Generate QR code
Open Access
Subscription Access
Ex-post evaluation of regional bureaucracy development programs
https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2018-1-45-70
Abstract
We study the influence of the program-targeted planning mechanisms on the civil service efficiency in the subjects of the Russian Federation. Our hypothesis is that the criteria for assessing effectiveness of civil service development programs are to increase the efficiency of its functioning and focus on solving problems of socio-economic development. The research methodology is based on the generalization of statistical data on the regions of the Central Federal District (CFD) of Russia in 2003-2016, and on the construction of some indices for civil service and socio-economic development. We have analyzed 67 programs of civil service development. Due to lack of financing Russian regions are forced to abandon many measures of the civil service reform. The average values of efficiency coefficients do not reach 30%, which indicates the existence of significant reserves for increasing the civil service development programs effectiveness. We have revealed that a crisis condition of socio-economic development resists the effective civil service development in the regions. At the same time, the region’s advanced positions in the economy do not automatically lead to a comparable high level of civil service development. This conclusion is important for extrapolating to regions of other federal districts and to the federal level in Russia.
Keywords
ex-post анализ,
program-target planning,
evaluation,
ex-post analysis,
efficiency,
civil service,
subjects of the Russian Federation,
reform
JEL: D73; O21; R58
About the Author
G. A. Borshchevskiy
Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
References
1. Averyanova N. N. (2015). The essence and purpose of documents of state strategic planning in modern Russia. Zakonodatelstvo, No. 7, pp. 23—25. (In Russian).
2. [Aganbegyan A. G. (2017). What kind of comprehensive plan does Russia need before 2025? Ekonomicheskaya Politika, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 8—29. (In Russian).
3. Auzan A. A. (2015). “The effect of the rut”. The problem of path dependence — the evolution of hypotheses. Bulletin of the Moscow University, No. 1, pp. 3—17. (In Russian).
4. Barabashev A. G., Kindras A. A. (2014). On the effectiveness of the program-target method of reforming the civil service: The experience of Russia. Voprosy Gosydarstvennogo i Munitsipalnogo Upravleniya, No. 2, pp. 7—27. (In Russian).
5. Borshchevskiy G. A. (2017). Assessment of trends in civil service: Methodological issues. Voprosy Gosydarstvennogo i Munitsipalnogo Upravleniya, No. 1, pp. 103—128. (In Russian).
6. Volmann H. (2010). Evaluation of public administration reforms: “Third wave”. Sotsiologicheskie Issledovaniya, No. 10, pp. 93—99. (In Russian).
7. Glazyev S. Yu. (2016). Applied results of the theory of world economic structures. Ekonomika i Matematicheskie Metody, No. 3, pp. 3—21. (In Russian).
8. Grinberg R. S., Grinin L. Ye., Korotaev A. V. (eds.) (2016). Crises and forecasts in the light of the theory of long waves. Moscow: Institute of Economics, RAS. (In Russian).
9. Klimenko A. V., Korolev V. A., Dvinskikh D. Yu., Slastikhina I. Yu. (2015). On the harmonization of documents of state strategic planning. Moscow: National Research University Higher School of Economics. (In Russian).
10. Kuzminov Ya. I., Semenov D. S., Frumin I. D. (2013). Incomplete transition: From Gosplan — to the master plan. Otechestvennye Zapiski, No. 4, pp. 85—98. (In Russian).
11. Kushlin V. I., Ustenko V. S. (2015). Reforming the civil service as a factor in managing social and economic development (The experience of developed countries). Sovremennye Technologii Upravleniya, No. 5, pp. 42—47. (In Russian).
12. Mau V. (2017). Lessons of stabilization and prospects for growth: Economic policy in Russia in 2016. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 2, pp. 5—29. (In Russian).
13. Naumov S. Yu., Maslennikova E. V. (2009). Results of reforms and prospects of development of the state civil service of the subjects of the Russian Federation. Vlast, No. 10, pp. 4—8. (In Russian).
14. Nekipelov A., Ivanter V., Bogomolov O., Glazyev S. (2014). In the continuation of the development of an alternative strategy for socio-economic development of Russia by the scientists of the section of economics of the Division of Social Sciences of the RAS. Rossiyskiy Ekonomichekiy Zhurnal, No. 2, pp. 1—12. (In Russian).
15. Ovcharenko R. K. (2012). Formation of the management system of the state civil service of the subject of the Russian Federation. Vlast, No. 1, pp. 45—48. (In Russian).
16. Perfiliev S. V., Loginov I. N., Gorbova O. Yu., Dudukina O. I. (2013). Program-oriented management of regional development. Ryazan: Ryazan State Radio Engineering University. (In Russian).
17. Polterovich V., Dmitriev M., Yakovlev A., Gurvich E., Auzan A. (2017). The fate of economic programs and reforms in Russia. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 6, pp. 22—44. (In Russian).
18. Tambovtsev V. (2017). Planning and opportunism. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 1, pp. 22—39. (In Russian).
19. Tikhomirov B., Frenkel A. (2017). On unified socio-economic policy and strategic planning. Ekonomicheskaya Politika, Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 82—117. (In Russian).
20. Chuguevskaya E. S. (2016). Conceptual foundations for the formation of a system of strategic planning documents for regional development. Moscow. (In Russian).
21. Shash N. N. (2015). Managing the effectiveness of state programs: The methodological foundations for the development of a program budget. Upravlenets, No. 1, pp. 4—15. (In Russian).
22. Yuzhakov V. N., Dobrolyubova E. I., Alexandrov O. A. (2015). How to evaluate the effectiveness of the implementation of state programs: The methodology issues. Ekonomichekaya Politika, Vol. 10, No. 6, pp. 79—98. (In Russian).
23. Barabashev A. G., Klimenko A. V. (2017). Russian government changes and performance. Chineese Political Science Review, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 22—39.
24. Cobb-Clark D. A., Crossley T. (2013). Econometrics for evaluations: An introduction to recent developments. New York: Economic Record.
25. Coryn C. L. S., Scriven M. (eds.) (2008). Reforming the evaluation of research. New directions for evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
26. EPAO (2007). Using the program assessment rating tool as a management control process. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Inspector General. Heilmann S., Melton O. (2013). The reinvention of development planning in China, 1993—2012. Modern China, Vol. 39, No. 6, pp. 580—628.
27. Tatham M., Bauer M. W. (2016). The state, the economy, and the regions: Theories of preference formation in times of crisis. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Vol. 26, No. 4, рр. 631—646.
28. Todd P. E., Wolpin K. I. (2005). Ex-ante evaluation of social programs. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.
Review
For citations:
Borshchevskiy G.A. Ex-post evaluation of regional bureaucracy development programs. Voprosy Ekonomiki. 2018;(1):45-70. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2018-1-45-70
Views:
864
Email this article 
