Comparative analysis of the quality of European institutions 2003-2009: convergence or divergence?

This paper gives a comparative cross-country analysis of the quality of the institutional framework that underpins economic governance in European countries. The paper attempts to identify the trends of change in the quality of institutions and determine if there is a convergence in the quality of EU institutions. The countries included in the analysis are selected groups of EU countries and the Western Balkan Countries. The analysis is based on the results of the executive officers’ opinion surveys conducted by the World Economic Forum for the Global Competitiveness Index 2003-2009. In order to identify the relative quality of public institutions and the trend towards convergence/divergence for different clusters of EU countries, a three-pillar composite indicator of institutional quality was constructed from available WEF indicators. The analysis was conducted at the aggregated level as well as for individual countries and pillars, measured in terms of difference to an average rank of survey response in the EU-14 + EU-8 members

Policy Performance and Governance Capacities in the OECD and EU. Sustainable Governance Indicators 2018. Bertelsmann Studies

This year marks the release of the third edition of the Sustainable Governance Indicators (SGI). The highly developed industrial nations continue to face enormous challenges, due not only to aftereffects of the global economic and financial crisis and the associated labor-market and sociopolitical upheavals. In other areas too, these nations look forward to a future rife with complex problems. Aging and shrinking populations, environmental and climatic changes, and social, cultural and technological shifts are placing democracies under massive pressure to adapt. As early as the first edition of the SGI, it was evident that despite often-similar reform pressures, political systems’ approaches and track records show significant variance. And in times of advancing globalization, the need for effective governance driven by capable leadership remains important. The previous SGI editions have also underscored the fact that this steering capability depends critically on the ability to combine short-term responsiveness with long-term resolve in policymaking

STUDY ON COMPETITIVENESS AND CORRUPTION IN ROMANIA. DEPENDENCES AND INTERDEPENDENCES AT MACRO AND MICRO LEVEL

Competitiveness represents the long term objective of any particular entity – country or firm; that’s why all the strategies – no mater the level – aim to obtain and maintain competitiveness. But, if we look closer to the world competitiveness ranking, we can see an important impediment of Romania’s competitiveness (at macro and micro economic level as well): generalized corruption. There are some well proven (through theoretical and methodological studies) dependencies and interdependencies between competitiveness and corruption – at national and firm level as well – which we would like to emphasize by this paper for a better understanding of the context and in order to extract some lessons for the future. Classification-JEL: K4, L2, N4, O1national and firm competitiveness; global competitiveness index; private and public corruption; corporate corruption/ethics indices; corruption perception index

Corruption, Governance and Security: Challenges for the Rich Countries and the World

Traditionally, national governance and corruption challenges have been seen as: i) particularly daunting in the poorer countries, with the richer world viewed as exemplary; ii) anchored within a legalistic framework and focused on formal institutions, iii) a challenge within public sectors, and, iv) divorced from global governance or security issues - seen as separate fields. Through an empirical approach based on the analysis of the 2004 survey of enterprises by the World Economic Forum, we challenge these notions and portray a more complex reality. We suggest that the undue emphasis on narrow legalism has obscured more subtle yet costly manifestations of misgovernance, which afflict rich countries as well. Emphasis is also given to measurement and analysis of misgovernance when the rules of the game have been captured by the elite through undue influence. We construct a new set of ethics indices, encompassing forms of (legal) corruption not subject to measurement in conventional (illegal) corruption indicators. It is found that manifestations of legal corruption may be more prevalent than illegal forms, such as outright bribery, and particularly so in richer countries. Further, we find that governance constraints, and corruption in particular, is a key determinant of a country's global competitiveness. These findings challenge traditional notions of what constitutes the country's 'investment climate', and who shapes it. It is also found that illegal forms of corruption continue to be prevalent in the interaction between transnationals of the rich world and the public sectors in many emerging countries. Finally, we suggest an empirical link between governance and security issues

United Nations Development Assistance Framework for Kenya

The United Nations Development Assistance Framework (2014-2018) for Kenya is an expression of the UN's commitment to support the Kenyan people in their self-articulated development aspirations. This UNDAF has been developed according to the principles of UN Delivering as One (DaO), aimed at ensuring Government ownership, demonstrated through UNDAF's full alignment to Government priorities and planning cycles, as well as internal coherence among UN agencies and programmes operating in Kenya. The UNDAF narrative includes five recommended sections: Introduction and Country Context, UNDAF Results, Resource Estimates, Implementation Arrangements, and Monitoring and Evaluation as well as a Results and Resources Annex. Developed under the leadership of the Government, the UNDAF reflects the efforts of all UN agencies working in Kenya and is shaped by the five UNDG programming principles: Human Rights-based approach, gender equality, environmental sustainability, capacity development, and results based management. The UNDAF working groups have developed a truly broad-based Results Framework, in collaboration with Civil Society, donors and other partners. The UNDAF has four Strategic Results Areas: 1) Transformational Governance encompassing Policy and Institutional Frameworks; Democratic Participation and Human Rights; Devolution and Accountability; and Evidence-based Decision-making, 2) Human Capital Development comprised of Education and Learning; Health, including Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH), Environmental Preservation, Food Availability and Nutrition; Multi-sectoral HIV and AIDS Response; and Social Protection, 3) Inclusive and Sustainable Economic Growth, with Improving the Business Environment; Strengthening Productive Sectors and Trade; and Promoting Job Creation, Skills Development and Improved Working Conditions, and 4) Environmental Sustainability, Land Management and Human Security including Policy and Legal Framework Development; and Peace, Community Security and Resilience. The UNDAF Results Areas are aligned with the three Pillars (Political, Social and Economic) of the Government's Vision 2030 transformational agenda

Annulment proceedings and multilevel judicial conflict

This open access book provides an exhaustive picture of the role that annulment conflicts play in the EU multilevel system. Based on a rich dataset of annulment actions since the 1960s and a number of in-depth case studies, it explores the political dimension of annulment litigation, which has become an increasingly relevant judicial tool in the struggle over policy content and decision-making competences. The book covers the motivations of actors to turn policy conflicts into annulment actions, the emergence of multilevel actors’ litigant configurations, the impact of actors’ constellations on success in court, as well as the impact of annulment actions on the multilevel policy conflicts they originate from

Imagining the Past - Remembering the Future

At its most general level the author\u27s critique is captured in the title of this Comment. In his view, Edley and Sunstein imagine the past of administrative law that represents but a partial understanding of where we have been and where we have come. They then propose a future that is, he fears, made up primarily of the recollection and extension of reforms that have already been attempted. Thus, their arguments have modest capacities, if applied generally, to do more good than harm

The Enlightenment of Administrative Law: Looking Inside the Agency for Legitimacy

This article’s investigation into the “agency for legitimacy” proceeds in five steps: Part I introduces the concept of “administrative constitutionalism,” which encompasses the debate over what should be the role and nature of public administration to ensure its legitimacy. It then lays out the elements of the rational-instrumental and deliberative-constitutive paradigms and explains how they contribute to administrative constitutionalism respectively from the outside-in and inside-out. Part II provides a brief history of administrative constitutionalism, which reveals there have been ongoing tensions between two paradigms—and thus between outside in and inside out accountability—since the 1880s. Part III elaborates on the authors’ argument that the current emphasis on the rational-instrumental model has been administrative constitutionalism unsustainable. Part IV argues that acknowledging and developing the deliberative-constitutive paradigm will strengthen administrative constitutionalism by admitting the existence of agency discretion and by looking for realistic ways to make it accountable. Finally, Part V offers a case study in how the deliberative-constitutive paradigm can contribute to administrative constitutionalism.The Kay Bailey Hutchison Center for Energy, Law, and Busines