The 22nd NISPAcee Annual Conference "Government vs. Governance in
Central and Eastern Europe: From Pre-Weberianism to
Neo-Weberianism?”
May 22-24, 2014,
Budapest, Hungary
The 22nd NISPAcee Annual Conference, organised in
co-operation with the Corvinus University of Budapest, Budapest, Hungary and
the National University of Public Service, Budapest, Hungary, was attended by
350 participants from 41 countries worldwide. This included 21 CEE countries
covered by NISPAcee’s institutional membership.
NISPAcee would like to thank the local organisers, the
Corvinus University of Budapest and the National University of Public Service
for the excellent organisation of the conference, financial support and
preparation of the social events, which created a friendly and pleasant
atmosphere for conference participants.
NISPAcee would also like to thank the programme
coordinators of the conference sessions and working groups for their
contributions to the high scientific and academic value of the entire event.
For the fourth time, NISPAcee included special
Pre-conference Programmes for Young Researchers: Master Class "How to improve
your paper”. The Master Class was conducted by Professor Dr. Michiel de Vries,
Radboud University Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
The conference was opened in the Hungarian Parliament
with welcoming and opening speeches given by representatives of NISPAcee,
Corvinus University of Budapest, National University of Public Service, and
IIAS. The conference programme continued at the Corvinus University with the
working sessions on the main conference theme, Panel on Max Weber and Public
Policy Today, general sessions, meetings of research working groups, EAPAA
session, ASPA-NASPAA-NISPAcee and ASPA panels, panel on Islamic PA and other
panels which enriched the programme of the conference with new information. In
addition to the WGs, NISPAcee organised special sessions which focused on the
current hot topics of PA practice in CEE to be explored and discussed with
practitioners - Colloquium for Practitioners.
Reports of the NISPAcee Working Groups
I. Working Group on Local Government
WG coordinators:
Arto Haveri, School of Management, University of Tampere,
Finland
Gabor Soos, Institute for Political Science (Hungarian
Academy of Sciences, Budapest, Hungary
In line with the general theme of the conference, the 7th
year of the Working Group on Local Government focused on the dynamics between
government- and governance-oriented developments at the local level in Central
and Eastern Europe (CEE) and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS).
The number of applications totalled 38, slightly lower
than in previous years. Twenty-two abstracts were accepted and 15 papers
presented in the four sessions. The geographical coverage was reasonably good.
The biggest group came from Hungary, but there were papers also from Poland,
Romania, Russia, Lithuania, Finland, Slovenia, Slovakia, Latvia and Estonia.
This year too, cross-country comparisons were few, although they were
particularly encouraged. However, two interesting comparative papers were
presented, both connected to the topic of the working group. As with each year,
a set of papers concentrated on local government systems and reforms as a major
determinant of local government development. Issues of good governance and
citizen participation were also covered in several papers.
II. Working Group on e-Government
WG coordinators:
Kristina Reinsalu, Estonian e-Governance Academy,
Tallinn, Estonia
Ljupco Todorovski, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia
This year we received twenty-two abstracts in the first
round of submissions and authors of twelve of these abstracts submitted full
papers, which were included in the final programme. The majority of these
papers addressed the relevant research and/or practical issues related to
e-government and more broadly, using information-communication technology (ICT)
in the public administration domain. Authors of the papers employed appropriate
theoretical and methodological frameworks to approach them. This is contrary to
previous years, when the majority of papers focused on an ad-hoc, descriptive
analysis of a specific ICT-based solution. Authors now compare different ICT
solutions and approaches to problems of public administration in different
sectors, regions or countries. We clustered the papers into four thematic
sessions entitled "Setting goals for e-government”, "Change of procedures and
processes”, "From policies to e-governance” and "Challenges”. More than twenty
participants from numerous countries, including Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Croatia,
Czech Republic, Georgia, Estonia, Hungary, Montenegro, Poland, Romania, Russia,
Serbia, Slovenia, United Kingdom and the United States of America, actively
discussed these topics during the sessions. This year, following the initiative
of John Taylor, the editor of the Information Polity journal, we granted a
best-paper award to the authors of the paper entitled "The Quest for Success of
e-Government: What the Structure and Allocation of IT Spending Tell Us”: Márta
Aranyossy, Adrienn Fekó and András Nemeslaki. They received a one-year
subscription to the Information Polity journal.
III. Working Group on Civil Service
WG coordinators:
Patrycja Joanna Suwaj, Judge, Poland
Hans Rieger, dbb akademie, Germany
With an average of more than 15 – 20 participants in each
session (except the last one – conflicting with a parallel penal session) this
working group was very well attended. The presenters and the participants were
a good mixture coming from both science and practice. This mixture of
participants could also be observed in the presentations, where we had
scientific findings and comparative studies, as well as practical
implementation and project reports.
Some participants join the group for the long-term which
gives the opportunity for further development as well as specialisation.
It was also obvious that the working group hosts a broad
exchange between experts from various countries: old EU member states’
representatives combined with new EU member states’ experts, non-EU member
states’ experts, USA experts, and experts from central and south Asian
countries.
In the warm-up, the participants introduced themselves
and formulated their various expectations. After the warm-up, in order to have
some team spirit in the group, we decided to have a 15-minute presentation and
a 15-minute discussion of each paper which was selected for presentation.
Under the main conference theme "Max Weber” in the WG
"Public service”, different topics were covered (in short):
Legal status of
personnel.
Administrative
reforms and success factors.
Human resources
management.
Gender.
Innovative
competencies.
Civil service
reform Afghanistan.
Retirement
factors.
Labour market
characteristics – private and public Sector employment.
Public service
succession pool.
Job security.
Impact of the
EU in CEE countries.
Many new ideas, especially from the young professionals,
were welcomed and discussed at length.
All papers had clear objectives and also some practical
solutions. Some project reports were presented for the third time, so it was
very interesting to follow the project results and the project implementation.
This presentation concept should be taken into
consideration by NISPAcee as an alternative presentation structure.
Most presentations were very much improved: the
presenters avoided a too broad historical background discussion and came
straight to their message and what was learned from their findings.
Within the discussions, we received new ideas for the WG
in 2015 in Tiblisi. Also, because of more and more overlapping content with new
panels (see Saturday) and other working groups, we decided to come back to the
roots of this Working Group:
- Integrity Management
A linkage to an existing project in South Caucasus
countries will be taken into consideration.
IV. Working Group on Public Administration Reform in
CEECA
WG Coordinators:
Veronica Junjan, University of Twente, Enschede, The
Netherlands
Diana Iancu, National School of Political Studies and
Public Administration, Romania
The theme of the 22nd NISPAcee Annual conference in
Budapest "Government vs. Governance in Central and Eastern Europe” was very
inspiring for the WG IV PAR in CEECA. During the five sessions assigned to our
group, 18 out of the 19 which were originally selected were presented. The
papers were grouped into sessions according to the following central themes:
Contextualisation; Reform Agendas in the Western Balkans and CEE; Effectiveness
in Central Asia and Caucasus; Results in CEE, and Lessons and Trends. Our
audience included practitioners and academics with, on average, 22 participants
per session, and engaged in very lively discussions. Participants brought into
the discussions a variety of practical and personal experiences, theoretical
frameworks, and methodological approaches.
The discussions reached several conclusions. First, it is
important to clarify the context where reforms are being designed and where
they are being implemented. The participants presented diverse theoretical
frameworks and methodologies used to analyse the institutional and social
context where reform efforts are carried out. Second, more reflection is needed
in terms of defining, measuring, and evaluating reform results (again, across
different institutional and social contexts). Difficulties in defining "what do
we measure?” and "how do we measure?” were extensively discussed, especially
when taking into account the multitude of stakeholders (with different
perspectives) active within the governance structures. Third, additional
attention needs to be paid to interpretation issues. Different positions were
exchanged concerning the differences between "myth” and "reality”, as well as
differences between "ideology "and "practice” in evaluating reforms.
International diffusion of measuring techniques and methodologies can be
interpreted, both as an attempt to test and refine theories across different
institutional and social settings, as well as a "socialisation instrument” for
governments aiming to position themselves in an international setting.
The attempts to take stock of the success of the reforms
(however defined) can be interpreted as an endeavour towards speaking the truth
to power. There are different ways of attaining that objective, with different
degrees of success. It is challenging to envisage innovative ways to address
that diversity in order to learn from each other’s experiences - academics and
practitioners alike.
V. Working Group on Internationalisation and Networking
of Public Administration Studies and Civil Servants’ Training Systems
WG coordinator:
Eugenijus Chlivickas, The Training Centre of the Ministry
of Finance of the Republic of Lithuania
Internationalisation and networking processes are one of
the most important conditions for a modernisation of public administration
studies and civil servants’ training systems in the European Union and in the
countries of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). The public administration
studies and civil servants' continuous training systems are closely related to
the strengthening of administrative capacities and new quality creation
according to the new global challenges.
In general the following relevant problems were discussed
in the working group:
· new challenges to develop public administration studies
under conditions of internationalisation and networking;
· progressive experience of public administration studies
accumulated through international practice;
· establishment and development of public servants’
education and training systems;
· development and implementation of national and
international solutions for the improvement of such systems, based on lifelong
learning principles.
The main attention focused on the following issues:
accepting new challenges for the improvement of public servants’ training,
studies and qualification quality; how to make public administration studies
and professional development quality relevant to international standards and
current needs; the importance of internationalisation and networking for
teaching and professional development processes; sharing new experiences
accumulated in CEE countries and through members of the EU, whilst improving
public servants’ qualifications and organising teaching and studies;
international cooperation: its cultivation not only in CEE countries, but also
within the EU and Europe focusing on the EU quality parameters; possibilities
for the application of the experience accumulated by 'old' EU countries as well
as Western countries in CEE countries; opportunities for dissemination and
application of Central and Eastern countries’ experience in other CIS
countries; integration of scientific research elements into processes of
studies, training and qualification improvement by networking and
internationalisation, and the necessity to conduct and expand scientific
researches in the sector of civil servants and public administration
specialists, studies and professional development.
The work in the group in 2014 revealed several problems
of international cooperation development in the area of civil servants’
training and suggested solutions to them. The results of WG 5 were determined
by the main priorities of WG 5 for the year 2015: progressive experience of
public administration studies and civil servants’ training accumulated in world
practice, EU countries and other countries; new challenges, new opportunities
and new teaching technologies which are to be taken into consideration under the
conditions of EU enlargement and networking; analysis of the current situation;
integration of scientific research elements into the processes of studies,
training and qualification improvement by networking and internationalisation;
development of internationalisation of public administration studies and civil
servants’ training systems and implementation of long-term strategies, and the
development and implementation of international programmes and projects.
VI. Working Group on Public Finance and Public Finance
Management
WG Coordinators:
Juraj Nemec, Matej Bel University, Banska Bystrica,
Slovakia
Lucie Sedmihradska, University of Economics in Prague,
Czech Republic
The WG announced two tracks for this conference:
(1) Local government taxation: Tax autonomy versus tax
competition and
(2) "Better” governmental spending as a reaction to the
crisis.
We received six papers prepared according to the research
protocol - three on local taxes and three on public procurement. We also
accepted a range of papers focusing on other different public financial
management and fiscal policy topics.
In the first section three papers were presented and
substantially discussed dealing with tax competition and it was agreed to
continue with this track for the next year. In the framework of the second
track - public procurement - one overview paper and two country case studies
were presented and a few members of the group expressed interest in this topic
for next year’s conference.
The remainder of the sessions discussed a mix of papers
on different public finance and public financial management topics, for example
economic growth, size economies in delivery of local public services,
efficiency of foreign loans, privatisation and many others. Based on the
discussions, we plan to announce at least two specialised research tracks
accompanied by a research protocol for the 2015 conference (local taxation and
public procurement). The research protocols appeared to be a useful tool in
previous years and not only for young scholars in the improvement of their
research and preparation of their papers. At the same time, we announced a call
for groups of scholars who would like to organise own sessions in the framework
of the WG. It is requested that those interested submit a proposal to the WG
coordinators by mid-June. The proposal should include a short description of
the topic, major research questions and a list of interested participants. This
sub-group is, of course, open, but it is better to announce it now to see if we
have at least three confirmed participants.
VII. Working Group on Public Policy Analysis Development
Issues
WG Coordinators:
Lesya Ilchenko-Syuyva, National Academy of Public
Administration, Office of the President of Ukraine
Frans Jorna, Saxion University of Applied Sciences,
Enschede, The Netherlands
The Working Group on Public Policy Analysis Issues
continues its work under the umbrella of the NISPAcee Annual Conferences. This
year the WG on PP received more than 20 applications in the area of the main
fields of interest of the WG. Roughly, the following themes could be
distinguished:
- Knowledge and information in policy analysis.
- Procedures of policy design and coordination.
- Evidence based policy analysis, development and
implementation.
- Case studies of the application of techniques (e.g.
stakeholder analysis, regulatory impact assessment, ex ante impact assessment,
policy evaluation).
- Paths forward and problems in public policy capacity
building.
- Public administration in ensuring good governance.
The Working Group still remained a forum for academics
and practitioners to exchange experiences on how academics can meet the urgent
needs of public servants in practice-oriented studies in preparing and
promoting relevant policy advice, as well as in upgrading academic and training
programmes in public policy analysis.
All in all, 12 papers were selected and actually
completed for presentation during the conference meetings in Budapest. They
were discussed in separate sessions. As not all presenters were able to come to
Budapest, the number of sessions was limited to three sessions focused on:
- General Knowledge and information in policy analysis.
- Democratic Governance and Auditing.
- Implementation and Evaluation.
According to the results of the discussions, the WG
decided to continue the work in the same format but with the accent on the
practical application of the presented results. Co-authored papers written by
academics and practitioners are highly encouraged for the next annual
conference.
VIII. Working Group on Public Administration Education
WG Coordinators:
Calin Hintea, Babes Bolyai University, Romania
Roger Hamlin, Michigan State University, USA
The Working Group held four sessions at the 20th Annual
NISPAcee conference in Budapest, Hungary. A total of 10 papers were presented
in English. All papers had a great deal to offer the NISPAcee community and
advanced the understanding of Public Administration education in Central and Eastern
Europe.
Those who presented papers came from eight countries -
Bulgaria, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, the Russian Federation,
Slovenia, and the United Kingdom. They represented eight different universities
and institutes. The coordinators were from Romania and the USA.
In general, about 20 people attended the working group
sessions. Several active working group members came to all sessions and
participated in all the discussions. In addition to the countries and
universities represented by the paper presenters, there were also participants
from international organisations such as EAPPA and NAPAA. The president of
NAPAA in the US attended all sessions.
The working group began with a full session discussion of
the preliminary findings of EAPPA’s long-term evaluation of accreditation in
CEE.
Almost all working group sessions discussed the aspects
of the competencies required by public administration graduates in CEE. Two
papers discussed general competencies; one paper covered the topic of teaching
English to PA students in Russia and how that leads to a more general
discussion of PA competencies. Another paper looked at comprehensive HR
Development in public administration. Another looked specifically at the
training of future public administrators in information security issues, a
growing area of required competence. Another paper looked at the subject from
the point of view of employer branding and yet another paper provided a
thorough research effort to evaluate PA education from the point of view of the
student.
The preliminary conclusions of the working group’s
discussions were that much more needs to be done to comprehensively define the
competency needs of public administrators, keep competencies up-to-date, and
integrate that discussion into the accreditation process to make accreditation
more competency-based.
For next year’s conference, the working group would like
to define and discuss the most critical issues facing public administration
education over the next 10 years. We may invite specific individuals to write
some of the papers.
IX. Working Group on Local Public Policies
WG Coordinators:
Daniel Klimovsky, Technical University of Košice,
Slovakia,
Franco Becchis, Turin School of Local Regulation, Italy
The Working Group on Local Public Policies was only established
in 2013. Generally, the working group intends to focus on the issue of the
regulation of local services – e.g. waste, water, transport, local energy
networks, public assets, sports facilities, welfare policies – and their
delivery in CEE countries where the transition from the planned economy has set
strange challenges to the relationship between local governments and markets.
The working group organised four sessions within the
programme of the 22nd NISPAcee Annual Conference. In total, 13 papers were
presented during the working group's sessions. Authors of those papers dealt
with different issues linked to local policy making. The presentations were
grouped into three sessions according to their main focus:
1) Institutions, actors, incentives framing local public
policies: instruments for analysis and practical case studies.
2) Inter-municipal cooperation and resulting governance
issues.
3) Governance of local public budget.
Whilst some authors dealt with structural and capacity
issues of local services regulation, certain others dealt with quality issues.
Some common features emerged from the various presentations, namely: the
importance of the local dimension in policy implementation; the need of
increasing capacities of local institutions; the importance of trust as the
"fuel” for local public policy implementation and to establish fruitful
relationships between local actors. Discussions that followed the paper
presentations were fruitful, and led to new perspectives as well as potential interpretations
of presented data. This point is very important in terms of sustainability of
the working group and the cooperation between its members.
X. Working Group on Good Governance
WG Coordinators:
Tetyana Malyarenko, Donetsk State University of
Management, Ukraine
Focused on the links between good governance and the
human rights based approach to development in countries of Central and Eastern
Europe and post-soviet countries, the participants of the Working Group
discussed both the theoretical and practical issues of public administration
under transition. Whereas some presenters analysed state-building and the
constitutional/public administration reforms in newly independent states
through the framework of implementation of the principles of human rights and
good governance, other presenters contributed to empirical research and
comparative analysis of good governance in public management organisations at
the local and national levels and, in particular, in the justice system. This
variety of research interests of the WG participants allowed us to explore the
many notions of justice, the importance and role of justice in state building,
and conflict prevention, as well as the functions of the key players involved
in providing justice. The Working Group participants came from academia, civil
society and policy community of countries of Central and Eastern Europe, the
former Soviet Union and Afghanistan.
XI. Working Group on Transition, Change and Uncertainty
WG Coordinators:
György Gajduschek, Corvinus University, Budapest, Hungary
Eva Zemandl, Central European University, Budapest,
Hungary
The 2014 NISPAcee conference in Budapest provided the
occasion to inaugurate the Working Group XI on Transition, Change and
Uncertainty. This new working group deals with the often unpredictable nature
of the CEE/FIS transitional context. It explores the consequences of
large-scale changes and prolonged uncertainty (i.e. in a political, economic,
and systemic sense, etc.) in CEE/FIS countries on administrative behaviour and,
thus, on the wider governance environment. The working group convened during
two sessions on Friday, May 23rd. Sessions featured papers presented by
participants from Bulgaria, Hungary, Russia, and Afghanistan, covering key
cross-cutting areas of research including the role of "governance” and
"network” paradigms in CEE/FIS and civil society-government relations. Three of
the papers also dealt with policy sector reforms in education and economy.
The discussion periods—running from 30 to 40 minutes
each—generated a great deal of lively debate and information exchange. With
regard to the working group’s key themes of change and uncertainty,
participants raised and debated the following questions: What is uncertainty?
If we are always surrounded by uncertainty anyway, is it really a matter of
concern? How much uncertainty can one society tolerate? What are the paradigms
for dealing with uncertainty? In response to the last question, one presenter promoted
the notion of "strategic governance” and proposed that a panel be devoted to
this topic at next year’s NISPAcee conference. Another participant floated the
notion of a "search for a national idea” as a way to address uncertainty during
phases of transition. There was another extensive debate concerning the role of
civil society in Russia and FIS countries, as well as information being
exchanged about the nature of civil society-government relations in different
countries. More generally, participants also debated the importance of western
governance paradigms and participation in the consolidation of CEE/FIS
societies and political systems.
The remainder of the report is structured as follows: the
second section presents the premise and key aims of the working group; the
third section maps out the main points and common threads raised in the papers
with regard to each of the working group’s four questions, and the last section
proposes an agenda for advancing the working group in the framework of the 2015
NISPAcee conference.
The working group focuses on the following four
questions:
· What are the large-scale changes prolonging uncertainty
in CEE? What are the causes?
· What are the behavioural implications of frequent
change and prolonged uncertainty on administrative personnel and leadership in
CEE/FIS public organisations? What are the effects on administrative behaviour,
culture, and ethos?
· Are large-scale changes and prolonged uncertainty
compatible with the implementation of different governing models (e.g.,
Weberian, NPM, governance, etc. etc.)? Is change necessarily undesirable?
· If and when deemed necessary, how can organisations foster
internal stability in a climate of sustained uncertainty? What best practices
exist in the region?
In general, the identified sources of prolonged
uncertainty in the CEE/FIS context can be whittled down to the following
overarching themes—each presenting an opportunity for further exploration
within the NISPAcee framework: unresolved issues concerning fundamental
political, societal, and institutional systems and structures, lack of
continuity and maturity of reforms, short-termism, lack of political consensus
and long-term strategising, radicalisation, lack of trust (political and
societal), conflict (political, societal), radicalisation, and low government
capacity. Many of the identified themes included short-termism, lack of
continuity and long-term strategising, lack of trust, and conflict. In general,
the papers and subsequent discussions recognised the merits of western models
(e.g., Weberian public administration, governance), but also highlighted the
incompatibility between the political and social institutional reality on the
ground and the wholesale implementation of these models.
XII. Working Group on Administration and Management of
Internal Security Agencies
WG Coordinators:
Sander Pollumae, Ministry of Justice of Estonia, Tallinn,
Estonia
Gabor Kovacs, National University of Public Service,
Budapest, Hungary
The NISPAcee Working Group on Administration and
Management of Internal Security Agencies was founded during the 20th NISPAcee
annual conference with the aim to bring together researchers and practitioners
of different areas of internal security (police, prison and other agencies).
The need for such a working group emanated from the lack of such a forum and
the importance of the field. After a short introductory period this WG has been
revived this year due to the initiative of the National University of Public
Service (NUPS), Budapest. Despite the very short organisational timeframe, the
topics covered by this WG met the interests of many paper-applicants, becoming
one of the "largest” WG’s with 22 papers presented during the three days by
Estonian, Slovenian and Hungarian experts.
The presenters – representing mostly the Faculty of Law
Enforcement and the Institution of Disaster Management of NUPS – analysed the
WG topic in strategic, institutional, legislative and executive aspects
pointing out the successful results and also the difficulties of this area. For
example, in an overview of the recovery system of natural disasters, István
Endrődi introduced the possibilities of using ICT and embracing civil society
into the management of civil society; the main objectives and pillars of the
European Internal Security Strategy; the role of the border-state of the
Schengen Area; the psychological effects of extreme weather conditions and the
use of the CAF model in the Slovenian Police Service. Besides introducing the
status quo in this field, presenters highlighted the trends, possible future
perspectives and obstacles, and also the main goals of this area.
The Estonian and Hungarian WG coordinators, working in
cooperation, have found the work and the outcome of the WG successful,
effective and beneficial "producing” some added value in the analysed field.
Considering immigration issues as the main focus for next year and the
possibility of contracting out tasks of internal security agencies as the main
topic, the coordinators of the working group decided that the working group
should continue and that it is able to contribute to the next annual
conference. Therefore, the coordinators plan to organise this WG again next
year in Georgia, with the hope of being able to cover more heterogeneous
issues, presented by a more international, multicultural expert network
representing more countries.
The main goal of the WG coordinators is to create an
international expert network in this field as a platform for further (joint)
research, exchange of information and best practices in this special field.
The conference programme consisted of following Panel
Sessions which enriched the programme of the conference with new information,
new initiatives and new opportunities for collaboration with external
organisations as well as within NISPAcee:
- Panel: Max Weber and Public Policy Today.
- Joint ASPA-NASPAA-NISPAcee Study Group on Cutback
Management.
- Governance of Territories and Regional Development:
Best Concept and Practices.
- EAPAA Information Panel on the Accreditation of Public
Administration Programmes.
- ASPA Panel: Interest Groups, Public Protest and the
Shaping of Public Policy
- Projects Relevant for the Region.
- Islamic Public Administration.
- The Next Innovation Frontier in Public Service
Education.
- New Strategies of Public Governance for Changing
Societies: a China-Hungary Comparative Approach.
- 25 years of change: Evaluating the Hungarian
development path.
- Politisation or Political Control of Bureaucracy: Where
should we draw the Line?
Colloquium for Practitioners
Coordinator:
Michiel de Vries, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen,
The Netherlands
The colloquium consisted of two sessions. In the first
session, public-private relations were discussed and during the second, the
difficulties of administrative reform. The goal of both sessions was not to
discuss papers, but to discuss the topics as such. This proved to be very
interesting and all participants were enthusiastic about the approach. During
both sessions there were a large number of participants who enjoyed the idea of
discussing the topical themes instead of scholarly papers.
One of the peculiarities of the colloquium was that
although the sessions were primarily meant for practitioners, the majority of
the attendants were academicians. This was, of course, in accordance with the
small number of practitioners attending the conference as a whole, but nevertheless
something might be done to attract more practitioners to this colloquium next
year, if it continues. One of the ideas is to have an extra session in which
the winners of the EPSA award present what they did in order to receive that
award and to discuss these practices.
The NISPAcee Business Meeting was also, as usual, on the
conference programme. The annual reports (activities, finances) and future
plans were presented to representatives of the NISPAcee members and other
participating guests.
Since the NISPAcee President, Mirko Vintar, completed his
elected period, the Steering Committee elected a new president from members of
the Committee – Marius Profiroiu.
NISPAcee Awards
During the 22nd NISPAcee conference, the following awards
were presented:
The Alena Brunovska Award for Teaching Excellence in
Public Administration was given to Prof. Rainer Kattel, Professor of Innovation
Policy and Technology Governance and Head of the Programme at the Ragnar Nurkse
School of Innovation and Governance, Tallinn University of Technology, Tallinn,
Estonia.
The NISPAcee Merit Awards were presented to Prof. Michiel
de Vries, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands, for his
substantial support and contribution toNISPAcee's development.
The Mzia Mikeladze PhD Thesis Award was presented toKülli Sarapuu, Ragnar Nurkse School of Innovation and Governance, Tallinn
University of Technology, Estonia for the PhD thesis "Mapping and Explaining
Post-Communist Development of Administrative Structure: The Case of the
Estonian Public Administration 1990-2010".
The Best Comparative Paper presented at the Conferencewas presented to the winners of two papers:
Riin Savi, Aleksandrs Cepilov, Ragnar Nurkse School of
Innovation and Governance, Tallinn University of Technology for the paper "The
Role of Agencies and Street-Level Bureaucrats in Cutback Management: Comparing
the Cases of Estonia and Latvia” and
Walter Kickert, Erasmus University
Rotterdam, The Netherlands, Tiina Randma-Liiv, Riin Savi, Tallinn University of
Technology, Estonia for the paper "Politics of Fiscal Consolidation in Europe:
A Comparative Analysis”.
The Award for "NISPAcee’s Best Graduate Student Paper”
was presented to the winner Ms. Palina Prysmakova, Florida International
University, Miami, USA for the paper
"Chinese Loans for Infrastructure Projects in Developing
Countries: The Connection between Short-Term Payoffs to the Chinese Local
Governments and Long-Term Obligations of the Belarusian Nation”.
|