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

<sec><h3>Background</h3>
<p>The existence of corruption threatens all aspect of a society, be that social, economic or political. Corruption is more pronounced in developing countries; however, it attracts very little attention from decision-makers. This paper analyses the social implications (health and education) of corruption in India and Pakistan. According to the <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="j_cejpp-2022-0003_ref_027">Corruption Perception Index Report (2019)</xref>, these countries are perceived to be the most corrupt ones.</p>
</sec>
<sec><h3>Objectives</h3>
<p>Corruption has been researched enormously with respect to its economic and political consequences, but not much attention has been given to its social implications on human rights. Corruption violates human rights directly or indirectly. Therefore, this paper aims to elaborate the links (direct and indirect) between corruption and human rights and focus on the consequences of corruption on health and education; it also aims to present anti-corruption policies to curb corruption in the investigated countries.</p>
</sec>
<sec><h3>Methods</h3>
<p>The research employs a systematic literature review method (PRISMA-P 2015) that identifies currently available research, selects and assesses contribution, analyses and synthesises data, and presents pieces of evidence with a justified conclusion. It also encourages researchers to apply PRISMA protocols in future researches.</p>
</sec>
<sec><h3>Results</h3>
<p>The results show that more than 80% of the reviewed articles argue that corruption is one of the invincible reasons for the people's dire social condition in India and Pakistan; moreover, corruption remains ignored, which shows that there are gaps to understand how corruption can extremely dent the right to education and health.</p>
</sec>
</abstract>

Social Implications of Corruption in Developing Countries: Case Study of Pakistan and India

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

<p>Donald Trump’s presidency produced a few legislative victories. Instead, as with his predecessors, the Trump presidency had to rely more on executive orders and other actions to move its agenda. But even this unilateral approach produced fewer results than his supporters hoped for or his detractors feared. This article will examine public policymaking and administration under the Trump Administration. It will argue that while the 2016 electoral victories for Republicans gave Donald Trump an enormous opportunity to move his political agenda, several factors prevented that from occurring.</p>
<p>These factors include indecision on the part of the Trump presidency whether to move a policy agenda or cripple the administrative state; denial of personal responsibility for policies or actions, a failure to understand the constitutional underpinnings of American politics and policymaking, especially when it comes to administrative agency action; intra-party disputes; party polarization; ethical, legal, and impeachment issues; governmental inexperience; and an overall inability to appreciate the differences between the American presidency and business leadership.</p>
<p>Overall, the article describes the political context of the Trump presidency and to explain how it, the structure of American government, and the overall indifference or failure of the Trump administration to understand how the government works rendered this presidency far less effective than it could have been. The lesson of the Trump presidency for the USA and other states is despite rhetoric and claims that outsiders or nontraditional leaders can affect governmental and policy change, they are often ineffectual or dangerous.</p>
</abstract>

Public Policy and Administration in the Age of Donald Trump

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

<p>The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, which hit the world in 2020 and is still persisting, has significantly impacted many areas of people's lives. The shutdown anti-pandemic measures implemented by the governments also caused the development of unemployment worldwide. In Slovakia, the restrictions or even complete closure of the operation and activities of the companies caused rising unemployment in some sectors, while in some sectors, the impact was not so substantial. Therefore, the main aim of this study was to analyse and quantify the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on unemployment in various sectors of economic activities in Slovakia. For impact evaluation, a counterfactual approach was used, with analysis of time series development and statistically created counterfactual situation. The analysis was based on real data about the unemployment situation in Slovakia in the period January 2013–April 2021. The results of the study showed that the most affected sectors according to the NACE classification were F – construction, I – accommodation and food service activities and R – arts, entertainment and recreation, showing an increase in unemployment of 89%, 88%, and 65%, respectively. The analysis in this study showed that the impact of a pandemic should be quantified among the sectors, as there are large differences in unemployment caused by the pandemic. From these findings, it is necessary to deduce the different intensities and amount of state aid to companies or employees in these sectors. The results of the study should help to target the policy interventions better to mitigate the impact of the pandemic.</p>
</abstract>

Department of Economics, Faculty of Operation and Economics of Transport and Communications

Department of Quantitative Methods and Economic Informatics, Faculty of Operation and Economics of Transport and Communications

No escape from COVID-19 consequences: cross-sectoral evaluation of impact on unemployment in Slovakia

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

<p>This article analyses political rationalities positioning residents in decision-making in the context of #housing2030 project in Warsaw, Poland. The paper applies a governmental approach, a policy analysis tool reconstructed (on the ground of existing studies) by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="j_cejpp-2022-0001_ref_023">Greg Marston and Catherine McDonald (2006)</xref>. As reported in the article, two political rationalities were identified: (1) public participation designed in the context of local communities and neighbourhoods and (2) public (tenant) participation designed in the context of neoliberal governance in housing. It was found that in the case of the #housing2030 project, the contradiction of political rationalities leads to an incoherent vision of public participation in housing policymaking and to some residents (social tenants) being treated differently. The article argues that this contributes to the micro-practices of social scepticism and distrust on the part of tenant organisations and urban movements towards the #housing2030 project.</p>
</abstract>

Political rationalities related to the public participation as exemplified by the Warsaw #housing2030 project

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. 