Issue 2008 no2 contents:

The objective of “arranging a permanent and systemic anti-corruption expertise of legislation” was set by the Russian President in 2004. The possibilities of addressing this objective were discussed among experts already back in the early 2000s. Published in 2004, the Guidelines for Experts Looking for Corruption Prone Elements Through Primary Analysis of Legislative Acts (CSR, 2004) allowed experts to become more active in their practical work of addressing this objective. The Anti-Corruption Commission of the Russian Federation State Duma used the Guidelines for the anti-corruption analysis of federal law drafts. In 2005 with support of the Russian Ministry of Economic Development and Trade, the Guidelines were adapted and became also used for the anti-corruption analysis of subordinate regulations. After such experience was summarized, the CSR prepared and published the Methodology of Primary Analysis (Expertise) of Prone to Corruption Elements in Regulations authored by E.V. Talapin, V.N. Yuzhakov and edited by V.N. Yuzhakov (M.: Statut, 2007). Among a variety of possible defects in the rules and legal formulas impairing the quality of laws and subordinate regulations, the Methodology identifies and describes 22 typical corruption prone elements, i.e. those provisions in the regulations which are more frequently found and which are very much likely to provoke corruption risks. The rules of the anti-corruption analysis ensure that it is made systematically and correctly. Such rules require the following: anti-corruption analyses are uniformly conducted and their results are uniformly described; experts see whether each typical corruption prone element is present or not in each rule; experts see how to prevent the appearance of and/or to eliminate each corruption prone element. Implementation of these rules implies the establishment of a certain anti-corruption analysis procedure requiring in particular: to make all legislators responsible for purity of regulations from any corruption prone elements. In 2007 -2008 the anti-corruption analysis of regulations (and their drafts) was practiced by at least ten federal executive authorities and in forty sub-federal entities of the Russian Federation. In most events one or the other Methodology version was used for the expertise. Typical corruption elements identifiable by the Methodology were found in the analysed regulations. Introduction of the anti-corruption analysis was assisted and can be facilitated among other activities by training seminars teaching to use the Methodology. In 2006-2008 the exerts of the Research Fund – Institute for Modernisation of Public and Municipal Administration conducted more than 25 such trainings for deputies, specialists and experts of the state authorities and non-government  rganizations. Future prospects for expanding the anti-corruption analysis practice among legislators are associated with mandatory introduction and uniform requirements for its technology. The Procedure and the Methodology attached to this article as an example are intended to address this task which can be achieved if they are approved by the regulatory acts (published at the official website of the Centre for Strategic Research at www.csr.ru).

The article suggests a comprehensive multivariable and multidimensional classification  of social forces and groups upholding public service reform (“supporters”), forces standing up against it (“opponents”) and groups indifferent to the reforming process (“morasses”). The classification comprises the level of state policy, social groups and personal one. The issue of designing such a classification has not only been addressed, but also has not been raised yet in academic studies: all the efforts resulted in elementary contrasting between “reformers” and “conservatives”, whereas existent situation involves far more complicated balance of forces. “Stocktaking” of social potential of the reform following such a thorny path and the forces confronting it appears to be a rather relevant issue. It may become an integral part of a large project, which will broaden our scientific knowledge and, moreover, will open up an opportunity for our state construction practices to evaluate more thoroughly implications of the steps taken and will increase the level of drawing up reforming programs and plans. Thus, the author considers this article as a theoretical base for empirical investigation, as only specific sociological analysis may encourage a comprehensive evaluation of actual social base required for our state machinery improvement, forces more or less confronting it, and possible “stockpiles” that might be made supportive to the reform, with adequate reforming strategy and tactics provided.

The article reviews fundamentals of creation of the modern Theory of Public Finance from the viewpoint of analysis of the Doctrine of State evolution as one of the most important components of the Philosophical Science of Society. The authors have examined evolution of various forms of state structure formulated by outstanding Russian philosophers and lawyers: B.N.Tchitcherin (1828-1904), М.М.Коvalevskiy (1851-1916) and PI.Novgorodtsev (1866-1924). Different concepts of the basic classical theories of State have been classified in detail, as well as verbose listing thereof, manifold scientific trends of particular schools representatives have been reviewed. Different Theories of State underlie diverse Theories of Public Finance. The authors understand the very pinch of the Public Finance Science as the way of obtaining and rational redistribution of limited resources by a State. Therefore the article reviews the key scientific papers of the most big-names in this field in Europe, beginning from Neapolitan duke D.Caraffa (1406-1487), who may be considered the Farther of the Public Finance Science, and up to A.Smith (1723-1790) papers, who formed the Public Finance Science - one of the most dynamically developing science at present. The authors have systematized classical concepts of Public Finance depending upon key category thereof. The authors note in conclusion that the concepts and basic ideas set out in the article represent overall view of approach to understanding of phenomenon of State and apprehension thereof. Disclosure of verbose listing of the Theories of State features will allow to analyze economic ideas directed to create the Theory of Public Finance at its earlier stages, before the start of the classical period.

We present the first empirical assessment of the U.K. Labour government’s  program of public management reform. This reform program is based on rational planning, devolution and delegation, flexibility and incentives, and enhanced choice. Measures of these variables are tested against external and internal indicators of organizational performance. The setting for the study is upper tier. English local governments, and data are drawn from a multiple informant survey of 117 authorities. The statistical results indicate that planning, organizational flexibility, and user choice are associated with higher performance. Conclusions are drawn for the theoryand practice of public management reform.

Recent years have witnessed various analytical methods for comparing or benchmarking technologies widely applied due to multiple public sector reforms. Such mechanisms became widespread because sometimes there was a lack of other criteria to assess better performance except for  comparing separate characteristic features of the systems being analyzed. Besides, introduction of management by objectives gave rise to multiple targets, which might be used as a base for comparison. Thus, along with the necessity for, nowadays there appeared a strong possibility for making effective use of benchmarking to manage changes and searching for a “second better” decision, including public management improvement. The article presents theoretical benchmarking issues, gives a brief outline for benchmarking initiatives derived from the world practices, and sets the requirements for public service benchmarking systems. Practices for better performance assessment, comparing activities and outcomes of government bodies, local authorities and regional structures should become an essential tool in the analysis of the current status, planning/developing of the changes in the context of public management reforms being carried out. Therefore, the article sets forward legal and guidance documents’ contents proposals, enabling introduction of benchmarking system into the current practices of executive bodies of an entity within the Russian Federation. The authors of the article conclude that introduction of benchmarking practices into planning and budgeting schemes for government bodies and other organizations, delivering public services, is considered to be the most essential condition for benchmarking efficiency in executive bodies. It is advisable to facilitate such integration taking into account the decisions made on the targets’ legal status and correlation mechanism of the achieved target values and the amount of financing given to services suppliers.

The article says though human rights and freedoms, specified in article 2 of the  Constitution of the Russian Federation do not encompass a citizens’ right to local governance, this right is constitutional by implication of part 2 of article 3, part 2 article 32, articles 130-133 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Opinions are mixed regarding definition of “a right to local government” and “a right to local governance” in academic writings. Basing on the analysis of the works of such prominent academics as N.S. Bondar, V.I. Vasilev, D.G. Zharomskikh, A.E. Eremin, V.A. Maksimov, A.A. Sergeev, the author concludes that the notions of “a right to local government” and “a right to local governance” should be distinguished between. A right to local governance is a combination of individual and collective rights; it does not imply establishment or abolishment of local government per se. Collective rights include the following ones: a citizens’ right to self-organization and to render status of municipal units to urban and rural settlements, and other areas; a citizen’s right to exercise authority through local government bodies independently; a right to determine the structure of local authorities independently; a right to hold a referendum as a form of direct local governance; a right to hold municipal elections, including deputy  lections, elections of other elective bodies’ members and elective officials within local authorities; a right to rule-making; a citizens’ right to decision-aking at the local level; a right to possess, use and manage municipal property independently; a right to financial autonomy, to draw up and approve local budget; a right to introduce local taxes and revenues; a right to maintain protection of public order independently; a right to determine and change boundaries of a municipal unit; a right to elaborate and adopt a standing rule of a municipal unit; a right to joint appeal to local authorities and local officials; a right to judicial or other defense of local government. Individual rights imply: a right to elect and to be elected to local authorities; a citizens’ right to encourage and participate in local referendums; an individual right to apply to local authorities and local officials; a citizens’ right to equal access to municipal service; a right to receive precise and accurate information on local government and officials’ performance. A right to local governance may be exercised directly as well as through local authorities. The boundaries of a municipal unit mark territorial boarders within which a right to local governance may be enforced. If local government power, serving as a basis of a constitutional system, is not possible to be limited, a right to local governance might be restricted in accordance with part 3 of article 55 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

The article examines the methods and outcomes of comparative analysis of nine  public services being provided by different government bodies in Chelyabinsk Region. The analytical part of the study is based on the survey, conducted in 2006, which is aimed at quality assessment of services provided. The article gives an account of general characteristics of the survey, analyzes quality of interaction with a service supplier, infrastructure elements associated with rendering services, and customer satisfaction with the procedure of service offering. Also, it assesses quality of service delivery and gives cumulative value of services. Public services’ benchmarking was aimed at determining the reasons of difference in quality and performance efficiency, and also possible ways of applying best practices. The research has been carried out in order to evaluate methods and  nalysis of benchmarking capabilities. It based on the data collected after multiple informants have been surveyed in Chelyabinsk to assess the quality of the public services provided. Empirical data were acquired through interviewing citizens, who applied for services in 2006. The method of data acquisition – an official personal interview in service delivery locations. From 6 to 80 informants have been surveyed on each service (sample on each service was shaped in proportion to the number of clients or applicants per year). Totally, the data from 337 informants were collected.