PUBLIC SECTOR REFORM:

HOW THE EU BUDGET IS USED TO ENCOURAGE IT

Centre for European Economic Research (ZEW),

Jacques Delors Institute (JDI) and European Policy Centre (EPC)

DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR INTERNAL POLICIES

POLICY DEPARTMENT D: BUDGETARY AFFAIRS

Workshop "Supporting the implementation of eGovernment at regional and local level',

Brussels, 15 November 2016

Aim of the study

Map all the different EU budgetary instruments providing direct or indirect support to public administration reforms (PAR)

Analyse the coherence, EU added value and complementarities within these various budgetary instruments as well as their consistency with the overall EU approach to public administration reforms

Analyse the role of expert groups, networks and awards as drivers of PAR, in particular EUPAN (European Public Administration Network) and EPSA (European Public Sector Award)

Formulate recommendations to improve the capacity of the EU budget and EU networks and awards to support PAR at the national level

2

Methodological note

Study carried out in April-June, 2016

Desk research of policy documents and legislation

Review of academic literature

> 30 semi-structured interviews (policy-makers, EU officials, academics, practitioners)

Four country case studies: Estonia, Bulgaria, Greece and Italy

3

Recent trends in PAR in Europe

Shift of reform-agenda to post-New Public Management (NPM) reforms

– Horizontal and vertical coordination within PAs

– Participation, transparency and open government

– Co-service and co-creation

A further post-crisis trend related to consolidation efforts

– cost-cutting exercises in the public sector

– Efficiency-enhancing reforms

4

EU action on PAR

EU budget probably the least important channel through which EU affects national PAs – many single market directives having important effects (Services Directive, Public Procurement Directives,PublicSector Information Directives…)

EU approach to PAR has broadened over time : from pure instrumental approach to well-functioning PA seen as pre-condition for economic and social development

PAR recommendations now in European semester, but lack of common assessment framework

.

5

Budgetary instruments

Various budgetary programs offering direct/indirect support to PAR:

– ESF/ERDF under TO11: €4.7 billion (of which €4.1billion providing direct support to reform national PAs)

– ERDF under TO2 (e-government): ”): €4.4billion

– ESI funds-Technical Assistance (T.A.): €11billion

– Connecting Europe Facility- digital: “generic services”, €2million distributed so far)

– Horizon2020: grants to ICT-enabled public sector innovation projects. (≅70million distributed so far)

• EU Justice programme:. ≅400million for 2014-2020 (of which ≅ 150-180million to public authorities)

• FISCALIS2020/CUSTOMS2020, ISA2, Hercule III, Europe for Citizens…

• Technical assistance through various EU Commission/EIB programmes

6

A focus on EU funding for e-government

Important amounts of ESI funding for e-government

CEF-digital can have important second-order effects

High degree of complementarity at programme level:

– CEF telecom/ISA2: development and deployment of digital interoperability solutions

– Horizon2020: competitive grants for highly innovative, trans-national projects (focus on open governance and co-creation)

– ESIF-financed interventions in the field of e-governance: less developed regions, focus on development and improvement of e-government services and applications

But some overlaps at the operational level (e.g, EU justice programme and CEF-telecom)

7

A focus on EU funding for e-government (2)

Some examples of synergies: e.g Di@vgeia (ESIF) and “Your Data Stories” (Horizon2020)

Lack of consistency between some ERDF-backed e-government projects and the principles and priorities embedded in EU e-government Action Plan 2016-2020

ERDF funding often used to digitalise existing services but without having in mind “interoperability” or openness from the start

8

9

ERDF funding for e-government under TO2 by category of region and by type of initiative, 2014-2020

(million €)

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

Less developed More developed Transition e-Government services and

applications (078)

Access to public sector info

(079)

10

ERDF funding for e-government under TO2 by country, 2014-2020 (million €)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

Mil

lio

n E

uro

eGov 078 openGov 079

Recommendations

A more prominent role of DG CONNECT in the preparation of all working programmes and definition of calls for proposals having implications for e-governance

DG CONNECT and DG REGIO should work in close cooperation to ensure that the negotiation and evaluation of Operational Programmesunder ERDF-TO2 are in line with EU e-government action plan

11

12

Thank You!

RESEARCH TEAM:

Centre for European Economic Research (ZEW):

Dr. Zareh Asatryan

Prof. Friedrich Heinemann

Mustafa Yeter

Jacques Delors Institute (JDI):

Dr. Eulalia Rubio

Dr. David Rinaldi

European Policy Centre (EPC):

Dr. Fabian Zuleeg

Back-up

13

Definition of PAR

Public Administration Reforms: “Deliberate changes to the structures and processes of public sector organisations with the objective of getting them to run better” (UN: 2006)

Focus on reforms aimed at improving core administrative structures (“bureaucracy”) and the judicial system (not reforms in specific public services or bodies)

14

Seven Recommendations

R1: Develop more principle-based PAR-related CSR

R2: Improve the monitoring and evaluation of ESIF-TO11

R3: EU Justice Programme more aligned with CSRs

R4: Ensure complementarity and coherence in e-governance

R5: Ensure better coordination between all programmes and services providing technical assistance interventions

R6: Use TAIEX to promote focused peer-to-peer exchange on PAR

R7: Increase the effectiveness of SRSP by a clear role and limited scope of action

15

R1: More principle-based PAR-related CSR

16

Need to develop a more principle-based approach to the identification of country weaknesses on PAs. SIGMA-OECD approach as an example

R3: Improve the monitoring and evaluation of ESIF-TO11

17

EU Commission should develop list of common specific indicators to evaluate the results and impact of ESIF interventions under TO11. This could be implemented during current programming period on voluntary basis and further improved and introduced in the ESIF regulation for the next programming period,

R4: EU Justice Programme more aligned with CSRs

18

Make some trans-national actions on judicial cooperation and training conditional to participation of at least one actor from country receiving CSRs on justice reform

R5: Complementarities and coherence in e-governance and technical assistance interventions

19

A more prominent role of DG CONNECT in the preparation of all working programmes and definition of calls for proposals having implications for e-governance

DG CONNECT and DG REGIO should work in close cooperation to ensure that the negotiation and evaluation of Operational Programmes under ERDF-TO2 are in line with EU e-government action plan

R6: Co-ordination and synergies in technical assistance interventions

20

More effort to ensure coordination and synergies between various services and programmes providing technical assistance for management of EU funds

Possibility to create a “single entry point” , e.g., through EIAH

R7: Use TAIEX to promote focused peer-to-peer exchange on PAR

21

Promote focused peer-to-peer exchanges among national officials in specific PAR aspects (e.g., introduction of once-only principle, the extension of e-procurement, the reduction of administrative burdens for businesses, or the improvement of insolvency frameworks) by using TAIEX experience

R8: Realise full potential of SRSP

22

Better define its role: SRSP working as facilitator rather than provider of services

Narrow its scope of intervention: SRSP used only to support reforms having a clear EU dimension, particularly:

– reforms requested by CSRs

– Reforms requested by an economic adjustment programme;

– reforms that are clearly complementary to the adoption of new EU legislation (e.g. reform banking system)

– Reforms that are complementary to the implementation of ESI programme (e.g. reform health care system to complement ESI investments in health care infrastructure)