The subject of the analysis in the article is the participation of the local government administration in running a cultural institution. The situation in the Podlaskie voivodship has been analyzed on a nationwide basis. The main problems focus on the principles and methods of financing cultural institutions by regional self-government and various ways of obtaining additional, extra-budgetary funding for their activities, especially from Ministry of Culture and National Heritage and the European Union. The author points to spatial, social, and financial diversification related to the access to cultural events and participation in them using the example of Podlaskie voivodship. He propounds greater professionalisation related to running cultural institutions at the level of the voivodship as well as conducting pro-development cultural policy by local government units. He also stresses the need for activating local and regional communities in connection with cultural events and participation in organizing them. Participation in culture at the local and regional level and prudent government policy in this area are the foundation for building a strong social and regional identity.
The idea of European unity is a political challenge that has been addressed in various forms since the states started forming in the vicinities of the Rhine, Danube and Elbe. In the course of history European integration has evolved to face the challenges of a) merging, crossing and diffusion of cultural patterns represented by different local, regional and supra-regional communities; b) the submission or conquests of regions by empires and imposing defined patterns of cultural life on them; c) the reinforcement of the continental identity vis à vis other civilizations, in particular Asiatic ones; d) the guarantee of safety for states and nations as well as the promotion of the ideas of liberty, the rule of law, self-governance and democracy. In creating the spiritual unity of Europe, the repertoire of values developed by the cultural life of ancient Greece and Rome, as well as Judeo-Christian communities, is commonly referred to. European identity is characterized by a division into cultural and political identification. The idea of European unity is both an intellectual, and a theoretical-doctrinal concept, oriented at the broadest range of cultural and civilizational integration of the continent, as well as a concrete political and economic undertaking. At present, particular significance is attached to the attitude of public opinion when implementing it. The Union's integration is an aspect of numerous implementation projects which depends on the support and legitimization of public opinion. ; The idea of European unity is a political challenge that has been addressed in various forms since the states started forming in the vicinities of the Rhine, Danube and Elbe. In the course of history European integration has evolved to face the challenges of a) merging, crossing and diffusion of cultural patterns represented by different local, regional and supra- regional communities; b) the submission or conquests of regions by empires and imposing defined patterns of cultural life on them; c) the reinforcement of the continental identity vis à vis other civilizations, in particular Asiatic ones; d) the guarantee of safety for states and nations as well as the promotion of the ideas of liberty, the rule of law, self-governance and democracy. In creating the spiritual unity of Europe, the repertoire of values developed by the cultural life of ancient Greece and Rome, as well as Judeo-Christian communities, is commonly referred to. European identity is characterized by a division into cultural and political identification. The idea of European unity is both an intellectual, and a theoretical-doctrinal concept, oriented at the broadest range of cultural and civilizational integration of the continent, as well as a concrete political and economic undertaking. At present, particular significance is attached to the attitude of public opinion when implementing it. The Union's integration is an aspect of numerous implementation projects which depends on the support and legitimization of public opinion.
The idea of European unity is a political challenge that has been addressed in various forms since the states started forming in the vicinities of the Rhine, Danube and Elbe. In the course of history European integration has evolved to face the challenges of a) merging, crossing and diffusion of cultural patterns represented by different local, regional and supra- regional communities; b) the submission or conquests of regions by empires and imposing defined patterns of cultural life on them; c) the reinforcement of the continental identity vis à vis other civilizations, in particular Asiatic ones; d) the guarantee of safety for states and nations as well as the promotion of the ideas of liberty, the rule of law, self-governance and democracy. In creating the spiritual unity of Europe, the repertoire of values developed by the cultural life of ancient Greece and Rome, as well as Judeo-Christian communities, is commonly referred to. European identity is characterized by a division into cultural and political identification. The idea of European unity is both an intellectual, and a theoretical-doctrinal concept, oriented at the broadest range of cultural and civilizational integration of the continent, as well as a concrete political and economic undertaking. At present, particular significance is attached to the attitude of public opinion when implementing it. The Union's integration is an aspect of numerous implementation projects which depends on the support and legitimization of public opinion.
The author analyses the selected mechanisms in the spatial (planning) policy as well as its outcomes. He points out at the sources of complexity within this area, patterns of order and chaos. His hypothesis claims that unsatisfactory results come from the low level of the state's governability in the area of policy formulation, implementation and evaluation. It also derives from inadequate institutional and analytical potential. As a consequence, public institutions are not able to use the regulatory instruments in an adequate way as well as to pay a proper attention to the policy analysis, including the consequences and long-term effects of spatial chaos. According to the author, cultural background seems to be important while trying to understand the state's problems in the area of spatial policy. It leads to the fact that spatial issues are rather lower on the public agenda among other public concerns (like economic or developmental goals).
The author analyses the selected mechanisms in the spatial (planning) policy as well as its outcomes. He points out at the sources of complexity within this area, patterns of order and chaos. His hypothesis claims that unsatisfactory results come from the low level of the state's governability in the area of policy formulation, implementation and evaluation. It also derives from inadequate institutional and analytical potential. As a consequence, public institutions are not able to use the regulatory instruments in an adequate way as well as to pay a proper attention to the policy analysis, including the consequences and long-term effects of spatial chaos. According to the author, cultural background seems to be important while trying to understand the state's problems in the area of spatial policy. It leads to the fact that spatial issues are rather lower on the public agenda among other public concerns (like economic or developmental goals). ; Autor analizuje wybrane mechanizmy w polityce przestrzennej, a także to, co można nazwać jej rezultatami w Polsce. Wskazuje na źródła złożoności, wzorce ładu i chaosu w tej polityce. Stawia tezę, że niesatysfakcjonujące rezultaty wynikają z tego, iż instytucje państwa wypracowały niski poziom sterowności w programowaniu, implementowaniu i ewaluowaniu problemów przestrzennych. To skutek ich nieadekwatnego potencjału instytucjonalnego, analitycznego.Wkonsekwencji instytucje państwa nie sąwstanie wsposób adekwatny posługiwać się instrumentami regulacyjnymi, nadawać odpowiedniego znaczenia roli analizy, wtym analizy konsekwencji idługoterminowych skutków występowania chaosu przestrzennego. Dla zrozumienia problemów zpotencjałem państwa wtej polityce autor uważa za ważny kontekst kulturowy. Sprawia on, że zagadnienia zagospodarowania przestrzeni sąnisko ulokowane naagendzie dyskutowanych zagadnień publicznych wśród innych zagadnień życia publicznego (jak cele gospodarcze, rozwojowe).
In 2015 we celebrate the twenty-fifth anniversary of the first free local elections to self-governing bodies. Those elections activated local citizens initiatives and greatly contributed to the transformation in our social awareness, leading to real change in Poland's political regime. The underlying rationale of free local elections, however, was the package of laws adopted on 8 March 1990 which created real self-government, enabled the elections to commune and municipality councils of 27 May 1990 and introduced a new dynamic to the process of the decentralisation of the state.Changes are always the result of dreams and our ability to realise them. It is possible to make them if there exist organisational structures and institutions which allow such changes to be made. The need for political transformation had long been felt and deliberated on by those involved in spatial development or and for whom the state monopoly status quo was unacceptable. To quote the late and much missed Professor Jerzy Regulski, the implementation of self-governance was departure from the monopoly of central government, which in turn meant an actual change in the political regime. The reform of 1990 broke up five monopolies of an authoritarian state which had existed in Poland since the end of the World War II: the political monopoly of one party, of centralised power, of uniform state ownership, of public finances and the state budget, and of the uniform public administration of the state.However, it must always be remembered that the possibility of realising dreams of a change in the nature of the state was shaped in the first triumphant stage of the Solidarity period in 1989, and later became a stable basis for the future in the resolution of the First National Congress of Solidarity Delegates and in the 'Samorządna Rzeczpospolita' (A Self-governing Republic) document. The success of the real change of 1990 was rooted in the long term determination and persistence of those whose personal experiences were involved in the quest for rationality in land management. Both Professor Jerzy Regulski and Professor Michał Kulesza drew their inspiration to change the political regime from the need to ensure that society worked in a way that would allow the local needs and initiatives be articulated, and inhabitants having the ability to take concrete decisions about the surrounding environment. In this way, the existing possibility of active involvement in local initiatives, incapable of being realised in the former political system, would become a reality and the citizens would be able to make collective decisions about their local area. This would also give a chance to oppose formally the investment logic resulting from the central planning of those times.The analytic work aimed at the transformation of the political regime that Professor Regulski started in the 1970s during his employment at the University of Lodz were subsequently continued at the Economic Institute of the Polish Academy of Sciences and led to the formation of a group of individuals for whom self-governance became a core value of the new regime and a way of looking at the modern state. The change that took place in 1990 was the beginning of the building of a de-centralised, modern state, the status of which was subsequently confirmed when Poland adopted the Council of Europe Framework Convention for the European Charter of Local Self-Government. Self-government is never an institution whose constitution is ever finished. This was shown during the reform carried out by Prime Minister Jerzy Buzek's government, which continued the break-up of the monopoly of power and implemented subsidiarity principles at the regional level enabling them to exercise powers locally, in newly created districts (powiat), as well as in the later legislative changes pertaining to the regulations governing the election of mayors (wójt or burmistrz) or the work of the Komisja Wspólna Rządu i Samorządu (Joint Committee of the Government and Self-Government). Today, after 25 years of our experience with self-government, we are much more aware of the changes needed in the self-governing system. They include the strengthening of actual independence of self-government achieved through the ensured free choice of the manner in which self-government bodies will carry out their tasks, guaranteed revenues and the possibility given to commune and municipality authorities of exercising real influence on their size, improved cooperation between communes and municipalities (gmina) and districts (powiat), and, fore and foremost, by ensuring all citizens a chance of co-decision on matters which directly affect them. Changes in the regime of self-governance are a consequence of its assessment by external, independent experts but are also motivated by the natural dynamics of the changes resulting from the very essence of self-governance and its institutions, communes and municipalities (gmina), districts (powiat) and regions (voivodships).In 2010 associations of self-governing units realised the need for change and amendments to the law on self-governance. Thus, they formulated a number of proposals which were included in a document called 'Requests to the President of the Republic of Poland to commence work on the white book of territorial self-government in the year of the 20th anniversary.' This document initiated work on a draft law which in 2013 became the subject of a legislative initiative put forward by President Bronisław Komorowski. The purpose of the new law on the collaboration of self-governing bodies in local and regional development is to strengthen the role of the citizen as well as the community in the work of self-government in Poland. The effort that Professors Jerzy Regulski and Michał Kulesza in their capacity as Advisors to President Komorowski put into the legislative work remains invaluable. It is believed that the involvement of individual citizens constitutes the strength of self-government and is a guarantee of its role at the service and in the interest of communities, individual inhabitants and businesses. Hence the need for enhanced collaboration and the partnership of different bodies of self-government and the increased involvement of citizens. There is draft law that contains regulations supporting these activities.Under the draft law, a local referendum is seen as an important tool to ensure the participation of citizens in decision-making processes, including those concerning local development plans. Local referenda should constitute a mechanism used to solve local issues of material importance to residents. Their result should be binding regardless of the turnout.Self-governance helps to create and strengthen the natural inclination of individuals to act together in areas where because of their social, business or cultural ties, a local community spirit develops. In today's world of global challenges and competition, we are looking for a space for the individual which provides a feeling of security. Another important value of self-governance is the possibility of creating affiliations with a community as well as individual entrepreneurship, social activity and a regard for the collective memory of the symbols of a place. The ability to participate in community life is inseparable from the functioning of democracy at a local level, with the consultation process, election of public officers, or participation in referenda.Self-governance is a special value which gives each of us a chance to exercise a real influence on local matters. It therefore occupies a very special place where politics has a personal dimension. The variety of self-governance means at the same time a variety of development policies since there are different communities, with different emotions, different experiences or ability to participate in democratic management. This variety is a special asset in the process of the stabilisation of the state as a whole. The diversity of opinions and experiences, appointments to public office of citizens not affiliated to or necessarily recommended by any party creates the solid foundations of a democratic state. This feeling of freedom within self-governing communities must be continued and promoted.The authors of many of the texts published in this issue of Ruch Prawniczy, Ekonomiczny i Socjologiczny devoted to self-governance are, at the same time, authors of the transformation of Polish law and Poland's administration in the last 25 years. Contributions submitted by, among others, Prof. dr hab. Irena Lipowicz, Prof. Jerzy Stępień, Prof. dr hab. Jerzy Buzek, Prof. dr hab. Leon Kieres or Prof. dr hab. Hanna Gronkiewicz-Waltz are the best proof of the capital importance that self-governance plays in a democratic state. I thank Professor Teresa Rabska and the editorial staff of Ruch Prawniczy, Ekonomiczny i Socjologiczny for their active involvement in questions of self-government from the very beginning. This issue is entirely devoted to a range of legal, economic and sociological aspects of new challenges facing self-government and its regime. Once again I thank them for such active involvement and participation in the jubilee celebrations of Self-Government and this special issue of the journal.We need self-governance not only to feel that we can influence decisions being made about local issues but also to be continually able to renew our confidence in institutions at a local level, and through their collaboration at the national level.
System polityczny Unii Europejskiej jest przykładem rządzenia odbywającego się w silnie zróżnicowanym środowisku kulturowym, społecznym i politycznym. Jego rozwój jest nielinearny, a wyznaczenie jego granic okazuje się bardzo trudne lub wręcz niemożliwe. Traktat z Lizbony nie określił w sposób jednoznaczny dalszego kierunku rozwoju UE, a wręcz przyczynił się do pogłębienia złożoności systemowych. W sposób szczególny zjawisko to zarysowało się w obszarze rozwiązań instytucjonalnych, które kumulują wszelkie napięcia i kryzysy pojawiające się w procesie integracji. W wyjątkowy sposób do zwiększenia niespójności w systemie integracyjnym przyczyniła się komasacja zjawisk kryzysowych po 2009 roku. Jednocześnie obserwujemy specyficzne właściwości towarzyszące kształtowaniu się mechanizmów instytucjonalnych, które w odpowiedzi na powtarzające się trudności wykształciły zachowania elastyczne i odpornościowe. Efektem są przeobrażenia systemu instytucjonalnego, które kreują niejednorodne rozwiązania o tendencjach zarówno integrujących, jak i dezintegrujących system. ; The political system of the European Union is an example of governance realised in a highly diversified cultural, social and political environment. Its development is non-linear and determining its boundaries turns out to be very difficult or even impossible. The Treaty of Lisbon did not clearly define the further direction of the EU's development, and even contributed to the deepening of systemic complexities. This phenomenon is particularly visible in the area of institutional solutions that accumulate all tensions and crises that appear in the integration process. The amalgamation of crisis phenomena after 2009 contributed to an exceptional increase in inconsistencies in the integration system. At the same time, we observe specific properties accompanying the shaping of institutional mechanisms, which in response to repeated difficulties have developed flexible and resilient behaviors. The effect is transformations of the institutional system, which create heterogeneous solutions with both integrating and disintegrating tendencies.
The paper presents results of a pilot study conducted in the second half of 2015 as part of the project Gender, Innovation and Sustainable Development in the Baltic Sea Region in the following five countries: Estonia, Poland, Sweden, Lithuania and Latvia. The countries differ in terms of the scale of female entrepreneurship and the level of innovativeness of their economies, but also in respect of state policy for gender equality. With an index at the level of 74 points, Sweden tops the ranking of the Gender Equality Index, while the other countries that fall within the scope of this research have a significantly lower index: Estonia – 54, Latvia – 47, Poland – 44, Lithuania – 40 [EIGE 2013]. Sweden is also a leader in the Innovation Union Scoreboard 2014 ranking (outdoing Denmark and Finland); Estonia, Lithuania and Poland, on the other hand, have been classified to a group of moderate innovators, while Latvia – to a group of modest innovators . EU experts hold an opinion that the success of Sweden (and other Scandinavian countries) in the area of innovativeness comes not only from high R&D expenditures, but also from socio-cultural factors, such as equal opportunities and focus on cooperation (socalled multilevel governance). (fragment of the text) ; Wartykule przedstawiamy wyniki badania wstępnego przeprowadzonego wdrugiej połowie 2015r., wramach projektu Gender, Innovation and Sustainable Development in the Baltic Sea Region, wpięciu krajach: Estonii, Polsce iSzwecji oraz na Litwie iŁotwie. Kraje te różnią się pod względem skali zjawiska przedsiębiorczości kobiet ipoziomu innowacyjności gospodarki, ale także wzakresie polityki państwa na rzecz równouprawnienia. Szwecja zajmuje pierwsze miejsce wrankingu Gender Equality Index ze wskaźnikiem na poziomie 74 punktów, podczas gdy pozostałe kraje objęte badaniem mają ten wskaźnik dużo niższy: Estonia – 54, Łotwa – 47, Polska – 44, Litwa – 40 [EIGE 2013]. Szwecja jest też liderem wrankingu Innovation Union Scoreboard 2014 (przed Danią iFinlandią), podczas gdy ...
In terms of law, federation is a complex political, economic, administrative and social system, whose individual components enjoy a significant level of independence. Political authority is organized so as to protect the identity of national, ethnic, linguistic and cultural minorities living in the territory of this multidimensional federal structure. From the constitutional point of view, federalism has two principal functions. Firstly, it unifies a state that was once disintegrated, thus allowing for the establishment of a political union and of some form of authority, which is a prerequisite of forming a somewhat broader identity; alternatively, it unifies various states. This function consists of the unification of what used to be separated and disintegrated. The other function concerns the task of maintaining the unity of those who underline the legitimacy of the authorities and reject their governance, because they feel harmed and oppressed by the political regime, or they believe that their interests are not guaranteed in the framework of a constitutionally determined autonomy. This is usually connected with their striving to become separated. In this case, federalism is a reaction to the threat of the state's disintegration, when different identities emerge in its internal structure, although they are not mutually excluded, and they do not exclude one another from this state yet. Then, federalism becomes a form of identification of various subjects with the federal state in a broader than local perspective. The second function of federalism refers us to the issue of a state comprising numerous nations, languages, cultures and religions. Modern democracy is both a political ideology and a political system. It generates increasing dissatisfaction with the way it operates on a practical level. The choice between a unitary and a federal approach does not mean a choice between a democratic or nondemocratic system, yet, from the long-term historical perspective, it appears that a federal system cannot operate without democracy, despite the obvious tensions between a democratic ideal and political reality.
The discussion of the role of self-government in Poland's political structure has been closely linked to the Polish people's aspirations and desire for freedom, democracy and a state in which sovereignty is indeed in the hands of its people. These aspirations, so strongly expressed during the general election of June 1989, have since the very beginning included demands for self-government. What it meant for the state and its political system, was the implementation of the idea embodied in the name Solidarity which, as a trade union, was also to be independent and self-governing. It was also the realisation of the demand for a 'Samorządna Rzeczpospolita' (a Self-governing Republic), one of the fundamental principles of the Solidarity movement put forward at its First National Congress, which I had the honour of chairing in 1981.In March 1990, only a few months after its election on 4 June 1989, the Polish parliament adopted a law that restored the institution of local self-government at the level of communes and municipalities (gmina). Thus, 25 years ago, the road to political transformation in Poland was opened, allowing the building of a Polish state understood as the political community of all its citizens – a real Res Publica.The predominating belief which accompanied us in this process was that the indispensable prerequisite to shaping democracy was to give back the state to its citizens, thus releasing dormant social energy and the entrepreneurial spirit of the people. After all democracy means not only the possibility of the democratically electing the political representatives (the authorities) but equally the chance for citizens to feel involved and take the responsibility for public affairs.Therefore the first democratic government, headed by Tadeusz Mazowiecki, began the process of restoring the state to its citizens from the most important starting point. It started with the rebuilding of communal and municipal self-governing structures and the recreating of the intellectual foundations for the formation of the new constitution of a citizens-centred state.This was possible mainly because a vision of reform had already been conceived and had been long developing in the minds of a number of distinguished persons. This project of self-government reform constituted an original example of engagement of Polish intellectuals in state affairs and their taking responsibility for the common good.The reform also turned out to be one of the most effective methods of de-communisation of Polish public life. This could be best seen in the results of the first election to self-governing structures in 1990, and the role which the Solidarity citizens' committees played in it. It was indeed the same people, the co-founders and members of the Solidarity movement, who have successfully carried out the restoration of self-government in Poland.'We marched for power to return it to the people' was the motto of the Polish government in 1997, a government which I had the honour of heading for the subsequent four years, and which articulated the goals and the sense of political and social transformation of those times. We called it a Four Reform Programme, and its objective was a fundamental transformation of public life in Poland. On the one hand we intended to create favourable conditions for the development of the public civic space, while on the other we strove to activate and make more dynamic the processes of economic, political and cultural development in the country.We believed that acceleration of this development and modernisation was contingent upon active participation of self-government structures. Hence the creation of strong self-government had gradually become our conscious choice and an urgent 'civilising task.' This task was grounded equally in the need to manage properly our recently regained independence, and in the need to make efficient use of the pre-accession period preceding Poland's membership of the European Union, which was then imminent.Thus the administrative reform undertaken by my government in 1999 introduced districts (powiat) as self-governing level of administration, allowing it, in conjunction with communes and municipalities (gmina), to take effective control of matters directly affecting local communities and their citizens. The self-governing structures formed at the level of strong voivodships, or regions, allowed at the same time to decentralise responsibility for regional economic development, competitiveness and modernisation strategies.Today, after over 10 years of EU membership, it is worth reflecting on the impact the political reforms which we carried through then have had on Poland's functioning in the system of European integration. We were proven right in our conviction that decentralisation and differentiation of various state functions would allow for a better and more effective use and management of EU funds.The three-tier self-government structure created solid foundations helping to satisfy better the aspirations of citizens, local communities and regions with regard to their modernisation and development. Today it is those local self-governing units, those closest to citizens, those most familiar with and with the best understanding of their needs, which are responsible for the drafting of regional development projects and the management of funds available for those projects. Self-government structures have become the real centres for formulating and implementing development strategies.This is the context in which the key challenge facing self-government is set, namely the fostering of entrepreneurship, ensuring proper conditions for innovation and mobilising citizens to engage in economic and social initiatives. The role of self-government in shaping of the state's development policy is not limited to dividing available means and resources. Much more important is its ability to effectively multiply the available means, to support partnership ventures, including public-private projects, to form strong business to business relationships as well as partner relations between research centres and local administrative bodies, or promote and support innovations and civic initiatives serving the common good. After all, all these are key factors for the long-term stability and development of our communities and our country, which is today the key measure of the responsibility for public matters, so deeply rooted in the idea of self-government.The self-government reform originated from the ideas developed in the 1980s of the twentieth century as part of the Solidarity movement, but was implemented in an already independent Poland, when laying the foundations for a transformation of the state and the democratisation of the citizen-state relationship. It also had, however, and maybe predominantly, a deep idealistic dimension, so easy to forget when we focus on the current and most urgent challenges of the present.In my opinion, it is in self-governance, as well as in the political and administrative culture, that opportunities for building our freedom lie: freedom, the sense of which we feel best if given a chance to share in the responsibility for it. In times of independence this means the possibility of personal engagement public issues based on the pro publico bono principle: issues pertaining to our family life, our local community, or the whole country.Today, in the context of our shared responsibility for the European Union, such an understanding of self-governance should also inspire us to seek new directions of development, and to participate in the shaping of Europe-wide standards of public life. In the same way as 25 years ago in Poland we founded a political community on the basis of self-governance, we should today look at self-governance as a chance to create a true political community of all European citizens.
