<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">The aim of this paper is to evaluate accountability using a newly constructed multivariate accountability index based on the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), as well as on the accessibility of government disclosure for each country in the South America context. That will allow to analyse and compare the accountability disclosure issues among the South American countries. This study uses the statistical dimensional structure of data to identify the number of (dominant) dimensions. The findings were eight dimensions defined as Environmental, Expenditure, Social, Strategic, Economic, Information, Macroeconomic and Organizational perspectives. Scores are recorded for the twelve countries in South America that are classified accordingly. The contributions of this research represent an advance in the theoretical and empirical framework by creating an accountability index that takes into account the principles of good governance to improve the South America Central Governments’ transparency performance. This index could be used both by academics and practitioners to classify countries and their web site accountability.</abstract>

Designing an Accountability Index: A Case Study of South America Central Governments

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">This study examines the initial impact of a broadly participatory planning process in the Czech Republic during 2016–2017, aimed at both reducing inpatient care and expanding community mental health systems, on policy and programmatic decision making. A central focus of the study involves the trade-offs between and efforts to integrate shared decision making with evidence-based planning methods within the context of a national psychiatric reform strategy, particularly one involving a former Soviet bloc state.Given the uniqueness of the Czech experience, an exploratory case study methodology is used, one involving ten interviews with key informants and examination of a wide variety of documents. Results include the development of broad new decision and oversight structures, and the initial implementation of community mental health services. The nation faces some of the same trade-offs found elsewhere, such as in the United States, between an inclusive participatory process, and one that systematically incorporates empirical rational and evidence and best practices within bounded parameters.Implications for new psychiatric deinstitutionalization initiatives are identified, including development of a national mental health authority, a professional workforce, new funding strategies, multi-level service coordination, mechanisms to assure transparency, among others.</abstract>

Decision Making in Psychiatric Reform: A Case Study of the Czech Experience

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">This article contributes to the consolidation and synthesis of scholarship on collaborative governance by expanding our knowledge of how the term is used in the academic literature and policy documents in a range of European countries. It adds value to the existing reviews of the field by conducting a systematic literature review on a corpus of over 700 article abstracts and a traditional literature review identifying five key analytical dimensions. The article also provides an exploratory analysis of grey literature hitherto outside the purview of researchers and considers the linguistic and cultural connotations that alter the meaning of the term when translated into new contexts in ten EU/EFTA countries. Findings indicate heterogeneity and fuzziness in the way the concept is used. The article argues that explicit positions with respect to five main analytical dimensions and taking into account the national connotations that the term carries across political systems would inject more clarity into the academic discourse. This, in turn, will help policymakers to make informed use of the concept, especially in multi-national policy-making arenas.</abstract>

The fuzzy concept of collaborative governance: A systematic review of the state of the art

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">It had been established that the heads of institutions should form teams of workers of different generations with different expectations and methods of work in the context of reforming the public service. The periods of forming generations have been set on the basis of literary sources, such as: Generation X (the period up to 1980); Generation Y (from 1981 to 1996); and Generation Z (after 1997). The most important criteria which form the characteristics of public servants have been singled out, and common and distinctive traits of Generations X, Y, and Z have been systematized. The distribution of the number of public servants in Ukraine has been analyzed by gender, age and the category of position. Based on the use of correlation-regression analysis, the tendency of changes in the share of state servants of Ukraine by age category up to 2020 was investigated. This made it possible to confirm the suggested hypothesis of the dependence of the effective reform of the Ukrainian public service on the effective interaction and cooperation of all generations of public servants. The main requirements for a public institution in which the employees of the new generation will work have been systematized.</abstract>

Department of Administrative and Financial Management

The influence of age factors on the reform of the public service of Ukraine

AHEAD OF PRINT

Volume 18 (2024): Issue 1 (June 2024)

Volume 17 (2023): Issue 2 (December 2023)

Volume 17 (2023): Issue 1 (June 2023)

Volume 16 (2022): Issue 2 (December 2022)

Volume 16 (2022): Issue 1 (June 2022)

Volume 15 (2021): Issue 2 (December 2021)

Volume 15 (2021): Issue 1 (June 2021)

Volume 14 (2020): Issue 2 (December 2020)

Volume 14 (2020): Issue 1 (June 2020)

Volume 13 (2019): Issue 2 (December 2019)

Volume 13 (2019): Issue 1 (June 2019)

Volume 12 (2018): Issue 2 (December 2018)

Volume 12 (2018): Issue 1 (June 2018)

Volume 11 (2017): Issue 2 (December 2017)

Volume 11 (2017): Issue 1 (June 2017)

Volume 10 (2016): Issue 2 (December 2016)

Volume 10 (2016): Issue 1 (June 2016)

Volume 9 (2015): Issue 2 (December 2015)

Volume 9 (2015): Issue 1 (May 2015)

Central European Journal of Public Policy

 The Central European Journal of Public Policy (CEJPP) is an open-access, multidisciplinary, peer-reviewed journal with primary focus upon analytical, theoretical and methodological articles in the field of public policy.   The journal article processing charge for accepted articles (APCs) is 400 EUR. This fee covers a part of open access publishing costs.   The aim of the CEJPP is to provide academic scholars and professionals in different policy fields with the latest theoretical and methodological advancements in public policy supported by sound empirical research. The CEJPP addresses all topics of public policy including social services and healthcare, environmental protection, education, labour market, immigration, security, public financing and budgeting, administrative reform, performance measurements, governance and others. It attempts to find a balance between description, explanation and evaluation of public policies and encourages a wide range of social science approaches, both qualitative and quantitative. Although the journal focuses primarily upon Central Europe, relevant contributions from other geographical areas are also welcomed in order to enhance public policy research in Central Europe.   Why subscribe and read   The CEJPP addresses significant political, economic and social issues of contemporary societies. It is a source of high quality research, aimed at academics, policy-makers and practitioners interested in public policy.   Why submit      Open access – free to view papers accessible to all interested readers;   No submission or publication fees;   Fair and constructive double-blind peer review;   Prompt publication process;   Authors’ own the copyright of their papers;      Archiving   Sciendo archives the contents of this journal in Portico - digital long-term preservation service of scholarly books, journals and collections.   Plagiarism Policy   The editorial board is participating in a growing community of Similarity Check System's users in order to ensure that the content published is original and trustworthy. Similarity Check is a medium that allows for comprehensive manuscripts screening, aimed to eliminate plagiarism and provide a high standard and quality peer-review process. 