Transcript Administrative Change - Strategies and EU Accession [198 KiB]

ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGE:
Strategies and EU Accession
Professor Ivan Koprić
Faculty of Law, University of Zagreb
The main differences between the public
and private sectors
The public sector is a complex value area (political, legal,
social, ecological, economical values) / the main value
orientation of private sector is economic one
Profit is the main indicator of success in the private sector /
public servants should fulfil different expectations
(problem of performance measurement)
Private sector actors are proactively seeking niches with
fine prospects for profit, while public administrative
organizations are, in general, reacting to the problems
in wider environment by decision-making, regulation,
support, etc.; PA is an instrument for resolving public
problems
Public administrative system: composition
and the main tendencies
State administration – organised as the system of classical
administrative organisations like ministries; reorientation
to the “core-business” (smaller organisations
concentrated on the public policies, drafting regulations,
authoritative decision-making, inspections, and similar
tasks)
Territorial self-government (local and regional);
harmonisation in wider European context;
decentralisation and new legitimacy; wider
responsibilities: from administrative tasks to the support
of economic and social development
Services of general interest (economic and non-economic,
i.e. social, health, etc.); new European regulation of the
services of general economic interest, especially in
network industries; European social model
Overall Europeanisation within broader globalisation context
Public sector values
-
are integrating governance system
are crystallized through political processes of
amalgamation interests and ideologies
Public administration should gain overall legitimacy in its
social milieu – that is why it has to adapt to complex
value orientations.
Value heterogeneity:
Continental European space: stress on the political,
legal, and social values (Hegel: a state is God’s walk
on Earth; Greek democracy and Roman law tradition)
Anglo-Saxon space: stress on the economic values
and pragmatism (brutal economic and social situation)
Within the public sector: different situation in transport
sector, finances, local self-government …
during historical development: political – legal – social
– economic - ecological
Types of public sector values
Political (democratic): accountability, publicness,
transparency, responsiveness, political decentralisation,
openness, legitimacy, flexibility (user-friendliness)
Legal: the rule of law, legality (organisational, substantive,
procedural, with regard to competence), legal
responsibility (for damage caused by illegal functioning,
or disciplinary responsibility), legal certainty, protection of
fundamental rights and freedoms, equality, impartiality,
due process, court supervision
Social: social justice, solidarity, social sensibility, care, charity,
sympathy, mercy, assistance to the citizens, cultural
diversity, respect for national, sexual, and other minorities
Ecological: protection of natural environment, protection of
biological diversity, careful management of natural
resources, life in harmony with nature
Economic: the three Es (economy, efficiency, effectiveness),
quality, market-orientation and private sector-orientation,
competitiveness, entrepreneurship
Administrative reforms
ARs are, in a way, a consequence of generally reactive nature
of public administration:
new politics asks for new administrative arrangements;
PA should adapt to changed expectations and search for
a new legitimacy;
PA should in-build new technologies;
it should find innovative solutions for quite new problems;
ARs are significant, deep organisational, institutional and
cultural changes in public administration that occur
periodically.
Types (Farazmand, 1999): 1. purposive (motivated by certain
purposes; purposive model), 2. adaptation (environmental
dependency model: to respond to environmental
pressures), 3. institutional (changing organisational
culture and behaviour; changing mindset)
Formal (official) and informal (latent) purposes and functions
of ARs; problem of rising expectations
Success factors: political and public support, human and
material resources, reliable organisation, well-thought-out
strategy, dedicated reform leadership …
Administrative doctrines vs. science of PA
Administrative doctrine – a system of ideas about desirable
way of operating and prescriptions about good practices,
grounded on dominant values and systematised
experiences, comprising standards with regard to
organisation, functioning, regulation, management, etc.,
in public administration.
Social, economic, political, demographic, and other
circumstances are influencing doctrines, also.
Lack of empirically verified theories (consolidated knowledge)
opens space for doctrines.
Doctrines are verified in practice.
Cameralism, the New Public Administration (the Minnowbrook
Perspective; USA; Frederickson, Waldo, Marini,
Chandler, Rohr, etc.), the New Public Management, Good
Governance …
Strategies for administrative change
Pollitt and Bouckaert (2000; 2001):
1. Maintain. To preserve and incrementally improve (upgrade) classical, Weberian model of public administration
as rational, well-organised, monocratic organisation with
fine tailored hierarchy, professionalism, impartiality,
legality, and standardised bureaucratic procedures.
2. Modernise. More fundamental changes in structures and
functioning (from procedures to results; output budget
orientation; autonomous executive agencies; from
appointment acts to employment contract, etc.)
3. Marketize. Introduction of market principles and
mechanisms in the PA system (internal market – British
NHS and competition of hospitals; charging real market
prices; consumer-orientation)
4. Minimize. Shrinking the public sector by privatisation,
contracting out, public-private partnerships, civil
(voluntary) sector involvement, etc.
The New Public Management
Imposing economic values and private sector techniques
into the public sector
Stress on economy and efficiency; ideology of state failure;
inclination to private entrepreneurship and free market
economy
From the 1980s, grounded in neo-liberal ideology
Conservative political actors in Anglo-Saxon countries
New Zealand, Australia, Canada, UK, USA
Significant role of international organisations (IMF; WB;
OECD)
Attack on welfare state; reaffirmation of capitalism class
structure; neo-colonialism
The New Public Management - elements
Hood (1991):
o
Autonomous professional public managers; wider
leadership competences and individual responsibility
o
Performance indicators (quantitative, if possible),
performance measurement
o
Output control, disregarding procedures; performancerelated pay systems; decentralised HRM
o
Fragmentation of large PA organisations; smaller,
financially more autonomous organisations with one main
“product” (public service) that compete at the internal
market and/or with private organisations
o
Competitiveness, public tendering, contractualisation
o
Managerial style more in line with private sector practice:
flexibilisation in employment arrangements, public
relations like in the private sector, etc.
o
Economy and cost reduction; including regulation costs
reduction (deregulation)
Structural and functional measures and effects
a) Structural
 Reduction (lean state; privatisation, budget reduction, reduction of
the level of social rights, etc.)
 Forms of private and third sector participation in public affairs (PPP,
outsourcing, concessions, etc.)
 Loosening structural ties (fragmenting state; agencification,
decentralisation, greater autonomy of public sector organisations,
etc.)
 Problems: accountability, coordination, strategic policy, ethics, local
self-government, costs
b) Functional
 Marketisation of the state; public market
 Competitiveness
 Real prices
 Services of general economic interest (liberalisation and
privatisation)
 Deregulation
 De-bureaucratisation (removing procedural obstacles to private
sector subjects and citizens; management by results)
 New budgetary solutions; internal and external audit, etc.
NPM – Ideas and effects with regard to
personnel; social consequences
Personnel
 More mechanical measures (reducing the number, pays reduction,
flexibilisation, private sector managers engagement, greater
autonomy of public managers with regard to remuneration,
payment and career system, etc.)
 Human potentials development (education, in-service training,
organisational culture building, ethics, orientation towards results
and citizens’ needs)
 Problems: instability, insecurity, organisations as psychic prisons,
unsuccessful organisations, consumerism, etc.
Social consequences
 Reinvigorating capitalism (state failure)
 Crisis of welfare state: poverty and lower level of social services,
unemployment rate is increasing
 Democratic deficit: weakening democratic legitimacy of the state
 Anomy (crime, social conflicts, disregarding legal regulations)
 Positive effects?
Good Governance
NPM criticisms during the 1990s followed by building new set
of ideas at a bit different value base
The role of international organisations: OUN; OECD; EU
Still under construction and stabilisation
European Governance: A White Paper (Brussels: COM (2001)
428) (governance based on proportionality and
subsidiarity); fundamental principles:
a) Openness
b) Participation
c) Accountability
d) Effectiveness
e) Coherence
The stress is on the role of the citizens, civil society, and local
self-government
UNDP: combination of efficient and democratic governance
OECD: Citizens as Partners: Information, Consultation and
Public Participation in Policy-Making, 2001
Increasing administrative and policy capacities + legitimacy
strengthening
The European Administrative Space
Set of principles and standards of public administration
organisation and functioning defined by law, whose
application is supported by the appropriate procedures
and accountability mechanisms
Macro perspective (EU – uniform implementation of the
law, the Council of Europe, the main European
traditions and models)
Micro perspective (administrative fields, issues, processes,
actors, institutions …)
Space in rising and development (different components in
different developmental phases)
The role of the courts, EU policies, regulatory bodies
functioning, mutual - experiential learning, doctrines,
administrative education, imitation, interaction …
The main principles of the EAS
a) The rule of law (legal certainty, reliability and
predictability of administrative actions and
decisions, legality)
b) Openness and transparency
c) Accountability of PA to other administrative,
legislative and judicial authorities
d) Efficiency in the use of public resources and
effectiveness in accomplishing policy goals
EU Accession
Complex and hard task
Political dedication and administrative capacity
Harmonisation with the acquis communautaire (legal
adaptations)
PA capacity to support negotiations, to acquire the European
administrative standards, to design and implement new
European-inspired public policies, and to implement the
acquis communautaire and new, changed domestic
legislation
Although administrative standards are not part of the formal
acquis communautaire, EC has possibility to monitor, ask for
change, look into AC implementation, etc.
Good administration as a general criterion for EU accession
The SIGMA role: assessments are the basis for EC Progress
Reports, designing ToR of the TA projects financed by EC,
support to administrative modernisation, etc.
European administrative standards
Codification of standards, mainly by SIGMA
Standards with regard to:
1. Constitutions (6)
2. Civil Service legislation (8)
3. Administrative Procedures legislation (10)
4. Public sector financial control (9)
5. External audit (4)
6. Budget and public expenditure management (13)
7. Policy-making and coordination at the centre of the
government (9) (systematisation according to Cardona)
CS legislation: paper no. 5: Civil Service Legislation Contents
Checklist; paper no. 14: Civil Service Legislation: Checklist
on Secondary Legislation and Other Regulatory Instruments
Harmonisation of local self-government –
The Council of Europe; EU
-
-
The European Charter of Local Self-Government of
1985 (the German model influence)
Other legal documents (on transfrontier co-operation
1980, Urban Charter 1992/2004, on the participation
of foreigners in public life at local level 1992, draft
Charter of Regional Self-Government, etc.)
EU, regionalism and regional policy
NUTS classification (Nomenclature des Unites
Territoriales Statistiques) (5 categories; regions as
NUTS II. units)
Committee of the Regions (opinions and resolutions)
Convergence or divergence?
The European local self-government traditions and models:
-
-
The French centralised model
The German model (federation, subsidiarity principle, detailed
regulation of local self-government scope)
The British model (unwritten constitution, sovereignty of the
Parliament, ultra vires legal doctrine)
The Scandinavian model of political decentralisation with
bigger local units
Europeanization, harmonisation, learning – convergence

Tradition and cultural diversity – divergence
Services of general interest
Former public services: liberalisation on separate markets, privatisation
of former state monopolies; quality concerns
Services of general interest
Services of general economic interest
Network industries (telecommunications, electricity, gas, transport and
postal services
Other SGEI (waste management, water supply, etc.)
Other (non-economic) services (social, health)
Public sector obligations (universal service, continuity, affordable prices affordability, quality of service, user and consumer protection)
Sectoral policies development (energy, electronic communications,
transport, postal sectors, audiovisual policy, water and waste
management, sport, culture, etc)
Designing coherent policy and legal framework for social and health SGI
Directive 2006/123/EC (the Services Directive): MSs have to transpose
it by the end of 2009
The most dynamic and challenging sector
Europeanization of the Republic of Croatia
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
Croatia as a late-comer
Formal and substantial Europeanization
Membership in the Council of Europe (1996)
Stabilization and Association Agreement (2001)
EU candidate status (2004)
Negotiation process
Administrative education
State administration development
I. 1990-1993 – Establishment phase




Semi-presidential system
Considerable new parts of state administration (new ministries, etc.)
War
Politicisation; poor professional standards; hidden lustration




Etatisation and centralisation
A number of poor reorganisations
Very slow democratisation
First Law on State Civil Servants in 1994

First political change after 1990 (coalition Government); parliamentary
system
Democratisation, decentralisation, attempts to raise professionalism
(second Law on State Civil Servants in 2001; third one in 2005)
Stabilization and Association Agreement (2001); candidate status in
2004; accession negotiations; institutional capacity building; functional
review; etc.
II. 1993-2001 – Consolidation phase (war till 1995)
III. 2001-2008 – Europeanisation phase


IV. 2008 – Modernisation phase?
The State Administration Reform Strategy
State administration
Central state administration
1.
2.
3.
Ministries (15)
State administrative organisations (9)
Central state offices (4)
First instance state administration
Offices of state administration at the county level (20)
Offices of the City of Zagreb (4) + transferred state administrative tasks
Government (+ Secretariat + certain other bodies = Government’s
Professional Service, Government’s Office)
State servants and employees
ICT implementation; Functional Review Project; preparation of the
new law on general administrative procedure and law on
administrative justice system, new system of human potentials
development and management; organisational adaptations, etc.
Agencies, independent regulatory bodies, other public bodies and
legal entities with public competences
Local self-government system
Local self-government: municipalities (429) + towns (126; 15
large towns with more than 35.000 inhabitants); territorial
self-government below municipal level (municipal and
urban districts, city quarters)
Regional self-government: counties (20; about 200.000
inhabitants in average)
City of Zagreb (capital, the largest city, double status as local
and regional unit, performs transferred state administrative
tasks)
Fully separated from the state administration system with
regard to organisation and personnel
Searching for a new legitimacy – introduction of direct election
of mayors (elections in May 2009)
State administration reform strategy
Adopted by the Croatian Government in March 2008 as part
of EU accession efforts (www.uprava.hr)
Structure:
I.
Executive summary
II.
State administration we want (Vision and goals of
modern administration)
III. The main results in the reform of political system and
state administration
IV. The main areas and directions of state administration
reform
V. Implementation of strategic measures
VI. Leadership, monitoring and evaluation of results
State administration reform strategy goals
1.
Increasing efficiency and economy in state
administration system
2. Raising the quality of administrative services
3. Openness and access to state administrative
organisations
4. The rule of law
5. Increasing social sensitivity inside state
administration and in relations with citizens
6. Rising ethical level and reducing corruption
7. Modern ICT implementation
8. Joining the European Administrative Space
*accompanied by 29 indicators
State administration reform strategy –
main areas and directions
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Structural adaptations of state administration
system: from structure to good governance (3
directions; 13 activities)
Increasing quality of programmes, laws and other
regulations: better regulation (4 directions; 14
activities)
System of state servants: modern civil service (4
directions; 10 activities)
Education and in-service training of state
administration: knowledge, skills and competencies
(2 directions; 8 activities)
Simplification and modernisation of administrative
procedures: e-administration (2 directions; 17
activities)
Other strategic documents
a)
Strategic Development Framework for 2006-2013
- Previous efforts: 55 recommendations for improving national
competitiveness of Croatia
b)
Decentralisation strategy under preparation – failure?
- Previous efforts: Decentralisation of Public Administration (20002003)
c)
Lack of overall strategic document with regard to
services of general interest
- Sectoral documents (for example, Strategy for Development of
Communal Utilities)
Implementation, management and
monitoring PAR
a) Implementation: Central State Office for
Administration
b) Management: Government and CSOA; vice prime
minister for public administration reforms
c) Monitoring: National council for monitoring and
evaluation –established in the Autumn of 2008
d) {Policy making: Government (formally); CSOA (???);
domestic and international experts (???); business
community (???)}
Central State Office for
Administration
-
-
Established in 2004, as one of four central state
offices as special tool for increasing managing and
coordinating capacity of the prime minister
(responsible to PM)
History: Ministry of Administration; State Directorate
for State Administration and Local Self-Government
Increasing capacity: from 66 to about 140 employees
Vague role design (legal regulations)
Organisational gaps and possible improvements
Lacking human potentials and low professional level
Moderate political, administrative and public support
Facing reorganisation according to the results of FR?
Main challenges
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Political support – Croatian Parliament;
Administrative support – changing position in
administrative system;
Public support – communication strategy and
activities;
Strategy development;
CSOA internal organisational development;
National council establishment;
Capacity development – education, training,
recruitment
Financial support – lack of support from the Ministry
of Finance
Lessons learned








PAR as part of the Europeanisation process is not the best
solution for domestic problems (Europeanisation is only one
of the environmental influences; EU is one of broader
institutional frameworks, not the only one)
PAR should be in line with previously discussed and adopted
basic national goals – otherwise it could be unsuccessful or
counter-productive
Three main parts of PA (state administration; local and
regional self-government; public services) need different
reform approaches
Strong administrative body needed (Ministry of Public
Administration, probably with vice PM as a minister)
Laws could foster or freeze reform efforts, but cannot replace
real will to make PA modern and better
Policy orientation should be developed
Education and training should be more intensive – capacity
building
State administration system, structural, personnel, human
resource, financial etc. measures needed
Institutional challenges





Good institutional structure is a necessary prerequisite for
successful reform, but other prerequisites are needed and
are of equal importance (political will and support; strategic
planning and policy making; educated and informed civil
servants; extra-organisational expertise; financial support;
reform dedication, etc.) – institutions do matter
Inappropriate institutions (weak institutions or inappropriate
networks of institutions …) impede positive impacts of other
favourable conditions
Institutions should be adapted to the specific circumstances
of a country (culture, external conditions, basic state’s goals
…)
Certain regularities are generally recognizable and could be
used for learning and suggesting proposals
Significance of good and bad examples in similar and
different conditions – experiential learning
Good and bad Croatian examples
 Good examples:
 Cooperation between academic community and CSOA
in the Strategy preparation, education, reform
monitoring and evaluation
 TA projects with participation of pro-reform domestic
experts as key experts
 Strong politicians as reform leaders
 Bad examples:
 Attempts to prepare the strategy and realise certain
reform measures with teams consisting exclusively of
academics, or CSOA servants, or foreign experts
(similar in acquiring acquis communautaire)
 Weak lines of CSOA state secretary’s political
accountability to the PM
 Informally politicised networks
 Too broad networks of politically selected experts for
EU accession negotiations
Administrative education
Development trends in Europe:





Creation of a comprehensive administrative education system
with vertical mobility (3+2+3)
Diversification of administrative education programmes, along
with consolidation of general administrative programme
More attention to practice
Impregnation by dominant doctrines
More multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary-oriented
programmes
Croatian situation:







Bologna process since 2005
Binary model of high education (polytechnics and universities)
Administrative education at polytechnics (BA degrees)
MA degree missing
Postgraduate studies – specialist and doctoral programmes
Predominantly legal or managerial orientation
Unsatisfied specialisation of specialist programmes
Thank you!
Professor Ivan Koprić
Faculty of Law, University of Zagreb
Mailto: [email protected]