Weaknesses and successes of the Ukrainian administrative reform

Abstract

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.