Networks of Academic Solidarity and Engagement (MASA) sent an opinion to the Republic Secretariat for Public Policy at proposal of the Program for the Improvement of Public Policy Management and Regulatory Reform 2021-2025 on the occasion of the public hearing that was opened on August 27, 2021. and lasts until 15.09.2021.
We are transmitting the content of the letter in its entirety.
The Republic Secretariat for Public Policies (RSJP) opened a public debate on the prepared Program for the Improvement of Public Policy Management and Regulatory Reform 2021-2025. Special objective 1 of the Public Administration Reform Strategy in the RS 2021-2030 - Improved quality of public policy documents and regulations is elaborated in this Program.
In the previous period, MASA participated in public debates that were initiated on the occasion of the adoption of several documents from the domain of public policies and regulations governing the field of higher education and scientific research work, and on that occasion numerous omissions were observed when it comes to: procedures, compliance with the provisions of the Law about the planning system, the quality of those documents, and finally, the degree of respect for the proposals and suggestions given on some provisions of specific public policies and regulations. For this reason, there is an interest in reacting and making some comments on the Program that would, among other things, resolve the perceived shortcomings.
The essence of our comments and suggestions is focused on Special Objective 2.
Code of measure 2.3. we have a proposal to emphasize the possibility of exchange and availability of data collected by ODU with the scientific and research community.
Code of measure 2.4. it is not entirely clear in the text, whether the process of announcing the competition, selecting research teams, conducting research, creating a new public policy or correcting the existing one, as well as measuring the effects, i.e. effectiveness of such an approach to last from 2022 - 2025, or is there some other dynamic in question?
When it comes to the training of civil servants, from the text of the Program, NAJU is seen as the most relevant institution for conducting training. Is it possible to involve the scientific and research community through another form of cooperation, by designing and organizing short study programs based on the Rulebook on the organization, implementation, issuing of certificates and the record-keeping procedure for short study programs (Official Gazette of the RS No. 32/2019)?
Code of measure 2.5. we are talking about the Group for Innovations in Public Policies, our proposal is to see more clearly and precisely the competences of this group, as well as the possibility of involving members of the scientific and research community in its work. The text generally talks about the advantages of an innovative approach in the creation of public policies, as well as the possibilities to involve interested parties, but it is not seen concretely, how it can look like through the work of the aforementioned Innovation Group.
We believe that the involvement of the scientific-research community in the process of creating public policies can be done/presented in several ways, not only through the process of research and data submission, but also through numerous other cooperation mechanisms: from networking, participating in innovative solutions and procedures for creating public policies - to the design and implementation of various types of training and the preparation of publications, i.e. schools that can be used for the education of civil servants. In the text of the Program, it is not indicated in the most precise way, but it seems to us that it is important.
