ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGE: ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGE: Strategies and EU AccessionStrategies and EU Accession

Professor Ivan KoprićProfessor Ivan Koprić

Faculty of Law, University of ZagrebFaculty of Law, University of Zagreb

The main differencesThe 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 ideologiesPublic 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 valuesPolitical (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 reformsARs 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 (up-

grade) 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 ideologyConservative political actors in Anglo-Saxon countriesNew Zealand, Australia, Canada, UK, USASignificant 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 responsibilityo Performance indicators (quantitative, if possible),

performance measuremento Output control, disregarding procedures; performance-

related pay systems; decentralised HRMo 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, contractualisationo 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 effectsStructural and functional measures and effectsa) 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 GovernanceNPM criticisms during the 1990s followed by building new set

of ideas at a bit different value baseThe role of international organisations: OUN; OECD; EUStill under construction and stabilisation European Governance: A White Paper (Brussels: COM (2001)

428) (governance based on proportionality and subsidiarity); fundamental principles:

a) Opennessb) Participationc) Accountabilityd) Effectivenesse) CoherenceThe stress is on the role of the citizens, civil society, and local

self-governmentUNDP: combination of efficient and democratic governanceOECD: Citizens as Partners: Information, Consultation and

Public Participation in Policy-Making, 2001Increasing administrative and policy capacities + legitimacy

strengthening

The European Administrative SpaceThe 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 EASThe main principles of the EAS

a) The rule of law (legal certainty, reliability and predictability of administrative actions and decisions, legality)

b) Openness and transparencyc) Accountability of PA to other administrative,

legislative and judicial authoritiesd) Efficiency in the use of public resources and

effectiveness in accomplishing policy goals

EU AccessionEU AccessionComplex and hard taskPolitical dedication and administrative capacityHarmonisation 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 accessionThe 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 standardsEuropean 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 SGIDirective 2006/123/EC (the Services Directive): MSs have to transpose

it by the end of 2009The most dynamic and challenging sector

Europeanization of the Republic of Croatia

a) Croatia as a late-comerb) Formal and substantial Europeanizationc) Membership in the Council of Europe (1996)d) Stabilization and Association Agreement (2001)e) EU candidate status (2004)f) Negotiation process g) Administrative education

State administration developmentI. 1990-1993 – Establishment phase Semi-presidential system Considerable new parts of state administration (new ministries, etc.) War Politicisation; poor professional standards; hidden lustrationII. 1993-2001 – Consolidation phase (war till 1995) Etatisation and centralisation A number of poor reorganisations Very slow democratisation First Law on State Civil Servants in 1994III. 2001-2008 – Europeanisation phase 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.

IV. 2008 – Modernisation phase?The State Administration Reform Strategy

State administration

Central state administration 1. Ministries (15)2. State administrative organisations (9)3. Central state offices (4)

First instance state administrationOffices 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 summaryII. State administration we want (Vision and goals of

modern administration)III. The main results in the reform of political system and

state administrationIV. The main areas and directions of state administration

reformV. Implementation of strategic measuresVI. 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 services3. Openness and access to state administrative

organisations4. The rule of law5. Increasing social sensitivity inside state

administration and in relations with citizens6. Rising ethical level and reducing corruption7. Modern ICT implementation8. Joining the European Administrative Space *accompanied by 29 indicators

State administration reform strategy – main areas and directions

1. Structural adaptations of state administration system: from structure to good governance (3 directions; 13 activities)

2. Increasing quality of programmes, laws and other regulations: better regulation (4 directions; 14 activities)

3. System of state servants: modern civil service (4 directions; 10 activities)

4. Education and in-service training of state administration: knowledge, skills and competencies (2 directions; 8 activities)

5. 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 (2000-

2003)

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

programmesCroatian 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!Thank you!

Professor Ivan KoprićProfessor Ivan Koprić

Faculty of Law, University of ZagrebFaculty of Law, University of Zagreb

Mailto: ikopric@pravo.hrMailto: ikopric@pravo.hr