, R., Sienerth, A.k. 2014. Decentralization in Romania: A Cons- tant Failed Reform under Scrutiny from the Constitutional Limits Perspective, Jurisprudence, 21 (4), 1208–1232. 10. CEPA 2014. Romania’s “Tipping Point” Advancing the Rule of Law, g overnance and Public Leadership, Retrieved from: http://cepa.org/ sites/default/files/CEPA.Report.Romania’sTippingPoint.July2014.com- pressed.pdf. 11. Ciuraru-Andrica, C. 2013. Pension Systems in Romania and Their Ef- ficient Administration, PhD thesis, retrieved from: http://phdthesis. 423 Public Administr Ation reform in r omAni A After 25 YeArs uaic.ro/PhDThesis/Ciuraru-Andrica,%20Cristina,%20Pension%20 systems%20in%20Romania%20and%20their%20efficient%20adminis- tration.pdf. 12. Constantinescu, C.M. 2015. Romania Between Decentralization and Deconcentration, Journal of k nowledge Management, Economics and Information T echnology, V/6, 1−19, Retrieved from: http://www.scien- tificpapers.org/wp-content/files/1544_Constantinescu.pdf. 13. Dan, S. 2015. The New Public Management Is Not That Bad After All: Evidence from Estonia, Hungary and Romania, Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, 44 E, 57−73. 14. Dincă, M.S., Dincă, g. 2009. Fiscal Decentralization in Romania: Pre- sent State and Perspectives, Analele Științifice ale Universității “ALE- XANDRU IOAN CUZA ” din Iași, tomul LVI, 103−116, retrieved from: http://anale.feaa.uaic.ro/anale/resurse/09_F05_Dinca.pdf. 15. Dragoş, D., Neamţu, B. 2007. Reforming Local Public Administration in Romania: Trends and Obstacles, International Review of Adminis- trative Sciences, 73 (4), 629−648. 16. Dragotă, M., Miricescu, M. 2010. Deficiencies of the Public Pension System in Romania. Some Reform Measures Derived from the EU Experience, Theoretical and Applied Economics, 11 (540), 3−14. 17. EFOR. 2016. Policy Brief No. 45, Clientelism Politic 2012−2016, re- trieved from: http://expertforum.ro/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/PB- 45-Clientelism-2012-2016.pdf. 18. EURACTIV. 2015. Industria IT din România: 14.000 de companii, 75.500 de angajaţi şi venituri totale de 4 mld. Euro, Retrieved from: http://www.euractiv.ro/economic/industria-it-din-romania-14.000- de-companii-75.500-de-angajati-si-venituri-totale-de-4-mld.-eu- ro-2722. 19. European Commission. 2015. Romania Country Report, Retrieved from: http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/pdf/csr2015/cr2015_romania_ en.pdf. 20. European Commission Country Report Romania. 2015. Retrieved from: http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/pdf/csr2015/cr2015_romania_ en.pdf. 424 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 21. gASPA. 2001. The g overnment Strategy for Accelerating Public Admi- nistration Reform, http://gov.ro/fisiere/programe_fisiere/reforma- admin-public.pdf. 22. governmental Order 1000/2006 Regarding the Organization and Functioning of NACS, Retrieved from: http://www.anfp.gov.ro/R/ Doc/2015/Formare/Hot%C4%83r%C3%A2re%201000%202006(r1). pdf. 23. g yorgy, A., Câmpeanu, E., g yorgy, A.C. 2011. Financial Strategies for the Romanian Local Public Administration, Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, 32 E, 114−124. 24. Hall, R. A. 2004. Political Culture in Post-Ceaușescu Romania, In: Carey H. F. (ed.), Romania since 1989. Politics, Economics and Socie- ty, New Y ork: Lexington Books, 215−226. 25. Hințea, C. E., Profiroiu, M. C., Țiclău, T.C. 2015. Strategic Planning and Public Management Reform: The Case of Romania, Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, Special Issue 2015, 30−44. 26. Hinţea, C., Ţiclău, T. 2015. Training of Senior Civil Servants In Eastern European Countries. The case of Romania, In: Montgomery Van wart, Annie Hondeghem, Erwin Schwella (Eds), Leadership and Culture. Comparative Models of Top Civil Servant Training, Palgrave Macmil- lan, 103−118. 27. Hințea, C.E. 2011. Reform and Management in Romania. Strategy and Structural Change. Revista de Cercetare si Interventie Sociala, 34, 177−196. 28. IRES 2016. România – societate cu încredere limitată. Raport de cerce- tare, Retrieved from: http://www.ires.com.ro/uploads/articole/ires_cri- za-de-incredere-perceptii-si-reprezentari_sinteza_ianuarie-2016.pdf. 29. Liebert S., Condrey S.E., g oncharov, D. (Ed.) 2013. Public Administra- tion in Post-Communist Countries. Former Soviet Union, Central and Eastern Europe and Mongolia, New Y ork: Taylor and Francis g roup. 30. March, J.g., Olsen, J.P . 1995. Democratic g overnance, New Y ork, Free Press. 31. Marrez, H. 2015. The Role of State-Owned Enterprises in Romania, ECFIN Country Focus, 12 (1), 1−8, Retrieved from: http://ec.europa. 425 Public Administr Ation reform in r omAni A After 25 YeArs eu/economy_finance/publications/country_focus/2015/pdf/cf_ vol12_issue1_en.pdf. 32. Mora, C., Ticlau, T. 2012. Public Administration Reform in Romania from a Leadership and Managerial Perspective. Revista de Cercetare si Interventie Sociala, 37, 196−206. 33. Mungiu-Pipidi, A., Ioniță S., Muntean, A. 2003. The Failure of Pu- blic g overnance in Romania, w orking g roup 11th Annual NISPAcee Conference, Retrieved from: http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/ public/documents/nispacee/unpan009134.pdf. 34. Pollitt, C., Bouckaert, g. 2011. Public Management Reform: A Com - parative Analysis − New Public Management, g overnance, and the Neo-w eberian State. New Y ork: Oxford University Press. 35. Preda, M., g rigoraș, V. 2011. ”The Public Pension System in Roma- nia: Myths And Facts, Transylvanian Review of Administrative Scien- ces, No. 32 E/2011, 235−251. 36. Profiroiu, M. (Coord.), Tudorel, A., Carp, R., & Dinca, D. 2006. Pu- blic Administration Reform in the Perspective of Romania’s Acces- sion to the European Union. Bucharest: European Institute of Roma- nia – Pre-accession Impact Studies, Study No. 3. 37. Șandor, S.D., Tripon, C. 2008. Romanian public servants on public administration reforms. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sci- ences, 23E, 100−116. 38. Strategia Actualizată a g uvernului privind Accelerarea Reformei în Administraţia Publică. 2004 – 2006. Retrieved from: www.mdrap.ro/ userfiles/consultari_publice/30_06_14/anexa1.doc. 39. Strategia g uvernului privind Accelerarea Reformei în Administraţia Publică 2001 – 2003. Retrieved from: http://gov.ro/fisiere/programe_ fisiere/reforma-admin-public.pdf. 40. Țiclău T., Hințea C. 2016. Administrative Leadership and Situational Antecedents in the Romanian Public Administration, Lex Localis, 14 (1), 133−156. 41. Torfing, J., Triantafillou, P. 2013. w hat’s in a Name? g rasping New Public g overnance as a Political-Administrative System, International Review of Public Administration, 18, 2, 9−25. 426 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 42. w orld Bank. 2010. Romania − Functional Review: Center of g overn- ment, Retrieved from: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/han- dle/10986/12270. 43. world Bank. 2010. Romania − Functional Review: Transport Sec- tor, Retrieved from: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/han- dle/10986/12278. 44. w orld Bank. 2011. Romania − Functional Review: Health Sector, Retrie- ved from: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/12290. 45. w orld Bank. 2011. Romania − Functional Review: Research, Develo- pment and Innovation Sector, Retrieved from: https://openknowledge. worldbank.org/handle/10986/12210 46. world Bank. 2013. Romania Judicial Functional Review, Retrieved from: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/20808. 47. world Bank. 2013. Reviving Romania’s growth and Convergence. Challenges and Opportunities: A Country Economic Memoran- dum, Retrieved from: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/ en/991181468333030934/pdf/746350RO0ESw0P000PUBLIC00Box3 77382B.pdf. 48. Studiu privind corupţia din administraţia publică locală, Raport Com- prehensiv, 2011, retrieved from: http://www.portalbn.ro/cj/Lists/Stiri/ Attachments/74/RAPORT%20COMPREHENSIV .pdf. 49. EC 66. 2006. Eurobarometrul 66. Opinia publică în Uniunea Europeană. Raport National – Romania, Retrieved from: http://ec.europa.eu/pu- blic_opinion/archives/eb/eb66/eb66_ro_nat.pdf. 427 Public Administr Ation reform in b ulgAri A: Weberi An b ureA ucr Acy , ne W Public mAn Agement, And good govern Ance A t the sAme time 11. Public Administration Reform in Bulgaria: Weberian Bureaucracy, New Public Management, and Good Governance at the Same Time Tatyana Tomova, Simeon Petrov 11.1. Introduction and Country Overview This chapter presents and analyzes the development of public adminis- tration reform in Bulgaria after the public transition from state socialism to democracy and market economy. The contribution explains the logic of the reform itself which began as part of the social transition but gained indepen- dence, and gradually adopted three concepts behind which stand influential international organizations. The administrative reform in Bulgaria reflects the development of ideas of public administration that these organizations disseminate. The different stages of reform correspond to the change in these ideas. For that reason, the reform seems infinite, without its own goal and without significant results that society and citizens can feel. The chapter is divided into four parts. The first three parts represent three stages in the development of the reform. The focus is on the measures taken consecutively due to the breaking with the heritage of the state soci- alism, followed by the introduction of the model of w eberian bureaucracy, New Public Management, and g ood g overnance. The fourth part presents the development of the model of decentralization in the country. The con- clusion is that the reform is not aimed at introducing a comprehensive model but rather at introducing particular practices that conform to the prevailing knowledge of public administration. Bulgaria is a country with a population of 7,153,784 people as of 31 De- cember 2015. This population represents 1.4% of the total population of the EU. As of the same date, the number of employees in the g eneral g overn- ment sector was 224,400 125 representing 7.4% of the employed persons in the country. In 2008, the percent of people employed in the g eneral g overnment 125 According to data from the NSI available at: http://www.nsi.bg/bg/node/14154. 428 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence sector was almost the same − it amounted to 7.0%. g enerally, the population of the country has decreased due to a relatively low birth rate and a high level of emigration. The number of employed people has also decreased − from 3,360,700 in 2008 it dropped to 3,031,900 in 2015. The country’s economy after 2007 126 developed in a way that is large- ly determined by the global economic and financial processes. In 2009, the gDP growth has dropped significantly − the physical volume  of GDP index compared to the previous year (gDP by production approach in the previous year prices, million levs) was 95.8. After 2009, GDP index stabilized at circa 100 during the period tof 2014 (subject to some variation). In 2015, the gDP index reached 103.0 127 . Despite relatively favorable indicators of economic de- velopment, Bulgaria is among the countries with a modest contribution to the gDP of the EU. In 2013, Bulgaria‘s gDP amounted to EUR 41 million, repre- senting 0.29% of the total gDP of the EU. The gDP in PPS for 2013 was EUR 86 million. gDP per capita for the same year in PPS was EUR 45 million, assuming that for the EU it is EUR 100 million. In absolute terms, this is equi- valent to EUR 5,800 for Bulgaria versus EUR 27,300 for the EU as a whole 128 . This indicator for Bulgaria has the lowest value among the EU Member States. The service sector has the main contribution for the economic develo- pment. The share of employment in services (as % of total employment) is 62.2% (the relevant share for the EU is 69.7%). The share of employment in agriculture is 6.4% (5.0% for the EU) 129 . Overall, the data shows that Bulgaria has a favorable development prospect at a very low-starting economic base and development trends which hinder the country‘s ability to overcome the gap with the other EU countries. Bulgaria has a similar performance when considering social indicators. g enerally, the country is developing steadily, with positive trends, but the overall ranking remains relatively low, especially in comparison to other EU countries. According to the Human Development Index (HDI), Bulgaria 126 In 2007, Bulgaria acceded to the EU. 127 According to data from the NSI available at: http://www.nsi.bg/en/content/5484/gdp-pro- duction-approach-%E2%80%93-total-economy. 128 According to data from Eurostat available at: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics- explained/images/2/2d/gDP_at_current_market_prices%2C_2003%E2%80%9304_ and_2012%E2%80%9314_YB15.png. 129 According to data from UNDP available at: http://hdr.undp.org/sites/all/themes/hdr_theme/ country-notes/BgR.pdf. 429 Public Administr Ation reform in b ulgAri A: Weberi An b ureA ucr Acy , ne W Public mAn Agement, And good govern Ance A t the sAme time ranks last among the EU Members States. Meanwhile, its progress is obvious. Bulgaria’ s HDI value for 2014 is 0.782 − which placed the country in the “high human development” category − positioning it at 59th place out of 188 coun- tries and territories. Between 1980 and 2014, Bulgaria’s HDI value increased from 0.665 to 0.782 − an increase of 17.5%, or an average annual increase of about 0.48%. During the same period, Bulgaria’s life expectancy at birth increased by 3.0 years, mean years of schooling increased by 2.6 years, and expected years of schooling increased by 3.2 years. Bulgaria’s gNI per capita increased to about 117.2% between 1980 and 2014. 130 The progress is stable but relatively slow, and does not allow the country to reach the EU average values. In Bulgaria and in other countries in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE), the transition period to democracy and market economy began immediately after the fall of the Berlin w all. The political transition is controversial, and the country is slowly overcoming the legacy of the past. The year 1997 is con- sidered as the year after which radical reforms became possible. The transi- tion to a market economy at the institutional level was developed successfully in the early years of transition period. However, the economic recovery is happening slowly, as after the exceptional drop, the level of gDP achieved in 1989 was reached for the first time in 2005. Bulgaria submitted its application for the EU membership in 1995, and in 2000, began accession negotiations with the EU. In 2007, along with Roma- nia, the country became a full member of the EU. A specific mechanism for cooperation and verification was introduced, according to which the Europe- an Commission monitors and assesses the country‘s progress in implemen- ting reforms. The mechanism was introduced because of the agreement that further efforts are needed in key areas to address certain weaknesses in the judicial reform and the fight against corruption and organized crime. 11.2. P AR Overview: Three Stages and Concepts of Public G o v e rna nc e PAR in Bulgaria can be conditionally divided into three stages. The first stage developed in the early 1990’s and ended around 1993−1994. During this first stage, the reform as far as it was about a comprehensive reform, was 130 According to data from UNDP available at: http://hdr.undp.org/sites/all/themes/hdr_theme/ country-notes/BgR.pdf. 430 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence strongly influenced by the agenda of the political transition. The second stage, which lasted until 2000, relates to the transfer of practices due to the financial dependence on global financial institutions and distribution of donor pro- grams by various international organizations, including the EU. This second stage simultaneously introduced the reform concepts of traditional model of administration and New Public Management (NPM). The third stage, which continues to this day, is directed primarily to achieving the goal of the Euro- pean conditionality. This stage enriches the reform with the concept of g ood g overnance. Each subsequent concept does not deny the previous one − on the contrary, they build upon such previous concepts. The emerging model of governance is a set of practices that meet the logic of the three concepts. 11.2.1. First Stage of the Reform From State Socialism to Democracy PAR 131 in Bulgaria started immediately after the beginning of the chan- ges and initially, at least until the mid-1990’ s, bears the marks of the transition from the state socialism to democracy and the attempt to break with the past. The bureaucracy inherited from the communist regime bears the scars of the previous social system, and is perceived more as a defender and conductor of the past. Its main feature is the relationship with the Communist Party. This relationship is expressed mainly in its selection based on political loyalty and affection as well as in its activities through which the will of the party is pri- marily implemented, regardless of the existence of formal law. The assessment of the inherited bureaucracy in Bulgarian society at this moment is contradictory. On the one hand, its political dependence, and espe- cially its commitment to the Communist Party are seen more as a problem. On the other hand, society takes into account its professionalism, and there are distinct attempts to protect and preserve it. The fact that a substantial part of the population is directly or indirectly associated with the inherited bureaucracy, and lives thanks to the employment in the government sector due to the size of the public sector during the communist period, should not be underestimated. 131 For the purposes of this chapter, we assume that the public administration covers all organiza- tions at the state, regional and local levels, involved in achieving public goals and supplying of public services with competences and responsibilities according to the law. These are profession- al organizations different from the representative political power, although they work together. Public administration is a specific concept emphasizing the openness and accountability of these organizations to the public and citizens. 431 Public Administr Ation reform in b ulgAri A: Weberi An b ureA ucr Acy , ne W Public mAn Agement, And good govern Ance A t the sAme time The public debate on administration reform was not very strong during the first years of the transition, not only because of the controversial attitude towards the inherited administration but also because of the specific agenda of the transition period, which prioritized the transition to institutions and practices of market economy. In practice, the political programs of emerging parties do not resolve the problem of administration reform. At the same time, the need for change, including administration change, is perceived as something obvious. At the expert level, the position of almost all experts and politicians is that “almost nothing from the totalitarian period can serve the new structures and the new administration” . For this reason, the public admi- nistration reform enters the priorities of almost all cabinets after 1989 (Пеев, 2007: 1). The reasons for the change of administration mainly relate to the establishment of democratic institutions. At the expert level, the need for change in the public administration is pri- marily associated with the need to reduce the size of the state and the redefi- nition of its role. „During the transition period, Bulgaria has to define the role of the state in the emerging market environment. The state, which has had a monopoly over all the economic spheres, has to withdraw in order to exercise its sovereign functions and to create the milieu for the performance of economic agents. This is a continuous process, implying privatization, de-monopolization, creating of competitive markets, etc. Therefore, this policy, which aims at impro- ving the performance of public administration, is to be considered within the context of the broader objectives of public sector reform“ (Borissova, 2001: 1). Thus, the beginning of the public administration reform goes in two di- rections. The first is related to the introduction of legal guarantees for political independence of the administration, whilst the second relates to the changing role of the state as a whole. The first goal was achieved very quickly and did not encounter any resistance or debate about what exactly should be done. The second goal is a matter of long transition which requires a comprehensive governance model. The legislative change aiming at ensuring the political independence of the administration began in 1990 with the Law on Political Parties which re- moved and prohibited the activity of all political organizations and parties in the state, district, and municipal institutions. The legal framework of the model of the new administration was introduced with the drafting and adop- 432 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence tion of the new Constitution of the Republic of Bulgaria in 1991. Notably, this was the time when the foundations for a change of the state government were placed by introducing the principle of political independence of the adminis- tration. According to the Constitution, in the performance of their duties, pu- blic servants shall be guided solely by the law and shall be politically neutral. It is envisaged that the conditions under which civil servants are appointed and removed from office, may become members of political parties and trade unions, and may exercise their right to strike are established by law. Although the immediate goal is the separation of administration from the Communist Party, the new Constitution sets a legal framework for the in- troduction of the w eberian model of bureaucracy, which applies only written law, and is politically independent. The new Constitution, however, „does not clearly define the role of public administration in the politico-administrative system“ (Пеев, 2007: 3). The main issues − the resolution of which could defi- ne the model of public administration − are not resolved by the Constitution, and the establishment of legal content is still not clear. In the first year after the change of the regime, the reform of public administration was not considered a strategic goal, and its role in a market economy was ignored (Пеев, 2007: 3). In the first years of the transition period, the reform aimed at introdu- cing the new governance model which started very timidly. In 1991, the Local Self-g overnment and Local Administration Act decreased central represen- tation at the local level. According to the administrative-territorial division of the country, during this period of the reform, there were two levels of local administration – the regional and the district level. The region (oblast) is an administrative-territorial unit responsible for implementing regional policy, exercising state administration at the local level as well as harmonizing natio- nal and local interests. Regions are governed by a Regional g overnor, and as- sisted by a regional administration. The district (obshtina) is the basic admi- nistrative-territorial unit in Bulgaria. It is governed by a mayor and locally elected council and administration. The self-government administration is located at the level of municipalities (kmetstvo) which are the smallest admi- nistrative- territorial units (Borissova, 2001: 5). This legislative reform was aimed at redistributing of power in the state through the empowerment of local communities. Thus, new actors in public governance were created, and the environment for the development of public policies changed dramatically. 433 Public Administr Ation reform in b ulgAri A: Weberi An b ureA ucr Acy , ne W Public mAn Agement, And good govern Ance A t the sAme time 11.2.2. Second Stage: Towards Traditional Administration and Public Governance through the Private Sector The second period of public administration reform in Bulgaria started with the government‘s decision to include it as one of the major priorities of Phare assistance in 1993−1994. This new period had two major factors that distinguished it from the previous one. The first factor was the birth of a targeted donor funding the reform. Many international organizations beca- me the donors, and the most influential among them were the w orld Bank and the EU. The second factor was related to the content of the reform − the „demand“ and gradual establishment of a Bulgarian model of administration and governance commenced. The main actors in the reform process were, on the one hand, the international financial institutions (IMF and w orld Bank), and on the other, the EU and the OECD through its joint project SIgMA. In March 1995, the g overnment made a policy statement in which it pledged to strengthen the authority of the State, rationalize the process of government, and increase its operational capability and efficiency. In September 1995, two interrelated structures were created to manage the administrative reform pro- cess: the inter-ministerial working group on Administrative Reform, which was part of the EU coordination structure, and the Department of Adminis- trative Reform at the Council of Ministers. In March 1996, the g overnment adopted the “New Strategy of Administration Reform in Bulgaria” which focused on reforming central and local administration (Borissova, 2001: 4). Notably, this second stage of public administration reform in Bulgaria took place when the debate on NPM and the fight for its impact on public sector reform in the country began. Thus, the same paradox which accom- panies the whole process of social transformation took over the public administration reform in Bulgaria as in other CEE countries as there was an attempt to develop and implement models which were considered by the w estern partners to be experimental and being in the process of develo- pment and implementation. The reform in Bulgaria represents less a transfer of models than a transfer of ideas and principles. Due to the break with the past and the institutional traditions, the CEE countries, including Bulgaria, are much more open to introducing such ideas and principles when compa- red to developed democracies. The latter transform their institutions, whilst the CEE countries create new institutions which fully comply with ideas dis- 434 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence seminated as correct. “The unique problem of East European governments is that they cannot draw lessons from their experience of the past four decades because post-Communist regimes are founded on a rejection of a Soviet- style regime” (Rose, 1993: 112). This can also be observed with the distribution of the NPM. For over a century, the public administration in the w est was inspired and built accor- ding to the notions of so-called „classic paradigm of the administration.“ In Europe, this paradigm is strongly influenced by w eber‘s ideas about bure- aucracy, and in the USA, the ideas of w . w ilson for rejecting the system of political patronage. The classical paradigm was functioning very successfully until the 1970’s, and then began a large-scale process of fundamental rethin- king of management and attempts to distance the administration from its roots, leading to „endless wave of reforms“ that lead to the adoption of diffe- rent, even opposing, models in different countries. Factors that mediated the creation of specific models in developed democracies were primarily inter- nal and are related to the inherited institutions as well as the ideas of the key stakeholders in the reform of the public sector. In CEE countries, the factors were primarily external and relate to the ideas of influential international actors in the reform process as well as to the diffusion of ideas through the inclusion of internal experts in international epistemic networks. The influence of the NPM in CEE countries was controversial mostly because of the position of the SIgMA − the leading international player in the reform process. After what was said about the power of the NPM creed, and seeing the frequent rule of neo-liberal governments in CEE states, some clarifications are needed. Firstly, while the public administration reform in CEE was promoted by various international organizations − SIgMA, the unit of the OECD to advise CEE on administrative reform and the most important agency dealing with the topic in the region (far more ubiquitous than the w orld Bank) − took a critical perspective towards NPM from the beginning. Therefore, in spite of pressure from other organizations and the understan- dable urge coming from the consultants and those CEE people engaged in reform who had learned about NPM in summer schools and training semi- nars in the “w est” , and thus wanted to tout it, the classical perspective could usually prevail (Drechsler, 2005: 100). The last statement is only partly true for Bulgaria. During the second 435 Public Administr Ation reform in b ulgAri A: Weberi An b ureA ucr Acy , ne W Public mAn Agement, And good govern Ance A t the sAme time stage of the reform, Bulgaria preserved its preference for the classical w ebe- rian model as regards the model of public administration (organization), and embraced NPM as regards the model of governance and delivery of services (functions and tools of implementation). The Bulgarian Public administra- tion reform fully embraced the language and principles of NPM: client focus, decentralization, separation of policy-making from implementation, and use of private partners for service delivery. Bulgaria‘s choices during the second stage of public administration re- form were largely affected by the market reforms and approaches adopted by the global financial institutions (IMF and w orld Bank). The conducting of so-called „structural adjustment reforms“ included public administration reforms focused on reducing overall costs of the government mainly through privatization of state-owned enterprises, and reduction of the wage bill to bring government spending down to sustainable levels and free resources for other, more beneficial uses to the overall economy. Additionally, Bulgarian experts, as a whole, embraced the ideas of NPM. The practices associated with these ideas were spreading as necessary, and were only possible in conditions of market regulation (Pavlov & Parashkevo- va, 2011; k atzamunska, 2011; g eorgiev, 1999). • Civil Servant Status During this second stage, the influence of the EU strengthened gradu- ally. This influence is not just a consequence of donor assistance through Europaid but the political intention to join the EU. The impact was mainly carried out by the European Commission’s report on Bulgaria‘s progress to- wards its accession after December 1995, when, on the fringes of the Madrid European Council, the country submitted its membership application, em- barking on the road towards negotiations with the EU. The regular report of the European Commission in 1998 stated that: „The main central institutions of the state continue to operate smoothly in general, regardless of the known instability caused by the fact that the administrative reform is still at an early stage. The process of administrative reform is launched with the aim of cre- ating an independent, efficient, and professional civil service. A number of initial steps have been taken for its implementation, particularly through the adoption of a strategy to modernize the administrative system and the law on public administration. They need to be complemented by other legislation.“ 436 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Regular reports drafted by the European Commission became an incentive for reform in Bulgaria. In particular, in terms of administrative reform such reports contribu- te to the perception of classical w eberian model of public administration. The administrative reform was introduced by a number of laws on which the operation of the new public administration was based. In pursuit of the cons- titutional provision, the Administration Act has been adopted in 1998, Civil Servant Act and Administrative Services for Individuals and Legal Entities Act in 1999, and the Access to Public Information Act in 2000. In 2000, began the introduction of the status of civil servant by adopting the prescribed re- gulations − Regulation on the Official Status of Civil Servants and Regulation of the Minister of Public Administration for the documents to hold public office. For the first time, the positions of state officials in the administration are defined in the Unified Classifier of the Positions in the Administration. The Administration Act regulates the structure of the administration, basic principles of organization of the operation thereof, positions therein, and principal requirements for occupation of the said positions. It regulates the powers of the executive authorities, structure and organization of the ope- ration of the administration thereof. This Act applies to the administration of the other bodies of state power as provided by the Constitution and to the bo- dies of local self-government. The Act was amended in 2006 by introducing the principles that should guide the administration’s activities: lawfulness; openness and accessibility; responsibility and accountability; effectiveness; subordination and coordination; predictability. In 2009, one principle was added: objectivity and impartiality. Depending on the distribution of activi- ties, the administration is divided to general and specialized administration. g eneral administration assists the relevant body of state power in the exer- cise of the powers therein vested, and the head of the respective administra- tion creates conditions for the implementation of the activities of the speci- alized administration, and carries out technical activities for administrative servicing. Specialized administration, on the other hand, assists the relevant body of state power in the exercise of the powers therein vested, related to its competence. The activities of the administration are implemented by the civil servants and persons working under an employment relationship. The procedure for appointment and the status of civil servants are established by a 437 Public Administr Ation reform in b ulgAri A: Weberi An b ureA ucr Acy , ne W Public mAn Agement, And good govern Ance A t the sAme time specific law (Civil Servant Act). Any employee working in the administration under an employment contract is appointed under the Labor Code. Accor- ding to the functions executed, the positions in the administration are of the following type: managerial; expert; and technical. The Administration Act introduces the institution of political cabinet for the Prime Minister, deputy prime ministers, government ministers, chairpersons of state agencies, and regional governors. A political cabinet is an organizational structure which is assigned with advisory, control, information and analytical functions which assists the respective executive authority in the formulation and implementa- tion of the government policy. The law defines the existence of two branches of the administration: central and local one, and the latter consists of regional and municipal administration. The Civil Servant Act regulates the formation, content, and termination of a civil-service relationship between the State and a civil servant in con- nection with the performance of civil service. According to this Act „civil ser- vant“ means a person who, by virtue of an administrative act on appointment, occupies a salaried tenured position in the state administration and assists a body of state power in the exercise of the powers thereof. By introducing a specific status of „civil servant“, the law creates a secure professional position that is independent of political interference. w ith the adoption of these two laws Bulgaria joins the classical model of w eberian bureaucracy at least from the legal framework standpoint. Thus, the country is no exception to the way and the choice of the CEE countries that, for various reasons, are oriented in the direction of „classic continental career systems“. The g erman model is emerging as a dominant influence in most states, including countries from CEE (Verheijen, 1999: 330−331). Usually, this orientation is explained by the influence of the EU on public administration reforms, despite the absence of clear Acquis Communautaire in this area. The question that arises is whether it is a choice between the weberian model and the model of the NPM or linking them to a new model that cha- racterizes the CEE countries. For developed democracies NPM appears as an alternative to the classical model due to the principle of orientation to the cli- ent rather than to the law. Thus, in developed democracies where the practi- ces of NPM are implemented (and that means everywhere but to a varying degrees), the model of NPM changes the classical model. For Bulgaria the 438 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence classic model of administration is a precondition for adoption of the NPM model. Only a strong, professional, and independent administration may transfer functions on the implementation and even formulation of policies to the private sector. Thus, a new model of administration emerged − a hybrid between the classic model and the NPM. In this case the professional admi- nistration is oriented towards offering efficient services through partnerships with the private sector. Therefore, there is no „return to the continental roots of pre-1945“ (Verheijen, 1999: 330−331). It is more of outlining a new model in which the w eberian principles of professionalization of the administration are an integral part. This explains also why the contradiction between the ideas of public administration reform of major international actors − global financial institutions and SIgMA project – is only seemingly. Some analyzes (Shivergueva & Nachev, 2011) explain the public admi- nistration reform in Bulgaria as a transition from the w eberian type of burea- ucracy to the NPM. Actually, the two models merge through the accumulation of practices that meet the logic of one of the two concepts. Of course, the in- troduction of the logic of the NPM changes the classical theory of w eber‘s bureaucracy. w hile the NPM is aimed at the result, the classical model exists because of the rules. At the same time, the NPM is not possible without profes- sional administration that has the qualities and capacity to achieve the result. The second stage of the public administration reform in Bulgaria which laid down the foundation of the new model − a hybrid between classic model and NPM − differs from the first stage in that, inter alia, it is not bound either by the issue or the language of the transition from state socialism to democra- cy. The main issue is: „How to build a working administration?“ rather than „How to remove the old administration and replace it with a new one“. The first question is not a part of the typical agenda of transition. It is common for both old and new democracies, despite the identification of various problems in them. The old democracies must reform the classical model that does not meet the new challenges associated with the global processes, emergence of many actors in the policies, and growing influence of international organi- zations. Bulgaria as well as other new democracies have to meet the same challenges, but because they do not possess the basic institutions of the w es- tern model, they must first perceive the classical model of administration. The introduced classic model of administration continues to evolve, and 439 Public Administr Ation reform in b ulgAri A: Weberi An b ureA ucr Acy , ne W Public mAn Agement, And good govern Ance A t the sAme time on a later stage, beyond the temporal limits of the second stage of the reform while retaining its main characteristics. The performance appraisal of public servants started in 2002. A compulsory competition was introduced in 2003 on taking up the public service, and the appointment was made through a competition based on professional merits. Commitments were introduced for the administration for further training of the public servants, including financial provisions for the training. The Institute of Public Administration has been established, having the task to organize and carry out education and professional training, and retrain public servants. Amendments have been made in connection with the development of the system of ranks, introducing five degrees for the junior and senior ranks (Operational Program “g ood go - vernance” 2014–2020). In 2006, the two main laws regulating the structure of administration and public service have undergone substantial amendments. The amen- dments introduced a distinction between the political and administrative level of the public administration. The category of the „senior civil servant“ was introduced. The opportunities for delegation of powers by the executive authority to the other officials of the respective administration were expan- ded. The competition arrangements were improved. The appointment of ci- vil servants to a position under a service contract and for a part-time work was regulated. Centralized competition for junior experts was introduced, thus establishing a pool of young and highly educated people willing to work in the administration. Until now, 4 centralized competitions are conducted for junior experts and a national competition for people with disabilities for expert positions in the public administration. The principle of mobility for civil servants was introduced, regulating permanent and temporary mobility. The opportunities for professional training of civil servants were improved by increasing the eligible costs of training from 0.8% to 2% of salary funds. In 2012, a new pay model for civil servants was introduced. The salary of civil servants was restructured by deleting the bonus for length of time, which is already included in the amount of new basic monthly salary of the civil servant. A new regulation is introduced regarding the bonuses that may be received by the civil servants by suspending the existing practice of the revenue from fees collected by the administrations to be used as a source of civil servants bonuses. The amount of performance bonuses that any civil ser- 440 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence vant may receive on an annual basis may not exceed 80% of the annual salary for the respective year. Eligible costs for performance bonuses in each admi- nistration are also defined in an amount of not more than 30% of the costs for salaries, wages, and social security contributions (Operational program “g ood governance” , 2014−2020). • Corruption The hybrid model of public administration established in Bulgaria is characterized by a relatively high degree of discretion power given to the administrative structures. The level of discretion power could be assumed as an indication for adoption of the NPM model − the greater is the extent to which the administration can alone take a decision, the more is its ability to seek efficiency in the delivery of services to the citizens in accordance with the specific problem and situation. Quite the opposite − more regulated acti- vities of the administration decrease its ability to maximize public benefits in a particular situation. Notably, the level of discretion power opens a space for practices of NPM that suggest solving of each case with a view to achieving optimal results. The comparative analysis of the public administrations reform in the CEE countries shows that Bulgaria is among the group of countries (together with Romania and Slovakia) where the adoption of the first civil service law is relatively late and happened after 1997. These countries are characterized by a high degree of discretion power (mostly over allocation and remuneration decisions). At the same time, and perhaps because of that, these countries have a relatively very high degree of politically induced changes in the admi- nistration after the change of its governments (Meyer-Sahling Jan-Hinrik, 2006: 16). Assuming that the discretion is an indicator of the perception of the NPM, Bulgaria is among the countries whose model of public administra- tion is influenced by it to relatively great extent. As a result of the relatively high degree of discretion, the hybrid model of public administration incorporates the preconditions for a high degree of corruption. The freer in its decisions the administration is, the likelihood of corruption pressure on it increases. The implementation of that likelihood depends on many other factors, including prevailing values and integrity of the administration that seem basic ones. Corruption in the administration is a very important problem according to the opinion of common Bulgarians 441 Public Administr Ation reform in b ulgAri A: Weberi An b ureA ucr Acy , ne W Public mAn Agement, And good govern Ance A t the sAme time and the opinions of a number of international organizations (Пеев, 2007: 10). Objectively, the level of corruption in Bulgaria is very high. According to the Corruption Perceptions Index of Transparency International, Bulgaria is only at 69 th place with a score of 41 (with a maximum score of 100) in 2015. It is the last country among the EU Member States according to this index (see Figure 11.1). 132 Figure 11.1: Corruption Perceptions Index The high corruption in Bulgaria is very unfavorable indicator for which each activity of the administration is met by the public with doubt and di- sapproval in advance. There are a number steps undertaken to control the corruption. Fighting against it is a goal in two consecutive strategic docu- ments. Important legislative measure in 2008 is the adoption of the Conflict of Interest Prevention and Disclosure Act that settles principles in terms of prevention and disclosure of conflict of interests of persons holding public office. This legislative measure is extremely important and is a clear signal of political will to resolve the negative phenomenon. Nevertheless, the control of corruption has not led to significant results so far. According to the w orld Bank w orldwide g overnance Indicators,Bulgaria has a relatively poor per- 132 According to data retrieved from Transparency International: http://www.transparency.org/ cpi2015#results-table). 442 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence formance on the control of corruption. In 2008, immediately after the acces- sion to the EU, Bulgaria has had a very low percentile rank. In the coming years, its performance has been improving, even though slightly, but after 2012, it went down again (see Figure 11.2). 133 Figure 11.2: Control on the Corruption (w orld Bank) • Agencitification Along with the level of discretion power, agencitification is a process that reflects the impact of NPM on the model of public administration. The esta- blishment of agencies (according to the Bulgarian legislation, they are three types: „executive“, „state“, and „commissions“, as the last ones are regulatory bodies) is regulated by the Administration Act. In Bulgaria, there are dozens of agencies (see Figure 11.3). 134 133 According to data retrieved from wB: http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/index. aspx#home. 134 State of the Administration Reports available online at: http://www.strategy.bg/Publications/ View.aspx?lang=bg-Bg&Id=81. 443 Public Administr Ation reform in b ulgAri A: Weberi An b ureA ucr Acy , ne W Public mAn Agement, And good govern Ance A t the sAme time Figure 11.3: Administrative Structures in Central Administration The share of executive agencies operating within the Ministries is largest but has relative independence in carrying out their functions. The proportion of employed persons in these agencies compared to total employed persons in the administration is constant after 2011, and varies around 30%. In govern- ment agencies that are completely independent institutions and subordinated only to the Prime Minister, the employed persons represent around 5% of the administration as a whole. The share of employees in regulatory bodies (commissions) is also constant in the period after 2011. It is rather insignifi- cant − about 1% (see Table 11.1). 135 Table 11.1: Number and Percentage of Employees in Agencies (by Type) 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 ADMINISTRATION OF THE EXECUTIVE AUTHORITY (TOTAL) 96,269 96,026 96,343 94,087 92,180 Growth in 2011=100% 100 99.7 100 97.7 95.8 CENTRAL ADMINISTRATION 54,919 55,014 54,966 53,009 51,338 T otal share of the central administration in % 57.1 57.3 57.1 56.3 55.7 1. Ministries and CoM administration* 6,908 7,206 7,081 6,843 7,070 Share of the central administration in % 12.6% 13.1% 12.9% 12.9% 13.8% 135 According to data retrieved from NSI: http://www.nsi.bg/sites/default/files/files/data/time- series/Labour_1.1.5.xls. 444 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 2. State agencies 2,771 2,754 2,764 2,821 2,631 Share of the central administration in % 5% 5% 5% 5.3% 5.1% 3. State commissions 500 525 513 504 499 Share of the central administration in % 0.9% 1% 0.9% 1% 1% 4. Executive agencies 17,963 17,736 17,743 16,551 15,763 Share of the central administration in % 32.7 32.2 32.3 31.2 30.7% 5. Administrative structures established by a legislative act which have functions in the implementation of the executive power 25,247 25,245 25,298 24,934 24,046 Share of the central administration in % 46 45.9 46 47.1 46.8 6. Administrative structures established by a legislative act reporting to the National Assembly 1,059 1,063 1,099 1,074 1,058 Share of the central administration in % 1.9% 1.9% 2% 2% 2.1% 7. Structures under Art. 60 of the Law on the Administration 471 485 468 282 271 Share of the central administration in % 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.5 0.5 Despite the adoption of agencitification practices, they are rather not contributing enough to the improvement of the public governance. For their most part, they only imitate the British practices (Маринов, 2011: 85), and fail to achieve the autonomy and rationality of actions. 11.2.3. Third Stage: Towards Good Governance The third stage of public administration reform in Bulgaria started with the launch of negotiations for full EU membership. The negotiation process started in February 2000 since the screening the EU employed to assess the candidate states ranked Bulgaria in what used to be at the time „the Helsinki group“ of countries admitted to begin membership negotiations. The state of the negotiations with the EU did not only indicate the achieved progress in various reform areas – it also triggered the reform effort itself and defined its timetable. w hat remained somewhat astride is that the public attention was the very nature of the EU enlargement negotiations. As opposed to any other type of diplomatic search for compromise, the format and the set of rules of these negotiations actually left little room for maneuvering of the candidate country (V elichkov, 2004). The impact of EU accession on public administration reform is not so unambiguous because the negotiations did not directly affect the mo- 445 Public Administr Ation reform in b ulgAri A: Weberi An b ureA ucr Acy , ne W Public mAn Agement, And good govern Ance A t the sAme time del of public management. At the same time, at the European level, there is no single strategy for strengthening of the capacity of the state administration nor is there a unified model for its most effective functioning (Shivergueva, 2009). In 2000, when Bulgaria comes into a negotiation process, the link betwe- en European integration and public administration reform seems to become stronger. The European Commission places great emphasis in the avis on the capacity of Member States’ administrations to implement the body of Eu- ropean law (Acquis Communautaire) on schedule, although this had never been an issue in previous waves of accessions. Nevertheless, the link between the accession and the public administration reform stays an indirect one since there is no general body of European law in the public administration sphere. Just as individual Member States are free to frame their own constitution, they are free to organize their administration as they see fit. This is an issue that comes under the subsidiarity principle. The EU‘s influence begins to show in the previous stage of the reform as the transfer of practices is provided through the PHARE program. Namely, the donor programs rather than the transposition of EU legislation are the basis of the affected by the EU public administration reform. w hile the EU makes funds available for the region as a whole, it is up to the national governments to use these funds efficiently (Michalak, 2012: 393) In the year 2000, one of the key recommendations of the Commission to Bulgaria as a candidate country made in the PHARE 2000 review was that the country should fundamentally revise and reconsider its public administration reform. In the 1998−2006 pro- gramming period, the PHARE‘s support for the reform of Bulgaria‘s state admi- nistration and judicial system totaled about EUR 304 million. The goals and outcomes expected from this support for the 2004−2006 period were set out in the Multi-annual Programming Document of the Ministry of Finance (MF). The focus of support in the area of state administration reform shifted from assistance to amending the legislative framework towards the problems related to its enforcement as well as to anti-corruption measures (Shivergueva, 2009). Regardless the way of transfer − through the donor programs or nego- tiation process − the EU imports in public administration reform in Bulgaria the concept of good governance. In 2001, the EU adopted the w hite Paper on European g overnance which defines the basic principles of administrations in the European area − openness, participation, accountability, effectiveness, 446 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence and coherence. These principles are the European interpretation of the con- cept of good governance. The essence of them and what distinguishes them from the previous models associated with the traditional model and respecti- vely NPM is the openness of the administration to society and citizens. This openness which is expressed in the transparency of actions, accountability to citizens, involvement and participation of citizens in public policies is concei- ved as a precondition for effective achievement of public purposes. g ood governance is the third element in the public administration re- form in Bulgaria, which upgraded the previous two − the traditional model of professional administration and NPM. The model of good governance brings new elements in the reform of public administration. It is a system of activi- ties of the state, private, and civil institutions for cooperative formulation and sustainable implementation of public interest (Taнев, 2009: 2). The three concepts − traditional model of administration, NPM, and good governance – not only do they not contradict but also complement each other, and together form the content of the reforms that Bulgaria held. It is hard to say which of these concepts prevails in the adopted model. In addition, it is not a mechanical connection but creation of a fundamentally new model that does not fit fully into any one of the three concepts, although complying with the logic of each of them. After 2000, the development of public administration reform in Bulga- ria fully follows the process of Europeanization. In this process, Bulgaria fa- ced two interrelated challenges: first, to develop administrative capacity in the areas directly related to membership obligations and second, to perform comprehensive modernization of the public administration (katsamunska, 2010: 53). Thus, Bulgaria meets the European conditionality, and at the same time, continues the reforms in the direction of the three elements that simul- taneously shape the model of public administration and public management: • Support for introduction and development of the status and com- petence of professional administration. This element also includes modernization of the administration through the introduction of modern approaches and technologies in its work. Bulgaria returns to traditional models of administration but on a different techno- logical level: both at instrumental and social perspective. In the third stage of public administration reform Bulgaria improved the 447 Public Administr Ation reform in b ulgAri A: Weberi An b ureA ucr Acy , ne W Public mAn Agement, And good govern Ance A t the sAme time traditional model by changing legislation and practices. In 2006, important amendments were made to the two basic acts in this sphere: Law on Adminis- tration (LA) and Law on Civil Servants (LCS). The LA amendments were related to the implementation of the administrative reform: distinguishing the political from the administrative level in the state administration, regulating the policy- making process, and creating effective internal control (Shivergueva, 2009). The E-g overnment Act was adopted at the end of May 2007. It lays the ground for a substantial reform in the administration work thanks to the in- troduction of new information technologies and the parallel use of paper and electronic documents. The law envisages the automation of administrative pro- cedures, introduction of transparency in administrative processes, and reduction in the opportunities for corrupt practices as well as reduction in administrative costs (Shivergueva, 2009: 28). Bulgaria is falling behind the EU member states in the process of developing e-g overnment. Despite some significant results mos- tly related to the expansion of the volume of e-services, the overall performan- ce of Bulgaria in connection with the introduction of e-governance is very low. According to the United Nations e-g overnment Development Index (EgDI) for the period 2003−2014 Bulgaria is extremely backward, from 35 th rank at the be- ginning of the period, it fell to 73 rd place at the end of it. It scored 0.5421 in total and is ranked the last among the EU Member States (see Table 11.2). 136 Table 11.2: Index of the United Nations for the Development of e-g overnment for 2013 and 2014 Country Rank 2014 EGDI 2014 Rank 2003 Rank Change Bulgaria 73 0.5421 35 -38 The analysis of the reasons for this situation enables the identification of the necessary measures for its development to a level meeting the Euro- pean requirements. Currently, three major reasons for the insufficient esta- blishment of e-g overnance in Bulgaria can be advanced: lack of interopera- bility of the administration information systems, lack of adequate electronic exchange between the administrations as well as unsolved issue of data unifi- cation (see Table 11.3). 137 136 Https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/Reports/UN-E-government-Survey-2014. 137 According to data retrieved from NSI: http://www.nsi.bg/en/content/6115/individuals-using-in- 448 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Table 11.3: E-g overnance 3.1. INDIVIDUALS USING THE INTERNET FOR INTERACTING WITH PUBLIC AUTHORITIES (LAST 12 MONTHS) Type of purpose 2008 2011 2015 % Number % Number % Number Total 10.0 595 015 25.4 1 390 314 17.8 986 529 Male 8.8 256 183 25.1 679 083 16.6 453 537 Female 11.1 338 832 25.8 711 231 19.0 532 992 Obtaining information from public authorities web sites 7.9 474 070 20.3 1 112 060 16.0 886 715 Male 7.4 214 225 20.2 545 649 14.8 404 715 Female 8.5 259 845 20.5 566 411 17.2 482 000 Downloading official forms 5.9 350 768 9.4 512 773 12.9 712 248 Male 4.8 140 396 8.5 230 221 11.9 323 952 Female 6.9 210 372 10.2 282 552 13.9 388 297 Sending filled forms 4.1 245 099 10.1 553 369 9.1 503 659 Male 3.3 96 313 9.7 261 874 8.2 222 449 Female 4.9 148 786 10.6 291 495 10.0 281 211 3.2. ENTERPRISES USING INTERNET FOR INTERACTING WITH PUBLIC AUTHORITIES Type of purpose 2004 2007 2011 2015   To- tal By size class Total By size class Total By size class To- tal By size class     10- 49 50- 249 250 + 10- 49 50- 249 250 + 10- 49 50- 249 250 + 10- 49 50- 249 250 + For ob- taining infor- mation 36.5 32.7 47.7 66.4 39.7 34.6 58.9 73.6 69.1 65.5 83.9 93.4 71.0 68.0 83.8 91.1 For ob- taining forms, e.g. tax declara- tion 26.7 24.1 33.7 50.5 36.5 31.5 55.1 70.2 74.7 71.2 89.3 97.4 75.8 72.8 89.1 93.6 ternet-interacting-public-authorities and http://www.nsi.bg/en/content/6149/enterprises-using- internet-interacting-public-authorities. 449 Public Administr Ation reform in b ulgAri A: Weberi An b ureA ucr Acy , ne W Public mAn Agement, And good govern Ance A t the sAme time For re- turning filled in forms 8.7 7.2 12.3 25.4 29.5 25.1 45.0 64.6 65.8 61.1 86.1 93.8 75.7 72.8 88.7 93.4 For submit- ting a propo- sal in a public e-tender system . . . . 6.6 5.4 10.8 16.9 7.7 7.4 9.2 10.5 . . . . In the field of administrative services, an assessment of the effectiveness and efficiency of the administration has been introduced. The administrative service in the administrations is monitored and analyzed through the Admi- nistrative Service Self-Assessment System, developed based on the model of the European Foundation for Quality Management which collects data on processes related to administrative services in the country and provides an opportunity to measure the quality of services and performance of adminis- trative services. Queue Management Systems are introduced in the adminis- trations servicing a large number of users in a total of 50 administrations throughout the country, illegal schemes at the municipal level are removed, and rates of state taxes administered at the central level are reduced. From a total of 517 administrations providing administrative services, 396 admi- nistrations provide services on a „one-stop shop“ principle, which attains 76.60%. An important legislative measure in 2008 has been the adoption of the Conflict of Interest Prevention and Disclosure Act that settles principles in terms of prevention and disclosure of conflict of interests of persons hol- ding public office (Operational program “g ood governance” 2014–2020). • Expansion and regulation of practices related to the NPM. This ele- ment is aimed at developing the regulatory capacity of the adminis- tration and the expansion of economic freedom. Additionally, within this element of the public administration reform it is foreseen such development of the administration (and the public sector as a whole) which is consistent with the logic of structural adjustment reform. 450 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence In direction of this development, Bulgaria undertakes multiple steps. In 2006, with the enactment of the Administrative Procedure Code and the repeal of the Administrative Services to Individuals and Legal Entities Act, the legislation in relation to administrative services is codified. From that moment onwards one and the same procedure is used both for adminis- trative services to individuals and legal entities as well as for the issuance of individual administrative acts. The procedure for exercise of judicial re- view on administrative acts is unified. The administrative service rules are described in details with the adoption of the Regulation on Administrative Services (Operational program “g ood governance” 2014–2020). Restricting Administrative Regulation and Administrative Control over Economic Activity Act has been adopted in 2004, whose aim is to fa- cilitate and encourage the pursuit of economic activity by means of restric- ting, to socially justified limits, the administrative regulation and adminis- trative control exercised over the said activity by the state bodies and by the bodies of local self-government. In PAR in Bulgaria a great importance is given to the creation and de- velopment of regulatory capacity of the administration. The introduction of this element of capacity involves a combination of freedom for economic operators and ability of the administration to establish the rules for their operation in a way that the achievement of public purposes (including pri- vate sector development) will be guaranteed. The w orld Bank w orldwide g overnance Regulatory Quality Indicator captures perceptions of the abi- lity of the government to formulate and implement sound policies and re- gulations that permit and promote private sector development. The perfor - mance of Bulgaria on this indicator is relatively good (see Figure 11.4). In fact, if there is a comparison of the performance of the country on all go- vernance indicators of the w orld Bank, the result for the regulatory quality would be that it has the highest percentile rank. Its performance is relatively stable in time, as it is best in 2010, and then there is a decrease which has not yet been recovered. 138 138 According to data retrieved from wB: http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/index. aspx#home. 451 Public Administr Ation reform in b ulgAri A: Weberi An b ureA ucr Acy , ne W Public mAn Agement, And good govern Ance A t the sAme time Figure 11.4: Regulatory Quality according to the w orld Bank For the purpose of regulation of one of the most important principles of the public administration − to increase its efficiency and effectiveness, in 2012, a prohibition on increasing the total number of executive admi- nistration is introduced. During the reviewed period, an optimization of administrative structures is consistently carried out in order to ensure a balance between normative statutory powers of the authority, functions and size of organizational units, and necessary and readily available human and financial resources. In the period of 2005−2009, the administrative structu- res and sub-delegations to ministers have been optimized with the total of 17,060 number of posts representing 10.5% optimization (Operational pro- gram “g ood g overnance” 2014−2020). Because of these measures, the total number of administration in the structures of the executive power remains stable until the end of 2013 and then it began to steadily decline (see Table 11.4). 139 139 According to data retrieved from NSI: http://www.nsi.bg/sites/default/files/files/data/timeseries/ Labour_1.1.5.xls. The data do not include the employed persons in the Ministry of Interior and the Ministry of Defense. 452 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Table 11.4: Data for Employed Persons in the Administration 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 ADMINISTRATION OF THE EXECUTIVE AUTHORITY (TOTAL)* 96,269 96,026 96,343 94,087 92,180 g rowth in 2011=100% 100 99.7 100 97.7 95.8 І. CENTRAL ADMINISTRATION* 54,919 55,014 54,966 53,009 51,338 Total share of central administration in % 57.1 57.3 57.1 56.3 55.7 ІІ. LOCAL ADMINISTRATION 41,350 41,012 41,377 41,078 40,842 Total share of local administrationin % 42.9 42.7 42.9 43.7 44.3 • Expansion and regulation of practices related to the concept of good governance. This element of the reform is aimed at changing relationships between the administration and the society. This element of the reform in Bulgaria, which is seen as a major, even unique, in the researches since 2000 (Tanev, 2009; k atsamunska, 2010), in- cludes a series of legislative changes, regulations of practices, measures to develop the capacity of both the administration and stakeholders. In 2000, Access to Public Information Act is adopted. It is an essential part of the legislation, regulating openness and transparency of public in- formation. Until Bulgaria‘s accession to the EU, this Act has been amended twice, in January and April 2002, in order to be consistent with the new Law on Personal Data Protection (effective from 1 January 2002) as well as with the Law on the Protection of classified information (30 April 2002). Access to Public Information Act formulates the principles applied upon exercise of the right of access to public information: openness, truthfulness, and comprehensiveness of the information; ensuring access to public information on equal terms; ensuring legality in seeking and obtai- ning public information; protection of the right to information; protection of personal data; safeguarding the security of society and the State. The process of policy development has been regulated − in the imple- mentation of the strategic goals, the executive authorities are required to set annual targets for the activities of the respective administration and control their execution. The principle of annual reporting for the administrations has been introduced in the implementation of the strategic objectives and priorities set in the program of the Council of Ministers. 453 Public Administr Ation reform in b ulgAri A: Weberi An b ureA ucr Acy , ne W Public mAn Agement, And good govern Ance A t the sAme time The progress in this element of the reform is perhaps one of the most difficult. It does not depend only, even at least, on the regulatory require- ment. It presumes the creation of a capacity to manage the process of public policy, which means at least two things: ability to formulate objectives ba- sed on rational methods, and ability to interact with stakeholders. Largely, the training of public administration organized under the Institute of Pu- blic Administration addressed this challenge. State bodies are legally bound to coordinate their activity and to con- sult social economic partners (SEP) and civil society in order to guaran- tee an integrated state policy. The coordination mechanisms as well as the process of consultations aiming at including a broad range of stakeholders are an important part of the process of policy-making (strategic planning, impact assessment), policy implementation, and assessment of the achieved results. All regional and almost all municipal administrations have also es- tablished advisory and coordination mechanisms. The functioning of com- mittees, councils, and working groups is also an operational way for the interaction of the central administration with the regional and municipal administrations with the objective of achieving the goals of local self-go- vernment and regional policy. Common regulations are established for the Advisory Boards. Rules have been introduced to increase accountability, transparency, and interaction with stakeholders. In Bulgaria, there is a strong fragmentation in the field of strategic planning and a huge number of strategic documents (see Figure 11.5). 140 There are about 550 strategic documents, including 210 at the national level. The large number of documents and poor coordination in their preparation create difficulties in achieving coherence of initiatives planned. Institutions have not yet established the mechanisms for joint implementation of strate- gic goals, and often develop their individual documents, projects, and ini- tiatives that are not always aligned with the Common Strategic Framework. 140 State of the Administration Reports available online at:http://www.strategy.bg/Publications/ View.aspx?lang=bg-Bg&Id=81. 454 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Figure 11.5: Strategic Documents at the National Level All the three elements of the reform are aimed ultimately at the search of efficiency of achieving public goals. Practices, however, cannot be reduced to one single concept. It seems to be wrong to look which concept prevails. It is rather spontaneously outlining a model that does not exist anywhere but corresponds to the today’s challenges. The way to this model is a way without a preliminary plan. Separate practices are introduced corresponding to the prevailing paradigm at the time of their introduction: traditional model, NPM, good governance. w hich paradigm prevails depends mostly on the international and supranational commitments of the State, which are a result of financial dependence (IMF), donor programs (w orld Bank, EU), or volun- tary inclusion in general political and normative space (EU). This does not mean that there is no pattern. Simply, this model has not yet been fully deli- neated. For the moment, it is a set of practices and the public administration reform seeks to continuously improve them without a clear agreement on the stakeholders’ and experts’ perspective about what actually is the purpose of their perception. Despite the lack of a clear governance model towards which the reform of public administration is aimed because of the demand of efficiency, it can be assumed that it is a general indicator of its operation and application. According to the methodology of the world Bank, general g overnment Effectiveness Indicator captures perceptions of the quality of public services, quality of civil service and degree of its independence from political pressu- 455 Public Administr Ation reform in b ulgAri A: Weberi An b ureA ucr Acy , ne W Public mAn Agement, And good govern Ance A t the sAme time res, quality of policy formulation and implementation, and credibility of the government’s commitment to such policies. The indicator itself mixes charac- teristics of the three concepts that define the content of public administration reform in Bulgaria. According to this indicator, the performance of the coun- try is rather modest. It has the lowest representation in 2008, and then there is a positive trend of growth of percentile rank but keeping levels of about 60 (see Figure 11.6). 141 After 2013, the positive trend is interrupted, and the percentile rank begins to decline. Figure 11.6: g overnment Effectiveness w orld Bank The interpretation of the above data is not unambiguous. The qualities of the model of public management and administrative capacity are a neces- sary precondition but not sufficient condition for improving public services. As the methodology of the index includes, among other elements, an assess- ment of the state of public schools, basic health services, drinking water and sanitation, electricity grid, transport infrastructure, maintenance and waste disposal, it is obvious that the relatively poor performance of the country is linked to problems in some of these sectors. PAR, even if successful, could not lead to quick and immediate results in improving public services. However, this is not an explanation that satisfies the audience. On the contrary, the results that are not achieved are constantly 141 According to data retrieved from wB: http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/index.aspx#home. 456 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence undermining the confidence in PAR. The distrust of citizens makes policy- makers to change the direction and seek for new solutions. This makes the reform continuous and the public governance model – elusive. This brings to the paradox that the reform itself is successful because it is moving in the right direction, and introduces practices that meet its basic principles but its results are unfavorable. The problem is whether this is a matter of time, or it is a matter of model and unsatisfactory results will recur. It is hard to talk about generic weaknesses of the model of public go- vernance that combines the principles of traditional bureaucracy, NPM, and good governance. The main reason for this is that the model is a spontaneous response to the adaptation of governance to modern challenges, and in this sense, it is constantly evolving. The main advocates and promoters of this model (g lobal Financial Institutions and EU) distribute more principles, best practices, and assessment indicators than the models. This does not mean that we cannot talk about the weaknesses of the model in its implementation in practices. The model of public governance to which the public administration re- form in Bulgaria has been targeted has one significant weakness. It is linked to the unresolved political dependence of public administration, which conti- nues to exist despite the legislative framework. The political dependence is expressed in mass replacement of administrative staff after the change of the g overnment, in taking a position in the administration because of political commitment and loyalty, as well as the influence of the political party in po- wer in the exercise of discretion power. The existence of these phenomena and determining their scope can hardly be supported by data. This condition is rather intuitively felt by both experts and citizens. There is an agreement between them that political de- pendence of the administration is widespread. However, this calls into question the existence of the traditional model of bureaucracy which as an attempt to be proved in the current model of governance is a precondition, a basis for the occurrence of other elements of the reform − the introduction of NPM practices and good governance. If there is something that must immediately be reformulated in the PAR model, it is how political independence and professionalization of the administration have to be guaranteed − in law and in practice. 457 Public Administr Ation reform in b ulgAri A: Weberi An b ureA ucr Acy , ne W Public mAn Agement, And good govern Ance A t the sAme time 11.2.4. More Centralization than Decentralization The introduction of the territorial model for the distribution of power in Bulgaria starts – as it was always noticed – at the very beginning of the societal transition – in 1991. According to this model that has been more developed than changed during the following 25 years, the vertical distri- bution of power consists of three levels: central, regional, and local level. Two levels in the territorial administration – regional and local – have a fundamentally different nature. w hile the first is a territorial extension of the central level, the second is built on the self-governance principle. • Administrative and territorial structure Administratively, the Bulgaria’s territory is divided in 28 regions and 265 municipalities. For approximation with the European requirements for Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics (NUTS), Bulgaria is divided into: 2 non-administrative-territorial units (North and South Bulgaria) at NUTS 1 level; and 6 planning regions at NUTS 2 level (Стефанова, М. Калфова, Е. 2004). The 28 regions, which are the second level in the vertical distribution of power, are defined as territorial units at NUTS 3 level (see Figure 11.7). 142 Regions (oblasti) are administrative units of the central government. They comprise one or several neighboring municipalities. The region admi- nistrations are financed directly by the central government budget. At the regional level, the main institution is the regional governor who is one-man body of the executive power. He/she implements the State governance re- gionally, and ensures the compliance between national and local interests on regional policy realization. Once more, he/she leads the regional admi- nistration. 142 State of the Administration Reports available online at: http://www.strategy.bg/Publications/ View.aspx?lang=bg-Bg&Id=81. 458 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Figure 11.7: Administrative Structures in Local Administration The regional governor communicates with local self-governance bodies in the region, executive power bodies, and other institutions that are not part of the executive system. His/her activity is directed to the State policy imple- mentation, and its coordination with locally formulated policy aims. The municipalities are the basic administrative-territorial units carrying out local self-government. They are established by the Council of Ministers according to a procedure specified in the Law on Administrative and Ter- ritorial Structure of the Republic of Bulgaria. Mayoralties and districts are composite administrative-territorial units of municipalities. The municipal administration supports the activities of the municipal councils and the ma- yors of municipalities, districts and mayoralties. (Data for employed persons in the local administration − see Table 11.5). 143 The mayor is the executive body in the municipality. He/she manages all municipal executive activities, organizes the disbursement of the municipal budget and implementation of long-term programs, organizes the implementation of the municipal council acts, and participates in its sessions with the right to an advisory vote, appro- ves the Rules of Procedure of the Municipal Administration. 143 According to data retrieved from NSI: http://www.nsi.bg/sites/default/files/files/data/time- series/Labour_1.1.5.xls. 459 Public Administr Ation reform in b ulgAri A: Weberi An b ureA ucr Acy , ne W Public mAn Agement, And good govern Ance A t the sAme time Table 11.5: Data for Employed Persons in the Local Administration   2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 LOCAL ADMINISTRATION 41350 41012 41377 41078 40842 Total share of local administration in % 42.9 42.7 42.9 43.7 44.3 1. Municipal and sub-municipal administrations 32,835 32,283 32,791 32,830 33,117 Share of local administration in % 79.4 78.7 79.2 79.9 81.1 2. Regional administrations 1,455 1,560 1,398 1,235 1,109 Share of local administration in % 3.5% 3.8% 3.4% 3% 2.7% 3. Specialized local administrations 7,060 7,169 7,188 7,013 6,616 Share of local administration in % 17.1% 17.5% 17.4% 17.1% 16.2% The legal and organizational framework of local government system in Bulgaria is based on many legal acts. The most important one is the Constitu- tion. According to it the municipality is the main (and so far the only) tier of local government in the country. The Constitution ensures the political basis of decentralization in Bulgaria – local government and the mayor are directly elected by the population of the municipality. This regulation is a precon- dition for achieving a considerable independence of communities from the central government. However, municipalities do not have their own indepen- dent powers defined in the Constitution − they receive or lose them by law, i.e. powers of municipalities derive from the parliament (k alchev, 2008:1−2). • Financial Decentralization Municipalities have their own independent budget and property, which can be used to serve their interests. Public services funded by municipal budgets are divided into two categories: activities delegated by the state and activities delegated by local activities. The delegated activities are financed by state transfers (grants, subsidies), and the local activities – by local reve- nues (local taxes, user charges, rents of property, privatization, etc.). Local governments can also borrow directly from the financial market but some restrictions are laid down by legislation (k alchev, 2008: 1−2). In recent years, the dynamics of the development of administrative ser- vices lags behind. In 2013, the administration provided 2023 types of admi- nistrative services to the citizens and businesses (see Figure 11.8). 144 144 According to data retrieved from: http://www.strategy.bg/StrategicDocuments/View.aspx?lang=bg- Bg&Id=891. 460 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Figure 11.8: Types of Services Provided by Central and Local Administrations The introduction of the decentralization model is one of the first subs- tantial institutional changes that come into the agenda of the transition from totalitarianism to democracy. Decentralization despite its concrete forms counts towards retrenchment of the state’s size and role and therefore res- ponds as a policy tool to the main ideas used for grounding the liberal chan- ges in the CEE countries at the begging of the 1990s. It also conforms to the ideas of democratization insofar as through it the governance approaches the citizens and their direct needs. In addition, it gives rise to new empowered actors – process that is also connected with the ideas of democratization for the sake of state monopoly over the policy-making limitation. Nevertheless, due to its compulsory presentation in the transition agen- da, the decentralization model is not at all predetermined neither obvious. Its shaping falls at cross purposes because the main objectives of the transition are or can be conflicting. The first objective is related to democratic institu- tions, building and shortening of the distance between the power and the ci- tizens. Its achievement supposes more functional and financial detachment of the self-governance level – the municipalities. The second is connected with the financial stability and economic recovery attainment through the IMF receipts that include, among other things, so-called “structural adjustment reform”. The second objective achievement presumes a strong control over 461 Public Administr Ation reform in b ulgAri A: Weberi An b ureA ucr Acy , ne W Public mAn Agement, And good govern Ance A t the sAme time the public outlays through the concentration of this function in state’s grasps. These two objectives – one for the democratization and one for the structural adjustment − are not equal in value. The first is publically suppor - ted; the second concerns more the expert debate. Furthermore, the structural adjustment can be perceived as a tool for achieving the main transition aims. However, it has a significant importance for the choice of model. In the speci- fic case of Bulgaria the second objective obtains more importance because of the international financial institutions’ influence over the transition policies. This influence is a consequence of the country’s financial dependence but the adoption of the ideas spread by them is supported and expanded by the in- ternal experts that embrace this line of social development. As a result of the significant influence that the IMF receipts gain during the first years of transi- tion, the Bulgarian choice toward decentralization is inwardly contradictive − the introduced model devolves functions to the municipalities, nevertheless it does not create financial preconditions for their fruition. Thus, after the initial legislative change, when in 1991 the decentrali- zation model was enacted, until at least 1997, when an active alteration of the self-governance legislative framework is undertaken, the major problem faced by the local authorities was the discrepancy between their powers and functions on the one hand, and the insufficient resources at their disposal on the other (Shivergueva, 2009: 15). The steps to decentralization model adjus- tment do not succeed to resolve this problem, and continue to persist while the changes are launched. However, the model advances in searching more decentralization. As a matter of fact the decentralization model development starts be- fore 1997 to a great extent under the influence of the EU and the accession process. As a rule – and this concerns the whole process of PAR – when the EU increases its influence over the country policies (for Bulgaria it happened around 1995, when the country entered the application for full membership, and the Commission started its work on the official position about this requ- est development), the IMF’s role lessens. The international organizationhas been markedly evident since 1997 when the Currency Board practices were introduced, and the financial stability seemd assured. The EU spreads in policies, including in the choice of governance model, with a more socially grounded view that enriches the neo-liberal project with 462 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence the ideas of citizens’ and local communities’ rights. At a large extent, due to the European influence, the decentralization process shifts in searching big- ger financial independence of the municipalities, and in extending the autho- rities devolution to the local bodies. The self-governance institutions increase their policy independence as well as their abilities to distribute the resources from the state budget on their own. The development of the property and financial grounds for the self-government and the decentralization start with the enactment of the Municipal Property Act in 1996. In the following two years, Local Taxes and Fees Act and Municipality Budget Act are passed. The structural adjustment aim is not abandoned. It is simply enriched with the idea of the governance that is close to citizens. Meanwhile in 1996, the National Association of Municipalities (hereinaf- ter: Association) in Bulgaria is founded with the participation of one third of municipalities in the country. In 1997, the number of participating municipa- lities increases and attains two thirds. Thus, the Association acquires the right to become a legitimated representative of the local power, represent and de- fend its interest. 264 out of 265 Bulgarian municipalities belong to the Associ- ation. Even though it is not a matter of formal law included in the institutional system of state policy-making, it becomes an active participant in this process. Signed by the end of 2001, the Decentralization Agreement between the g overnment of Bulgaria and the National Association of Municipalities ou- tlines the main problems and the fields that need changes. As a result of the Agreement the following measures are undertaken in 2002: − working group for developing the suggestions on main legal acts changes is created by a decision of Council of Ministers; − Financial decentralization framework for the period 2002−2005 and a plan for its implementation are adopted; − Decision for the division of activities founded through the local budgets by local activities and activities delegated by the state is made by The Council of Ministers. Standards for the number of municipa- lity employees and for the maintenance of activities delegated by the state are introduced. During the following years, changes in the main legal acts are amended incrementally. These changes comprise the introduction of tax decentrali- zation practices. The main ground for them is the need to widen financial 463 Public Administr Ation reform in b ulgAri A: Weberi An b ureA ucr Acy , ne W Public mAn Agement, And good govern Ance A t the sAme time independence of the municipalities which is perceived as the essential pre- requisite for a better economic and social development of the local commu- nities through the self-governance tools. Five local taxes were enacted since 1997. However, local municipali- ties only administered these taxes, acting mostly as tax collection agencies, without the ability to add new taxes or determine the tax rate or the tax base (k alchev, 2008: 4). Since 2008, local municipalities have not only been collec- ting these taxes but have also determined their size (tax rate). In addition to the already existing five local taxes, another one was added − the trade license tax (patent tax), which was a national tax until recently. On the other hand, the central government eliminated the partial transfer of personal income tax from the central government to the local governments. These specific steps towards fiscal decentralization could only be enacted through the changes in the Constitution. So far, the Constitution forbade determining the local taxation parameters by the local authorities. However, since 2008, the Consti- tution permits the local authorities to determine the size of local taxes accor- ding to and within the limits (ranges) provided by law. Changes in the Cons- titution were followed by the changes in the Local Tax and Fees Act which empowered the local authorities to determine the effective tax rates within a predefined range (For municipal revenues see Table 11.6). In spite of these changes, the taxing power of municipalities is very li- mited. The central government controls more than 70% of local budget reve- nue without bearing responsibility for the quantity and quality of the public services provided to the local residents. Local authorities in Bulgaria do not enjoy real tax autonomy, cannot influence revenue from local taxes, and have, in fact, a limited access to capital markets (k alchev, 2008; Stoilova, 2009). 145 Table 11.6: Municipal Revenues (in millions of leva)   2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Municipal reve- nues – total 2,333 2,694 3,238 4,077 5,491 4,761 4,637 4,548 4,577 4,907 Own revenues – share 35.2% 34.9% 37.5% 40.8% 32.4% 31.9% 32.7% 36.6% 37.1% 36.8% 145 According to data retrieved from Ministry of Finance: http://www.minfin.bg/bg/page/19. 464 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence Despite the effectuated changes, the financial state of municipalities has not improved considerably. Just the other way round, because of the economic crisis as well as because of the exceptionally uneven economic development of the country, the mean share of the own municipal revenues has decreased. In 2010, the biggest reduction was due to the decrease in the revenue from the municipal property management. Nowadays, the property management has become one of the main challenges of the local administrations (Ботев Йордан, 2015). The development of decentralization model elicits certain changes in proportion of the outlays for local activities in the municipal budgets. The trend is toward a slight increase in the expenditures of local activities’ share (See Table 11.7). 146 Table 11.7: Expenses in Municipal Budgets (in millions of leva)   2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Costs for local activities 1,058 1,371 1,727 2,381 2,862 2,566 2,365 2,297 2,287 2,449 Share 45% 51% 53% 58% 58% 54% 51% 50.5% 50.3% 50.1% Cost of government activities 1,275 1,323 1,556 1,696 2,111 2,194 2,272 2,251 2,287 2,459 Share 55% 49% 47% 42% 42% 46% 49% 49.5% 49.7% 49.9% One of the main problems, which the introduced decentralization mo- del elicits, is the extraordinary uneven development of municipalities. Their indebtedness measured through the size of the debt as a share from the own revenue and the state subsidy range within wide limits − from 0% to 243% according to the data for 2013 (Ministry of Finance: http://www.minfin. bg/bg/page/19). The same data show that a relatively small number of mu- nicipalities have overdue charges. Just two of them have a debt which as a share of the revenue exceeds 100%. The uneven territorial development is confirmed from the data for the gDP per capita that are figured at NUTSII and NUTSIII level (see Table 11.8). 147 146 According to data retrieved from Ministry of Finance: http://www.minfin.bg/bg/page/19. 147 According to data retrieved from NSI: http://www.nsi.bg/sites/default/files/files/data/timese- ries/gDP_1.1.4.xls. 465 Public Administr Ation reform in b ulgAri A: Weberi An b ureA ucr Acy , ne W Public mAn Agement, And good govern Ance A t the sAme time Table 11.8: gDP and gV A by Economic Sector and Region (2014)  Statistical regi- on (NUTS II) Oblast (NUTS III) Gross Value Added by eco- nomic sector GV A, Million BGN GDP , Million BGN GDP per capita, BGN Agricul- ture I ndustr y Services  BULgARIA   3 823 19 726 49 059 72 608 83 612 11 574 Severozapaden   649 1 716 2 787 5 151 5 932 7 381   Vidin 89 77 329 495 570 6 034   Vratsa 152 715 590 1 457 1 678 9 494   Lovech 97 317 478 892 1 027 7 635   Montana 140 206 460 806 929 6 611   Pleven 171 400 929 1 501 1 728 6 710 Severen tsentralen   626 2 038 3 378 6 042 6 958 8 376   V. Ta r n o v o 141 468 1 081 1 690 1 946 7 801   g abrovo 46 493 460 999 1 150 9 804   Razgrad 142 300 406 848 977 8 152   Ruse 147 672 1 102 1 922 2 213 9 675   Silistra 150 105 329 584 672 5 826 Severoiztochen   627 2 329 5 128 8 083 9 308 9 775   Varna 147 1 408 3 423 4 978 5 733 12 096   Dobrich 211 339 694 1 245 1 434 7 802   Targoviste 116 222 386 723 833 7 113   Shumen 153 360 624 1 137 1 309 7 376 Yugoiztochen   556 3 825 4 667 9 048 10 419 9 819   Burgas 188 558 2 380 3 126 3 599 8 687   Sliven 108 306 583 996 1 147 5 936   St. Zagora 146 2 642 1 287 4 075 4 692 14 348   Yamb ol 114 319 418 851 980 7 751 Yugozapaden   555 6 448 27 369 34 373 39 582 18 614   Blagoevgrad 250 678 1 154 2 082 2 397 7 567   kyustendil 59 264 423 746 859 6 656   Pernik 47 200 410 657 756 5 914   Sofia 137 1 351 912 2 401 2 765 11 544   Sofia cap. 62 3 954 24 470 28 487 32 804 24 982 Yuzhen tsentralen   810 3 371 5 730 9 911 11 413 7 872   k ardzhali 140 219 434 794 914 6 041   Pazardzhik 162 637 793 1 592 1 833 6 842   Plovdiv 259 1 913 3 276 5 448 6 273 9 268   Smolyan 93 282 380 755 869 7 554   Haskovo 156 319 847 1 323 1 523 6 386 • Regional level Decentralization model in Bulgaria gives important functions to the re- gional level, i.e. a deconcentrated state power. It does not formulate its own policies while it should coordinate local policies (formulated at the munici- pality level) in region framework. The coordination depends more on abili- 466 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence ties, skills, and leadership than on legally bound commitments. The legislative changes are easier than the development of abilities and shaping of leadership. For this reason, there are many problems that question nowadays the capa- city of regional level for the policy coordination implementation (Живле, К. Джилджов, А. Нодингс, П. 2009). The existing regional administration capacity is not perceived as a specific issue that should be resolved for the sake of the current decentralization model improvement in the current PAR reform. Insofar the fact that some steps have been undertaken is related to the European regional and cohesion policy implementation. These steps change slightly the practices; however, they have not the opportunity to significantly influence the territorial governance. The regional level deficits related to the policy coordination are not defi- cits of structure. They derive from a limited capacity of the public administra- tion as a whole to implement and follow the good governance logic when it acts (Т. Танев, 2011). This logic presumes that different governance levels are involved in a common, horizontal process of policy aims formulation. Thin- king through the formal hierarchy turns back the process to the w eberian bureaucracy. For this logic, the existence of a great number of empowered, independent actors is counter-evident. In the practices this thinking widens the role of the center despite the formally build decentralization. In the public debate, the opportunity for a self-governance principle in- troduction at the regional level is discussed. The newly developed Decentra- lization Strategy for 2016−2025 and its Implementation Plan embrace this opportunity. The intended decentralization, and especially its regional level is not clear yet. w hat will happen depends on the state’s will to lose, or at least, to share the control over the policy formulation and public finances. For the moment, this seems to prevail. 11.3. Conclusion: Setting of Administrative Practices instead of Governance Model Since 1989, the PAR in Bulgaria advances as three interrelated proces- ses. They differ in the concept they introduce in the practices; their start up time, and the actors through whom the relevant practices are transfered. The first process introduces the traditional model of administration 467 Public Administr Ation reform in b ulgAri A: Weberi An b ureA ucr Acy , ne W Public mAn Agement, And good govern Ance A t the sAme time concept and the practices that have shaped the statute and the capacity of professional and politically independent administration. This part of the re- form is relevant, to a great extent, for the agenda of transition from totalita- rianism to democracy because it contains the opportunity to substitute the old administration and break with the past. The orientation to the classical model of public administration is additionally supported by the Europe- an process for the sake of the relevant practices spread in a few influential member states. The second process of the PAR in Bulgaria introduces the NPM con- cept in the governance model. It leads to the devolution of public services delivery to the private sector; orientation of public administration activities to the results and to the client; creation and development of public authori- ties’ regulatory capacity, and decrease in the administrative burden on the businesses. Specific aspect of this process is the decrease in the administra- tion size and its optimization in relation to the functions. The international financial institutions are the main actors for spreading of this concept. The EU cannot be perceived as the main actor while it supports the NPM ideas for the sake of prevailing liberal paradigm of the common market building. The third process has started last and it is grounded on the European integration and requisiteness to respond to the European conditionality. It has enlarged the reform by bringing the concept of good governance and the practices, which have opened the administration to the society and in- volved the society in its activities. The PAR is often explained as a shift from the first concept to the second, and next to the third concept. As a matter of fact, the reform agenda looks in this way. However, as the reform content mixes the three concepts and creates administrative structure relevant to the classical model, it has introduced practices and regulations over the policy implementation in re- levance to the NPM and over the policy formulation – in relevance to good governance. “Does this reform lead to a new governance model shaping?” , is the research question that rises. For the moment, the PAR result is nothing than a setting of administrative practices. It is only the future of the PAR that can respond whether one of these concepts will prevail or whether a new governance model will emerge from the incremental process of the administrative practices introduction. 468 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence References 1. Borissova, O. 2001. Public administration reform in Bulgaria, Retrie- ved from:http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/ UNTC/UNPAN016718.pdf. 2. Dimova, E. 2013. Some Current Problems of Human Resources Mana- gement in Bulgarian Public Administration, Trakia Journal of Sciences, No. 3, 348−354. 3. Drechsler, w. 2005. The Re-Emergence of “weberian” Public Admi- nistration after the Fall of New Public Management: The Central and Eastern European Perspective, Halduskultuur, 2005, Vol 6, 94−108. 4. kalchev, E. 2008. Financing Bulgarian Local g overnments through Taxes and User Charges, Retrieved from: http://publicfinance.ru/file- manager/files/emil_kalchev.pdf. 5. k atsamunska, P . 2010. g ood g overnance and Reform of Public Admi- nistration in Bulgaria, Economic Alternatives, Issue 1, 2010, 51−60. 6. Meyer-Sahling, Jan-Hinrik. 2006. De-Politicisation through the Backdo- or? EU Integration, Administrative Reform, and Party Patronage in East Central Europe. Paper presented at the ECPR Joint Sessions, w orkshop 6: Political Parties and Patronage. Nicosia/Cyprus, April 2006. 7. Michalak, k. 2012. The Quality of g overnance in Public Administration Reforms in New Democracies: Bulgaria and Romania, Retrieved from: hrcak.srce.hr/file/195632. 8. Nozharov, S. 2014. Model of Effective Management of Bulgarian Public Administration 9. Managing EU Funds Economic Alternatives, Issue 4, 2014, 64−77. 10. Pavlov P , Parashkevova, A. 2011. The New Public Management − Con- ceptual Basis for the Use of Outsourcing in an Administrative Environ- ment, Retrieved from: http://www.tksi.org/JOURNAL-kSI/PAPER- PDF-2011/2011-3-02.pdf. 11. Richard, R. 1993. Lesson-Drawing in Public Policy: A g uide to Lear- ning across Time and Space, Chatham House Publishers, [1.01.1993.] 12. Shivergueva, М., Nachev, I. 2011. Reforms in the Bulgarian Public Administration, In: Public Administration in the Balkans from w ebe- 469 Public Administr Ation reform in b ulgAri A: Weberi An b ureA ucr Acy , ne W Public mAn Agement, And good govern Ance A t the sAme time rian Bureaucracy to New Public Management, Editors: L. Matei and S. Flogaitis, ASsee Online Series, No. 1/2011, 88−105. 13. Shivergueva, М. 2009. Reforms of Bulgarian Public Administration, New Bulgarian University Sofia, December 2009, Retrieved from: https://ideas.repec.org/h/nsu/asseec/2-4.html. 14. Stoilova, D. 2009. Local g overnment Reforms in Bulgaria: Recent De- velopments and k ey Challenges, Retrieved from:http://unpan1.un.org/ intradoc/groups/public/documents/nispacee/unpan045241.pdf. 15. Todorova, R. 2000. EU Integration and Public Administration Reform: The Bulgarian Case. In: Jak Jabes (Ed.) Ten Years of Transition. Pros- pects and Challenges for the Future of Public Administration. Univer- sity of Ottawa. 16. Velichkov, k. 2004. Bulgaria’s EU Accession Negotiations: Achieve- ments and Challenges, No. 8, 2004, Retrieved from: www.ucm.es/bucm/ cee/papeles. 17. V erheijen, T . 1995. Constitutional Pillars for New Democracies. The Ca- ses of Bulgaria and Romania. DSw O Press, Leiden. 18. V erheijen, T . 1999. Civil Service Systems in Central and Eastern Europe, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishers, 330−331. 19. Verheijen, T. 2000. Administrative Capacity Development a Race Against Time?, The Hague, June 2000. 20. Ботев, Й. 2015. Политика на общината при управление на общинската недвижима собственост в Република България, София, 2015. 21. Г еоргиев, Л. (ред.) 1999. Подготвяне на публичните администрации за 22. Европейското административно пространство, Доклади на SI- gMA N 23, Retrieved from: http://www.sigmaweb.org/bylanguage/bul- garian/39548132.pdf. 23. Живле, k., Джилджов, A., Нодингс, P . 2009. Mодернизиране на де- концентрираната администрация в България в: Реформата на об- ластното ниво на управление, София, 2009 г. 24. Маринов, А. 2011. Въвеждане на агенцията като реформа и като инструмент на административните реформи, ПУБЛИЧНИ ПО- ЛИТИКИ.bg Г одина 2 / Брой 4 / Октомври 2011. 470 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 25. Пеев, Г . 2007. Реформите в администрацията, позволили влизането на Република България в Евреопейския съюз, Retrieved from:http:// ebox.nbu.bg/adminconf/8_g.Peev .pdf. 26. Стефанова, М., Калфова, Е. 2004. Децентрализация и интеграция: Регионално и местно управление, София, 2004. 27. Танев, Т. 2009. Механизми на взаимодействие между равнищата на управление в процеса на разработване и осъществяване на страте- гии в публичната сфера, Retrieved from: http://www.self.government. bg/decentralization/?id=280&cid=&ssid=8. 28. Танев, Т. 2011. Доброто управление (g ood g overnance): наследено- то понятие, ПУБЛИЧНИ ПОЛИТИКИ.bg Г одина 2 / Брой 1 / Март 2011, 75−112. 471 Main TheMes of Public ad Minis Tra Tion reforMs in The eas Tern eu MeMber sT a Tes 12. Conclusion: Main Themes of Public Administration Reforms in the Eastern EU Member States Mantas Bileišis, Polonca Kovač 12.1. Convergence, Divergence, and Administrative Spaces In this book we present overviews of public administration reforms of 9 of 11 post-communist EU Member States: Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slova- kia, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, Romania, and Bulgaria written by the public administration researchers from respective countries. One characteristic of the region with regard to comparative public administration is that a large body of research is published in national languages, and there are a few ou- tlets for its dissemination internationally. From the broader perspective of public administration research, the term coined in the wake of the collapse of communism in Europe which refers to the region as Central and Eastern Europe (or CEE) is still very persistent, although the intervening quarter of a century has resulted in countries taking wildly different developmental paths. And while that is self-evident when looking at, say, Slovenia as opposed to Tajikistan, the differences between the 11 countries on which we focus in this book are often much harder to identify at first glance. So, what are the themes that allow defining this region as precisely that – a region? To begin with we found that there is a considerable variation betwe- en the paths the countries are taking in terms of the development of reforms. And this, we believe, means that the topic of administrative convergence in the EU is of key relevance and will remain such into the future. A common administrative space may become the institutional “glue” that keeps the EU together in times of political disagreement but we are very far from having national administrations, the sum of which could be defined as “space” . The specificity of the region of 11 new (Eastern) EU member states is usually explained by two features of its history: post-communist 148 transfor- 148 This is often called post-socialist transformation in countries which were affected by the Soviet Union to a lesser extent. 472 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence mation and European integration. Both of which occurred simultaneously. And both of which describe a decades old phenomena. There is evidence that these concepts can no longer sufficiently explain developments in public administrations of these countries. But that is not to say that the idea of “the w est and the rest” does not still hold true between w estern and Eastern EU member states. Although the EU is the most prominent institutional pro- ject of the w est, there is still a long way before differences between w estern and Eastern member states will no longer be pronounced. And this needs to be kept in mind when making comparative analyses. Eastern and w estern member states of the EU differ in several critical respects: Eastern member states have lower citizens’ trust in governments and their accountability, the- re remains a stark difference in economic prosperity, and most of the regi- on’s administrations have significantly more politicized civil services, which affects their capacity. In the wake of ‘Brexit’ referendum greater institutional integration is becoming an important topic in the EU. But closer integration, which implies convergence in governance practices, is a deeply contentious issue. Indeed, there is much to be said about divergence. E.g. the Eurozone crisis has dis- proportionately affected the southern EU member states to a point, in fact, at which their economic prosperity has nearly equaled that of the eastern mem- ber states. Therefore, going forward with the discussions on future prospects of greater EU integration a better understanding of actual trajectories of con- vergence or divergence, and key factors driving them is important. As Pollitt (2001) points out convergence in terms of public administration reform can be misguiding. At least four consecutive levels of convergence can be iden- tified: (i) convergence of reform debates, (ii) decisions, (iii) practices, and (iv) results. Concepts of convergence and divergence in public administration originated when theorizing the move from traditional bureaucracy to New Public Management in the w estern countries (Pollitt, 2001; cf. Pollitt, van Thiel & Homburg, 2007). The problem with Eastern EU member states with regard to the convergence/divergence debate is that a move towards post-bu- reaucratic governance coincided with post-communist/socialist transforma- tion. This means that although the transformation took different paths it does not automatically mean that divergence of administration is taking place. The convergence/divergence debate in this sense can be enhanced by con- 473 Main TheMes of Public ad Minis Tra Tion reforMs in The eas Tern eu MeMber sT a Tes sidering the public administration traditions approach (e.g. Pierre & Painter, 2010). Regions with largely uninterrupted centuries old political institutions significantly limit possibilities to implement formal theories of governance. E.g. the NPM with its origins in the Anglo-Saxon tradition proved to be a tough sell in countries like France or g ermany. But the eastern EU member states were considered a tabula rasa in the early 1990s – starting reforms from similar positions, and as Pollitt (2007) puts it, countries in the region were ‘imposed’ with or ‘strongly urged’ for NPM reforms. But we believe the tabula rasa argument not to be accurate. Important differences among the coun- tries did exist already at the outset. The Baltic States, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Croatia needed to develop tools of sovereign government, and Slovenia and Croatia had to fight wars of independence. Also pre-communist traditions of governance became the benchmark against which new developments were measured domestically. As a result, the rhetoric of adopting ‘European stan- dards’ 149 that pervaded the discourse of public administration reforms (PAR) before the EU accession had different meanings in different countries. Being aware of this complex interaction of a search for administrative tradition, and the impetus for convergence make this region of particular interest for public administration research. Despite the shortcoming of reforms, the region’s countries are poster- children for benefits of Europeanization. In 2004, two countries, Czech Re- public and Slovenia had a Human Development Index value of 0.800 (very high). In the intervening decade 7 more regional countries have joined this list, and this is despite a particularly hard impact of the 2008−2009 that hit most of the regions. In this contribution we will leave out the discussion what was the role, positive or negative, of NPM of region’s success (Randma-Liiv, 2008; Drechsler and Randma-Liiv, 2014). Ours is a more empirically focused question: Do pu- blic administration reforms in the region follow a pattern that would amount to an administrative tradition as outlined by Peters and Painter (2010)? In recent years Hungary and Poland conducted reforms that, as Drechsler and Randma-Liiv (2014) put it, are driven by endogenous factors. These reforms are severely challenging the assumption that this region can be defined by a sin- 149 w e use the term synonymously to Europeanization (more in Nemec & al., 2015; cf. Trondal & Peters, 2013). 474 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence gle reform trend. Finding concepts that explain common and differing gover- nance developments could shed light more broadly on public administration theory with regard to the w estern public administration and be a good test for the validity of New Public g overnance (NPg), and other formal public administration theories, most of which make universal claims and pay little attention to particular social and institutional contexts of nation-states. The NPg, similarly as the NPM, are formal theories, which cannot be adopted in practice in corpore; while w eber’s ideal-type bureaucracy is a result of gene- ralization and seems to retain important explanatory power for the behavior of public administrations, and even enjoys a comeback as Neo-weberianism (Dunn & Miller, 2007; k ovač & gajduschek, 2015). w e kept in mind these four formal governance theories, and we tried to utilize them as heuristic and analytic guidelines to try to frame generalizable observations. 12.2. Call them EEU-11 Before addressing the subject matter of this contribution, we believe a discussion on identification (i.e. naming) of the region in question is necessa- ry. Membership of the EU in many respects was a rite of passage of statehood for many of the post-communist/socialist countries. The 11 post-communist/ socialist countries joined the EU in 3 consecutively smaller enlargements: 8 in 2004 (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hun- gary, Slovenia), further 2 in 2007 (Romania, Bulgaria), and finally, 1 in 2013 (Croatia). Moreover, it is becoming obvious that the EU’s Eastern expansion is likely to experience a long break 150 . The fact that in 2016 in our region of interest three countries were in the Schengen zone and six (all of them largest by population) are not in the Eurozone shows a slowing integration processes. w ith the ‘Brexit’ vote and consecutive economic, and migration crises the ‘enlargement fatigue’ is finding forms of political expression in many of the most economically powerful member states, and this is not likely to change. Thus, the eastern borders of the EU have split the once-communist Europe at least into two areas, which tackle profoundly different administrative issues. Hence, the region of 11 countries, we believe, needs a set term of reference. 150 Four w estern Balkan states of Albania, Macedonia, Montenegro, and Serbia were recognized candidates in 2016, but only two, Montenegro and Serbia, were conducting negotiations; these were in the opening stages, and their pace was slower than for the countries that acceded earlier. 475 Main TheMes of Public ad Minis Tra Tion reforMs in The eas Tern eu MeMber sT a Tes It is still the case that differences among Eastern EU member states are smaller as compared to other EU regions. Nonetheless, they have become more pronounced over time. As years go by, attributing generalized reform trends to the region as a whole deserves due contention. At the outset of wri- ting this book we had hoped to arrive at a something resembling a model of Eastern EU governance. And on these terms we do see several persistent factors which ensure similar governance outcomes in most of the regional countries. However, this is caused not so much by the processes of convergen- ce but rather institutional limitations for reforms that do not allow divergence to occur at greater scale or pace. However, more time is needed before we can tell for sure if this extended period of lingering close together will result in a public administration tradition in the full sense of this term. Much of the body of literature on post-communist transformation and later on Europeanization agrees that the policies towards the post-communist EU candidate countries were similar and had a strong homogenizing effect (Jacoby, 2006). w ith regard to Europeanization, this literature was primarily concerned with how the EU accession conditionality affected public admi- nistration and other reforms in candidate countries. Some studies on the to- pic have suggested that Europeanization has been in this respect understood mainly as the impact of common values and trends as well as formalised prin- ciples, norms, and case law within or as an impact of the EU on drafting and implementation of regulations in individual countries as pursued particularly by the SIgMA. Y et, Europeanization is much more difficult to demonstrate as a factor of reforms after the accession (Sedelmeier, 2011). Such admissions al- low revisiting both studies of post-communist transformation, and reach furt- her back in history to seek out reform factors that shape different states and societies. Broadly, we claim, that Huntington’ s thesis (1997), that in a ‘post-ide- ological’ world of free market democracy versus communism the nation states will turn to their long standing cultural (or civilizational) identities to build political legitimacy. w ith 9 of the 11 countries included in the Huntingtonian map of the w est, and with Bulgaria and Romania having powerful European nation-state narratives that overshadow their eastern Christians historical affi- liations, Huntington’s thesis might serve as an explanation for these countries’ compliance to the EU requirements without having to cope with challenges of state building per se as it happened in much of the rest of the region. 476 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence After all, although dramatic, communism in historical terms was only a short period, and in the the early 1990s, there was still a living memory of the previous period. Because of its totalitarian, centrally planned, and brutally enforced policies it brought certain uniformity to the eastern part of Europe. The concept of Central and Eastern Europe (or CEE) was coined after the collapse of communism, and is still often used to refer to post-communist or post-socialist countries. However, this concept includes countries as different as the Czech Republic and Tajikistan (cf. Vintar & al., 2013; analyzing PARs under the scope of the NISPAcee region). As years and decades go by, diffe- rences between sub-regions of CEE become ever more accentuated. In sum, four distinct regions can be identified from the European perspective within CEE. 11 EU member states (of which 5 are members of the Eurozone), w est- Balkan states in the current EU enlargement agenda with likely members- hip at an indeterminate point in the future, six post-Soviet states within the Eastern Partnership (EaP), and the remaining six of Russia and Central Asia which, in effect, are beyond the European governance debates altogether. At the outset of the discussion, we propose referring to the 11 countries of the region as Eastern Members of the EU, new Members of the EU, Central and Eastern European EU Members, and to avoid any confusion, the concept of EEU-11 (Eastern European Union). Because the term used for new mem- ber states as proposed by Drechsler and Radmaa-Liiv (2014) is not specific enough, e.g. Malta and Cyprus also qualify, as to some extent do Sweden, Finland, and Austria which already had to comply to the Copenhagen criteria for joining. Moreover, while Sedelmeiers’ (2009), although specific but rat- her clumsy, post-communist new member states, and while the Central and Eastern European countries (CEEC; with a relevant number; as in Lippert & Umbach, 2005) raise questions about where to exactly draw the line between central and eastern Europe, the UN’s classification of Baltic States as Norther Europe makes things even more complicated. The notion of EEU-11 is hence suggested to simultaneously identify and differentiate the area. Firstly, we wish to emphasize key similarities and convergences characteristic for respective countries, resulting from common societal legacies (primarily post-communist one), up to date administrative structures (above all based on the EU membership), and economic processes (crisis and rationalizations). Secondly, we feel that there is an increasing need to 477 Main TheMes of Public ad Minis Tra Tion reforMs in The eas Tern eu MeMber sT a Tes differ this region from other countries of Eastern and/or Southern Europe that express other or additional issues, which are not relevant for our scope. Namely, such a concept of EEU-11 can serve as a theoretical if not practical ground for further PAR developments, both at the European (in terms of pursuing joint interests of these 11 member states within the EU) and national levels. 12.3. EU, EEU-11, or Case-by-case? Is there any sense for intra-regional comparisons of national public administrations within the EU? Do, by limiting ourselves geographically, we also risk overlooking important things? Both are the questions we cannot fully answer here but we do believe that several reasons deserve to be men- tioned in defense of EEU-11 as a meaningful region for comparison. w hat we discovered in the process of reviewing the national contribution was that generalizations become more difficult, not easier, when we were trying to des- cribe more particular topics, such as the civil service. This increase of com- plexity as we look closer into the cases is, of course, to be expected. Similarly as, e.g. a generalization of modernity maybe useful when discussing profound technological change, such as the Internet, but is next to useless in a discus- sion on whether next years’ national budget of a small country will go up or down by 2%. Nevertheless, what we found was that a difficulty to generali- ze lies in the fact that comprehensive reforms which have a clearly spelt-out ideology (or a paradigm if you will) is present only in the case of Hungary’s strong state narrative (Fodor, 2012). Furthermore, formal theories such as neo-w eberianism or New Public g overnance are not part of public debates on public administration reform. Instead, narrow and most often contingen- cy driven changes are the main type of reforms in EEU-11. Although changes are happening continuously − for the most part they are incremental and do not amount to a formation of a specific public administration model. Finding ourselves in a situation where by trying to look closely at each case we en- counter a torrent of events which are of limited consequence, while trying to find a meta-trend we do not seem to find a single structuring factor of public administration reforms that would apply to the entire EEU-11 we opted for a middle road, of describing the several most prominent themes in public administration that are of concern, and that are likely to remain of concern throughout the EEU-11. And as e.g. Jreisat (2005) points out, comparative 478 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence research in public administration may arrive closer to describing emergent features of governance into a coherent theory by aggregating data from diffe- rent governance systems. In addition, our work is not conducted on barren soil. There are several recent publications focusing specifically on the region and raising similar qu- estions (k ovač & gajduschek, 2015; Vintar & al., 2013). These publications go some way in pointing out the P AR trends in the EU. But what we set out to do in this conclusion is to stress that in all EEU-11 there are raging debates on how to achieve convergence to the EU ‘average’ , and beyond on any metric. Moreo- ver, what we find these debates result in themes that do overlap throughout the region. EEU-11 is differently experiencing fluctuations of global economy, and it is mostly on the sidelines of third country immigration. These new social and economic disparities are bound to impact public governance. Before we begin outlining the themes we deem most prominent we ask you to keep in mind the research question we asked the contributors to answer: “What are the concepts and their content of PAR or administrative and/or gover- nance changes that frame research debates in your country?” . This question was elaborated to encourage contributors to cover: (i) national governance setups and governance mode(s); (ii) organization of public administration, including decentralization and agencification, and main resources, e.g. public funding; (iii) development of civil service; (iv) administrative procedures and transpa- rency issues. This was also complimented with and followed up by additional questions to the contributors to elaborate on: (i) “Can a ‘native-to-the-region’ EEU-11 theory of PAR (administrative/governance change) be constructed to replace the Post-Communist/Socialist transition narrative?”; (ii) “Does the post-communist transition narrative still play a role in understanding PAR in the regional countries?”; (iii) “How is the concept of Europeanization cons- tructed with regard to PAR (administrative/governance change)?”; (iv) “w hat are the key arguments for explaining ‘implementation gaps’ in the PAR process in the country/region? Are there differences in policy areas?” A decision to collect data this way resulted in highly varied inputs which presented us with a challenge of trying to generalize the regions experience. However, public administration research in EEU-11 mostly goes by imported theories and terminologies. In addition, to gain relevance in our domestic public administration reform discourses as well as provide international pers- 479 Main TheMes of Public ad Minis Tra Tion reforMs in The eas Tern eu MeMber sT a Tes pectives, we need our national academic communities to begin constructing narratives both closely related to local realities, and at the same time, having a high level of sophistication. In this regard, this book still leaves a lot to be done. Nevertheless, we find that there is meaning in learning from each ot- her’s experience, rather than implementing further ideas that originated from the w est in very different settings. At the same time, we believe this book will contribute its small part to the debates on European Administrative Space (EAS). Protection of the four freedoms is something we believe in strongly. Moreover, in Europe where policy is becoming more erratic, a strong insti- tutional backbone of public administration may very well come in handy. In the long run, greater convergence not only in areas which the EU directly affects but in key aspects of administration, such as administrative culture, ethics, procedures, and civil service are key institutional prerequisites which will become a focus of contention between political forces of integration and otherwise. Here, the story of EEU-11 is a cautionary one. Convergence is a particularly tall order, and will not be achieved by itself. w e believe five public administration reform themes in EEU-11 are cle- arly discernable, and are the following: (i) near unchangeable ‘paradigm’ set- ting role of institutional setups of the early 1990s, (ii) tension between pressu- res to reform between international and local considerations, (iii) lack of a ‘strategic visions’ for the outcomes of reforms, (iv) persistence of legalism, and (v) tension between centralizations and decentralization. 12.4. Initial Institutional Steps w ith regard to the observation that initial institutional setups are nearly immovable, one particular feature of EEU-11 is apparent: existing political institutions at the national level have, in most of EEU-11, hardly changed since the early 1990s. The path-dependence on initial conditions of any insti- tutional setup is the cornerstone of the historic institutionalist theory (Hall & Taylor, 1996). Europeanization is, in this respect, primarily reflected in hori- zontal governance (Nemec & al., 2015). Moreover, there is no denying that post-communist transformation was the period of setting governance models that have not experienced a major reshuffle. In EEU-11, post-communist re- forms were already initially well on the path of Europeanization, and favora- bly set for the later enlargements. Although the basic institutional setups have 480 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence not changed substantially in EEU-11, there is a notable exception of Hungary. This might also be the case for Poland in the wake of 2015 elections. An important feature of the context of public administration reforms in the EEU-11 is that these countries are parliamentary democracies with only Romania considered semi-presidential. Nevertheless, even in its case the pre- sidential power with regard to public administration is severely limited. No- netheless, eight states with the exception of Estonia, Latvia, and Hungary do have direct presidential elections. Having two national institutions which hold popular mandates means that most EEU-11 have created a large number of veto players at the very top national executives means that difficulties of both initiating and following through with reforms occur more often than not. In EEU-11, achieving consensus for reforms among the elites is that much harder (Talat-kelpša, 2004). This enhanced system of checks and balances is a na- tural result of totalitarian experience in the region, and is a means of guarding against risks of authoritarianism. Hungary is particularly interesting in this re- gard as it allows us to draw an important lesson: there, differently from Estonia and Latvia, a highly ethnically homogenous society with the absence of a po- pular presidential election could create the conditions for radical reform. And it is the only case of reforms that not only focus on narrow public management areas but reshuffle the entire institutional system based on a locally developed ‘strong state’ concept. In Poland, conditions for a debate about comprehensive national governance reforms became only possible when the president and the prime minister were closely politically aligned and coordinated by a cha- rismatic leader who did not hold an official position. In this regard, the Polish arrangement for a reform agenda is much more fragile. Another important observation with regard to the political context of PAR is that the post-communist transformation was largely peaceful (or, especially the war in Croatia, have not been a direct impact of this origin but national or other tensions). The lustration process, if it occurred at all, did not bar the participation of former communists in the political process, or public administration (w elsh, 1996). This meant that, in most cases, the staff of go- vernment agencies was not replaced, and many of the practices of communist administrations persisted well into the 1990s. All these factors play into the fact that most of the public administration reforms since the EU accession were moderate and narrow in their focus. In addition, the nature of post- 481 Main TheMes of Public ad Minis Tra Tion reforMs in The eas Tern eu MeMber sT a Tes communist transformation means that reform is more often called for by the political parties that identify themselves as right-wing, whereas the left-wing governments tend to favor incremental change, if not status quo. w ith the exception of Hungary, and possibly Poland, EEU-11 seems to have settled on an institutional setup which is unfavorable for comprehen- sive reforms because for those to go ahead a great number of political and social factors need to coincide. This is in stark contrast to the institutional arrangements of the Anglo-Saxon tradition where strong executives can im- plement reforms of public management with little resistance. However, this is not to say that under the conditions of recent authoritarian and totalitarian experiences, low trust and lower rankings in corruption perception an An- glo-Saxon institutional reform in the EEU-11 would be a good idea. History of non-EEU-11 post-communist regimes, which are often presidential, bears witness. As Pollitt (2013) points out, the ease with which reforms can be star- ted and a lack of accountability for the results of such reforms raises questions about the merits of the institutional system. 12.5. Non-Alignment of Domestic and International Drivers for Reforms Due to the relationship between external (international) and internal (domestic) factors of PAR, the opinions of contributing authors have diver- ged significantly. Here, the countries with long and uninterrupted periods of statehood (Poland, Hungary) seem to have been least affected by the external pressures. Nonetheless, two institutions enjoyed significant influence over re- forms in EEU-11 in the decade preceding the EU accession: the IMF and the EU. These organizations have managed to drive a lot of governance change in the entire region. Primarily, this was because the elites and population were aligned in the support of EU integration − a situation that occurs in excee- dingly few areas of reform. In addition, in the 1990s, all countries, with the exception of Slovenia, had entered some sort of IMF program (Roaf & al., 2014). At the time, the IMF did espouse the principles of NPM and encoura- ged its program among the participant countries to adopt relevant reforms. But these reforms often focused on narrow sectors of fiscal governance and economic policy, similarly as the Europeanization process produced ‘islands’ of ‘Europeanized’ administrative practices (g oetz, 2001). And it appears that 482 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence it still remains to be the case that in narrowly defined (i.e. receive little public or political attention) policy areas, where the EU-level regulation is of high importance, reforms continue to be implemented and new practices taken up through various peer-to-peer networks. However, due to their ad hoc nature and lack of research, it is difficult to say whether this is a case across the entire EEU-11 and across all policy areas. On the other hand, we can claim that due to the narrow focus of such reforms, the proliferation of modern methods of public governance seep through the entire public sector, and does not spur broader public and political debate over PAR. Rather, the caricatures of public administration as a corrupt and inefficient are drawn in the public discourse; and fatalistically imply a need to deregulate and reduce the scope of PA, rat- her than reform it. A typology explicitly presented by the contributor with the Romanian country profile (see Table 1) of PAR appears to apply to the entire EEU-11. The two criteria for the four main types of reform are: (i) conditionality (i.e. imposed, or presented by the reformers as imposed by international obliga- tions) versus/or ideology-driven (espoused by the reformers), and (ii) secto- rial versus structural (affecting all, or most of government agencies). Table 12.1: PAR Types in EEU-11 Conditional Ideology-driven Sectorial Most common (adoption of new EU regulation) Fairly common, initiated by the ministers with narrow focuses Structural Very rare, mostly a historic legacy of the EU integration, and IMF funding programs Very rare (e.g. Hungary’s constitutio- nal reform) Source: see Romanian profile by Calin Hintea et al. Countries in EEU-11 are almost entirely all similar in terms of initia- ting and conducting structural reforms because their institutional setups al- low few possibilities to conduct such reforms. However, the region is highly divergent in terms of ideological sectorial reforms. w hereas with the EU- driven (conditional sectorial) reforms, similarities are very clear, and only the adoption speed and the breadth of impact on change of administrative 483 Main TheMes of Public ad Minis Tra Tion reforMs in The eas Tern eu MeMber sT a Tes practices differs. Smaller countries, such as Slovenia, Latvia and Lithuania, diligently implement conditional sectorial reforms. Is some sense, it is a form of outsourcing much of the administrative procedures to the EU institutions with the national institutions not devoting many recourses on reviewing the- se. Contrary, others, such as Slovakia and Hungary, tend to adopt the ‘box ticking’ logic, formally adopting needed reforms without following up with substantive change in public management. Roughly, the same geographic divide can be identified when speaking of ministerial level ideology-driven reforms. These are more common in countries where ministerial autonomy is large and reforms (or their rheto- ric) are often used as a means of postponing accountability of tenure in of- fice. In countries, such as Slovakia, reform is an organic part of the political rhetoric, often without a substantial strategic concept of what the reform is trying to achieve. The EEU-11 states have also underwent a process of inten- sive agencification with many agencies tasked with coordinating standards of administrative practices, such as central civil service agencies, or governance agencies. However, the monitoring tools that would enable such agencies to effectively compare other institutions performance are, in most part, not in place, and therefore, their capacity to mobilize public and political support for PAR is difficult. Nevertheless, the variety and number of these reforms is staggering, and an inventory would need to be made in order to definiti- vely claim that these are more often used as a means of political communi- cation, rather than attempts to genuinely modernize processes. Albeit there is some evidence that in cases when technocrats are appointed as ministers, substantial sectorial reforms do occur. In sum, although generally speaking but obvious, is also that EEU-11 are still often dealing with rather basic PA restructuring issues instead of upgrading good administration principles as identified in the w est. This is indicated, among others, by many reported im- plementation gaps, and consequently, mainly formal PA modernization and internationalization. The exchanges of best practices are fragmented and un- derdeveloped, especially beyond small Baltic or w estern Balkans countries. This is evident at almost all levels: nationally among sector specific policies, regionally, in the EU and broader. On the other hand, we can claim that a divergence between countries of the region may be drawn along two lines of this typology: the presence 484 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence of structural reforms (Hungary, possibly Poland) versus no such presence; and within the latter group of countries – differences between quick versus sluggish uptake of new EU regulation. w e believe this line, with the exception of Slovakia (and having in mind lacking information from Estonia and Czech Republic), may be drawn between the Eurozone participants and non-Euro- zone participants. 12.6. What Are the Visions for Reform? Lack of ‘strategic visions’ is directly linked to the lack of strategic (structural) reforms in EEU-11. The legacy of the communist period pla- gues the public sector in a sense that there are very low trust levels in the society (both political and social). Therefore, populations are persuaded to undergo reforms by charismatic leadership, rather than rational public deba- tes. Throughout the region, the two strategic policy goals of EEU-11, which evoked comprehensive reforms, were the memberships of EU and NATO. However, once these goals were achieved the institutional arrangements do not allow building national (or to that matter regional) consensus on futu- re visions of public governance which societies would espouse. In addition, when reforms do happen after all, as they did in Hungary, they are focused on strengthening the national level institutions at the expense of other levels of governance, which goes against the grain of much of the thinking in public administration theory over the past decades. The EEU-11-level reform ini- tiatives were predicted by some, claiming that this region might become an international policy actor of the likes of g ermany, France, or the g reat Britain under the leadership of Poland (Friedman, 2010); however, this is yet to ma- terialize. The international regionalism, which could give rise to meaningful debates on common administrative standards, does not seem to have much influence across the EEU-11. Thus, the EEU-11 countries are engaged in a ‘catch-up’ competition measuring their practices not amongst themselves but against the likes of g ermany. However, imitation is a very limited form of in- novation, and for EEU-11, the ‘catch-up’ with the countries that are different in size, history, and structure of economies resigns EEU-11 to a peripheral status in the EU. This, of course, is not necessarily a bad thing, as adopting only reforms that were tested elsewhere allows avoiding mistakes, but equally the elites in the EEU-11 cannot in all honesty promise their societies that 485 Main TheMes of Public ad Minis Tra Tion reforMs in The eas Tern eu MeMber sT a Tes convergence in economic output and incomes with the leading innovative economies of the EU is possible in the near future. Two other closely related elements of PAR in EEU-11 are the persistence of legalism, and the continuous debates on pros and cons of centralization or decentralization. Persistence of legalism tells a story of heritage of w eberian bureaucracy of the interbellum period and even before. Administrations of the Visegrad group and Slovenia, and to some extent Croatia, have a clear heritage of Austrian-g erman administrative tradition where formalization of procedures under the Rechtsstaat principle is seen as a crucial element of “good administration” (as a sub-concept of good governance, Venice, 2011). Moreover, the European Administrative Space also pursues especially con- vergent development of national systems based on common principles of administrative law and good administration (Trondal and Peters, 2013, who see phases of national Pas as follows: (i) independence, (ii) integration, and (iii) co-optation). Consequently, this field, striving for PA beyond formality and actual effectiveness, should be addressed in most of EEU-11 in future as well, in line with others, such as civil service system or regionalism. On the other hand, looking over past 25 years, even the likes of the Baltic States and Romania, did not avoid the fate of creating highly bureaucratized administra- tive systems. This is a paradoxical feature of PAR of EEU-11; post-communist transformation, and in cases of six out of the eleven countries, creation of so- vereign states took place at a time of high noon of New Public Management. Therefore, creation of bureaucratic governance tools went in parallel with the NPM debates. It needs to be admitted that the communist bureaucracies were anything but w eberian; they were highly politicized, acted arbitrarily, and were corrupt. Therefore, in a sense the region had to leapfrog from pre-bure- aucracy to a post-bureaucracy. In EEU-11, the result in most cases of EU-driven PARs was the creation of highly bureaucratized public administrations, declaratory to create effecti- ve tools to enforce free market rules and incorporate the European acquis (Hille & k nill, 2006). The body of European regulation implied the creation of bureaucratized procedures while the EU and the IMF in parallel promoted the NPM as a solution to inefficiencies that occurred due to lingering practi- ces of communist administration era. The result of this process was that the EEU-11 countries created bureaucratized procedures to regulate for NPM. 486 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence This is a fundamental paradox which limits the NPM’s impact on governance, as bureaucratic procedures created in parallel to the NPM reforms became interwoven with the NPM. These procedures undermine the NPM-promoted practices; also regulating for NPM is simply incompatible with the notion of flexibility as any managerial innovation or exercise of administrative discre- tion raise questions of revisiting existing legislation. Moreover, there is very little appetite for such reviews among the political elites as reforms of this type are very risky, and have little political rewards. Centralization versus decentralization theme was set off in the 1990s as a wave of decentralization which, after a totalitarian period, could only be such by definition. This process has created a great variety of multi-level local and regional governance modes; and the EEU-11 does not seem to have a clear pattern of decentralization. Moreover, in many instances decentralization has proven a fiscal hazard as national budget allocations are too small for the service delivery standards that are expected by the residents, and with many municipalities having problems raising sufficient funds themselves. The oc- curring regional disparities due to decentralization are causing a rethink in some countries about how to balance national cohesion with the expanded rights of local self-government. However, once set, the intra-state multi-le- vel governance arrangements prove to be just as hard to reform as any ot- her area of public administration. Of all the themes we identify, this is the most structured in the texts of the contributors. Its prominence in all of the contributions allows us to claim that the disequilibrium and the need to find workable governance solutions in terms of decentralization will be a litmus test of the capacities of EEU-11 to conduct reforms that result in increases of efficiency and ensures greater citizen satisfaction and empowerment. To sum up, we can generally identify the main groups of EEU-11 coun- tries and the main PAR focuses, which have been followed within them (T able 2). However, simplified but to reveal the main differences, we apply three-le- vel intensity of focus, i.e., lacking or highly inconsistent ( ), present but par- tially or rather formally implemented ( ), and relatively consistently execu- ted ( ). The analysis reveals that the EEU-11 has conducted mainly formal reforms regarding PA organization and (de)centralization and management of public finances. 487 Main TheMes of Public ad Minis Tra Tion reforMs in The eas Tern eu MeMber sT a Tes Table 12.2: Focuses of PAR in (groups) of EEU-11 (nine countries included) Countries: Focuses: Baltic (Latvia, Lithuania) Visegrad (Poland, Hungary, Slovakia) Western Balkans (Slovenia, Croatia) Eastern Balkans (Romania, Bulgaria) k ey PA legacies Soviet- Scandinavian Soviet Austrian- Yugoslavian French- Soviet Type of PARs: top-down & radical     Europeanization     Managerial reforms     Organization of PA, de/centralization     Public funding, rationalization     Civil service system, ethics     Procedures, transparency     g eneral/systemic governance model   (partially Hungary)   Source: own research. Although there are evident differences among the above groups of EEU- 11, we believe that joint characteristics, e.g. formal institutionalism and spe- cific policies implementation but lack of systemic, i.e. holistic and consistent reforms, are (still) a common identification of the region as a whole. Not sur- prisingly, one can claim systemic governance model and good governance practices are − due to its lacking consistency and often only formal imple- mentation − still in the nascent state in the region (Vintar & al., 2013; k ovač & gajduschek, 2015). Especially, more ambitious good governance and good administration principles, such as the rule of law and protection of human rights, transparency and participation, good administration with e-govern- ment, modernization of administrative procedures, and efficient and effective management of human and other resources in PA and Total Quality Manage- ment are still ahead of us. 488 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence The five PAR themes we identified in the EEU-11 region spur us to belie- ve that the reason why economic developmental outcomes in these countries are similar is the fact that their relationship with the rest of the EU is one of center to periphery, with the EEU-11 being firmly in the periphery. As time goes by, it is likely that divergence between countries will increase. Especially, if and when comprehensive reforms will occur because these are not likely to be focused on intragovernmental cooperation to create synergies through common governance arrangements. However, this divergence is likely to take many decades as the institutional setups in the region are generally unfavo- rable towards ambitious PAR initiatives, and are often confined to narrow policy sectors. At the sectorial level, this creates an incredible variety of pu- blic management practices, and before we can speak of an EEU-11 as an area having a particular tradition of public administration, we need to draw atten- tion that even at the national level government agencies are seldom compa- red between themselves with regard to various modes of public management. The one hurdle, which is particularly strong at the administrative level in this case, is the high level of formalism in EEU-11 which, in essence, creates per- formance evaluation paradoxes (as in van Thiel & Leeuw, 2002). In EEU-11, the only reliable benchmark for organizational performance remains their compliance to regulation. 12.7. Where Is EEU-11 in the Broader P AR Debate? w ith respect to origins and ambitions for PARs, the region is firm- ly peripheral to the more economically prosperous countries to its w est. Here, the discourse is one of ‘catching-up’; and some similarities between the region’s countries occur because all of them are trying to catch up with the same lot. As a result, one outstanding issue in which all the region’s countries should share an interest is that the lack of native-to-the-region reform initiatives resign it to mostly adopting imitation-type innovations. Moreover, this condemns the region to an unending process of ‘catching- up’ . w hen comprehensive reforms do occur, as in the case of Hungary, they are not benchmarked against international practices, but rather are based on national exceptionalism, and this inevitably creates divergences in admi- nistrative practices. Nonetheless, the achievements of region’s governments cannot be overlooked. All things considered, we propose a term of EEU-11 489 Main TheMes of Public ad Minis Tra Tion reforMs in The eas Tern eu MeMber sT a Tes to refer to this region, as its reforms do not amount to a tradition in the Peters’ and Painter’s sense (2010) but also cannot be grouped with other post-communist/socialist countries due to very large differences in policy outcomes. At the national levels, reform are concentrated at the ministerial levels mostly to not challenge or change the overarching institutional ‘pa- radigms’ . In addition, they can be likened to an administrative à la carte? Nine of the EEU-11 countries fall into the cultural category of the w est as defined by Huntington (1997), and mark its outer boundary. In EEU-11, the communism is broadly perceived not only as a type of governance but as something imposed by a foreign power. Therefore, accepting and adop- ting recommendations from the w est was a natural instinct of catching- up on what has been missing over half a century. That narrative remains a powerful force to date, but on the other hand, it also impairs the ability of these countries to engage each other and learn from best practices of one another. Ultimately, the metrics that drive much of the political debate show that the regional countries still have a lot in common. Economic and social outcomes of EEU-11 show that best performers (e.g. Slovenia and Czech Republic) are roughly half way to the EU averages from the regional worst performers. On the other hand, the EEU-11 are closing the economic gap between the South European member states. This catch-up is as much a re- sult of the prolonged South European slump in the wake of the global finan- cial crisis of 2008−2009 as it is of post-communist member states advances. w hen contrasting the region with other post-communist or post-socialist countries (e.g. w estern Balkans, EU’s Eastern Partnership members), the picture suggests that economic growth is not guaranteed by the members- hip, rather the differences in economic performance were in place prior to the EU accession. After all, the EEU-11 had much less trouble in the way of challenges to their sovereignty, while many other post-communist coun- tries continuing to do so. The EEU-11’s preoccupation with trying to close the gap to the EU average in terms of gDP has caused most of the regional countries to su- bordinate public administration to that goal by introducing short-term po- litically contingent reforms, and the political elites seized (if they ever) to see public administration as enablers of economic prosperity. As a result, the direct impact of formal public administration theories on actual PARs 490 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence should not be overstated. The relationship of formal theories of public administration, such as the traditional bureaucracy, NPM, or New g overnance with the reforms and practices they refer to are very complex. Hood’s NPM’s description (1991) is one of generalizations but the NPM does have a normative agenda, and the same applies to New g overnance theory with some claim it to be a descriptive category, while others consider it a normative theory. However, although the terminology of New g overnance is not directly adopted, the democratization and citizen empowerment narrative is now on a par with that of NPM’s efficiency. In addition, in many countries, fun- ding is becoming available and experiments are being conducted with new modes of citizen engagement. Nevertheless, these do not amount to a con- solidated reform agenda yet. Efficiency and participation are not necessarily complimentary; and the elites and societies in the EEU-11 remain naïve to this aspect of PAR. Another very important observation is also that simi- larities between the EEU-11 countries do not seem to be a result of a new administrative tradition, but rather all of these countries have built politi- cal institutions that limit their ability to introduce comprehensive admi- nistrative reforms, and an incremental process of new practice adoption is taking place which creates increasing differences among these countries. w hat we see is that the administrative isomorphism is not occurring within the EEU-11 below the nation-state level. Moreover, with the crisis of EU institutions popular legitimacy the process or creation of a European admi- nistrative space (Trondal & Peters, 2013) is resigned to a slow and poorly reflected process changing attitudes among public administration profes- sionals due to their engagement with EU decision-making processes (Me- yer-Sahling, Lowe & van Stolk, 2015). EU’s membership and the Europea- nization process that led up to it indeed requires a rethink when looking at the region. The current EU border probably too narrowly defines the part of post-communist/socialist Europe that share common developmental pers- pectives. w hile to the w est, convergence is difficult, as there is no single model of PA to converge to. This ‘catching-up’ with abstract averages results in poorly reflected reforms. Ultimately, the reason why we think it matters to continue to talk about EEU-11, is that reform agendas of early 1990s to mid-2000s have created new political and economic elites that used the 491 Main TheMes of Public ad Minis Tra Tion reforMs in The eas Tern eu MeMber sT a Tes window of opportunity to gain dominant socio-economic positions, but by no means they ensures long-term sustainability. The regions fortunes are inextricably linked with the fortunes of EU, and some take it home, that instead of contributing to EU’s success energy and recourses need to be devoted to reducing that dependency. To conclude, let us emphasize our belief that public administration and its reforms need to be addressed interdisciplinary to be successful in resol- ving cross-sectional and cross-border problems that face the EU as a whole. w e feel that the EEU-11 needs to join up its capacities to learn from each other in this respect in order to develop democracies that deliver to their citizens. 492 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence References 1. Drechsler, w ., & Randma-Liiv, T. 2014. The New Public Management Then and Now: Lessons from the Transition in Central and Eastern Europe (No. 57). TUT Ragnar Nurkse School of Innovation and go - vernance. 2. Dunn, w . N., & Miller, D. Y . 2007. A critique of the New Public Mana- gement and the Neo-w eberian State: Advancing a Critical Theory of Administrative Reform. Public Organization Review, 7 (4), 345−358. 3. Fodor, g. 2012. gábor. 2012. The ‘Strong State’Paradigm: g ood g o- vernment and the State in Central and Eastern Europe – w hy Do we Need a Stronger State?, Reforming Europe. Berlin, Heidelberg: Sprin- ger, 153−172. 4. Friedman, g. 2010. The Next 100 Years: A Forecast for the 21st Cen- tury. Anchor. 5. Hall, P . A., & Taylor, R. C. 1996. Political Science and the Three New Institutionalisms. Political studies, 44 (5), 936−957. 6. Hille, P ., & k nill, C. 2006. It’s the Bureaucracy, Stupid, The Implemen- tation of the Acquis Communautaire in EU Candidate Countries, 1999−2003. European Union Politics, 7 (4), 531−552. 7. Hood, C. 1991. A Public Management for all Seasons?. Public Admi- nistration, 69 (1), 3−19. 8. Huntington, S. P . 1997. The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of w orld Order. Penguin Books India. 9. g oetz, k. H. 2001. Making Sense of Post-Communist Central Admi- nistration: Modernization, Europeanization or Latinization?. Journal of European Public Policy, 8 (6), 1032−1051. 10. Jacoby, w. 2006. Inspiration, Coalition, and Substitution: External Influences on Post-Communist Transformations. world Politics, 58 (04), 623−651. 11. Jreisat, J. E. 2005. Comparative Public Administration Is Back In, Prudently. Public Administration Review, 65 (2), 231−242. 493 Main TheMes of Public ad Minis Tra Tion reforMs in The eas Tern eu MeMber sT a Tes 12. kovač, P. & gajduschek, g. (Eds). 2015. Contemporary g overnan- ce Models and Practices in Central and Eastern Europe. Bratislava: NISPAcee Press. 13. Lippert, B., & Umbach, g. 2005. The Pressure of Europeanisation: From Post-Communist State Administrations to Normal Playersin the EU System. Baden-Baden: Nomos. 14. Meyer-Sahling, J. H. 2009. Varieties of Legacies: A Critical Review of Legacy Explanations of Public Administration Reform in East Cen- tral Europe. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 75 (3), 509−528. 15. Meyer-Sahling, J. H., Lowe, w ., & van Stolk, C. 2015. Silent Professio- nalization: EU Integration and the Professional Socialization of Pu- blic Officials in Central and Eastern Europe. European Union Politics. 16. Nemec, J. (Ed.) 2015. Europeanisation in Public Administration Re- forms. Bratislava: NISPAcee Press, Retrieved from: http://www.nispa. org/files//EU-book-g eorgia-EN.pdf. 17. Painter, M. J., & Peters, B. g. 2010. Tradition and Public Administra- tion. Palgrave Macmillan. 18. Pollitt, C. 2001. Convergence: The Useful Myth?. Public Administra- tion, 79 (4), 933−947. 19. Pollitt, C. 2007. Convergence or Divergence: w hat Has Been Hap- pening in Europe?. In: New Public Management in Europe (10−25). Palgrave Macmillan Uk. 20. Pollitt, C. 2013. 40 Years of Public Management Reform in Uk Cen- tral g overnment – Promises, Promises... Policy & Politics, 41 (4), 465−480. 21. Randma-Liiv, T. 2008. New Public Management versus Neo-w ebe- rian State in Central and Eastern Europe. The NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, 1 (2), 69−81. 22. Roaf, J. et al. 2014. 25 Years of Transition: Post-Communist Europe and the IMF (Regional Economic Issues Special Report). w ashing- ton, DC: International Monetary Fund. 494 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 23. Productivity Clustering and growth in Central and Eastern Europe. Retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/publi- cation/303870343_Productivity_clustering_and_growth_in_Cen- tral_and_Eastern_Europe [accessed Sep 2, 2016]. 24. Sedelmeier, U. 2009. Post-Accession Compliance with EU g ender Equality Legislation in Post-Communist New Member States. Europe- an Integration online Papers (EIoP), (2). 25. Sedelmeier, U. 2011. Europeanisation in New Member and Candidate States. 26. Talat-k elpša, L. 2004. Vyriausybė ir Prezidentas. [The g overnment and the President ] In A. k rupavičius, Lukošaitis, A. (Eds), Lietuvos politinė sistema: sąranga ir raida (385−422). k aunas: Poligrafija ir informatika. 27. Thiel, van, S., & Leeuw, F . L. 2002. The Performance aradox in the Public Sector. Public Performance & Management Review, 25 (3), 267−281. 28. Trondal, J., & Peters, B. g. 2013. The Rise of European Administrati- ve Space: Lessons Learned. Journal of European Public Policy, 20 (2), 295−307. doi:10.1080/13501763.2013.746131. 29. Vintar, M. et al. (Eds). 2013. The Past, Present and the Future of Public Administration in Central and Eastern Europe. Bratislava: NISPAcee Press. 30. welsh, H. A. 1996. Dealing with the Communist Past: Central and East European Experiences after 1990. Europe‐Asia Studies, 48 (3), 413−428. 31. Venice Commission. 2011. Stocktaking on the Notion of g ood g over- nance and g ood Administration. Study 470/2008¸ CDL-AD (2001)009. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. 495 Subject Index A accession 11, 20, 27, 34, 35, 41, 46, 51, 54, 55, 56, 67, 73, 76, 204, 205, 209, 217, 221, 226, 249, 252, 267, 272, 273, 274, 278, 281, 283, 284, 290, 305, 307, 319, 354, 358, 366, 379, 380, 395, 396, 398, 401, 404, 412, 413, 418, 421, 425, 429, 435, 442, 444, 445, 452, 461, 473, 475, 480, 481, 489 accountability 12, 83, 156, 197, 198, 208, 227, 231, 242, 245, 313, 319, 320, 330, 361, 362, 377, 407, 413, 414, 430, 436, 445, 446, 453, 472, 481, 483 administrative procedure (-s) 12, 17, 26, 41, 70, 128, 129, 130, 131, 135, 136, 237, 271, 272, 318, 328, 326, 327, 328, 329, 330, 331, 341, 349, 364, 374, 375, 419, 447, 478, 483, 487 agencies (-y) 12, 37, 45, 50, 57, 58, 60, 61, 64, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 73, 74, 77, 79, 80, 82, 83, 99, 105, 106, 109, 116, 117, 118, 119, 126, 134, 166, 204, 217, 218, 220, 221, 243, 248, 249, 250, 251, 252, 256, 257, 260, 261, 266, 270, 284, 305, 307, 314, 318, 319, 320, 322, 348, 350, 355, 356, 361, 362, 375, 376, 377, 389, 390, 401, 404, 407, 408, 418, 419, 421, 434, 437, 442, 443, 444, 463, 480, 482, 483, 488 agencification 26, 51, 57, 58, 196, 209, 217, 218, 220, 248, 318, 319, 320, 348, 406, 418, 419, 478, 483 B bureaucracy 36, 56, 61, 65, 92, 94, 95, 98, 100, 105, 111, 112, 114, 115, 117, 120, 132, 140, 148, 151, 197, 198, 238, 241, 245, 274, 276, 287, 342, 364, 402, 427, 430, 432, 434, 437, 438, 456, 466, 472, 474, 485, 490 bureaucratization 105, 110, 130, 136, 415 C centralization 45, 233, 261, 457, 486 civil service 12, 14, 15, 23, 26, 30, 36, 44, 46, 50, 51, 58, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 73, 74, 75, 77, 78, 90, 102, 105, 106, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 134, 135, 141, 142, 153, 161, 178, 179, 180, 181, 196, 197, 198, 204, 496 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 496 221, 222, 223, 237, 239, 241, 246, 260, 273, 274, 275, 276, 283, 285, 286, 307, 320, 321, 322, 323, 324, 347, 351, 354, 363, 364, 367, 372, 373, 378, 379, 389, 401, 402, 406, 407, 408, 413, 414, 415, 421, 435, 437, 440, 454, 477, 478, 479, 483, 485 competitiveness 56, 312, 327, 332 cons 485 D decentralization 33, 104, 142, 176, 200, 201, 203, 207, 233, 282, 297, 313, 359, 369, 370, 382, 386, 406, 410, 411, 412, 419, 422, 423, 457, 459, 460, 462, 465, 466 decision-making 12, 36, 40, 54, 75, 77, 82, 110, 120, 142, 173, 182, 183, 184, 208, 237, 239, 241, 242, 245, 258, 286, 287, 306, 311, 312, 313, 317, 318, 323, 325, 326, 332, 344, 346, 351, 369, 378, 490 democracy 26, 40, 42, 91, 102, 144, 147, 149, 150, 158, 173, 174, 182, 185, 197, 198, 242, 245, 264, 309, 313, 329, 332, 344, 345, 354, 427, 429, 430, 438, 460, 467, 475 divergence (-s) 11, 12, 39, 274, 472, 475, 483, 488 E EE 11, 307 effectiveness 21, 90, 141, 173, 175, 205, 224, 258, 267, 284, 287, 324, 363, 364, 372, 377, 392, 393, 400, 401, 407, 409, 413, 414, 415, 436, 445, 449, 451, 485 efficiency 29, 67, 68, 80, 82, 83, 110, 115, 134, 141, 153, 175, 185, 186, 198, 203, 205, 211, 218, 224, 227, 230, 239, 242, 243, 244, 267, 287, 288, 306, 309, 310, 311, 312, 313, 320, 322, 327, 328, 331, 332, 347, 375, 401, 407, 411, 413, 414, 421, 433, 440, 449, 451, 454, 486, 490 e-government 73, 202, 229, 278, 281, 327, 372, 404, 487 ethics 12, 50, 78, 79, 367, 373, 407, 408, 409, 479, 487 EU 11, 12, 14, 16, 21, 22, 24, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 34, 41, 44, 45, 46, 48, 51, 52, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 61, 64, 66, 73, 74, 76, 80, 81, 82, 83, 87, 91, 92, 94, 95, 97, 103, 106, 109, 110, 112, 113, 121, 122, 130, 131, 133, 136, 137, 139, 154, 497 162, 174, 178, 184, 195, 202, 204, 205, 209, 217, 220, 221, 228, 229, 234, 236, 249, 252, 264, 267, 269, 271, 272, 273, 281, 283, 284, 286, 290, 291, 292, 298, 299, 302, 305, 306, 307, 308, 319, 320, 325, 326, 327, 328, 329, 333, 334, 335, 336, 337, 338, 340, 341, 346, 354, 355, 356, 358, 363, 366, 370, 371, 377, 378, 379, 380, 381, 388, 394, 395, 396, 398, 399, 401, 403, 404, 408, 411, 412, 413, 414, 418, 423, 427, 428, 429, 430, 433, 435, 437, 441, 442, 444, 445, 447, 452, 454, 456, 461, 467, 468, 469, 471, 472, 473, 474, 475, 476, 477, 478, 479, 480, 481, 482, 483, 484, 485, 488, 489, 490, 491, 492, 493, 494 Europeanization 11, 17, 27, 30, 32, 34, 45, 83, 85, 139, 184, 278, 290, 302, 306, 326, 329, 331, 332, 333, 339, 341, 346, 350, 353, 354, 355, 362, 363, 368, 376, 378, 379, 380, 381, 388, 446, 473, 475, 478, 479, 481, 487, 490, 492 F funding 57, 61, 63, 103, 105, 154, 212, 318, 320, 433, 478, 482, 487, 490 G good administration 12, 146, 306, 325, 328, 329, 483, 485, 487 governance 1, 16, 17, 23, 31, 33, 48, 55, 66, 84, 87, 88, 89, 101, 117, 193, 205, 233, 237, 243, 246, 278, 281, 282, 286, 292, 293, 294, 295, 296, 297, 298, 299, 300, 309, 333, 334, 335, 336, 338, 351, 384, 385, 387, 391, 401, 422, 424, 425, 427, 429, 430, 433, 439, 441, 444, 445, 447, 448, 450, 451, 466, 468, 470, 474, 477, 490, 492, 493, 494, 503, 504 H historical 28, 90, 143, 196, 241, 261, 278, 289, 314, 315, 341, 368, 393, 402, 475, 476 history 23, 30, 34, 45, 96, 140, 148, 149, 158, 195, 241, 277, 341, 342, 381, 400, 471, 475, 484 I integrity 12, 154, 324, 325, 354, 394, 406, 408, 409, 440 L lawfulness 325, 328, 436 498 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence local self-government 12, 42, 44, 63, 72, 140, 150, 152, 168, 182, 183, 197, 204, 305, 314, 315, 316, 318, 343, 352, 353, 356, 362, 364, 370, 436, 450, 453, 458, 486 M management 2, 14, 15, 19, 20, 23, 24, 25, 31, 47, 48, 49, 56, 61, 73, 86, 87, 88, 89, 94, 119, 133, 171, 194, 196, 204, 205, 209, 235, 237, 242, 245, 278, 281, 285, 291, 292, 294, 296, 300, 307, 308, 310, 312, 333, 336, 337, 372, 373, 375, 382, 387, 391, 401, 407, 422, 423, 424, 425, 427, 430, 449, 468, 469, 472, 485, 487, 492, 493, 494 marketization 37, 209, 288 modernization 12, 14, 17, 55, 64, 73, 76, 83, 139, 142, 184, 283, 303, 305, 306, 307, 311, 329, 330, 341, 351, 355, 356, 357, 365, 367, 368, 374, 375, 377, 379, 380, 392, 446, 483, 487 municipalities (-y) 51, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 91, 99, 101, 110, 111, 120, 121, 134, 142, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 154, 156, 158, 159, 163, 166, 168, 169, 171, 172, 173, 174,183, 182,184, 186, 195, 198, 199, 201, 207, 208, 210, 211, 212, 228, 230, 254, 255, 258, 259, 261, 264, 265, 266, 267, 268, 269, 270, 275, 304, 305, 314, 315, 316, 317, 318, 330, 340, 349, 362, 417, 432, 457, 458, 459, 460, 461, 462, 463, 464, 465, 486 N Neo-w eberian State 49, 237, 244, 245, 278, 281, 286, 300, 337, 391, 401, 425, 492, 493 New Public g overnance 31, 117, 237, 243, 278, 281, 286, 391, 401, 425, 474, 477 New State 128, 135, 351, 362 O openness 74, 79, 141, 177, 181, 182, 242, 258, 313, 329, 330, 339, 365, 371, 378, 415, 430, 436, 445, 446, 452 organization of PA 113, 487 499 P PAR 11, 12, 26, 63, 81, 152, 196, 199, 200, 203, 204, 205, 206, 208, 209, 237, 276, 278, 279, 280, 282, 283, 284, 286, 289, 290, 303, 304, 305, 306, 307, 308, 309, 318, 320, 325, 331, 389, 391, 392, 393, 395, 396, 398, 402, 403, 412, 413, 414, 418, 419, 420, 421, 429, 430, 450, 455, 456, 461, 466, 467, 473, 477, 478, 480, 481, 482, 483, 485, 486, 487, 488, 490 post 1, 38, 47, 83, 85, 87, 218, 290, 292, 293, 294, 295, 296, 298, 301, 302, 335, 336, 338, 378, 386, 400, 401, 424, 478, 492, 493, 494, 503, 504 post-communist 11, 50, 83, 331, 393, 402, 471, 472, 474, 475, 476, 478, 479, 480, 481, 485, 489, 490 post-socialist 11, 12, 15, 38, 39, 44, 248, 302, 309, 331, 378, 379, 380, 381, 471, 476, 489 privatization 35, 38, 40, 98, 100, 102, 109, 113, 114, 117, 132, 133, 134, 204, 215, 216, 218, 243, 254, 264, 265, 266, 267, 268, 269, 271, 285, 309, 318, 324, 340, 344, 345, 346, 369, 375, 376, 378, 399, 431, 435, 459 process 13, 14, 26, 27, 30, 36, 40, 41, 46, 50, 51, 52, 55, 56, 57, 64, 68, 70, 75, 77, 90, 95, 96, 99, 100, 102, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 114, 119, 125, 132, 135, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 146, 147, 153, 156, 157, 158, 166, 173, 181, 183, 184, 185, 199, 204, 207, 208, 214, 216, 217, 219, 221, 222, 224, 225, 226, 244, 248, 249, 252, 262, 263, 264, 265, 266, 267, 269, 272, 273, 283, 305, 306, 315, 316, 317, 319, 325, 330, 331, 332, 345, 348, 349, 350, 352, 353, 354, 355, 356, 357, 359, 368, 376, 380, 381, 392, 393, 395, 397, 401, 403, 405, 406, 410, 411, 413, 414, 418, 419, 421, 431, 433, 434, 435, 442, 444, 445, 446, 447, 452, 453, 460, 461, 462, 466, 467, 477, 478, 480, 481, 483, 485, 486, 488, 490 public administration 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 29, 30, 31, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 50, 51, 52, 53, 55, 56, 57, 58, 65, 68, 69, 70, 71, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 90, 92, 94, 97, 101, 104, 111, 112, 128, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 146, 149, 150, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 162, 165, 168, 169, 170, 173, 174, 181, 182, 184, 185, 186, 196, 197, 198, 200, 202, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 224, 225, 229, 231, 232, 237, 246, 247, 249, 278, 283, 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 309, 310, 311, 314, 318, 322, 326, 327, 331, 332, 341, 342, 346, 347, 350, 351, 353, 354, 355, 356, 357, 358, 363, 500 Public Administr Ation reforms in eA stern euro PeAn union member s t Ates Post-Accession c onvergence And d ivergence 364, 365, 366, 367, 368, 370, 371, 372, 373, 374, 375, 376, 377, 378, 379, 380, 381, 389, 390, 391, 392, 394, 396, 401, 402, 410, 412, 413, 414, 425, 427, 430, 431, 432, 433, 434, 435, 436, 437, 438, 439, 440, 442, 444, 445, 446, 449, 451, 453, 454, 455, 456, 466, 467, 471, 472, 473, 474, 475, 477, 478, 479, 480, 482, 484, 486, 488, 489, 490, 491 public finances 18, 56, 142, 154, 162, 174, 177, 466, 486 public interest 40, 42, 149, 251, 283, 325, 327, 328, 329, 357, 367, 408, 410, 446 public sector 14, 16, 18, 19, 21, 23, 25, 30, 38, 40, 41, 43, 65, 66, 70, 71, 73, 80, 140, 141, 155, 166, 174, 175, 181, 183, 184, 198, 204, 205, 212, 218, 221, 225, 227, 237, 243, 255, 267, 304, 305, 307, 309, 310, 313, 314, 319, 320, 321, 322, 324, 345, 346, 350, 351, 355, 360, 362, 367, 371, 372, 374, 378, 381, 400, 402, 404, 405, 421, 430, 431, 433, 434, 449, 482, 484 public services 15, 16, 18, 19, 34, 39, 40, 45, 59, 61, 74, 77, 131, 140, 156, 158, 186, 198, 203, 204, 209, 211, 230, 243, 253, 254, 256, 261, 264, 269, 270, 305, 318, 322, 328, 344, 347, 350, 351, 352, 353, 358, 362, 369, 379, 390, 391, 404, 408, 410, 411, 413, 414, 415, 416, 418, 430, 454, 455, 463, 467 Q quality 39, 44, 67, 74, 118, 125, 126, 129, 141, 142, 150, 185, 197, 198, 208, 211, 213, 215, 216, 224, 226, 230, 232, 245, 332, 357, 358, 360, 361, 362, 364, 365, 366, 368, 375, 377, 395, 401, 404, 408, 411, 413, 414, 415, 418, 420, 449, 450, 454, 455, 463 R rationalization 305, 306, 307, 309, 317, 324, 348, 420, 487 red tape 79 reform (-s) 1, 17, 22, 31, 32, 34, 35, 38, 47, 48, 50, 55, 61, 63, 66, 70, 84, 87, 88, 90, 95, 101, 102, 104, 108, 117, 119, 122, 139, 141, 144, 149, 150, 153, 157, 177, 178, 184, 190, 194, 195, 197, 198, 199, 200, 202, 203, 206, 221, 233, 234, 235, 279, 282, 291, 294, 295, 297, 298, 299, 300, 302, 333, 334, 335, 336, 337, 339, 351, 355, 356, 359, 368, 382, 383, 386, 387, 388, 389, 391, 393, 395, 396, 398, 402, 410, 412, 413, 414, 419, 420, 421, 422, 423, 424, 425, 427, 430, 433, 468, 469, 471, 481, 484, 492, 493, 503, 504 501 region 217, 294, 297, 465 regions 27, 60, 61, 63, 91, 92, 119, 120, 121, 135, 200, 203, 205, 207, 217, 259, 314, 315, 316, 317, 340, 342, 345, 363, 391, 457, 473, 475, 476, 478, 491 rule of law 78, 94, 129, 152, 172, 239, 242, 244, 248, 280, 284, 289, 304, 328, 331, 351, 354, 366, 487 S state administration 25, 40, 111, 112, 119, 120, 122, 126, 129, 130, 140, 142, 149, 150, 151, 155, 156, 162, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 207, 224, 225, 228, 239, 240, 246, 259, 304, 305, 317, 318, 319, 321, 322, 323, 330, 343, 346, 347, 349, 350, 351, 352, 356, 361, 362, 363, 364, 367, 432, 437, 445, 447 strategies (-y) 14, 31, 37, 58, 64, 73, 76, 82, 83, 126, 133, 171, 207, 267, 268, 290, 304, 306, 307, 317, 320, 324, 355, 356, 358, 357, 358, 365, 369, 395, 396, 407, 412, 413, 414, 415, 420, 421, 435, 442, 445, 453, 457, 459 structure of PA 246 T theoretical 19, 34, 37, 38, 39, 44, 94, 277, 348, 381, 391, 401, 477 theory 11, 12, 17, 29, 36, 38, 39, 41, 43, 81, 100, 115, 152, 207, 227, 243, 320, 381, 438, 474, 478, 479, 484, 490 transition 20, 34, 35, 38, 39, 41, 43, 44, 51, 107, 116, 132, 195, 240, 241, 253, 254, 267, 271, 276, 278, 280, 282, 283, 284, 285, 286, 288, 290, 304, 307, 319, 329, 345, 346, 354, 359, 378, 379, 380, 381, 392, 393, 427, 429, 430, 431, 432, 438, 457, 460, 461, 467, 478 transparency 12, 29, 67, 78, 141, 177, 181, 182, 225, 227, 228, 230, 232, 244, 263, 271, 287, 294, 319, 329, 330, 365, 371, 372, 378, 407, 414, 415, 417, 420, 441, 446, 447, 452, 453, 478, 487 Polonca kovač and Mantas Bileišis PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION REFORMS IN EASTERN EUROPEAN UNION MEMBER STATES POST-ACCESSION CONVERGENCE AND DIVERGENCE ISBN 978-9955-19-850-5 (internete) ISBN 978-9955-19-851-2 (spausdintas) Maketavo Laura Tekorienė 2017 01 25 Tiražas 300 egz. Užsakymo Nr. 11236 Published by: University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Administration g osarjeva 5, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenija w ebsite: www.fu.uni-lj.si E-mail: info@fu.uni-lj.si Published by: Mykolo Romerio universitetas Ateities g. 20, Vilnius Puslapis internete www.mruni.eu El. paštas: mrulab@mruni.eu Parengė spaudai UAB „Baltic Printing House“ Svajonės g. 40, LT – 94101, k laipėda Puslapis internete www.balticprinting.com El. paštas info@ balticprinting.com Spausdino UAB „Baltijos kopija“ k areivių g. 13B, Vilnius Puslapis internete www.kopija.lt El. paštas info@kopija.lt Polonca kovač and Mantas Bileišis PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION REFORMS IN EASTERN EUROPEAN UNION MEMBER STATES POST-ACCESSION CONVERGENCE AND DIVERGENCE ISBN 978-9955-19-850-5 (online) ISBN 978-9955-19-851-2 (print) Layout Laura Tekorienė 25 01 2017 Edition 300 copies. Order No, 11236 Published by: University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Administration g osarjeva 5, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenija w ebsite: www.fu.uni-lj.si E-mail: info@fu.uni-lj.si Published by: Mykolas Romeris University Ateities 20, Vilnius w ebsite: www.mruni.eu E-mail: mrulab@mruni.eu Prepared UAB „Baltic Printing House“ Svajonės str. 40, LT – 94101, k laipėda w ebsite www.balticprinting.com E-mail info@ balticprinting.com Printed UAB „Baltijos kopija“ k areivių str., 13B, Vilnius w ebsite www.kopija.lt E-mail info@kopija.ltwww.kopija.lt