"Personal Post-doctoral Research Funding" project PUTJD130
PUTJD130 "The Politics of Public Administration Reform in Democracy Promotion: An Interpretive Policy Analysis of the EU's Eastern Partnership Program (1.09.2015−31.08.2017)", Kristina Muhhina, University of Tartu, Faculty of Social Sciences, Johan Skytte Institute of Political Studies.
PUTJD130
Avaliku halduse reform ja demokraatia edendamine: Euroopa Liidu Idapartnerlusprogrammi tõlgendav poliitikaanalüüs
The Politics of Public Administration Reform in Democracy Promotion: An Interpretive Policy Analysis of the EU's Eastern Partnership Program
1.09.2015
31.08.2017
R&D project
Personal Post-doctoral Research Funding
Field of researchSubfieldCERCS specialityFrascati Manual specialityPercent
2. Culture and Society2.13. Political Science and AdministrationS170 Political and administrative sciences 5.4. Other social sciences [anthropology (social and cultural) and ethnology, demography, geography (human, economic and social), town and country planning, management, law, linguistics, political sciences, sociology, organisation and methods, miscellaneous social sciences and interdisciplinary, methodological and historical S&T activities relating to subjects in this group. Physical anthropology, physical geography and psychophysiology should normally be classified with the natural sciences]100,0
PeriodSum
01.09.2017−31.08.201763 420,00 EUR
63 420,00 EUR

Käesoleva uurimistöö eesmärgiks oli mõista avaliku halduse (AH) reformiabi võimalusi ja piiranguid demokraatia edendamisel Euroopa Liidu (EL) naabruspoliitikas. Selleks viidi läbi ELi Idapartnerlusprogrammi (IP) tõlgendav poliitikaanalüüs Gruusia ja Armeenia näitel. Uurimuses rakendati narratiivianalüüsi, mille käigus vastati järgmisele uurimisküsimusele: Kuidas IP erinevad osapooled loovad AH reformi tähendusi läbi vastastikku üksteist mõjutavate hea valitsemise narratiivide ja millised on erilaadsete tõlgendusviiside tagajärjed Euroopa naabruspoliitika tulemslikkusele idanaabruse riikides? Projekti tulemusena leiti, et AH reformiabi konstrueeritakse läbi mitme omavahel konkureeriva narratiivi. Samaaegselt ELi domineeriva poliitikanarratiiviga, mis defineerib hea valitsemise läbi modernse riikluse arendamise, seaduspärasuse tagamise ja majandusarengu edendamise, mõjutavad reformipraktikaid IP huvigruppide poolt kasutatavad lood, mis tuginevad alternatiivsetele hea valitsemise representatsioonidele. Nende seas ilmneb ELi narratiivi kriitika, mis viitab algselt laienemise tarbeks loodud uus-weberiaanliku AH reformiabistrateegia diferentseerimise vajadusele naabruspoliitika tarbeks. Lisaks viitavad mõningate IP osapoolte reforminarratiivid vajadusele vaadata ümber AH arengut toetavad meetmed, mis hõlmaks peale riikliku haldusorganisatsiooni tugevdamise ka senisest enam selliseid teemasid nagu haldustegevuse legitiimsus, riigivõimuharude omavaheline tasakaal ja kohalik omavalitsus. Viimaks, eduka demokratiseerumisprosessi toetamiseks IP riikides peaks ELi AH reformiabi senisest enam olema seotud teiste demokraatia edendamise instrumentidega. Selleks tuleks esmajoones tähelepanu pöörata et reformipraktikad, mille käigus edendatakse Lääneriikidest pärinevaid AH mudeleid arvestaksid naabruspoliitika riikide kontekstiga ning aitaksid välja arendada funktsionaalseid demokraatliku valitsemise formaate, mis tagaksid AH legitiimsuse ja aruandluse.
The purpose of the research project was to understand the prospects and limitations of public administration reform (PAR) assistance in the EU’s democracy promotion by carrying out an interpretive policy analysis of the Eastern Partnership Program (EaP) in Georgia and Armenia. The study featured a narrative inquiry of PAR in the EaP framework guided by the following research question: How is the meaning of PAR constructed through various narratives of good governance interacting between the actors who inhabit the EaP policy space, and what are the implications for the success of the European Neighborhood Policy (ENP) in the Eastern neighborhood? The findings of the study showed the narrative nature of good governance promotion and indicated several competing narratives of PAR in the EaP policy space. While the EU’s narrative of legally constituted state essentializes and universalizes statism, legalism, and economism as constitutive elements of good governance in the EaP, the contending stories and nonstories of reforming PA put forward by policy-relevant stakeholders also rely on alternative meanings of good governance. Among them the narrative of critique of the legally constituted state points to the potential limitations of the enlargement-oriented perspective to PAR in the ENP, and the need for PAR assistance strategies that go beyond Neo-Weberian state-building. Also, some PAR-participants engage topics to talk about reforming governance that fall outside the scope of the dominant policy story such as input legitimacy, reform of political institutions, and local governments. Finally, the results of this study underscore the need for a better match between the types of institutions being built for steering collective action and providing public goods/services in the EaP countries, and the accompanying arrangements that allow for effective articulation of public demands, legitimacy in administrative action, and accountability in the exercise of public power.
The purpose of the research project was to understand the prospects and limitations of public administration reform (PAR) assistance in the EU’s democracy promotion by carrying out an interpretive policy analysis of the Eastern Partnership Program (EaP) in Georgia and Armenia. The study featured a narrative inquiry of PAR in the EaP framework guided by the following research question: How is the meaning of PAR constructed through various narratives of good governance interacting between the actors who inhabit the EaP policy space, and what are the implications for the success of the European Neighborhood Policy (ENP) in the Eastern neighborhood? The findings of the study showed the narrative nature of good governance promotion and indicated several competing narratives of PAR in the EaP policy space. While the EU’s narrative of legally constituted state essentializes and universalizes statism, legalism, and economism as constitutive elements of good governance in the EaP, the contending stories and nonstories of reforming PA put forward by policy-relevant stakeholders also rely on alternative meanings of good governance. Among them the narrative of critique of the legally constituted state points to the potential limitations of the enlargement-oriented perspective to PAR in the ENP, and the need for PAR assistance strategies that go beyond Neo-Weberian state-building. Also, some PAR-participants engage topics to talk about reforming governance that fall outside the scope of the dominant policy story such as input legitimacy, reform of political institutions, and local governments. Finally, the results of this study underscore the need for a better match between the types of institutions being built for steering collective action and providing public goods/services in the EaP countries, and the accompanying arrangements that allow for effective articulation of public demands, legitimacy in administrative action, and accountability in the exercise of public power.