The 29th NISPAcee Annual Conference

Conference photos available

Conference photos available

In the conference participated 317 participants

Conference programme published

Almost 250 conference participants from 36 countries participated

Conference Report

The 28th NISPAcee Annual Conference cancelled

Excellent conference. I really enjoyed the papers, speakers, schedule and location and great staff!

D.B., United States, 27th NISPAcee Annual Conference 2019, Prague

...relating to public administration and policy. Good opportunities for networking.

N.D., Georgia, 27th NISPAcee Annual Conference 2019, Prague

Excellent participants, argument-driven discussions, impartial and supportive Chairs in the Working Group.

D.G., Republic of North Macedonia, 27th NISPAcee Annual Conference 2019, Prague

...to detail and I really enjoyed the supportive and encouraging atmosphere there. Thank you!

R.B., Lithuania, 27th NISPAcee Annual Conference 2019, Prague

...both in terms of academic quality and logistics, and also social events. It was a true joy.

E.Z., Bulgaria, 27th NISPAcee Annual Conference 2019, Prague

...The special programmes were really excellent and we took home many varied experiences.

P.N., Hungary, 27th NISPAcee Annual Conference 2019, Prague

...Sessions were interesting, scholars were engaging and all the social events were amazing!

B.K., Kazakhstan, 26th NISPAcee Annual Conference 2018, Iasi

Excellent organization, excellent food. Compliments to the organizers, they did a wonderful job!

V.J., Netherlands, 26th NISPAcee Annual Conference 2018, Iasi

...I must say that the PhD pre-conference seminar was the most useful seminar of my life. Very well...

K.V., Czech Republic, 26th NISPAcee Annual Conference 2018, Iasi

... I would even argue that they are the very best - both in terms of scientific content and also entertainment…

P.W., Denmark, 26th NISPAcee Annual Conference 2018, Iasi

An opportunity to learn from other researchers and other countries' experiences on certain topics.

G.A.C., Hungary, 25th Conference 2017, Kazan

Very well organised, excellent programme and fruitful discussions.

M.M.S., Slovakia, 25th Conference 2017, Kazan

The NISPAcee conference remains a very interesting conference.

M.D.V., Netherlands, 25th Conference 2017, Kazan

Thank you for the opportunity to be there, and for the work of the organisers.

D.Z., Hungary, 24th Conference 2016, Zagreb

Well organized, as always. Excellent conference topic and paper selection.

M.S., Serbia, 23rd Conference 2015, Georgia

Perfect conference. Well organised. Very informative.

M.deV., Netherlands, 22nd Conference 2014, Hungary

Excellent conference. Congratulations!

S. C., United States, 20th Conference 2012, Republic of Macedonia

Thanks for organising the pre-conference activity. I benefited significantly!

R. U., Uzbekistan, 19th Conference, Varna 2011

Each information I got, was received perfectly in time!

L. S., Latvia, 21st Conference 2013, Serbia

The Conference was very academically fruitful!

M. K., Republic of Macedonia, 20th Conference 2012, Republic of Macedonia

 :: Anonymous user Login / Register 

Optimised for Tablet | Smartphone
WG3:  Public Administration Reform in CEE and CA

WG coordinators: 

  • Dr. Diana-Camelia Iancu, Faculty of Public Administration, National University of Political Studies and Public Administration, Bucharest, Romania, dciancu@gmail.com

Diana-Camelia Iancu is a Senior Lecturer of European Governance and serves as Dean of the Faculty of Public Administration at the National School of Political Studies and Public Administration. She was public policy consultant for different international donors (OECD, World Bank Group) and managed a European Social Fund project dealing with blended learning and quality assessment of public administration teaching programmes in Romania. Her research interests include international development and administrative capacity building in transitional countries. 



  • Dr. Veronica Junjan, Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Behavioural, Management and Social Sciences, University of Twente,  Enschede, The Netherlands, V.Junjan@utwente.nl

Assistant Professor at the Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Behavioural, Management and Social Science, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands. Her current research focuses on investigating decision-making processes and public performance management, particularly within the mechanisms and dynamics of public sector reform associated with EU multi-level governance. Since 2008 she has been involved as co-Chair in the coordination of the work of, first the Panel, then the Working Group on Public Administration Reform in Central and Eastern Europe and Central Asia.
 
Call for papers
 
The last decades have been severely altered by environmental challenges, financial crisis and threats to democracy building and consolidation. Currently, the entire world is fight the covid-19 pandemic, whose effects on government policy and policy-making will undoubtedly be seen in the coming months (and years).   All these events, and many more, have led (and also accompanied) the transformation of the welfare state in both well-established and transitional democracies. As advocated by the literature on public management reforms and citizen participation, citizens have become active players in the quest for viable solutions for better governance. In fact, recent works conceptualise (digital) participation and (representative) co-production of public services (Brandsen and Honingh, 2016; Osborne, 2018; Eriksson, 2019; Lember et al. 2019; Verschuere et al. 2019).

WG III Public Administration Reform in CEE and CA is interested in investigating the different means and solutions for citizen empowerment and their collaboration with (sub) national governments towards developing and implementing policy reforms. Good and bad practices are equally relevant: understanding the reasons for success as well as failures in policies with the involvement of citizens’ help not only develop the theory further, but can also provide lessons for future societal transformations. Our focus on Central and Eastern Europe as well as the Caucasus ensures a diversity of contexts, which may lead to interesting variations in the current theoretical paradigms of participation and co-production of services.

In 2021, the sessions of our WG aim to explore the following two directions:

1.    How do governments presently organise citizen involvement along the different phases of policy cycle, from problem identification to evaluation? To what extent do they update their reform strategies and instruments for ensuring good governance and with what visible outcomes? And, what consequences has the recent pandemic had on the partnership of governments with their own citizens?
2.    How can governments make citizens trust them for the right reasons and governmental organisations trust each other to attain the common good? What are the factors and the strategies that support or impede citizens in organising to make their voices heard?

Successful abstract submissions need to include the following sections: a) review of the relevant literature, b) a clear research question; c) description of the methodology, and d) short discussion of the expected results. For policy papers, the abstract needs to include: a) the overview of the policy problem, b) a short account of the existent alternatives, and c) the proposed recommendations. A variety of research designs and data collection methods are appreciated.

All contributors invited to join our sessions in Ljubljana will have the opportunity to discuss their papers with the Chairs, appointed discussants and invited participants. The Chairs expect that a number of papers will be invited to contribute to a joint-publication of the WG, dedicated to the existing challenges in ensuring a transparent and open public administration across the globe.

References:

  • Brandsen, T., & Honingh, M. (2016). Distinguishing Different Types of Coproduction: A Conceptual Analysis Based on the Classical Definitions. Public Administration Review, 76(3), pp. 427-435.
  • Eriksson, Erik M.  (2019) Representative co-production: broadening the scope of the public service logic, Public Management Review, 21:2, pp.291-314.
  • Lember, V., Brandsen, T., & Tõnurist, P. (2019). The potential impacts of digital technologies on co-production and co-creation. Public Management Review, 21(11), pp.1665-1686.
  • Osborne, S. 2018. From Public Service-dominant Logic to Public Service Logic: Are Public Service Organizations Capable of Co-production and Value Co-creation? Public Management Review 20 (2): pp.225–231.
  • Verschuere B., Brandsen T., Johnston K. (2019) Civil Society and Citizens: From the Margins to the Heart of Public Administration Research. In: Ongaro E. (eds) Public Administration in Europe. Governance and Public Management. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, pp. 193-202.