1. Improving efficiency, effectiveness and economy of public expenditures in the time of the public finance crisis: How much could New Public Management help in CEE conditions? Juraj Nemec, Prof. Dr. Matej Bel University Banska Bystrica, Slovakia

2. Contents Public finance crisis How to react to it, how to revitalise public finance? NPM ideology does not help much, NPM tools may...

3. Contents Current economic and social situation How to react?

4. Where we are (at least in EU)? Recovery? Or new phase of a systematic crisis? Financial crisis - 2008 Economic crisis – 2009 - ? Public finance crisis – visible now in most developed countries. Are they semi-independent or part of more global problem?

5. Systematic crisis? Too many experts start to speak about systematic crisis: –Inequality –Environment –Over-consumption

6. Public finance crisis Caused by two main factors: a/ Public finance in developed world are not sustainable b/ Public finance are impacted by crisis and massive stabilization expenditures 2008- 2010: - less revenues - significant expenditure growth (stabilization and credit markets operations)

7. Public debt as the % GDP Average 1993-2002 200320072008200920102014 USA64.961.263.170.587.097.5 106.7 Euro- zone 68.668.765.869.178.985.091.4 Japan117.3 167.2187.7196.3217.2227.4234.2 UK43.138.544.151.962.772.787.8 Zdroj: IMF World Economic Outlook Projections, April 2009

8. Situation 2010 New projections even more challenging! IMF 2010 World Economic Outlook Greece, Ireland (35 % deficit in 2010?)

9. Possible solutions The economic theory includes following „core“ possible solutions: –Increasing revenues: (Significant) GDP growth – not predicted Higher taxation - happens –Decreasing expenditures: Cuts - happens Improved economy, efficiency and effectiveness – not much done in this priority area –Inflation, printing money - happens

10. Core question What is the role of New Public Management (NPM) in revitalisation of the public finance and the public sector?

11. NPM in general All (almost all) post 2000 evaluations indicate that results from NPM based reforms are very mixed. Too many expectations not achieved.

12. NPM in CEE public administration reforms All countries in our region implemented at least some NPM elements in their PA reforms. - Visibly, Estonia is the country, where NPM ideas have prevailed in various public administration reform concepts and strategies originating in the second half of the 1990s. But not anymore! - Czechia may be the other pole, partly reluctant to marketization of the public sector especially before 2005.

13. Selected experience with NPM approaches/mechanisms/tools in CEE Source: dominantly original research data on contracting, outsourcing and performance evaluation and management.

14. Contracting local public services

16. Outsourcing of supportive services in public organizations The same picture! But (just occassion????) by direct research „on spot“ we found 10 out of 10 wrong decisons!

17. Program (performance) budgeting In theory very positive. Reality SVK – mainly bureaucratic exercise not connected to PA norms (transparency, responsibility, accountability). Example: Program: Prevention and protection of health Sub-programme: Improving quality of life and health of population Goal: Improving and securing the health status of inhabitants by the realization of projects focusing on better natural and working environment. Planned resources: not defined Indicator: yes

18. Performance financing Example – universities SVK, CZ and almost everywhere Main base: number of students. Results: “Performance trap”! Significant increase of newly accepted students, but resources remained almost unchanged.

19. Selected experience with NPM approaches/mechanisms/tools: Conclusions Results from the use of concrete NPM type tools and mechanisms in CEE are significantly different, and depend much on concrete local conditions and the environment. Implementation of any NPM mechanism shall be deeply investigated for pervasive effects and other dysfunction ”ex-ante”. Ex-post corrections are costly, if possible.

20. Selected quotations “NPM is particularly bad if pushed upon transition and development countries because if it can make any sense, then it is only in an environment of a well-functioning democratic administrative tradition” (Drechsler 2005: 101). “The greater the shortcomings in a country’s established management practices, the less suitable are the [NPM] reforms” (Schick 1998: 124). “Once a so-called Weberian administrative system is institutionalized, then it may make sense to consider how best to move from that system towards a more ‘modern’ system of PA” (Peters 2001: 176). “Importing NPM techniques that needed to improve Weberian bureaucracies when these were not present, and simultaneously building classical checks and balances was a tough reality. Reforming in such a case sometimes was organizing dysfunctions” (Nakrosis and Nemec, unpublished).

21. Important factor: Specific “transitional” circumstances Competitiveness and business strategies Democracy, citizen as the watchdog for government’s malfunctions “Quality of the state of law” Territorial fragmentation Corruption Education and training

22. Conclusions: Where we (should) go? NPM as the reform ideology cannot help to save our public finance and to improve our public sectors.

23. Conclusions: NPM role “Adie NPM” should mean that managing by contracts, objectives, competition, etc. as the goal, is forgotten story (not only for CEE, but generally). But governing by predictable, reliable and coherent, open and transparent, accountable and responsible bureaucracy, using evidence and consultation based policy making and simultaneously properly managing efficiency, economy and effectiveness of any government operation is the future target.