Domestic and external factors affecting the management and sustainability of change.
The coordinators have identified the  following set of problems:
lack of common understanding and expectations of the aims of PAR projects;
confusions over the terminology used and methodologies proposed (Anglicised terms like ‘governance’ and ‘capacity-building’ do not mean the same to people with different professional or technical backgrounds, and when translated into different languages);
suspicion that many foreign consultants have only technical qualifications, and lack necessary understanding of the historical and cultural setting in which they work on mission;
recipient governments and beneficiaries are often not as willing or capable to implement projects as external donors suppose, and need, them to be;
it is often far from clear who the real beneficiaries are intended to be, while there is often limited opportunity for those outside the state administration to obtain information about projects or to make their own views known;
the objectives of PAR, and standards of ‘best practice’ or ‘benchmarking’, often exceed what is normally expected or achieved in the states acting as donors or ‘norm-setters’ themselves;
generally the problems of managing projects and making them sustainable have been under-estimated;
fixed ideological perspectives on both sides have deflected projects from meeting the real needs of PAR, and priorities of public policy, in the countries concerned;
the needs of reform in those states that have not already acceded to the EU, or do not qualify for, or seek, membership, differ in crucial respects from those in the new member states of EU from CEE and thus need special attention.

It was suggested that NISPACEE provides an ideal forum in which to investigate such claims across a number of different affected countries, and to convene a group of experienced and interested professionals to begin a search for explanations and possible solutions.

Paper: Addressing implementation issues and improving technical assistance to public administration reform in Russia
Author(s):
Maya Gusarova, World Bank Russia Country Office, Moscow, Russian Federation
Tony Verheijen, World Bank Yelena Dobrolyubova, World Bank Maya Gusarova, World Bank / DFID Donor Secretariat Natalia Ivanova, World Bank / DFID Donor Secretariat
Presenter(s):

Paper: Sustainable state reform
Author(s):
Frits Van Den Berg, Patom, Gouda, Netherlands
Presenter(s):

Paper: The core group cycle – a robust and flexible approach to public administration reform successfully tested in Russia and Ukraine
Author(s):
Karin Plokker, Nicolaas Witsen Foundation, Bussum, Netherlands
Presenter(s):

Paper: Governance innovation through network: the case of Saudi Arabian general investment authority
Author(s):
Khalid Al-Yahya, The Dubai School of Government, Dubai, United Arab Emirates
Presenter(s):

Paper: The politics behind aiding administrative reform. Swedish politicians’ views on the technical assistance to CEE countries during their transition process:
Author(s):
Michiel de Vries, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, Netherlands
Iwona Sobis, Goteborg University, Goteborg, Sweden
Iwona Sobis & Michiel S. de Vries Iwona Sobis University of Skovde Sweden iwona.sobis@his.se Michiel S. de Vries Radboud University Nijmegen The Netherlands m.devries@fm.ru.nl
Presenter(s):