Instituto de Estudios Políticos y Derecho Público "Dr. Humberto J. La Roche"
de la Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Políticas de la Universidad del Zulia
Maracaibo, Venezuela
Esta publicación cientíca en formato digital es continuidad de la revista impresa
ISSN-Versión Impresa 0798-1406 / ISSN-Versión on line 2542-3185Depósito legal pp
197402ZU34
ppi 201502ZU4645
Vol.39 N° 69
Julio
Diciembre
2021
ISSN 0798- 1406 ~ De pó si to le gal pp 198502ZU132
Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas
La re vis ta Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas, es una pu bli ca ción aus pi cia da por el Ins ti tu to
de Es tu dios Po lí ti cos y De re cho Pú bli co “Dr. Hum ber to J. La Ro che” (IEPDP) de la Fa-
cul tad de Cien cias Ju rí di cas y Po lí ti cas de la Uni ver si dad del Zu lia.
En tre sus ob je ti vos fi gu ran: con tri buir con el pro gre so cien tí fi co de las Cien cias
Hu ma nas y So cia les, a tra vés de la di vul ga ción de los re sul ta dos lo gra dos por sus in ves-
ti ga do res; es ti mu lar la in ves ti ga ción en es tas áreas del sa ber; y pro pi ciar la pre sen ta-
ción, dis cu sión y con fron ta ción de las ideas y avan ces cien tí fi cos con com pro mi so so cial.
Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas apa re ce dos ve ces al año y pu bli ca tra ba jos ori gi na les con
avan ces o re sul ta dos de in ves ti ga ción en las áreas de Cien cia Po lí ti ca y De re cho Pú bli-
co, los cua les son so me ti dos a la con si de ra ción de ár bi tros ca li fi ca dos.
ESTA PU BLI CA CIÓN APA RE CE RE SE ÑA DA, EN TRE OTROS ÍN DI CES, EN
:
Re vicyhLUZ, In ter na tio nal Po li ti cal Scien ce Abs tracts, Re vis ta In ter ame ri ca na de
Bi blio gra fía, en el Cen tro La ti no ame ri ca no para el De sa rrol lo (CLAD), en Bi blio-
gra fía So cio Eco nó mi ca de Ve ne zue la de RE DIN SE, In ter na tio nal Bi blio graphy of
Po li ti cal Scien ce, Re vencyt, His pa nic Ame ri can Pe rio di cals In dex/HAPI), Ul ri ch’s
Pe rio di cals Di rec tory, EBS CO. Se en cuen tra acre di ta da al Re gis tro de Pu bli ca cio-
nes Cien tí fi cas y Tec no ló gi cas Ve ne zo la nas del FO NA CIT, La tin dex.
Di rec to ra
L
OIRALITH
M. C
HIRINOS
P
ORTILLO
Co mi té Edi tor
Eduviges Morales Villalobos
Fabiola Tavares Duarte
Ma ría Eu ge nia Soto Hernández
Nila Leal González
Carmen Pérez Baralt
Co mi té Ase sor
Pedro Bracho Grand
J. M. Del ga do Ocan do
José Ce rra da
Ri car do Com bel las
An gel Lom bar di
Die ter Nohlen
Al fre do Ra mos Ji mé nez
Go ran Ther born
Frie drich Welsch
Asis ten tes Ad mi nis tra ti vos
Joan López Urdaneta y Nil da Ma rín
Re vis ta Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas. Av. Gua ji ra. Uni ver si dad del Zu lia. Nú cleo Hu ma nís ti co. Fa-
cul tad de Cien cias Ju rí di cas y Po lí ti cas. Ins ti tu to de Es tu dios Po lí ti cos y De re cho Pú bli co
“Dr. Hum ber to J. La Ro che”. Ma ra cai bo, Ve ne zue la. E- mail: cues tio nes po li ti cas@gmail.
com ~ loi chi ri nos por til lo@gmail.com. Te le fax: 58- 0261- 4127018.
Vol. 39, Nº 69 (Julio - Diciembre) 2021, 814-831
IEPDP-Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Políticas - LUZ
Recibido el 14/04/2021 Aceptado el 21/06/2021
Administrative reforms in Eastern
Europe: A comparative legal analysis
DOI: https://doi.org/10.46398/cuestpol.3969.50
Stanislav V. Zlyvko *
Valerii A. Bortniak **
Kateryna V. Bortniak ***
Iryna P. Storozhuk ****
Roman Z. Holobutovskyy *****
Abstract
The objective of the article was to analyze the legal regulation
of the decentralization reform in Eastern Europe and its impact
on the unemployment rate. Methodologically, statistical analysis,
hypothetical-deductive method and correlation were used. It was
found that the rst stage of the reform of the New Civil Service
in Poland, Ukraine, Romania, the Czech Republic, Slovenia,
Latvia, and Bulgaria began in 1990, but can be called an informal
preparatory stage. It is determined that the process of implementation
of administrative reforms is inuenced by a series of factors: historical,
economic, geographical. It is concluded that there is no positive correlation
between the eectiveness of public administration and the eectiveness
of local self-government in all the countries studied. The reform of
decentralization has been shown to have a negative impact on employment.
In addition, it found that Poland is the most stable country among those
studied, with a high level of eciency of local self-government. La more
negative correlation between the eciency index of local self-government
and employment, and the most positive correlation between local and
unemployment rate.
Keywords: public administration; decentralization; new public
administration; employment; unemployment.
* Professor, Department of Administrative, Civil and Commercial Law and Process, Law Faculty,Academy
of the State Penitentiary Service. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2732-3144. Email: zlslsv@
ukr.net
** Associate Professor, Department of Public and Private Law, Kyiv V. I. Vernadsky Taurida National
University. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1285-966X. Email: valbortn83@meta.ua
*** Associate Professor, Department of Public and Private Law, Kyiv V. I. Vernadsky Taurida National
University. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2135-3820. Email: katbortn85@meta.ua
**** Associate Professor, Department of Constitutional, Administrative and Financial Law, Faculty of Law,
Leonid Yuzkov Khmelnytsky University of Management and Law. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-
0003-3104-6071. Email: irynaa1975@gmail.com
***** Associate Professor, Department of General Law Disciplines, Faculty of Law, Dnipropetrovsk State
University of Internal Aairs. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3160-3333. Email: kafedra_
zpd675@ukr.net
815
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 69 (Julio - Diciembre 2021): 814-831
Reformas Administrativas en Europa del Este: un
Análisis Jurídico Comparado
Resumen
El objetivo del artículo fue analizar la regulación legal de la reforma de
descentralización en Europa del Este y su impacto en la tasa de empleo.
En lo metodológico se utilizó análisis estadístico, método hipotético-
deductivo y correlación. Se encontró que la primera etapa de la reforma
de la Nueva Administración Pública en Polonia, Ucrania, Rumania, la
República Checa, Eslovenia, Letonia y Bulgaria comenzó en 1990, pero se
puede llamar una etapa preparatoria informal. Se determina que el proceso
de implementación de las reformas administrativas está inuenciado por
una serie de factores: históricos, económicos, geográcos. Se concluye que
no existe una correlación positiva entre la efectividad de la administración
pública y la efectividad del autogobierno local en todos los países
estudiados. Está demostrado que la reforma de la descentralización tiene
un impacto negativo en el empleo. Además, se encontró que Polonia es el
país más estable entre los estudiados, con un alto nivel de eciencia del
autogobierno local. La correlación más negativa entre el índice de eciencia
del autogobierno local y el empleo, y la correlación más positiva entre los
locales y la tasa de desempleo.
Palabras clave: administración pública; descentralización; nueva
administración pública; empleo; desempleo.
Introduction
Administrative reforms are part of everyday life of modern countries,
which are looking for new ways to manage the public sector under the
inuence of external and internal factors. Public sector reforms are actions
of the government to reengineer the provision of public services in order
to increase the eciency and eectiveness of the civil service (Chand and
Naidu, 2020).
The impetus for administrative reforms in public administration was
scal stress caused by global changes in the economic system and the
need to improve the work of the civil service (Aucoin, 1990). Governments
have had to cut spending, sta, investment, and services, demand higher
productivity and better performance from public authority. In order to
obtain higher places for their countries in the world economic rankings,
governments have been forced to rethink their role in governance and
design country development strategies (Caiden, 2001).
816
Stanislav V. Zlyvko, Valerii A. Bortniak, Kateryna V. Bortniak, Iryna P. Storozhuk y Roman Z.
Holobutovskyy
Administrative reforms in Eastern Europe: A comparative legal analysis
The issue of implementing administrative reforms is especially urgent in
the new democracies of Central and Eastern Europe. The rst wave of new
public administration reform around the world began in the mid-1970’s to
increase government eciency and eectiveness (Suzuki and Avellaneda,
2018). The second wave of the new administrative reform coincides with
the beginning of European integration and accession to the EU.
The implementation of administrative reforms is a long-term process,
which is due to the object of reform being unchanged throughout the
period, while the ways of reform change according to the state of public
administration.
1. Literature Review
Across Europe, there are three main paradigms of reform: the rst
paradigm concerns the introduction of Weberian style structures and
processes, transforming tribal systems into modern administrations that
are guided by the rule of law, operate transparently within a reasonable
timeframe; the second reform paradigm, often referred to as New
Public Administration, mainly concerns the introduction of a market-
type mechanism; the third paradigm of reform combines elements of
Weberianism with aspects of New Public Management (Hammerschmid et
al., 2016).
The main administrative reforms were aimed at: relations between the
central, regional, and local levels of government; organisation of public
services; principles of nancial management; development of state policy
and evaluation of management results. The basis of administrative reform
is the relationship between the state and society or between local self-
government and citizens (Nikos, 2001).
Decentralization is an open-ended concept that goes beyond the traditional
categories of unitary and federal states (Harguindéguy et al., 2019). There
are four main types of decentralisations: political, administrative, scal and
market. Financial responsibility is a key component of decentralisation.
Subnational governments and private organisations can eectively perform
decentralised functions when they have the appropriate level of revenue
that is collected locally or transferred from the national government — as
well as the power to decide on expenditures (World Health Organization,
n. d.).
The results of scal and administrative decentralisation are often
analysed together with the consequences of the political and economic
situation. The level of decentralisation reform has a positive and signicant
impact on the level of economic development of municipalities. The
817
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 69 (Julio - Diciembre 2021): 814-831
political subdivisions, which are the highest level in the structure of scal
decentralisation, usually have a higher level of local employment. This
suggests that scal decentralisation can be an important policy tool to
stimulate local economic development and local employment (Bartlett et
al., 2020). So, an eective policy to improve the labour market as part of
decentralisation reform is possible only with the nancial support of local
governments (Churski, 2002). Levels of decentralisation can be seen as
long-term eective responses to demands of investors and voters. Economic
integration strengthens the requirements for scal decentralisation;
however, economic integration is even more likely to have the opposite
eect under certain conditions (Garrett and Rodden, 2000).
Fiscal decentralisation should improve the eciency of local self-
governments and stimulate production growth. However, empirical
evidence is mixed. Fiscal decentralisation can aect economic growth in
two ways: labour productivity and employment (Bartolini et al., 2019).
Employment is important for people’s well-being, as it is crucial for
nancial well-being. There are many ways to increase employment rates:
an eective unemployment benet system, a social safety net in general,
or a balanced labour market policy. Municipalities are more informed
about local working conditions, the labour market and the unemployed
who are looking for work. Decentralisation of public employment services
would make them more eective in organising work and providing services
(Nieminen, 2020).
Municipalities can organise and nance employment services more
eectively, as local employment services have more information on
employment issues and labour needs (Mergele and Weber, 2020). However,
decentralisation is not an unequivocally eective tool. Boockmann et
al. (2015) found that decentralisation had negative consequences for
male employment and ineective for women. The implementation of
administrative reforms is critically dependent on a strong institutional
foundation (Lapuente and Van de Walle, 2020).
Local branches of centralised public employment services are subject
to the directives of the central institution. This allows monitoring their
work more eectively, which facilitates the implementation of common
standards and best practices. In a more decentralised environment, local
branches of the public employment service are more exible. They can
develop independent strategies according to the specic conditions of their
local labour market (Weber, 2016).
818
Stanislav V. Zlyvko, Valerii A. Bortniak, Kateryna V. Bortniak, Iryna P. Storozhuk y Roman Z.
Holobutovskyy
Administrative reforms in Eastern Europe: A comparative legal analysis
2. Research Objectives
The aim of the scientic article was to establish the legal regulation
of the New Public Administration (decentralisation) reform in Eastern
Europe and the impact of this reform of the New Public Administration on
the employment rate.
Research objectives of the article:
1. Review the legal regulation of the New Public
Administration (decentralisation) reform in the countries of Eastern
Europe and the countries that last joined the EU.
2. Analyse statistical indicators that reect the state of the New Public
Administration (decentralisation) reform and employment.
3. Study the impact of the New Public Administration (decentralisation)
reform and employment.
4. Provide a comparative legal description of the impact of the New
Public Administration (decentralisation) reform and employment in
the countries of Eastern Europe and the countries that have recently
joined the EU.
3. Materials and Methods of Research
The main approach in the study of administrative reforms in Eastern
Europe and the most recent EU member states was to establish the impact
of NPA (decentralisation) reform on employment. This position is due to
the construction of a logical chain consisting of the following components:
administrative and scal decentralisation, policies aimed at economic
growth of political subdivisions by attracting investors, expanding the
private sector, and increasing jobs, which will reduce unemployment
and improve the welfare of local people. The study was conducted based
on statistics in Eastern Europe and the most recent EU member states.
This approach was chosen to carry out a complete study of the impact of
decentralisation on employment in countries that have actively pursued
European integration with a view to joining the EU.
The study involved statistical analysis to compare data on the eectiveness
of public and local government, employment and unemployment in Eastern
Europe and the most recent EU member states.
The hypothetical-deductive method was conductive in determining
the direction of the research, that is determining the impact of the
NPA (decentralisation) reform on the employment rate in Eastern Europe
and the most recent EU member states.
819
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 69 (Julio - Diciembre 2021): 814-831
The study also involved the method of correlation analysis to establish
the correlation: between the local government eciency index during
2005—2017 and the public administration eciency index 2007-2016 in
Poland, Ukraine, Slovenia, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Latvia, Romania;
between the local government eciency index during 2005—2017 and
employment in relation to the population aged 15+ during 2005—2017 in
the studied countries; between the local government eciency index during
2005—2017 and the unemployment rate during 2005—2017 in the studied
countries.
The research used the most signicant studies that reect the
development of scientic thought in the eld of administrative reforms for
the period from 1990 to 2021. This period of analysis was chosen as the
one that most clearly reects the state of implementation of administrative
reforms at the present stage.
The paper analyses the following indicators:
- Local Government Index 2005—2017 reected by The World Bank.
- Government Eciency Index 2007—2016 reected by The World
Bank.
- Employment to population ratio, 15+, total (%) (modelled ILO
estimate) for 2005—2017 reected by The World Bank.
- Unemployment, total (% of total labour force) (modelled ILO
estimate) 2005—2017 reected by The World Bank.
4. Results
Historically, the process of the New Public Administration (decentral-
isation) reform in Poland, Slovenia, Latvia, Bulgaria, Ukraine, the Czech
Republic, and Romania has begun since 1990. There were no clearly de-
ned reform strategies in any of the studied countries, so the rst stages of
NPA reform can be called a stage of preparation for the ocial start of this
reform (Table 1).
820
Stanislav V. Zlyvko, Valerii A. Bortniak, Kateryna V. Bortniak, Iryna P. Storozhuk y Roman Z.
Holobutovskyy
Administrative reforms in Eastern Europe: A comparative legal analysis
Table 1. Legal regulation of the New Public Administration
(decentralization) reform since 1990
Countries The period of the New
Public Administration
(decentralisation) reform
Legal regulation
Poland First stage – 1990-1999
Second stage – 1999+
Territorial Self-Government Act
(1990), County Self-Government
Act (1998), Voivodeship
Self-Government Act (1998),
Voivodeship Government
Administration Act (1998).
Slovenia First stage – 1991-1997
Second stage – 1997 – 2010
Third stage - 2010+
Strategy for EU Accession
(1997–1999), Strategy on
Further Development of the
Public Sector (2003-2005),
Slovenia’s Development Strategy
(2005–2013) the Exit Strategy
(2010–2013)
Latvia First stage – 1990-1998
Second stage – 1998-2009
Third stage – 2009+
Law on Administrative Territorial
Reform, (1998)
The Optimisation Plan, (2009)
Bulgaria First stage – 1991 – 2000
Second stage – 2000 - 2006
Third stage – 2006+
Administration Act (1991),
Strategy for Decentralization
(2016).
Ukraine First stage – 1991-2014
Second stage – 2014-2019
Third stage – 2020-2021
The Concept of Reforming Local
Self-Government and Territorial
Organisation of Power (2014), the
Law “On the Principles of State
Regional Policy” (2015), the Law
“On Civil Service” (2015), the Law
“On Cooperation of Territorial
Communities” (2020)
Czech
Republic
First stage - 1991-2006
Second stage - 2007-2013
Third stage – 2014+
Concept of Public Administration
Reform.
Strategy of Implementation
of Smart Administration in
the Period of 2007 – 2015
(2007), Strategic Framework
of the Development of Public
Administration in the Czech
Republic for 2014 – 2020, (2014).
Romania First stage – 1991-2001
Second stage – 2001-2006
Third stage – 2006+
Law of local public administration
(1991), Strategy for public
administration reform for 2004–
2007 (2004), Law No. 195/2006
on decentralisation (2006).
Source: developed by the author.
821
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 69 (Julio - Diciembre 2021): 814-831
The process of public administration reform is long (Table 1) due to its
variability to any changes taking place in the state. Accordingly, the global
and national economic crises suspended the implementation of the NPU
reform and partially returned to more centralised public administration
(the global crisis of 2007-2008). The impetus for the NPA reform in the
studied countries was European integration to join the EU (Bulgaria,
Romania — 2007, Poland, Slovenia, Lithuania, the Czech Republic — 2004,
Ukraine — in the process of European integration).
Local government indices are shown from 0 to 1 for 2005 to 2017 (Table
2). Poland has the highest local government index of for the studied years,
which is stable at 0.99, Latvia, which is 0.99 during 2005-2015, Slovenia’s
index during the studied years was not lower than 0.98.
Table 2. Local Government Index.
2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017
Poland 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99
Slovenia 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.99
Latvia 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.98
Bulgaria 0.92 0.82 0.82 0.93 0.97 0.96 0.96
Ukraine 0.92 0.95 0.84 0.84 0.95 0.95 0.96
Czech Republic 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.90 0.90 0.90
Romania 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.62
Source: World Bank (2019a).
The highest government eciency index from 2007 to 2016 (Table 3)
was 3.84 recorded in Slovenia in 2009, the lowest government eciency
index was 2.59recorded in Ukraine in 2011.
Table 3. Government Eciency, Index.
2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2016
Poland 3.15 2.71 3.15 3.11 3.01 3.20
Slovenia 3.53 3.84 3.65 3.11 2.74 2.95
Latvia 3.60 3.39 3.07 3.40 3.37 3.46
822
Stanislav V. Zlyvko, Valerii A. Bortniak, Kateryna V. Bortniak, Iryna P. Storozhuk y Roman Z.
Holobutovskyy
Administrative reforms in Eastern Europe: A comparative legal analysis
Bulgaria 2.71 2.96 3.03 3.08 2.84 2.98
Ukraine 2.75 3 2.59 2.68 2.68 2.87
Czech Republic 3.20 3.03 3.18 3.03 3.45 3.68
Romania 2.81 3.11 2.83 2.75 3.15 3.22
Source: World Bank (2019b).
In order to establish the correlation between the eectiveness of local
government and the eectiveness of public administration, it is necessary
to conduct a correlation analysis of the indicators of Tables 2 and 3. In
carrying out the analysis, we use the formula:
where x1 — local government eciency index and x2 – public
administration eciency index, r – linear correlation coecient.
The linear correlation between the local government eciency index
and the public administration eciency index in the studied countries
during 2007-2017 (including the local government eciency index in 2017
and the public administration eciency index in 2016) was the following:
Poland — -1.34, Slovenia — - 0.39, Latvia — -0.22, Bulgaria — 0.54, Ukraine
— -0.14, the Czech Republic — -0.53, Romania — -0.58.
Thus, a negative correlation was established between the local
government eciency index and the public administration eciency
index, except for Bulgaria, where the linear correlation index is 0.54, which
indicates the average level of correlation between the studied indicators.
The correlation between the local government eciency index and the
public administration eciency index of the studied countries in 2007 is
0.699, which indicates a high level of correlation of indicators, and in 2015
this linear correlation index of these indicators is -0.274. Employment
during 2005—2017 in the studied countries uctuated slightly between
45.3%—61.67%. The lowest employment rate (45.3%) was recorded in
Bulgaria in 2005, and the highest (61.67%) — in Ukraine in 2013 (Table 4).
823
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 69 (Julio - Diciembre 2021): 814-831
Table 4. Employment to population ratio, 15+, total (%) (modelled ILO
estimate).
2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017
Poland 45.31 48.84 50.74 50.66 50.6 52.37 54.27
Slovenia 55.36 56.89 55.95 53.33 51.66 52.27 54.68
Latvia 51.52 56.56 49.57 49.11 52.31 54.13 55.88
Bulgaria 45.3 50.09 50.62 46.62 46.89 49.22 52.04
Ukraine 51.16 51.42 50.1 50.95 61.67 49.76 49.33
Czech Republic 54.78 55.73 54.7 54.32 55.23 56.61 58.71
Romania 49.63 50.72 50.04 50.24 50.61 50.74 52.29
Source: World Bank (2021).
The impact of the NPA (decentralization) reform on employment can
be determined by conducting a correlation analysis between the local
government eciency index and employment to the population aged 15+
during 2005—2017. The linear correlation index between these indicators
in the studied countries is: Poland — -2.72, Slovenia — 0.084, Latvia —
-0.475, Bulgaria — -0.301, Ukraine — 0.244, Czech Republic — -0.692,
Romania — -0.877.
Thus, the negative correlation between the local government eciency
index and employment is recorded in Poland, where the most stable
local government eciency index is established. The greatest correlation
between these indicators of the studied countries is established in Ukraine,
but the correlation coecient indicates a low level of interdependence. It
should be noted that Ukraine is not a EU member, decentralisation reform
was launched in 2014.
The general correlation index between the local government eciency
index and employment in the studied countries in 2005 was 0.094, and in
2017 — 0.135, which indicates a low level of interdependence.
The lowest unemployment rates in the surveyed countries during 2007-
2017 were observed in Slovenia, Latvia, Ukraine in 2007, Poland, Bulgaria,
the Czech Republic, and Romania in 2017 (Table 5).
824
Stanislav V. Zlyvko, Valerii A. Bortniak, Kateryna V. Bortniak, Iryna P. Storozhuk y Roman Z.
Holobutovskyy
Administrative reforms in Eastern Europe: A comparative legal analysis
Table 5. Unemployment, total (% of total labour force) (modelled ILO
estimate).
2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017
Poland 17.75 9.6 8.17 9.63 10.33 7.5 4.89
Slovenia 6.51 4.82 5.86 8.17 10.1 8.96 6.56
Latvia 10.03 6.05 17.52 16.21 11.87 9.87 8.72
Bulgaria 10.08 6.88 6.82 11.26 12.94 9.14 6.16
Ukraine 7.18 6.35 8.84 7.85 7.17 9.14 9.51
Czech Republic 7.93 5.32 6.66 6.71 6.95 5.05 2.89
Romania 7.17 6.41 6.86 7.18 7.1 6.81 4.93
Source: World Bank (2021).
By conducting a correlation analysis between the local government
eciency index and the number of unemployed (in%) during 2005—2017,
a linear correlation index was established between these indicators in the
studied countries, which is: Poland — 2.404, Slovenia — -0.171, Latvia —
0.295, Bulgaria — 0.546, Ukraine — -0.092, the Czech Republic — 0.544,
Romania — -0.918.
The highest interdependence between the local government eciency
index and the number of unemployed (in%) is found in Poland, the medium
level of interdependence is recorded in the Czech Republic and Bulgaria,
the lowest level — in Latvia. Negative interdependence was established
in Slovenia and Ukraine. The general correlation index between the local
government eciency index and the number of unemployed (in%) in the
studied countries in 2005 was 0.421, and in 2017 — 0.360, which indicates
a low level of interdependence.
5. Discussion
Over the past few decades, many unitary countries have sought
decentralisation as a means of nding more ecient and optimal
governance. Other countries were dissatised with the results of previous
governance and centralised policies. Socio-economic problems have
become more acute, causing the need to address them through poverty
reduction, improving eciency of the public sector and governance, greater
macroeconomic stability, and scal sustainability (Martinez-Vazquez et al.,
2016).
825
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 69 (Julio - Diciembre 2021): 814-831
Rethinking the results of centralised public administration and the tools
for its implementation marked the launch of the third wave of administrative
reforms — the New Public Administration, which was designed to expand the
powers of local self-government with the possibility of self-nancing. The
central subjects of the New Public Administration reform are citizens who
previously held a passive position in governance, and are now considered
full social actors, which are the centre of the administrative reform policy
(Nikos, 2001).
Decentralisation improves resource allocation, accountability, and
cost recovery, while subnational governments are assumed to have better
information than the central government on the problems and needs of
the local population. It is also believed that the population is more aware
of the actions of subnational governments than the central government.
However, subnational governments do not automatically receive additional
information about the local population, unlike the central government
(Azfar et al., 2004). It is established that the interdependence between
the eciency of state power and the eciency of local self-government is
negative in the studied countries, except Bulgaria. Therefore, it is erroneous
to claim that NPA (decentralisation) clearly has a positive eect on the
eectiveness of public administration and local self-government.
Thus, we fully agree with the statements that: scal and administrative
decentralisation improve perceptions of government performance;
federalism is perceived negatively; the overall result of decentralisation is
ambiguous; decentralisation aects the service sector more favourably than
others; large companies perceive decentralisation less favourably than other
companies; the eect of the same form of decentralisation diers within
all public spheres; the form of decentralisation and its contextualisation
in terms of dening the objectives of public activity, requires careful
consideration and detailing (Goel et al., 2017).
Administrative and scal decentralisation are complementary reforms.
Their eectiveness and eciency cannot be unambiguous and the same
for everyone. One of the important factors that must be taken into account
when implementing decentralisation reform is geographical. Geography is
an important factor that determines the reasonability of nancial autonomy
of local self-government. Mountain areas have limited nancial resources
and are more dependent on funding from the central government. The
islands enjoy greater income autonomy than their continental counterparts
(Abouelfarag and Qutb, 2020).
The explanation is that the island’s economy is tourism-based, which
serves as a local source of income growth through local fees and taxation.
The most urbanised municipalities show a higher revenue autonomy and a
lower dependence on public funding. Besides, education, unemployment
and well-being of the population also depend on the nances of local self-
826
Stanislav V. Zlyvko, Valerii A. Bortniak, Kateryna V. Bortniak, Iryna P. Storozhuk y Roman Z.
Holobutovskyy
Administrative reforms in Eastern Europe: A comparative legal analysis
government. Unemployment increases (hinders) local nancial autonomy
and makes local government less (more) dependent on the central
government (Psycharis et al., 2015).
The factors are especially important for understanding the results of
reforms, especially in comparison with other countries. These include:
the administrative system and culture of the country or region, which is
determined by its history (Kurilov, 2019); the initial status of the territory
before the reform, especially the size, number of participating municipalities,
type of amalgamation (merger against association) and reforms that have
taken place in the past; reform process, implementation strategy; local
government and the dynamics of consensus; political incentives and
political leadership in the reform process; existing resources and the level
of eciency of individual local authorities (Ebinger et al, 2018).
Most local communities are currently unable to provide adequate
services to the local population. It is established that in the context of local
self-government reform the issue of employment and implementation of
the state employment policy becomes the main task of the amalgamated
territorial communities. At the same time, each amalgamated territorial
community attaches great importance to the preservation and development
of its human resources, which, in turn, eectively inuences the state
employment policy (Serohina, 2020).
It was found that decentralisation, which aimed at improving the
eciency of local self-government, which would increase the welfare
of the population and best meet the needs of the community, had a
negative impact on the employment rate. Poland has the highest local
self-government eciency index, while a negative correlation between the
local self-government eciency index and employment was revealed. In
Ukraine, where the decentralisation reform started in 2014, the greatest
interdependence between these indicators was found among the studied
countries.
Evidence of the negative impact of decentralisation on employment
is the greatest interdependence between the local government eciency
index and the number of unemployed (in %) in Poland.
Therefore, we agree that decentralisation reform should not be seen as a
tool to increase employment (Nieminen, 2020) and taken as an end in itself
— it is implemented in order to better provide services, manage resources
more eciently or support other overall results. Internally, decentralisation
increases the need for qualied sta in the civil service and in the eld
(World Bank Group, n. d.). Decentralisation reforms require a careful
assessment of the causes of possible problems and economic opportunities
in order to avoid unintended consequences (Mergele and Weber, 2020).
827
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 69 (Julio - Diciembre 2021): 814-831
Local self-governments need to develop strategies to attract investors
in order to expand the private sector, which will increase the number of
jobs and involve local people in work. As a result of consistent and eective
local government policies, unemployment will decrease, the well-being of
the population will improve and economic growth will be ensured (Nepram
et al., 2021).
Conclusion
The study of administrative reforms in Eastern Europe is relevant, as
in Eastern Europe for a long time there was centralised management. The
wave of economic crisis and democratisation led to a wave of administrative
reform aimed at decentralising governance by empowering local
communities, as well as increasing the eciency of local self-government. It
was envisaged that such a policy would boost economic growth, redistribute
funds eectively, improve the well-being of the local population and meet
all the needs of the local community. However, the global economic crises
have made their adjustments not in favour of administrative reforms. Public
administration is a changing institution that responds to any changes taking
place in the state, especially economic changes.
However, the global economic crises have made their adjustments not
in favour of administrative reforms. Public administration is a changing
institution that responds to any changes taking place in the state, especially
economic changes. Accordingly, the implementation of administrative
reforms is a rather long process, which includes the development of
strategies, adoption of relevant legislation, adjustment and change of ways
of reform in accordance with the needs of society. The study found that
the current administrative reform in Eastern Europe is the New Public
Administration reform. The study is based on the idea of the impact of
decentralisation on employment, which is variable to the economic situation
and governance policy and reects the level of welfare of the population.
It was determined that the decentralisation reform did not have
a positive eect on the public administration eciency and the local
government eciency in the studied countries, except Bulgaria. There is a
negative correlation between the local self-government eciency and the
employment rate, except in Slovenia and Ukraine, where there is a weak
correlation. Regarding the impact of local governance on unemployment,
the negative impact is recorded in Ukraine, Romania and Slovenia.
Evidence of the negative impact of decentralisation reform on
employment is the analysis of data from Poland, which has a consistently
high level of local government eciency, the most negative correlation
with employment and the largest correlation with unemployment during
828
Stanislav V. Zlyvko, Valerii A. Bortniak, Kateryna V. Bortniak, Iryna P. Storozhuk y Roman Z.
Holobutovskyy
Administrative reforms in Eastern Europe: A comparative legal analysis
2005-2017, indicating ineective policies of public and local government
regarding the employment of citizens. At the same time, the study showed
that in Ukraine, which has recently launched the decentralisation reform
(since 2014), the policy of providing the population with jobs is more
eective.
However, the results of administrative reforms are ambiguous, as
their eectiveness is inuenced by various factors, such as historical,
geographical, economic.
The prospect of further research is to cover the organisational and
economic aspects of the implementation of administrative reforms and
their impact on sustainable development.
Bibliographic References
ABOUELFARAG, Hanan AbdelKhalik; QUTB, Rasha. 2020. Does government
expenditure reduce unemployment in Egypt. In: Journal of Economics
and Administrative Sciences (Ahead of print). Available online. In:
https://doi.org/10.1108/JEAS-01-2020-0011. Date of consultation:
30/11/2020.
AUCOIN, Peter. 1990. “Administrative reform in public management:
Paradigms, principles, paradoxes and pendulums” In: Governance: An
International Journal of Policy and Administration. Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 115-
137.
AZFAR, Omar; KAHKONEN, Satu; LANYI, Anthony; MEAGHER, Patrick;
RUTHERFORD, Diana. 2004. “Devolution and Development”, 1st
Edition. Routledge, London, New York.
BARTLETT, William; ĐULIĆ, Katarina; KMEZIC, Sanja. 2020. “The impact
of scal decentralisation on local economic development in Serbia” In:
Journal of Local Self-Government. Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 143-163.
BARTOLINI, David; NINKA, Eniel; ANTOLIN, Raaella. 2019. “Tax
decentralization, labour productivity, and employment in OECD
countries” In: Applied Economics. Vol. 51, No. 34, pp. 3710-3729.
BOOCKMANN, Bernhard; THOMSEN, Stephan L.; WALTER, Thomas; GOBEL,
Christian; HUBER, Martin. 2015. “Should welfare administration be
centralized or decentralized? Evidence from a policy experiment” In:
German Economic Review. Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 13–42.
CAIDEN, Gerald E. 2001. “Administrative reform” In: Public Administration
and Public Policy. Vol. 94, pp. 681-693.
829
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 69 (Julio - Diciembre 2021): 814-831
CHAND, Anand; NAIDU, Suwastika. 2020. New public management model
and performance appraisal system. In Ali Farazmand (ed.), “Global
Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance.”
Springer, Cham.
CHURSKI, Pawel. 2002. “Unemployment and labour-market policy in the new
Voivodeship system in Poland” In: European Planning Studies. Vol. 10,
No. 6, pp. 745–763.
EBINGER, Falk; KUHLMANN, Sabine; BOGUMIL, Joerg. 2018. “Territorial
reforms in Europe: eects on administrative performance and democratic
participation” In: Local Government Studies. Vol. 45, No. 1, pp. 1–23.
GARRETT, Georey; RODDEN, Jonathan. 2000. “Globalization and
Decentralization”. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest
Political Science Association in Chicago, IL on April 27-30, 2000.
GOEL, Rajeev K.; MAZHAR, Unnad; NELSON, Michael A; RAM, Rati. 2017.
“Dierent forms of decentralization and their impact on government
performance: Micro-level evidence from 113 countries” In: Economic
Modelling. Vol. 62, pp. 171–183.
HAMMERSCHMID, Gerhard; VAN DE WALE, Andrews; RHYS, Steven;
BEZES, Philippe. 2016. “Introduction: Public Administration Reforms
in Europe. Public Administration Reforms in Europe. The View from the
Top.” Edward Elgar Publishing. Cheltenham, Northampton, UK.
HARGUINDÉGUY, Jean-Baptiste Paul; COLE, Alistair; PASQUIER, Romain.
2019. “The variety of decentralization indexes: A review of the literature”
In: Regional & Federal Studies. Vol. 31, No. 2, pp. 1–24.
KURILOV, Yuriy. 2019. “Administrative reform in Ukraine: from its origins to
the future” In: Public Administration Aspects. Vol. 7, No. 9-10, pp. 62-
78.
LAPUENTE, Victor; VAN DE WALLE, Steven. 2020. “The eects of new public
management on the quality of public services” In: Governance. Vol. 33,
No. 3, pp. 461-475.
MARTINEZ-VAZQUEZ, Jorge; LAGO-PEÑAS, Santiago; SACCHI, Agnese.
2016. “The impact of scal decentralization: a survey” In: Journal of
Economic Surveys. Vol. 31, No. 4, pp. 1095–1129.
MERGELE, Lukas; WEBER, Michael 2020. “Public employment services
under decentralization: Evidence from a natural experiment” In: Journal
of Public Economics. Vol. 182, No. 2, pp. 104–113.
830
Stanislav V. Zlyvko, Valerii A. Bortniak, Kateryna V. Bortniak, Iryna P. Storozhuk y Roman Z.
Holobutovskyy
Administrative reforms in Eastern Europe: A comparative legal analysis
NEPRAM, Damodar; SINGH, Salam Prakash; JAMAN, Samsur; 2021. “The
Eect of Government Expenditure on Unemployment in India: A State
Level Analy” In: Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business. Vol.
8, No. 3, pp. 0763–0769.
NIEMINEN, Jeremias. 2020. “Decentralized employment services and active
labor market policy: Evidence from Finnish municipal employment
trials”. Master’s thesis. University of Turku. Turku, Finland.
NIKOS, Michalopoulos. 2001. “Trends of administrative reform in Europe:
Towards administrative convergence?” In: International Public
Management Review. Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 39-53.
PSYCHARIS, Yannis; ZOI, Maria; ILIOPOULOU, Stavroula. 2015.
“Decentralization and local government scal autonomy: evidence from
the Greek municipalities” In: Environment and Planning C: Government
and Policy. Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 262–280.
SEROHINA, Natalia O. 2020. “Decentralization and its impact on eective
employment” In: Ekonomika ta Derzava. Vol. 1, 2, No. 14, pp. 79-83.
SUZUKI, K., AVELLANEDA, C. N. 2018. “New Public Management and
Municipal Performance: Do NPM Reforms Boost Performance?”
Available online. In: https://scholarlypublications.universiteitleiden.
nl/handle/1887/80372. Date of consultation: 30/06/2021. Date of
consultation: 30/11/2020.
WEBER, Michael. 2016. The Short-Run and Long-Run Eects of Decentralizing
Public Employment Services. ifo Working Paper Series 209. Leibniz
Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich. Leibniz.
WORLD BANK/ 2019a. Local Government Index. Available online. In:
https://govdata360.worldbank.org/indicators/hc9f5a751?country=
UKR&indicator=41980&countries=BGR,ROU,CZE,LVA,POL,SVN&
viz=line_chart&years=2005,2018. Date of consultation: 30/02/2021.
WORLD BANK. 2019b. Government Eciency. Available online.
In: https://tcdata360.worldbank.org/indicators/h8125e315?country=
ROU&indicator=40979&viz=line_chart&years=2007,2016. Date of
consultation: 30/02/2021.
WORLD BANK. 2021. Employment to Population Ratio, 15+, total (%) (Modeled
ILO Estimate). Available online. In: https://data.worldbank.org/
indicator/SL.EMP.TOTL.SP.ZS?end=2020&locations=RO&start=2005
Date of consultation: 30/02/2021.
831
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 39 Nº 69 (Julio - Diciembre 2021): 814-831
WORLD BANK GROUP. (n. d.) Administrative Decentralization.
Available online. URL: http://www1.worldbank.org/publicsector/
decentralization/admin.htm Date of consultation: 30/02/2021.
WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION. (n. d.). “Health Laws and Universal
Health Coverage.” Available online. In: https://www.who.int/health-
laws/topics/governance-decentralisation/en/#:~:text=There%20
are%20three%20major%20forms,levels%20of%20a%20national%20
government Date of consultation: 30/11/2020.
www.luz.edu.ve
www.serbi.luz.edu.ve
www.produccioncienticaluz.org
Esta revista fue editada en formato digital y publicada
en julio de 2021, por el Fondo Editorial Serbiluz,
Universidad del Zulia. Maracaibo-Venezuela
Vol.39 Nº 69
