<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">This paper presents means by which relations between facts and decisions can be put on a higher, more transparent and accountable level. The complexity of relations, their exponential effects, new technology and numerous rules have increased the public administration’s unaccountability for its actions – if it is even possible to talk about accountability at all. This kind of situation is presented as the rule of nobody that through multiple relations, competencies and division of labour diminishes the possibility to view a situation as a whole, and enhances the distinction between a person’s formal role and his inner personal world. Classical decision-making procedures (more or less still) exclude interactions between political-legal and scientific institutions on one side and between the first and social groups on the other about modern risks that go beyond classical factory-related or occupational hazards. If the presented means (performance indicators, the avoidance of exclusive subjective evidence, the use of probability in individual cases, the right to clear information, the office for legislation and regulatory analysis and an IT platform) were formally integrated into decision-making, they could enable democratisation, for which the non-stop present and available communication links are sine qua non.</abstract>

Means Against the Rule of Nobody

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">The level of development of every country is reflected in constitutional regulation and consequent laws that regulate citizens’ rights to participate in the administration of public affairs. The Constitution of the Slovak Republic and related constitutional laws establish the democratic and constitutional basis of the legal state of the Slovak Republic. The establishment of the Slovak Republic in 1993 required reformulating and enacting all rights and symbols of the state. The principle <italic>“the state’s power derives from the citizens”</italic> is embedded in the Constitution. However, doubts are currently being raised as to whether the citizens participate in the administration of public affairs in the estimated range and in the appropriate manner as it is embedded in the Constitution of the Slovak Republic. The scope of the article is extensive, due to the character of the selected problems. This also affected the main goal of the article. Since the aim is considerably large, it was necessary to define several partial objectives. At the same time, it was desirable to examine other indicators that contributed to the main aim. The aim of the article was to summarize, analyze and categorize the available facts about the legal-theoretical terms for the participation of citizens in public life in the conditions of the Slovak Republic, as well as within the EU.</abstract>

The Legal-Theoretical Terms of Citizen Participation in the Administration of Public Affairs in the Slovak Republic

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">In developed countries, both universal and optional parts of healthcare exist. This article shows the importance and fiscal position of universally available care and suggests where it can be extended by optional financing schemes such as prepaid health programmes. We use a comparative approach, SWOT analysis and synthesis of individual mechanisms of health financing into a single health system. A simple scheme of possible health system financing configuration is created, and we classify the financial resources and schemes used accordingly. Overall this article introduces a theoretically substantiated overview of health policy options for Czechia based on principles of universally available care, solidarity, fiscal neutrality, adequate fiscal space for health and voluntary private health expenditure.</abstract>

The Relationships and Configuration of Universal and Optional Healthcare Financing Schemes in Czechia

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">Most quantitative studies deal with the costs of transparency lobbying and give little or no attention to quantifying the benefits. The aim of the article is to determine options for increasing lobbying transparency and their evaluation and comparison from the viewpoint of direct and indirect benefits. Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) isused. Five basic options are identified. Option I is the possibility of increasing the transparency of lobbying by measures introduced on lobbyists. Option II represents an increase of transparency in terms of lobbying targets. Option III is defined as an increase in lobbying transparency by means of sunshine principles and the increase of lobbying transparency by monitoring and sanctions is included in Option IV. All five options are evaluated from the perspective of realized direct and indirect benefits. The selection of the most suitable option will be carried out in relation with the presupposed incurred regulatory costs of lobbying transparency increase.</abstract>

What Benefits Does Transparent Lobbying Bring

AHEAD OF PRINT

Volume 15 (2024): Issue 1 (March 2024)

Volume 14 (2023): Issue 4 (December 2023)

Volume 14 (2023): Issue 3 (September 2023)

Volume 14 (2023): Issue 2 (June 2023)

Volume 14 (2023): Issue 1 (March 2023)

Volume 13 (2022): Issue 4 (December 2022)

Volume 13 (2022): Issue 3 (September 2022)

Volume 13 (2022): Issue 2 (June 2022)

Volume 13 (2022): Issue 1 (March 2022)

Volume 12 (2021): Issue 4 (December 2021)

Volume 12 (2021): Issue 3 (September 2021)

Volume 12 (2021): Issue 2 (June 2021)

Volume 12 (2021): Issue 1 (March 2021)

Volume 11 (2020): Issue 4 (December 2020)

Volume 11 (2020): Issue 3 (September 2020)

Volume 11 (2020): Issue 2 (June 2020)

Volume 11 (2020): Issue 1 (March 2020)

Volume 10 (2019): Issue 4 (December 2019)

Volume 10 (2019): Issue 3 (September 2019)

Volume 10 (2019): Issue 2 (June 2019)

Volume 10 (2019): Issue 1 (March 2019)

Volume 9 (2018): Issue 4 (December 2018)

Volume 9 (2018): Issue 3 (September 2018)

Volume 9 (2018): Issue 2 (June 2018)

Volume 9 (2018): Issue 1 (March 2018)

Volume 8 (2017): Issue 4 (December 2017)

Volume 8 (2017): Issue 3 (September 2017)

Volume 8 (2017): Issue 2 (June 2017)

Volume 8 (2017): Issue 1 (March 2017)

Volume 7 (2016): Issue 4 (December 2016)

Volume 7 (2016): Issue 3 (September 2016)

Volume 7 (2016): Issue 2 (June 2016)

Volume 7 (2016): Issue 1 (March 2016)

Volume 6 (2015): Issue 4 (December 2015)

Volume 6 (2015): Issue 3 (September 2015)

Volume 6 (2015): Issue 2 (June 2015)

Volume 6 (2015): Issue 1 (March 2015)

Volume 5 (2014): Issue 4 (December 2014)

Volume 5 (2014): Issue 3 (September 2014)

Volume 5 (2014): Issue 2 (June 2014)

Volume 5 (2014): Issue 1 (March 2014)

Volume 4 (2013): Issue 4 (December 2013)

Volume 4 (2013): Issue 3 (September 2013)

Volume 4 (2013): Issue 2 (June 2013)

Volume 4 (2013): Issue 1 (March 2013)

DANUBE

 DANUBE is an international professional journal referring to the tradition of the humanities-oriented periodical of the same title, which was first published in Vienna as early as 1923. Just as the Danube River connects European capitals, the DANUBE Journal creates a strong network of links between European researchers who have dedicated their professional lives to the social sciences and humanities. The journal also welcomes authors from other regions, as long as they respect the Aims &amp; Scope of the journal. The journal has been published by the De Gruyter, a prestigious publisher with a history of almost 270 years, since 2021 in collaboration with the PRIGO University. It is printed, but in particular it is published and distributed as an electronic Open Access resource. It is listed in most key citation databases, while it has been listed in the Scopus database since 2010.  Only anonymized manuscripts containing high-quality original research that strictly respect Aims &amp; Scope of the Journal and the Instructions for authors may be submitted, solely via Editorial Manager.  Rejection Rate   48%   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. 