Suchergebnisse

The article analyses the results of a nationally representative survey on local democracy conducted in Ukraine in the autumn of 2017, offering insights into attitudes towards local authorities and ongoing decentralization reforms, as well as participation in local politics. The survey shows that people have very low trust in the authorities, but more trust in them than in national institutions. Respondents feel that they have little influence on local politics and that local authorities do not take their opinion into account. On the other hand, the majority report being active in various forms of local political activity. Further, there is considerable support of decentralization reforms; people have already noted certain local improvements since the decentralization reform was launched in 2015. Differences among the several geographical regions of Ukraine are small. Survey findings are explained through three analytical frameworks that emphasize the historical heritage, important economic and political conditions, and structural adjustment to European institutions. ; Artikkelen er skrevet med finansiering fra det norske Utenriksdepartementet (prosjekt UKR-14/0013) og Norges Forskningsråd (NORRUSS Pluss-programmet, prosjektnr. 287620). Norges forskningsråd 287620 Utenriksdepartementet UKR-14/0013 ; publishedVersion

In this thesis, we compare two organizational reforms within one policy area. How the "Modernization reform for development management" from 2002/03 and the "Reform for the organization of grant management" from 2018/19, affected the relationship between the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Norad - the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation. Central is the political choice of the overall organizational model in the reforms, with two main alternatives: an integrated model in which the directorate becomes part of the ministry, and a delegated model that assigns the directorate additional tasks (enhanced vertical autonomy). In the thesis, we examine what led to the reform in 2003, and whether the newer reform can be regarded as a continuation of the 2003 reform. We have chosen to base our analysis on the theoretical framework for reforms by Pollitt and Bouckaert. The thesis is a comparative case study, and the analysis is based on three types of data sources: semi-structured interviews, document analysis, and media coverage. In the thesis, we find that several driving forces contributed to the initiation of reform in 2002/03, but that the Minister of Development's political ambitions must be regarded as a main reason to reform. The result of the reform was a mixed model, which can best be explained by the interaction - or tug-of-war - between two ministers, between foreign policy and development policy and the meeting between political desires and what was administratively feasible. Unresolved issues in the 2003 reform led to constant attempts to find an administrative balance in the years between the two reforms. In 2019, driving forces within the political system, especially party politics, became decisive for the choice of model, after the political party KrF (the Christian Democrats) entered the government. By studying the two reforms over time, we show in the thesis that ongoing discussions about the interface between politics and administration, as well as tensions between foreign policy and development policy interests, were central to the reform processes. This may help explain why reforms are repeated. The thesis is a contribution to understanding reforms in a context that also includes the time perspective. ; publishedVersion

- ; In critically important parts of the cold war era the Democratic Party was the steward of American foreign policy. But since September 11. 2001, the party has, however, mostly been a bystander to the major transformation of U.S. foreign policy carried out by the Bush administration. Will the party continue to play such a passive and reactive role or will it be able to formulate a coherent and realistic alternative the Bush foreign policy? Both the U.S. international behavior and world politics will be greatly affected by the outcome of the ongoing internal debate in the party. This paper takes a closer look at this debate and the various fractions that now compete for being the foreign policy face of the party. It is still too early to tell the outcome of this jockeying for power, and consequently the Bush administration will most likely continue as the dominant force behind American foreign policy.