By: Bryane Michael and Yasmeen R. Hussain
What should central and eastern european policymakers do to develop their “capacities to govern”?
In public administration theory and practice, the 21st century has been marked by a shift of emphasis from efficiency (often simplified as cost-saving, downsizing, and outsourcing) to effectiveness. OECD governments have moved from saving money to “responding to public service clients.” Unlike members of the OECD, Central and Eastern European Countries and the Russian Federation suffered from the “double paradox of transition” during the 1990s. On the economic front, these countries were actively striving toward reducing the size and scope of government. On the political front, “democracy” led to a multiplicity of party platforms and increased political competition rather than co-operation. By the late 1990s, policymakers and academics realised that the State could not simply be politically and economically downsized -- it had to be “rightsized”; in order for the public administration and “government” to work (and work well) “capacities to govern” must be developed.
In a recent edited book published by the National Institutes and Schools of Public Administration in Central and Eastern Europe (NISPAcee), see box, the authors make the case that such capacities include setting strategic directions, fomenting certain sets of values, building new ways of financing public goods and services, and promoting constructive interaction between the public and private sectors.
The book uses Eastern Europe as the template from which to examine capacity building and thereby highlight the most relevant aspects of governance. Impeccably organized, it leads the reader logically through many of the considerations that can shape capacities to govern. Loosely categorized for the purposes of this review, studies include work by the following scholars 1:
- indicators of governance and strategic capacity building
Yehezkel Dror, notes the importance of strategic capacity and argues that Eastern European institutions are moving through “ruptures in history” which need to be carefully governed through transition (and post-transition) policy.
Martin Potucek identifies and defines indicators based on ten capacities of good governance, conducts an expert survey, and finds that Central and Eastern European countries are roughly 49% of the way toward the “good governance” of the Western European countries.
- aspects of governance that concern mindsets and perceptions and the degree to which these motivate governance systems
Michiel de Vries finds that democratic values change over time – particularly with regard to policymaker attitudes toward leadership, minorities in decision making processes, participation, conflict resolution, parochialism, central-local relations, and income policies at the local level in Belarus, Lithuania, Netherlands, Russia and Sweden.
- influence of constructing consensus and political values upon the independence and professionalisation of the civil service
Katarina Staronova finds that just as in most countries, the line between political figures (ministers) and civil servants (their secretaries) in the Slovak Republic is sometimes a fuzzy one.
- importance of developing regional financial and administrative capacities
Capacity building also entails the equalization needed to promote social justice and remove variance needed to bring expenditure in control thus reducing poor public sector performance. Bartlomiej Gurba maps fiscal relations between national and sub-national administrations in Poland, finding that capacity – especially the capacity to deliver public goods – is clearly needed given the increasing demands placed on local administration.
- dependency on information and incentives provided to civil servants
The quality of local level service is affected by more than the degree of political or fiscal decentralization. Conducting a study in Estonia, Kristina Tonnison finds that information flows within the public sector itself and from public service users to the Government are often inadequate.
Another viewpoint is presented by Pavel Oseiko, who concludes based upon his work on the health service sector in Hungary, that close interaction among the public sector, business sector, and civil society is a reason why economic performance has increased so rapidly. If capacities to govern must be developed, these capacities should be linked to providing the correct incentives to economic agents.
- corruption
Mungiu-Pippidi and Sorin Ionita describe corruption and governance trends generally across Eastern Europe by studying “amoral family-based policies” of the ruling elite in Romania who look for their own interests before those of the nation. Such family-based policy compromises not only the technical capacity to govern, but even the political will to develop these capacities.
Mantas Jonauskis suggests activities that can be undertaken to reduce corruption. Noting extensive legislative and institutional framework for preventing corruption in Lithuania, he offers recommendations for a specific “model” anti-corruption programme based around civil servant ethics and probity in public-private relations.
The papers in this volume valuably contribute to a model of government “rightsizing” and “capacity building”.
Bryane Michael, Linacre College (bryane.michael@linacre.oxford.ac.uk) and Yasmeen R. Hussain, AGSIRD (yasmeen@alum.berkeley.edu)
1) The summaries in the article represent our interpretations of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or language of the authors themselves. Some authors may have been omitted to keep this article reasonably short. |