Kyrgyzstan's Public Sector Reforms: 1991–2010

Baimyrzaeva, Mahabat

doi:10.1080/01900692.2011.582062

Cited by 10 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As a result, it turned to the IMF for an emergency loan, and received additional assistance from the World Bank, which required the implementation of standard economic adjustments, including liberalization, marketization, and privatization (Abazov, 1999;Pétric, 2005). Donors also emphasized "good governance," which entailed political and financial decentralization, as discussed above (Baimyrzaeva, 2005(Baimyrzaeva, , 2010(Baimyrzaeva, , 2011Fraser, 2009, p. 67-68). In addition to the direct assistance from the IMF and World Bank, a number of other organizations helped to design and implement reforms for the development of local self-government.…”

Section: Case Study: the Kyrgyz Republic 1991-2018mentioning

confidence: 99%

Decentralization, legitimacy, and democracy in post-Soviet Central Asia

Siegel

2021

Journal of Eurasian Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During the 1990s, a conventional wisdom emerged, based on literature going back decades, that political decentralization might be among the most effective forces for democratization. If ordinary people could participate in autonomous local governments, democracy would be built from the ground up, ultimately shaping the entire political system. Once decentralization reforms were implemented across the world, however, the results were disappointing. Authoritarianism not only thrived at the local level, it could also undermine democratization at the national level. Thus, local-national transference still held, but sometimes as a poison. In this context, the case of post-Soviet Kyrgyzstan is an anomaly. Here, the relative success of political decentralization—rather than its failure—nevertheless failed to spur democratization at the national level. I argue that this is because decentralization allowed national authorities to appease international donors while they consolidated their own power. Moreover, while decentralization empowered local communities, it did so in ways that personalized local authority and pitted local and national authorities against one another, resulting in intense localism and antagonistic center-local relations that undermined any democratic transference. The case study findings are based on ten months of field research, which includes interviews with local and national officials, ordinary villagers, and representatives of NGOs and international organizations.

show abstract

Section: Case Study: the Kyrgyz Republic 1991-2018mentioning

confidence: 99%

Decentralization, legitimacy, and democracy in post-Soviet Central Asia

Siegel

2021

Journal of Eurasian Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the other group, there are countries of the former USSR (without the Baltic Assembly countries), countries of the former Yugoslavia (without Croatia and Slovenia) and Albania, where reforms have not been implemented, have been partially implemented or real reforms have been implemented with long delay. As a result, their positive impact on the citizens' quality of life is relatively small (Bogus, Pavelco, 2006;Perlman, Gleason, 2007;Baimyrzaeva, 2011;Džinić, 2011;Rinnert, 2015;Busygina et al, 2018). In this context, it was considered important to analyze the Ukrainian public administration reform, actually initiated only in 2014 and completed in 2020.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Weaknesses and successes of the Ukrainian administrative reform

Michalski¹,

Matviishyn²,

Luhova³

2022

Czasopismo Geograficzne

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

raine is one of the last post-communist countries where implementation of administrative reforms has started in practice. The aim of the study is to analyze the local-level results of the main stage of the administrative reform in Ukraine which was carried out in 2014–2020. The analysis concerns Ukrainian local government units equivalent to LAU 1 and LAU 2. When collecting data, the so-called triangulation of sources was applied. The SWOT method was used in the analysis, and Neshkova and Konstadinova’s publication (2012) constitutes the reference point. The decentralization of power and finance has led to the creation of amalgamated territorial communities (ATCs), better able to deliver public services. Thus, in this respect, the effects of the administrative reform in Ukraine so far have been similar to those diagnosed by Neshkova and Konstadinova (2012) in other post-communist countries. Admittedly, corruption in Ukraine has decreased, but only slightly. Therefore, Neshkova and Konstadinova’s (2012) assumption about the positive impact of administrative reforms on reducing corruption in post-communist countries was not confirmed in Ukraine. Referring to the detailed results of the SWOT analysis, the greatest strengths of this reform included the partial success of financial decentralization and the establishment of the State Regional Development Fund (SRDF) to support the development of local governments. The quality of public services has also improved. However, there were also weaknesses in the form of still too small funds received by the new ATCs and irregularities in the functioning of the SRDF. International support for this reform and the intensification of the activities of non-governmental organizations were considered to be the greatest opportunities. The still existing strongest threat of an endogenous nature is (despite its decline) the level of corruption, and the exogenous one is a threat from Russia. In addition, the negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic can be seen at the end of the implementation of the reform.

show abstract

Public Sector Reforms in Central Asia

Knox

2022

Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Kyrgyzstan's Public Sector Reforms: 1991–2010

Cited by 10 publications

References 3 publications

Decentralization, legitimacy, and democracy in post-Soviet Central Asia

Decentralization, legitimacy, and democracy in post-Soviet Central Asia

Weaknesses and successes of the Ukrainian administrative reform

Public Sector Reforms in Central Asia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About