Public Participation at the Local Level Daniel Klimovský Cluj Napoca, 6 February 2014.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Disability Management PSAC National Health & Safety Conference 2013 Mental Health at Work – We Are All Affected.
Advertisements

BFUG Work Program on QA Agenda Gayane Harutyunyan Basel,
Civil Society Days Strengthening democratic spaces for civil society in the European public sphere Civil dialogue practices in Europe The example.
Moscow International Conference, Citizen Participation in the Local Public Service Provision and Quality Improvement Edita Stumbraitė-Vilkišienė.
Inita Paulovica Deputy Resident Representative Turkmenistan.
Organization Structure of My Country 2 BiH’s Legislative and Executive Bodies 3.
Michael Moreland & Kathryn Beseau Partners Moreland & Associates, Inc.
Government, Politics, and the Policymaking Process.
Shanghai Community Voluntary Service Research Report Shanghai Community Voluntary Service Research Report Zhiyuan Yu Assistant Professor.
Comparative Evaluation of the Impact of e- participation in Local Climate Change Policy Programs The Effectiveness of E-Participation.
“Framework for mainstreaming Ireland's experience" Siobhan Barron Director National Disability Authority Ireland.
IWRM PLAN PREPARED AND APPROVED. CONTENT Writing an IWRM plan The content of a plan Ensuring political and public participation Timeframe Who writes the.
Adviser, Ministry for State Reform, Lebanon
Public Policy SOL 9a.
NGO Advocacy Work Czech NGOs Advocacy experience Petr Patočka
Towards Greater Accountability: Challenges and Policy Recommendations presented by: Harry Anthony Patrinos Lead Education Economist World Bank Round-table.
Better Regulation Executive Making regulation work for everyone Introduction to Regulatory Impact Assessment Claire Chaubert February 2007.
Important Reports 2008 OECD Improving School Leadership 2009 MacKinsey Redefining School Leadership responsibilities 2010 Capturing the leadership premium.
Quote for today “Sometimes the questions are complicated and the answers are simple” - ?? ????? “Sometimes the questions are complicated and the answers.
E-participation and transparency in the decision making process Rauna Nerelli Ministry of Justice, Finland.
1.  Policy Cycle  Government actors - incentives  Interest Groups  Interests  Resources  Strategies 2.
Statistical Coordination: Russian Experience Federal State Statistics Service.
Stakeholder analysis for project design Ingvild Oia, Programme Specialist,UNDP Photo by: Konomiho/flickr.
Communication Paper on Smart Regulation COM(2010) 543, 8 October 2010 Presentation by Savia Orphanidou 3 rd November 2010.
1.  Policy Cycle  Government actors - incentives  Interest Groups  Interests  Resources  Strategies 2.
Getting Cancer Control Message to Policy Makers ~ Kent Hartwig Advocacy Strategies, LLC October 11, 2013.
Participative democracy in Romania. Participative Democracy The legal framework 1 – A national phenomenon 2 - Legal basis for participatory democracy.
Consumer Education and Information (Session Ib: Tools to empower consumers) Edin Zametica Advisor to SERC, Bosnia and Herzegovina Chair of the ECRB Customers.
The Theory & Practice of Government Powers Module 3.8: The Public Policy Cycle.
Public Participation in Tampere T A M P E R E E N K A U P U N K I Mr. Antti Leskinen Head of Local Democracy Unit City of Tampere, Finland.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE REMJA WORKING GROUP ON MUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE IN CRIMINAL MATTERS AND EXTRADITION.
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The Splendours and Miseries of Regulatory Impact Assessment in the Czech Republic Daniel Trnka Regulatory Policy Division, Directorate for Public Governance.
DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT Provincial Comments on the Draft National Framework for the Implementation of Funding Models for Wards Presentation to Premier’s.
IRES: an update on the revision process Vladimir Markhonko United Nations Statistics Division The 4 th meeting of the Oslo Group on energy statistics Ottawa,
Dissemination Workshop JUNE  Specific objectives The main goal of our strategy before EU elections was to inform the young people in our.
Riga’s AC Baseline Review Säästva Eesti Institute Heidi Tuhkanen, SEI-Tallinn Centre
Secondary Accommodation and Review Committee (ARC) Presentation by: Sam Colizza Manager of Plant Services February 24, 2011 Huron-Superior Catholic District.
School Closure Policy Public Meeting Dec. 12 th, 2006 Jordan Tinney Dec. 12, 2006.
The company secretary – the power behind the board! Theresa Minnie, Head of Client Relations and Members 7 October 2015.
Public Policy Setting the Agenda for for policies that affect us.
Transparency in the EIB EIB and Information policy Roundtable meeting 29 June 2005.
Citizen participation in public policy making Novum Forum Perspectives of Active Citizenship Ivo Hartman November 2009.
Eurostat DSS November 2013 Strategic issues related to the modernisation of European social statistics Standardisation of variables.
Public Policy Processes and Citizen Participation in South Korea Governance in Korea st semester March 18, 2013 Organized by Saori Kakihara.
DEVELOPING THE WORK PLAN
Participation in the Process of Brownfield Regeneration Dagmar Petríková, Matej Jaššo „This project has been funded with support from the European Commission.
What is convincing evidence? Naved Chowdhury & Enrique Mendizabal Objective of the session: –To arrive at a definition of CONVINCING evidence –what makes.
Public Participation in Legislative Process in Slovakia Public Participation in Legislative Process in Slovakia JUDr. Milan VETRÁK.
Practical tools of Dutch legislative drafters Jan A.B. Janus Jakarta 4-7 July 2011.
Joint UNECE/OECD Work Session on Statistical Dissemination and Communication February 2005, Henley-on-Thames, United Kingdom REPUTATION MANAGEMENT.
Impact analysis during the harmonisation process with the EU and effects on Lithuanian economy Giedrius Kadziauskas, Senior Policy analyst 23 rd Fabruary.
Introducing Regulatory Impact Analysis into the Turkish Legal Framework Improving Transparency, Consultation and Communication of RIAs March 2009.
WS Gender Statistics 2004 UNECE Statistical Division Joint ECE-UNDP Assessment of official statistics related to gender equality in Eastern Europe and.
The Rezoning Process CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG PLANNING.
ESTATE AGENCY AFFAIRS BOARD UPDATE ON THE AUCTION ALLIANCE vs. ESTATE AGENCY AFFAIRS BOARD LEGAL MATTER 01 st March
Ann MacNeille Assistant Attorney General Maryland Attorney General’s Office Counsel, Open Meetings Compliance Board John S.
Information and Network security: Lithuania Tomas Lamanauskas Deputy Director Communications Regulatory Authority (RRT) Republic of Lithuania; ENISA Liaison.
Stakeholder Relations. Local government principles, LGA- S4 “(a) transparent and effective processes, and decision-making in the public interest; and.
Lawrence J. Bohlen Manager Member Services & Education Local Government Insurance Trust __________________________________ MACO Winter Conference January.
Structure of Government Municipal. Division of Power  Canada has a federal system of government  Federal (Canada)  Provincial (ie: Ontario)  Municipal.
LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND CURRENT PRACTICE IN MEMBER STATES Workshop on participatory budgeting Neza Vodusek, CDLR Rapporteur Slovenia.
The Splendours and Miseries of Regulatory reform in the Czech Republic
Regulatory Strategies and Solutions Group, LLC
Complying with Maryland’s Open Meetings Act
Contents Introduction Strategic Priorities
The activity of Art. 29. Working Party György Halmos
Issues & Policies in US Politics
Policy making process.
Civic Involvement, Participation, & Skills
Presentation transcript:

Public Participation at the Local Level Daniel Klimovský Cluj Napoca, 6 February 2014

Agenda Public participation and public policy making Slovakia: fragmentation Survey: Does size matter?

Participation and legitimacy In search of legitimacy, public participation has become an attractive strategy targeted not only at improving the policy-making process, but also, at inducing “frustrated” citizens a certain feeling of trust in authorities and their consequent activities (Bishop and Davis, 2002)

Policy making and legitimacy Any public policy is legitimized if the citizens have a reason for complying with that policy or for its direct supporting (Fung, 2006)

Policy making cycle Implementing the policy Formulating the policy Assessing the policy Taking the decision Setting the policy agenda Policy making cycle

Public participation Gramberger, OECD (2001) – Information – Consultation – Active participation

Fragmentation vs. consolidation „Lithuanian approach“ Does size matter? Slovak case What are other relevant factors that influence the participation?

Legal framework Stages of Policy- Making Process Gramberger's (2001) Classification Tools Setting the policy agenda Information - obligatory publication (official communal panel) of communal board's program before its session - optional publication (communal broadcast, telecast, web-site, newspaper, etc.) of communal board's program before its meeting - publication of a report (minutes) of communal board's session Consultation - notices presented in the sessions of communal board (warnings and notices from the side of the deputies of communal board or mayor) - membership in various committees of communal board - involvement in the public opinion researches or opinion polls Active Participation - information call - meetings of citizens-voters with their deputies - proposals presented in the sessions of communal board or addressed to the mayor (complaints and other incentives from the side of communal residents) - residents' petitions - residents' demonstrative activities Formulating the policy Information - obligatory publication of communal board's program before its session - publication of a report (minutes) of a session of communal board (including presented proposals and counter proposals)

Survey Questionnaires in 12 selected municipalities: – Four size categories

Factor analysis Clear (statistically significant) differences between: – „classical“ participation tools – „modern“ participation tools

Part of „classical tools“

Size matters Size matters!!! Other significant factors: – Age – Locality of occupation instead of locality of permanent stay ???

Thank you for your attention