Policy Analysis in the Czech Republic by Arnost Veselý & Martin Nekola

Author:Arnost Veselý & Martin Nekola [Veselý, Arnost & Nekola, Martin]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: Political Science, Public Policy, General, Public Affairs & Administration
ISBN: 9781447347439
Google: u3JoDwAAQBAJ
Barnesnoble:
Publisher: Policy Press
Published: 2018-03-01T00:00:00+00:00

The current state of the policy advisory council system in the Czech Republic

In 2013, there were 26 standing advisory and working committees and councils at the governmental level.3 Of these, 14 worked directly under the Office of the Government;4 the other 12 were established and organised by particular government departments.5 Depending on its composition, policy priorities, resources and stability, the government (or, with varying degree of independence, governmental departments) endowed the committees and councils with diverse tasks and objectives. In general, their main aim is to improve the situation in a related policy area through providing the government with relevant information (see the concept of evidence-based policy making in Howlett, 2009).6 Moreover, the advisory committees and councils formulate and express their opinions with respect to government bills and policy proposals. They may also, of their own initiative, identify or point out potential problems and formulate their own policy proposals. While they have certain (limited) resources for producing their own studies and analysis, they usually do not conduct inquiries and investigations. Besides these, their objectives may be rather process-oriented. They may initiate or facilitate cooperation among relevant actors within a policy community.

Their influence (see Fobé et al, 2013, pp 234-236) or impact (see Robert, 2008, pp 323-325) in the policy-making process differs significantly (compare Weible, 2008, pp 619-621). In terms of direct influence of their advice on a policy programme, some of them draw up recommendations and policy proposals which are almost entirely accepted by the government, while others stand in opposition to the government instead and exert their influence mainly through the news media and public discussion. There are also quite significant differences in terms of available resources granted by the government to enhance the capacity of the committees and their advice. Advisory committees are engaged mostly in the initial stages of the policy-making process (agenda-setting and formulation) as well as in policy evaluation. They are less often involved in policy implementation.7

To partially deal with the diversity of governmental advisory councils, we can divide them according to a few criteria. First, with regard to method of establishment, we can distinguish between statutory, (relatively) permanent and ad hoc groups. Second, concerning their institutional affiliation, we differentiate governmental, departmental and interdepartmental groups. Moreover, as outlined in the introduction, according to the degree of independence from and accountability to the government, we can identify three categories: predominantly external groups, predominantly internal groups and a hybrid category that represents an overlap and dynamism between these two. Last but not least, considering the nature of representation of the members and related balance provisions, that is ensuring or protecting the public interest in advisory committees either by representing and pursuing the 'interest of the public'/'public interest' or by balancing competing direct interests (Brown, 2008, 2009), we can divide those with committee members into experts in terms of their professional competence; and representatives in terms of their political interests.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.