Source: Central European Economic Review (September 1999): 26-27.
Some comparisons can be drawn from the aggregate statistical data presented
in tables 1.1 and 1.2. The state of economic development is rather common for
these generally small-sized countries (Poland being an exception). However,
the levels of gross national product (GNP) substantially differ.
Very relevant is economic downturn during the transitive period, which is
evident for every country, teamed by a relatively high rate of unemployment.
Such data demonstrate the expenses of structural change. The inflation rate
for 1997 compared to that of the former decade, although still high, shows
that these countries have experienced recovery from the shock of changes in
economic and fiscal policy.
Another basic analogy is that the more consolidated and wealthy countries
of the late federations have fared well despite amputation from their former
political and economic systems. The collapse of the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia
and Czechoslovakia also demonstrates the clear will for autonomy in this
region. In the 1990s, the traditional forced integration of the past was
avoided.
As quoted so often, the introduction of political transition was very
rapid. Poland took almost ten years; for Hungary, ten months was enough; in
East Germany, ten weeks; and in Czechoslovakia, ten days of "velvet
revolution." The key contextual factor of course was the waning of the
Soviet Union’s influence. After the political upheavals of 1989 and 1990,
all of the countries in the group addressed economic and other systemic bases
for the transformation with various levels of intensity.
The political process has been continuous in the overwhelming majority of
these countries. Therefore, western involvement has had crucial effect,
including influence on the choice of models for building democratic systems.
However, a new, nearly unprecedented model of and framework for integration
has become increasingly attractive in these countries—
namely, towards a "western-type Europe." Escape from former bonds
has not seemed to hinder the pursuit of new opportunities for cooperation.
Nowadays the common foreign policy objective among the countries discussed
here is the desire to join the EU. The components of such strategy affect
particular areas of internal policy as well.
The introduction of a new democratic and plural model at the local level
was very important as the first step of transition. The European Charter of
Local Self-government summarized the minimum requirements for preparing and
establishing new institutions, which promoted the widely accepted essence of
such development from both a structural and legal point of view. Most of the
countries in this region realized the importance of adaptation to these
principles and signed the charter in the mid-1990s, affirming the desire to
follow the West European tradition of local governance. The process is not
simple in every aspect, although the charter allows some flexibility for
prospective member countries. Professional and public debate ensued in many
countries of the region concerning whether the charter’s prescriptions
really ensured coherent development or if the moderate cosmetic changes
necessary for compliance actually disguised traditional corruption and
antidemocratic phenomena.
Such debates are interesting from another aspect as well. The whole process
of reform exhibited numerous changes of direction in the 1990s. As will be
demonstrated later in this study, attempts to group countries according to the
systems they have adopted are quite problematic, since such analogies will
probably become defunct as the trajectory of transition continues to shift
country by country in the coming years. In all of these countries debates have
been nearly continuous concerning the question of which route of modernization
to follow and which model to adopt. Thus, identifying "typical"
features and creating subgroups should be understood as temporary. A better
way to a more thorough analysis is to typify national reforms and the route of
attempts as a whole.
Thus, when studying the direction of administrative reform, models vary not
only country by country, but period by period. National directions for public
administrative system building are dependent on policy preferences to a large
extent. Due to the fluid and quite sensitive political balance existing in
Central Europe, changes in conceptual issues are made relatively often
concerning local government reform. This statement can be illustrated by three
examples.
1. According to some authors (Regulska 1996, Grochowski 1997) the local
reform and democratization process in Poland reached stagnation in the
mid-1990s (though some local experiments with new models continued), breeding
disillusionment. Debate was continuous during this period concerning the
appropriate number of levels for the territorial administrative and local
government systems. Territorial division before the last crucial change in
1999 instigated further discussion among political factions, and as a
consequence, the draft version of the reform program was amended, altering the
number of tiers and their governing rights. Thus, crucial
politico-administrative changes occurred while the transformation was in
process.
2. Another example of "internal" criticism resulting in a
subsequently altered trajectory for transition is found in Lithuania. Crucial
reform revisions were initiated in 1995, replacing the formerly conceptualized
two-tier system of local government with a single tier. Additionally, strong
criticism emerged concerning the comprehensiveness of change. According to
Gazaryan (1995), the development of local government in the first five years
resulted in neither the improvement of public services nor the involvement of
the populace in decision-making.
The motives for such criticism are two-fold. First, discussions concerning
the administrative structure of the system are of particular importance to
party factions that view these changes from the standpoint of influence gain
or loss. Second, those who have found the reforms to be insufficient feel that
there is a "democratic deficit" in the process; citizens' opinions
have not yet been heard and incorporated into the local government reform
plan.
3. Finally, the Czech example should be mentioned. This country has quite
radically reformed its institutions and mechanisms of local democracy.
Municipalities have taken over all self-governing functions, and the division
of power is quite clear between state administrative and local government
offices. However, debate on the establishment of an intermediate government
tier has ensued for a decade (Vidlaková 1997). Subsequently, from the
year 2000, this concept will be realized in practice.
Despite relatively often-changing conceptions, there are common directions
and different models that may be classified. Nevertheless, strong coherence
and consistency should not be expected in the long run.
