<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic crisis is ongoing, and the elderly are still affected by the virus, sometimes with fatal consequences. The political leaders are, inter alia, focussed on protecting citizens, including this vulnerable group. This article aims to describe the response of the Norwegian political leadership, with a focus on the public health measures enacted to protect the elderly during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic crisis in the years 2020 and 2021. This study has a descriptive qualitative research design using thematic-content analysis as a methodology to evaluate data collected from official documents, national statistics and public health documents from Norway. Statistics show that the elderly mortality rate per 100,000 person-weeks during the first wave of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic was 2.69 in Norway; during the second wave of the pandemic, it was 1.43. The public health measures the Norwegian political leadership instigated were more effective in containing the crisis when compared to other European countries, and this paper investigates the reasons. The results of our study provide public health policy decision-makers with insights into analytical material showing the usefulness of different measures enacted by the Norwegian government. The Norwegian government’s responses to the crisis, such as the public health measures, restrictions, social consequences for vulnerable groups such as the elderly, as well as cross-government and cross-community cooperation, will need further in-depth analysis.
</abstract>

Public Health Measures Enacted by the Norwegian Political Leadership to Protect the Elderly in Response to the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic Crisis

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

A considerable degree of collaboration between civil society organisations (CSOs) and governmental organisations (GOs) occurs in various collaborative areas, such as collaborative platforms, that aim to increase mutual understanding and reach shared solutions to complex social challenges. However, little is known regarding how CSOs relate to and discuss the starting conditions for participating in collaborative platforms. By highlighting the perspectives of CSOs supporting refugees, this article shows that the starting conditions affect whether CSOs decide to participate. Nevertheless, the starting conditions are also essential for their general understanding of the platform’s aim and purpose, thus affecting more than the initial decision to participate or not. A primary barrier to their participation is the political agenda behind the platform and what role CSOs think they should have in society. Consequently, the inclusive ‘whole society approach’ that collaborative platforms intend to create might be out of reach before starting the collaboration.
</abstract>

A Platform for Collaboration: The Views of Civil Society Organisations on a Local Compact

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

Eastern European post-communist countries inherited pervasive corruption after the breakup of the USSR. Public trust was the crucial factor in tackling corruption and democracy building in these countries. This article takes Armenia as a case to study the antecedents and evolution of trust in Eastern European post-communist countries that went through a government coup in the 21st century. By comparing the corruption situation in Armenia before and after the Velvet Revolution 2018, we scrutinise how trust was and is critical to combating corruption and democracy building. We argue that in transition governments, one can distinguish two sources of creating public trust. The first wave generates when the government is newly established, and people trust the leader and his persona. Arguably, in this stage, the level of trust generated is based on expectations. The second wave of trust comes with the government’s actual performance, measured partly based on corruption perception.
</abstract>

Democracy building and the link between public trust and corruption perception: Comparative analysis before and after the Armenian Velvet Revolution in 2018

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

This paper is a configurational analysis that creates a new theoretical elaboration of populist parties in Europe in terms of policy choices. The forms of populism that we can see in contemporary Europe are new, relevant and do not have a theoretical representation in the literature. This paper also provides a clearer understanding of the characteristics of populist and anti-establishment parties in Europe, which can provide valuable insights into likely responses to reformed policy environments. To do so, the paper analyses policy positions connected to the populist literature for 242 parties in Europe in 2014 and 2019 using the Chapell Hill Expert Survey and the PopuList Survey data. Groups of parties with similarly held positions in 2014 and 2019 are identified using cluster analysis to investigate whether differences in positions are defined predominately according to a national, east–west, right–left faction or other criteria. The result highlights that rather than across a classical right–left divide connotation, Europe can be divided into four clusters: right-wing populists, a moderate pro-Europe left, a pro-Europe pro-liberalism centre and an intersectional left based on identity politics. Overall, the moderate left and the centrist liberalism centre are the most common parties across Europe, and the other two factions seem to be born as a reaction to these two. However, the other two factions are growing over the years, especially the populist right-wing in Central and Eastern Europe. This brings to light serious policy implications for the future of the European Union and for considering populism simply as a discursive matter.
</abstract>

Clustering and Analysing Relevant Policy Dimensions of Populist, Left-Wing, Centrist, and Right-Wing Parties across Europe

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

This article applies a systematic literature-based approach to select, analyze, and categorize publications appearing on public sector management (PSM) reforms in Eastern European (EE) and former Soviet Union (FSU) countries. Findings of the literature review reveal the complexity of reformation in the region and point to the multilayered character of the reform processes, including design of the reform content, implementation, and evaluation of achieved results. The analysis, also shows that the reforms’ results are uneven and somewhat controversial. This article contributes by systematizing literature on transforming PSM in EE and FSU countries; analyzing the trajectories of the dominant reforms and finding overlooked topics; providing avenues for future research; and by contextually covering twenty-eight countries that experienced economic transition and significant societal transformations.
</abstract>

Reforming the Public Sector in Eastern European and Former Soviet Union Countries: A Systematic Literature Review

AHEAD OF PRINT

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. 