[full article and abstract in Lithuanian; abstract in English] Lithuania has a fragmented advisory system, with a total of 213 advisory bodies working at the central level of government in 2017. Ad hoc advisory bodies have low average lifespans, while the permanent advisory bodies usually have small administrative capacities. The Sunset Commissions were an exception because they advised Lithuanian governments for more than ten years – having been active since 1999 – and operated within a well-developed institutional framework. They provided recommendations on how to improve the efficiency and quality of public management for five Lithuanian governments until 2016 when Skvernelis’s government decided to discontinue its activities. There was almost no systematic monitoring of the extent to which the recommendations were carried out. Therefore, it is important to analyze the impact of the Sunset Commissions’ recommendations on public management policy in Lithuania. By combining the advisory systems and public policy process literature, the article identifies the main factors that may affect the successful use of advice: the compatibility of recommendations with the dominant political ideas, the composition of an advisory body, the government’s expectations toward its purpose, economic conditions, the support of the parliamentary majority and the political attention to its recommendations and the role of the changing leaders during public management reforms. Our empirical study – which was based on desk research, an analysis of administrative information, interviews and a survey of the Commissions’ members – consisted of two main stages. First, we assessed the impact of the Sunset Commissions on public management policy. Second, we determined the causal configurations underpinning the adoption and implementation of the recommendations set out by this advisory body. The results of our assessment reveals a good deal of variation in the use of the Commissions’ recommendations. The 1999–2000 and 2009 Commissions were the most successful in terms of the recommendations adopted and implemented. The lifespan of these Sunset Commissions was marked by economic downturns that opened “windows of opportunity” for major reforms. These advisory bodies are also characterized by high performance indicators. In contrast, the advisory bodies that worked during 2006–2008 and 2013–2016 received less political attention in the Lithuanian government in the context of economic growth, which made implementation more difficult. Overall, our assessment suggests that a more active performance of the advisory body is not sufficient to explain the level of adoption and implementation of its recommendations, as the political and economic conditions significantly shape the use of advice. The second part of the empirical study allowed us to determine the main causal configurations that explain the adoption and implementation of the recommendations suggested by the Sunset Commissions. The most important condition for successful adoption is the compatibility of advice: in other words, the more the given advice corresponds to a particular government’s priorities, the more successful the use of recommendation becomes. In addition, the uptake of recommendations is more frequent during economic downturns as well as when prime ministers exercise transformational leadership during the reform process. Meanwhile, the composition of the advisory body, the expectations of the government toward its performance and the leadership exercised by the heads of the commissions are less important. The conditions for the successful implementation of recommendations are slightly different. Although transformational leadership maintains its importance during the implementation phase, the exercise of transactional leadership can also lead to an incremental change if policy implementation is pursued adequately at the administrative level. To conclude, our research reveals that the Sunset Commissions had a substantial impact on Lithuanian public management policy. Even though the effectiveness of the advisory body varied during the rule of the Lithuanian governments, a majority of the Commissions’ members agreed that its work should be continued. The research also allows us to offer practical recommendations for the further performance of the Sunset Commissions. The main suggestions include, but are not limited to, strengthening the mandate of the Commission, enhancing administrative discipline during the execution of the recommendations and allocating financial resources for supporting the performance of the Commission.
Modern societies are facing an increasing number of transboundary systemic threats. The sudden spread of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has once again highlighted concerns about governments' capacity to deal with disruptions and stressed the need for more resilient governance arrangements.Besides the usual policymaking, the latter might emerge from decisions, made during the crisis management as well. Building on ideas of the new institutionalism, more specifically, the normative logic of appropriateness and the rational logic of consequentiality, we examine how different mechanisms in varying contexts lead to different types of resilience building. Based on the results of pattern matching applied to the Lithuanian case of COVID-19 crisis management in 2020, we argue that in environments where the logic of consequentiality was dominant, resilience was mostly strengthened because of major breakthroughs, stemming from coercive pressures as well as top-down policy action from the centre of government. In contrast, more incremental developments contributed to resilience building through normative or mimetic pressures, professionalization, network-based and bottom-up practices in environments, where the logic of appropriateness prevailed. We claim that, while the logic of consequentiality helps to strengthen resilience in the context of turbulence, the logic of appropriateness is especially important for ensuring its sustainability.
Straipsnyje analizuojamos naujojo viešojo valdymo sąsajos su šiuolaikinio muziejų valdymo koncepcija, naujojo viešojo valdymo priemonių paplitimas Lietuvos muziejuose ir įtaką jų taikymui darantys veiksniai. Nors pasaulyje plinta šiuolaikinio muziejų valdymo teorija, kurios pagrindiniai teiginiai glaudžiai susiję su naujojo viešojo valdymo praktikomis (hierarchinio valdymo modelio atsisakymu, orientacija į lankytojus ir jų įtraukimu į muziejaus veiklą, tarpsektoriniu bendradarbiavimu, skaidrumo ir atskaitingumo siekiu), gyventojų apklausos rodo, kad Lietuvos muziejų veikla menkai kinta, o specialistai muziejus priskiria tradicinėms institucijoms. Tyrimo metu atlikta Lietuvos muziejų veiklą reglamentuojančių teisės aktų analizė atskleidė įtvirtintus tiek tradicinio, tiek naujojo viešojo valdymo elementus. Remiantis kiekybinio tyrimo duomenimis, galima teigti, kad šiuolaikinio muziejų valdymo priemonės paplitusios tik iš dalies, o muziejų valdymas yra gana uždaras. Taikydamos naujojo viešojo valdymo priemones, šios institucijos susiduria tiek su sisteminėmis, tiek su vidinėmis kliūtimis (jos nagrinėjamos kokybinio tyrimo metu) – nefunkcionaliu paskatų mechanizmu, bendros muziejų politikos trūkumu ir lemiamą reikšmę turinčiu muziejaus vadovo vaidmeniu. Įvardytų problemų sprendimas lemtų efektyvesnį naujojo viešojo valdymo priemonių taikymą Lietuvos muziejuose ir padėtų gerinti šių institucijų veiklą.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.