Research analysis Archives - Think For Europe

National PAR Monitor 2021/2022 – Kosovo

22/08/2023/in News, Policy Study /by Emilija Nenadovic

The Kosovo PAR Monitor 2021/2022 is the result of monitoring work performed in 2021/2022 by the Group for Legal and Political Studies, and it represents findings from Kosovo in the six areas of PAR defined by the Principles of Public Administration (SIGMA principles). As the third systematic PAR monitoring done in Kosovo by GLPS, this report offers comparisons with the baseline PAR Monitor findings of the 2017/2018 and 2019/2020 monitoring cycles.

PAR Monitor reports are based on a comprehensive methodological framework designed by the WeBER research team that combines quantitative and qualitative sources of evidence. With the SIGMA principles as the building blocks of monitoring work, PAR Monitor reports are complementary to similar work by SIGMA/OECD and the European Commission, differing in that they offer citizen and civil society perspectives on these principles. Together with this comparative regional report, the PAR Monitor package consists of six national reports, each including findings on a total of 23 compound indicators to monitor a selection of SIGMA Principles.

The Kosovo PAR Monitor 2021/2022 is available for download here: English.

National PAR Monitor 2021/2022 – Montenegro

22/08/2023/in News, Policy Study /by Emilija Nenadovic

The Montenegro PAR Monitor 2021/2022 is the result of monitoring work performed in 2021/2022 by the Institut Alternativa, and it represents findings from Kosovo in the six areas of PAR defined by the Principles of Public Administration (SIGMA principles). As the third systematic PAR monitoring done in Montenegro by IA, this report offers comparisons with the baseline PAR Monitor findings of the 2017/2018 and 2019/2020 monitoring cycles.

PAR Monitor reports are based on a comprehensive methodological framework designed by the WeBER research team that combines quantitative and qualitative sources of evidence. With the SIGMA principles as the building blocks of monitoring work, PAR Monitor reports are complementary to similar work by SIGMA/OECD and the European Commission, differing in that they offer citizen and civil society perspectives on these principles. Together with this comparative regional report, the PAR Monitor package consists of six national reports, each including findings on a total of 23 compound indicators to monitor a selection of SIGMA Principles.

The Montenegro PAR Monitor 2021/2022 is available for download here: Montenegrin and English.

Serbia PAR Monitor 2021/2022

28/07/2023/in News, Policy Study /by Emilija Nenadovic

The Serbian PAR Monitor 2021/2022 is the result of monitoring work performed in 2021/2022 by the European Policy Centre – CEP, and it represents a report of key findings from across the Western Balkans in the six areas of PAR defined by the Principles of Public Administration (SIGMA principles). As the third systematic PAR monitoring done in North Macedonia by EPI, this report offers comparisons with the baseline PAR Monitor findings of the 2017/2018 and 2019/2020 monitoring cycles.

PAR Monitor reports are based on a comprehensive methodological framework designed by the WeBER research team that combines quantitative and qualitative sources of evidence. With the SIGMA principles as the building blocks of monitoring work, PAR Monitor reports are complementary to similar work by SIGMA/OECD and the European Commission, differing in that they offer citizen and civil society perspectives on these principles. Together with this comparative regional report, the PAR Monitor package consists of six national reports, each including findings on a total of 23 compound indicators to monitor a selection of SIGMA Principles.

The Serbia PAR Monitor 2021/2022 is available for download here: Serbian and English

Albania PAR Monitor 2021/2022

27/07/2023/in News, Policy Study /by Emilija Nenadovic

The Albania PAR Monitor 2021/2022 is the result of monitoring work performed in 2021/2022 by the Insitute for Democracy and Mediation – IDM Albania, and it represents a report of key findings from across the Western Balkans in the six areas of PAR defined by the Principles of Public Administration (SIGMA principles). As the third systematic PAR monitoring done in North Macedonia by EPI, this report offers comparisons with the baseline PAR Monitor findings of the 2017/2018 and 2019/2020 monitoring cycles.

PAR Monitor reports are based on a comprehensive methodological framework designed by the WeBER research team that combines quantitative and qualitative sources of evidence. With the SIGMA principles as the building blocks of monitoring work, PAR Monitor reports are complementary to similar work by SIGMA/OECD and the European Commission, differing in that they offer citizen and civil society perspectives on these principles. Together with this comparative regional report, the PAR Monitor package consists of six national reports, each including findings on a total of 23 compound indicators to monitor a selection of SIGMA Principles.

The Albania PAR Monitor 2021/2022 is available for download here: English

North Macedonia PAR Monitor 2021/2022

25/07/2023/in News, Policy Study, Publications /by Emilija Nenadovic

The North Macedonia PAR Monitor 2021/2022 is the result of monitoring work performed in 2021/2022 by the European Policy Institute – EPI, and it represents a report of key findings from across the Western Balkans in the six areas of PAR defined by the Principles of Public Administration (SIGMA principles). As the third systematic PAR monitoring done in North Macedonia by EPI, this report offers comparisons with the baseline PAR Monitor findings of the 2017/2018 and 2019/2020 monitoring cycles.

PAR Monitor reports are based on a comprehensive methodological framework designed by the WeBER research team that combines quantitative and qualitative sources of evidence. With the SIGMA principles as the building blocks of monitoring work, PAR Monitor reports are complementary to similar work by SIGMA/OECD and the European Commission, differing in that they offer citizen and civil society perspectives on these principles. Together with this comparative regional report, the PAR Monitor package consists of six national reports, each including findings on a total of 23 compound indicators to monitor a selection of SIGMA Principles.

The North Macedonia PAR Monitor 2021/2022 is available for download here: English and Macedonian

Bosnia and Herzegovina PAR Monitor 2021/2022

24/07/2023/in News, Policy Study /by Emilija Nenadovic

The Bosnia and Herzegovina PAR Monitor 2021/2022 is the result of monitoring work performed in 2021/2022 by the Foreign Policy Initiative – FPI BH, and it represents a report of key findings from across the Western Balkans in the six areas of PAR defined by the Principles of Public Administration (SIGMA principles). As the third systematic PAR monitoring done in North Macedonia by EPI, this report offers comparisons with the baseline PAR Monitor findings of the 2017/2018 and 2019/2020 monitoring cycles.

PAR Monitor reports are based on a comprehensive methodological framework designed by the WeBER research team that combines quantitative and qualitative sources of evidence. With the SIGMA principles as the building blocks of monitoring work, PAR Monitor reports are complementary to similar work by SIGMA/OECD and the European Commission, differing in that they offer citizen and civil society perspectives on these principles. Together with this comparative regional report, the PAR Monitor package consists of six national reports, each including findings on a total of 23 compound indicators to monitor a selection of SIGMA Principles.

The Bosnia and Herzegovina PAR Monitor 2021/2022 is available for download here: English

Public consultations and policymaking in Serbia: Form over substance

12/02/2022/in Policy Briefs, Publications, Slider /by Think for Europe

Being part of the wider public administration reform (PAR), policymaking reforms in Serbia entail improvements in implementing consultations with stakeholders, and public debates on policy documents and legislation (hereinafter: public consultations), throughout the drafting process. By consulting the target groups throughout, the effects of the proposed solutions are assessed, and the costs minimized, which makes public consultations one of the most valuable tools in the preparation of draft policy documents and legislation. Moreover, involvement positively impacts sustainability of policies and ensure their responsiveness to real needs of the society.

However, public consultations are still insufficiently widespread in policymaking in Serbia, and when they are conducted, it is often pro forma, without ensuring the quality of the process. As a result, policies are often not adapted to the citizens’ needs, and their implementation degree is low. This further contributes to the reduced citizens’ trust in institutions[2], resistance to policy implementation, and ultimately, makes policies unsustainable.

The results of the National PAR Monitor 2019/2020 for Serbia indicate that there has been no progress in conducting public consultations compared to the baseline PAR Monitor for the period 2017/2018. In other words, public consultations have not been consistently conducted, there is a lack of continuity in reporting, and the real influence of public participation is limited due to minimal adoption of suggestions and comments. In addition, the competent authorities are insufficiently engaged in proactive informing and involving of stakeholders in the various stages of these processes.

Download the policy brief here (English) and here (Serbian).

Public-consultations-and-policymaking-in-Serbia_form-over-substance

The EU as a promoter of democracy or ‘stabilitocracy’ in the Western Balkans?

08/02/2022/in News, Policy Study, Research analysis, Slider /by Think for Europe

Through its enlargement policy, the EU seeks to foster democratisation in Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Montenegro, North Macedonia and Serbia, also called Western Balkans six (WB6). Despite years of efforts, the EU’s policies have not brought about the expected change.

The enlargement process has lost both efficacy and political momentum. Instead of experiencing decisive democratic reform, the WB6 have slowly developed into ‘stabilitocracies’: countries with obvious democratic shortcomings that at the same time claim to work towards democratic reform and offer stability.

The report, conducted by the Clingendael and the Think for Europe Network, identifies eight flaws in the EU’s strategies, policies and their implementation that are believed to contribute to stabilitocracy formation.

In each of the WB6 countries, concrete cases exemplify how EU influence has unintentionally contributed to stabilitocracy formation and what factors have determined whether the EU approach has been constructive or not. The technical approach is the most prevalent flaw in the case studies. Examples range from the EU’s inability to harmonise the interests of different ethnic groups in Bosnia and Herzegovina, structural weaknesses in the European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo (EULEX), the failure of technical safeguards to counter blurred boundaries between branches of power in Montenegro, an overly technical focus in progress reports on democracy and rule of law reforms in North-Macedonia, and an overly technical fixation in the application of the revised methodology in Serbia.

To avoid the traps of further stabilitocracy entrenchment, we put forward recommendations and critical reflections on how to improve the EU’s role in the region. Recommendations include focusing more on genuine feedback to WB6 governments, better reporting on the state of progress, enhancing communication with citizens, and specifying benchmarks while accompanying them with more tangible timelines.

However, fixing the technical process is a necessary but not sufficient condition for the EU accession process and its democratisation agenda for the Western Balkans. Therefore, the EU and its member states need to seriously consider proposals for a further overhaul of the enlargement process in order to allow for a staged accession trajectory for the WB6. At the same time, the EU could speed up engagement with the WB6 beyond the enlargement framework in order to not lose grip in a region subject to increasing great-power competition. Lastly, it is recommended that the Netherlands takes further action to substantiate its ambitions as a critical but engaged member state.

The-EU-as-a-promoter-of-democracy-or-stabilitocracy_2eproef

Read the full report (HTML) or download the report (PDF).

Save the date for an online forum on Thursday 10 March, 15.30-16.45 hrs. Lawmakers, policymakers and researchers will debate on the EU’s unintentionally contribution to the formation of ‘stabilitocracies’ and the next steps. You can participate through the Q&A and poll questions.

Confirmed speakers are Milena Lazarević (Programme Director, European Policy Centre – Belgrade), Nikola Dimitrov (Former Foreign and Deputy Prime Minister for European Foreign Affairs of North Macedonia) and Geert Luteijn (Lecturer Political Science, University of Amsterdam). The full programme will be announced soon. Please register to save the date!

Public engagement in developing key strategic public administration reform (PAR) documents

07/02/2022/in Policy Briefs, Publications, Slider /by Think for Europe

Consultation is structured public engagement, which involves seeking, receiving, analysing, and responding to feedback from stakeholders, by defining the purpose and subject of the consultation whether it is a policy initiative, regulatory change, or legislative proposal.

The use of public consultation has different implications for the improvement of the regulatory framework. If undertaken in a timely and effective manner, consultation captures the collective intelligence of a society and helps collect empirical information for analytical purposes, especially as a precondition for the move towards more analytically‐based models of decision‐making processes. Furthermore, consultation mechanisms are increasingly characterised by greater openness and accessibility, particularly for smaller, less organised interests, which leads towards more pluralistic approaches. Consultation is inherent to transparent and effective governance.

In North Macedonia, based on document analysis as regards the overall public consultation process, it can be said that evidence-based findings produced by CSOs are rarely referenced in the sample of adopted government policy documents. All in all, 19 policy documents in three areas, which are currently being implemented, have been analysed, out of which only 6 contain references to findings produced by CSOs.

Read more here (in English).

WeBer_Public-Engagement-in-Developing-Key-Strategic-Public-Administration-Reform-PAR-Documents

Proactive transparency and the right of access to information: A conversation starter between the government and the people

01/02/2022/in Policy Briefs, Publications, Slider /by Think for Europe

Proactive transparency and free access to information characterize democratic societies, introducing the order of a country to ensure transparency of the work of its administrative structures. These structures need to provide a basis for initiating communication between institutions and citizens. Communication rests on reactive transparency of the administration and its pursuit of the Freedom of Access to Information Act. Upon this Act, citizens are to receive information upon request, while the administration published specific information on its own initiative for the purpose of informing the citizens of its work, on their rights and obligations, or to involve citizens in decision-making processes pertaining to laws, policies, actions and other. This communication takes place on different levels and through various channels, and the development of new technologies and wider use of internet platforms and social media opens opportunities for new ways of involving the citizens.

The Brief can be downloaded here (in English) and here (in BHS).

Brief02_eng-1