From the viewpoint of one Ukrainian government manager, a new element of a European Union programme aimed at its “Eastern Partnership” initiative is easing coordination of institutional development (ID), but political support is needed for overall success.
Some previous institutional development projects in Ukraine were either too rushed, or lacked follow up from either Ukraine or the European Union, according to Nataliya Kyrychenko, Deputy Director of the Centre for Adaptation of the Civil Service to the Standards of the European Union, under the Main Department of the Civil Service of Ukraine.
Now, the implementation of a new “Comprehensive Institution Building Programme,” or CIB, should better facilitate project planning and implementation, according to Ms. Kyrychenko.
“Until recently ID projects were not very well coordinated. For instance we had a one year project for ID in the Ministry of Transport, but after that there was no follow up, not from the Ukrainian, nor from the donor side. And a one year period is not long enough for institutional change,” she said in an interview with Jos Brand, a trainer on TC Reform Guidelines. The interview took place on 30 September 2010 as part of a series of activities on the EU’s reform on Technical Cooperation (TC), the Backbone Strategy.
“CIB will focus on all parts of an important area of change, for instance how to adapt our organisations towards increased competitiveness of the economy or towards the required standards of Sanitary & Phytosanitary capacities,” she said.
The CIB is part of The Eastern Partnership, a programme which was presented by the foreign minister of Poland at the EU's General Affairs and External Relations Council in Brussels on 26 May 2008. The Eastern Partnership was inaugurated in Prague on 7 May 2009. The members of the Eastern Partnership consists of the the European Union and its neighbors - Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova, Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia.
The Eastern Partnership is to add to the European Neighbourhood Policy funding of Euro 350 million for 2010 – 2013 for six countries of this initiative, including Euro 175 million for the CIB programme. For Ukraine, at least Euro 43.37 million on the CIB programme was allocated. Full-scale realisation of the CIB programme is expected in the first quarter 2011.
For Ms Kyrychenko, the CIB programme is helping ease the Ukraine government’s transition from a Soviet-style views on economic management, to a more-liberal approach. But some pitfalls still remain, she cautions.
“We assist the Government of Ukraine (GoU) to transform from the previous Soviet type of administration towards a more market oriented government functioning,” according to Ms Kyrychenko. “At present we have a kind of hybrid situation between the old era and a market oriented structure. There are still some duplications, for instance the Ministry of Regional Development has similar functions as the Department for Regional Development in the Ministry of Economy.”
Ms Kyrychenko, with a staff of nine, is at the center of coordinating the greater EU programme, along with its CIB subset.
“We receive requests from government agencies for support and make sure that the documents and procedures are according to the financing regulations. Not drafting the documents ourselves, but facilitate the beneficiary organisations to make the best use of the available EU instruments so they will get what they need,” she says.
Among her greatest concerns is coordinating the Ukraine-EU programmes.
“The coordination with the EU Delegation runs quite smoothly, both formal and informal, we have easy access to our colleagues at the Delegation,” she says. But as the programme grows, so does the need for informal cooperation across the partner groups, she says. In some instances, it already occurs.
“A good example of (informal) donor coordination takes place in the Sanitary & Phytosanitary area. There is a donor group which is open for anybody to participate and which also includes the main beneficiary organisations. The work on this CIB area is discussed and coordinated, for example ensuring that training activities are not overlapping. At the moment the EU Delegation is taking the lead for this group, but should be taken over by one of the beneficiary organisations,” according to Ms Kyrychenko.
“Another example: the day before yesterday we had a donor coordination meeting organised by the Department of Civil Service where general donor coordination issues were discussed. Donor coordination is becoming more important for our organisations,” she says.
Still, coordination aside, some hurdles remain to full implementation, largely from workers inside the targeted organisations.
“The drafting of the Institutional Reform Plans – a key element of CIB – will likely meet with resistance from the beneficiary organisations. Reforms will probably imply changes in structure like combining functions and staff changes. Within the organisations, this will not be very popular. If we do not get political support we will lose the chance of reform. We need this political support to make CIB successful,” she says.
More work is needed in the public sphere, according to Ms Kyrychenko.
“A separate and overall public sector reform programme is needed in parallel with the CIB. This public sector reform is mentioned in the GoU socio-economic development plan that was published in June this year and will be presented later on, probably in November. The economic reforms will be coordinated by a special Economic Reform Committee under the President. The Public Administration Reform part will be guided by the Deputy Prime Minister,” she says. “When that happens, it will be more difficult to resist reforms.”
For more information on the Centre for Adaptation of the Civil Service to the Standards of the European Union, see www.center.gov.ua
Log in with your EU Login account to post or comment on the platform.