1. Introduction Since the collapse of the communist system in the countries of Central and East part of Europe, many reform processes have taken place. Some of them concern reforms of public administration in Ukraine. Some countries of that region are more ad- vanced in implementing administrative reforms, others less. For less advanced countries, assistance from international organizations and countries with greater experience in implementing New Public Management is important. Initially, the support was addressed to all countries in the region (see Camyar, PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION REFORM AS MAIN PREREQUISITE FOR DEEPER COOPERATION WITH EU AND NATO Volodymyr Streltsov (1) (2), Viktoria Shvedun (3), Juri Klejshmidt (4) (1) Academic, Scientific and Production Center, National University of Civil Protection of Ukraine, Chernyshevska, 94, 61023, Kharkiv, Ukraine, e-mail: kbuapa@gmail.com (corresponding author) (2) Management Department, Faculty of Management and Security, Pomeranian University, Arciszewskiego 22a, 76200, Słupsk, Poland, (3) Academic, Scientific and Production Center, National University of Civil Protection of Ukraine, Chernyshevska, 94, 61023, Kharkiv, Ukraine, e-mail: applevikvs@gmail.com (4) Academic, Scientific and Production Center, National University of Civil Protection of Ukraine, Chernyshevska, 94, 61023, Kharkiv, Ukraine, e-mail: kspimkh@gmail.com Citation Streltsov V., Shvedun V., Klejshmidt J. 2019, Public administration reform as main prerequisite for deeper cooperation with EU and NATO, Journal of Geography, Politics and Society, 9(1), 46–54. Abstract For Ukraine strategic partnership with NATO is an integral part of the European integration course as complementary to the process of internal reforms in the context of the implementation of the Association Agreement between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community and their Member States, of the one part, and Ukraine, of the other part. The significant part of the thesis is devoted to classifications of indicators that measure the European integration progress. In addition to the existing classifications, the author suggests using a new one that analyzes all indicators according to two parameters: (1) as markers of how public administration values (legality, integrity/honesty, transparency, accountability, effec- tiveness) are adjusted and level of trust for public institution was changed over time; (2) as measurements of ability to integrate into different fields (policies, economy, law approximation, social field etc). The analysis of these indicators helped to generate their taxonomy to measure a progress. The author has specified that the lack of deep relations within regional trade agree- ments with democratic countries results in poor quality of regulation and ineffective governmental performance in Ukraine. Key words public administration, administrative reform, indicators, EU and NATO values, Eastern Partnership, Ukraine. Received: 18 September 2018 Accepted: 13 February 2019 Published: 31 March 2019 Journal of Geography, Politics and Society 2019, 9(1), 46–54 DOI 10.26881/jpgs.2019.1.07 Public administration reform as main prerequisite for deeper cooperation with EU and NATO 47 2010), currently mainly to countries lagging behind in this respect. Analyzing this support, one should bear in mind that its positive use depends on many factors. And you can find both examples of effective changes due to this support (Ivan, Iov, 2010; Swian- iewicz, Mielczarek, 2010), as well as its not efficient use (Ioniţa, Freyberg-Inan, 2008; Karini, 2013). Un- fortunately, Ukraine belongs to the second group of cases (Leitch, 2017; Solonenko, 2009). The good governance block is the main objective of the administrative reform in Ukraine, in which the EU and NATO see improvement in the efficiency of implementation of legislation, greater ability to ef- fectively use EU and NATO assistance with an em- phasis on well-functioning public administration and directions for building a better and ethical civil service. However, these declarations are mostly still remain on paper and have not led to major changes in both efficiency and accountability (transparency) in the civil service system. In addition, a little atten- tion is paid to resolving the conflict between indi- vidual values and principles of public management. The beginning of the administrative reform in Ukraine in 2010 was marked by a drop in the number of ministries from 20 to 16 and a quarter of the num- ber of employees in public administration. However, it was not accompanied by systematic actions aimed at increasing the efficiency and accountability of the government’s activities (Kabmin…, 2010). Under the pressure of international partners and NGOs (publication confirming this emphasis, here and to References), a regulation of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine has been generated since June 24, 2016. № 474-р „Some issues of reforming public administration of Ukraine” (Rozporiadzenia…, 2016), in which the Strategy for reforming public adminis- tration of Ukraine for the years 2016–2020 has been defined, together with the action plan for implemen- tation of the Strategy. In fact public administration reform was ongoing in 2017 with introducing the new (old – same changes were in yearly 2000’s) posi- tion of state secretary across government ministries. These state secretaries are responsible for adminis- trative work, taking the burden of human resources and administration from ministers. Some proper di- vision of labor between ministers, deputy ministers, and state secretaries, and procedural changes were happened (Koliushko, 2017). The pilot restructuring of 10 ministries has already begun, with each ulti- mately containing directorates responsible for sepa- rate policy areas (10 pilotnych…, 2017). This is the second attempt since the end of the 90s of the systemic approach to public adminis- tration reform. However, the pilot version of the document contains a small number of quantitative indicators and little focus put on convergence with EU public administration values. Another attempt to describe the integration di- mension of the Eastern Partnership countries is the publication of the Estonian Eastern Partnership Cen- ter, where it focuses on the comparison of public management in the Eastern Partnership countries (Public Administration ..., 2011). The participants of this project have adopted the point of view which based on the European principles of public admin- istration and proposed indicators that characterize these principles. This approach corresponds to the spirit of scientific knowledge and is more suitable for researching and developing a system of indica- tors to measure the quality of integration processes at the national level. The fact that improving the quality of manage- ment has a direct impact on the quality of life, allows to look at the process of integration from the point of view of the household, which has the advantages of the integration process. But at the same time not least core government result is trust. Trust in govern- ment is both a driver of government effectiveness and economic development, and an outcome mea- sure for government action (Government at a Glance 2017, 2017, p. 214). The main goal of this study is examined current authoritative rankings (OECD, World Bank Group, etc.) approaches for measuring main parameters of public administration and explore their usability for assessing the principles of public administra- tion in the management of integration processes framework. 2. Evolution of public administration issues in authoritative rankings The SIGMA report “European Principles for Public Administration” defines the principles of fairness and predictability (legal certainty), transparency, ac- countability and effectiveness, which were to serve as a guidepost for public CEE governance systems on their course of necessary reform implementa- tion (European Principles ..., 1999 , p. 8) .These rules have been taken from administrative law, constitu- tional and judicial decisions of domestic courts and the EU Court. It is worth noting that in the SIGMA report, the European principles of public administra- tion are called the “non-formalized version of the ac- quis communautaire” (European Principles …, 1999, p. 19). Taking into account the contribution of SIGMA and the achievements of the European Commission in the sphere of building assessment framework, it 48 Volodymyr Streltsov, Viktoria Shvedun, Juri Klejshmidt is safe to say that several important things should highlight, when talk concerning measuring the qual- ity of integration processes management (Verhei- jen, 1999): • sectoral capacity to implement the legislation developed, in the case of the EU this is a well- known acquis; • development of coordination structures of the European integration process; • horizontal reform of administrative bodies, in- cluding civil service rules and a comprehensive public management reform strategy based on the basic principles of SIGMA; • “ability to implement”. The requirement to implement the sectoral acquis directly comes from the conclusions of the Madrid Summit and the third group of the Copenhagen cri- teria. However, the principles of civil service reform and the coordination of European integration policy were only developed in the Commission’s proposals. In turn, the criterion for civil service reform has been divided into a number of specific requirements to develop a common strategy or reform plan, adop- tion of civil service laws that would guarantee pro- fessionalism and political independence of admin- istrative authorities, create a professional system and reform officials’ salaries, training requirements, reforms of local self-government, etc. As confirmed by A. Verheijen (1999), EU officials during the inter- action with candidate countries have repeatedly stressed the need to develop a professional civil ser- vice and set it as a condition of membership even more than in the Commission’s proposals. The most difficult element to understand is the latter, namely, the requirement to develop the insti- tutional ability to implement the acquis. Unlike the previous EU accession, transposition of the acquis is no longer considered a sufficient measure for a post- communist candidate (Fournier, 1998). In addition to the implementation of horizontal management reforms, the candidate countries were also required to prove that their new institutions are robust and able to implement the acquis (this requirement is becoming more and more important, starting with Commission reports on the progress of the Europe- an integration process, which were published after 1998). This aspect of the enlargement process, that is the question of ‘verification’ (Mayhew, 2000), was not present in any of the previous enlargements, there- fore it was not quite clear to the experts how the Commission would make sure that EU legislation is correctly implemented after transposition (your own Tab. 1. Indicators used to measure the quality of public management in accordance with the European values of public administration List of Indicators European values – principles of public administration Data source Rule of law Legal certainty World Governance Indicators (WGI) Political Stability and Absence of Violence/ Terrorism WGI Favoritism in decisions of government of- ficials Global Competitiveness Index (GCI) Judicial independence GCI Citizens freedom and political rights Freedom House Transparency of government policymaking Transparency GCI Corruption perception Transparency International Press freedom index Reporters without borders Irregular payments and bribes GCI E-governance UN database Voice and Accountability Accountability WGI Wastefulness of government spending GCI Polarization of trust in the governmental institutions (informed public vs. general population) Edelman Trust Barometer, Razumkov Center Regulatory Quality Effectiveness WGI Government Effectiveness WGI Diversion of public funds GCI Doing business IFC/World Bank Source: Public Administration…, 2011; own proposals. Public administration reform as main prerequisite for deeper cooperation with EU and NATO 49 EU target for implementation is defined with regard to the level of transposition and allows a deficit ra- tio of no more than 1.5% (Dimitrova, 2002) But the importance of the values-principles underlying the functioning of the public management system is un- disputed (table 1). The second, more specialized block should con- tain indicators that will show progress in the rel- evant areas of integration interactions. Therefore, it is necessary to rely on the opinion of the expert community, because other approaches will not fully reflect the full picture of integration. Unfortunately, a quite important element can’t be added to this list regarding the fulfillment of valu- able guidelines in the public service and the resolv- ing conflict of values (even between transparency and effectiveness). This is due to the lack of a unified approach to the processing of this information, al- though they have a significant impact on the quality of public administration activities. The OECD mem- ber countries have published several reports on this subject, but the issue of introducing indicators assessing the value-based public management has not been successful. In turn, the European Commis- sion, monitoring the progress of the candidate or neighboring countries, only emphasizes the pres- ence or absence of strategies aimed at introducing codes of ethics and improving the quality of public administration through vocational training (Joint Staff ..., 2011). 3. Exploring the value-principles of public administration Considering the first principle, it can be said with certainty that it mainly focuses on the legal certainty. This means that compliance is mandatory for every- one. In a democratic society, there is no one but the right, including the elected president. The state and its organs cant violate human rights and freedom. A person can do anything that is not prohibited by law, and the state and its organs operate within the limits defined by law. A person is considered inno- cent in committing a crime and can’t be punished until his guilt has been proved in a lawful manner and determined by an inauspicious court judgment. The rule of law counteracts arbitrariness (prejudice), that is, the use of power in self-interest, conflicts of interest, etc. The rule of law requires a clear hierarchy of legal norms established by independent courts, and stipulates that state authorities are not entitled to act contrary to general principles approved and published by special normative and regulatory deci- sions. Therefore, it is proposed to include in the list of indicators the following elements: the rule of law, privileges in government decisions, independence of the judiciary, personal autonomy and individual rights, political stability and absence of violence. The second principle focuses on the transparen- cy and openness of the authorities. In order for the government to be responsible to society, it should be given the opportunity to be fully aware of what is happening in the country. People should know what, for what purpose and how the authorities work. For example, transparent authorities organize public meetings and rallies with citizens. In a demo- cratic state, the media and citizens have the oppor- tunity to obtain information about the decisions taken. The following indicators were used to meas- ure the extent to which the principle was achieved: transparency during policy development, corrup- tion perception index, press freedom, irregular pay- ments and bribery, e-governance. As noted earlier, the corruption perception index is a cumulative in- dicator that reflects the political and administrative elements of corruption that have different conse- quences for state policy. For greater probability, it is better to use one indicator, which is mainly related to administrative corruption. The press freedom index will reflect the possibil- ity conducting independent journalistic investiga- tions against public officials and politicians, because they give impetus to inspections and litigation. The last indicator includes several components: e-servic- es, readiness for e-management based on website evaluation, telecommunications index, e-participa- tion index and human resources potential. Accountability principle is considered as one of the core government result like effectiveness. It obliges elected and appointed officials to answer and inform the public about their activities. Officials should make decisions in a proper manner (delib- erative approach) and perform their official duties, report to Parliament and the community. As this principle is supplemented by the principle of trans- parency, it is based on several indicators: account- ability and freedom of expression, management of public funds and gap of trust in the governmental institutions between informed public and general population. Another principle is also the cornerstone of the functioning of the public administration system. As mentioned earlier, its implementation often accom- panies sacrifices of the previous principle. To meas- ure progress in this area, it is proposed to such indi- cators as: the quality of the regulatory environment, government effectiveness, diversion of government spending, and the ease of doing business. 50 Volodymyr Streltsov, Viktoria Shvedun, Juri Klejshmidt As can be seen from table 2, each principle cor- responds to several indicators based on different information sources with different rating scales and periodic. For greater convenience, measurements are pro- posed for rankings (doing business) in which the ranking of countries takes place, use a scale from 0 to 10 with the best and worst results, respectively. A look at each of the indicators under the appro- priate rule provides rather comforting information. Observance of the rule of law is a serious problem of the Ukrainian state throughout the entire history of independence (fig. 1). A slight improvement occurs only during the presidential election. This situation with the rule of law reflects the state of total social anomie, where the value of the law is declared but not executed. Inappropriate compliance is a common practice. There are sev- eral reasons for this phenomenon. Conflict of legal norms, legal nihilism, shaped in times of lack of con- trol by the state, lack of financial means for the state to fulfill its obligations. Such a situation is perceived in both dislike and inability to comply with a court judgment. According to the report of the Commis- sioner for Citizens’ Rights in 2017, only 18% of all court decisions were executed properly (Shchorich- na dopovid..., 2018, p. 42). A negative tendency to enter the area of freedom and justice is the number of complaints to the Euro- pean Court of Human Rights (ECHR). Ukraine ranks first behind the number of complaints brought to the ECHR against domestic court decisions, which violating the rights of citizens fair justice. A positive confirmation of the situation is the ranking of civil liberties and political rights (Judicial independence, fig. 2; Freedom House, fig. 3). The second set of indicators focuses on trans- parency. In this segment, Ukraine constantly main- tains its middle position while improving its posi- tion (Transparency of government policy making, fig. 2). Incidentally, EU countries have an average of 5, which once again confirms the intentions of the state bureaucracy as part of network management, Tab. 2. Information sources with different rating scales Sources WGI GCI TI Freedom House UN database Reporters without borders Doing bus- siness Eddelman trust ba- rometer Rating scale -2.5 – +2,5 1 – 7 1 – 10 1 – 7 0 – 1 179 – 1 183 – 1 1-100 Period every year every year every year every year every two year every year every year every year Source: WGI, CGI, TI, FH, UN, WFPI, Doing business, The 2018 Edelman…. -3.0 -2.5 -2.0 -1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Voice and Accountability: Estimate Regulatory Quality: Estimate Government Effectiveness: Estimate Rule of Law: Estimate Control of Corruption: Estimate Political Stability and Absence of Violence/Terrorism: Estimate Fig. 1. Some WG Indicators used to measure the quality of public management in Ukraine Source: WGI 2007–2016. Public administration reform as main prerequisite for deeper cooperation with EU and NATO 51 which seeks way to sacrifice transparency for a quick and effective solution. In the field of integration, this is manifested both in the unavailability of information on the use by central authorities of budget support funds as part of international assistance, including the European Neighborhood and Partnership Instrument. This also applies to the implementation of agreements on the free trade area and trade with sanctioned countries. The situation is exacerbated by the fact that the Eurasian vector of integration ( cooperation within Custom Union) with neighboring countries is as- sociated with limited public participation. Even the parliamentarians themselves have no information about the intentions of top officials. Totally different approach within the framework of Ukraine-EU relations, where many institutions have been institutionalized in order to involve civil society organizations and activists. In the Ukrain- ian part of the Cooperation Committee, an Expert Council is created as an advisory body. The Euro- pean Commission’s communication also proposed to support the further development of civil society organizations, in particular in 2009 the first Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum (EaP CSF) took place to facilitate networking between organiza- tions and their dialogue with the public authorities. Civil society organizations are an institutional part- ner of the EU, its Member States and the Eastern Partnership countries in the questions of planning, implementing, monitoring and developing multilat- eral cooperation programs. Another body involved in the multilateral format of relations is the Conference of Regional and Local Authorities of the Eastern Partnership (CORLEAP), whose first meeting took place in Poland on 8 Sep- tember 2011. According to the organizers, the in- volvement of local and regional authorities in the im- plementation of the Eastern Partnership policy must strengthen foundations of local self-government in partner countries and bring this policy closer to the community. The conference consists of 36 heads of regional or local authorities, equally from the EU Committee of the Regions and six partner countries. This means that there is a mismatch between the EU representation and the EaP countries. There- fore, the partner country can be represented by the supporters of one party, as in the case of Belarus. Ukraine is again not represented proportionally as part of the Conference because it has a much bigger population level compared to other Eastern Partner- ship countries. The logical continuation of the topic of non-com- pliance with the principles of the rule of law is the high level of corruption (figures 1, 2), although in the last few years it can be observed positive dynam- ics. Insufficient control of compliance with values at public positions, non-comprehensive introduc- tion of new methods of bureaucratic management, low financial motivation – all this creates favorable conditions for the development of social anomie 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Transparency of government policymaking Irregular payments and bribes Favoritism in decisions of government officials Diversion of public funds Judicial independence Wastefulness of government spending Fig. 2. Some indicators of Ukraine in the Global Competitiveness Index Source: International… (2008–2017). 52 Volodymyr Streltsov, Viktoria Shvedun, Juri Klejshmidt through Ukrainian civil service corps members. Neg- ative rhetoric of European and American govern- ments towards the anti-corruption policy in Ukraine also leads to a decrease in civil society’s confidence in anti-corruption initiatives. An important lever recalled to break the vicious circle of the temptation of officials who, according to polls, for the most part do not orientate themselves to the interests of citizens, are independent journal- istic investigations and dissemination of such infor- mation in independent media (World Press Freedom Index (Reporters without borders), fig. 3). Moreover, events related to the beating of jour- nalists or difficulties in running a professional activ- ity have a significant impact on the press freedom index. At the same time, Ukraine is in a fairly good posi- tion in the ranking of e-government (E-government (UN E-government survey, 2018), fig. 3). However, there is unfortunately a disappointing tendency to aggravate the situation. Slightly more than one third of citizens, mainly in large cities, have access to the Internet. Digital inequality and diversity of ap- proaches to creating databases are the main prob- lems for introducing e-governance into the practice of public authorities’ activities. Although a synergy can be noted by improving dialogue between the government, technical assistance projects, business and citizens. It also can be observed a slightly, but better, situ- ation in respect one of the basic values- accountabil- ity (Accountability and freedom of speech, fig. 3). It is about the possibility of influencing the gov- ernment’s actions by dismissing or suspending its acts. Ensuring transparency means the openness of the process of making internal decisions, explain- ing how the government performs its tasks through various policy instruments. Transparency requires a clear formulation of the state policy strategy and the timely publication of all statistical data and fore- casts. The logical consequence of the limited public participation in the implementation of public policy is a number of budget violations detected by the Ac- counting Chamber and the State Financial Inspec- tion (Diversion of public funds, fig. 2). The continuation of the problem chain is the low level of perception by the community of the govern- ment’s ability to shape and implement a policy that promotes the development of the private sector, but the disclosure of positive dynamics in this area is mainly the effect of improving the conditions for setting up and running a business (Regulatory en- vironment quality and government efficiency, fig. 1; The ease of doing business, fig. 3). The unsatisfactory level of combating the nega- tive effects of the financial crisis, which largely adapted Ukrainian exports and worsened the situ- ation with public finances, are the main trends in 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Global Competitiveness Index Doing bussiness Freedom House Transparency International World Press Freedom Index UN E-government survey Fig. 3. Another Ukrainian public administration performance indicators changes Source: GCI, TI, PFI, UN E-government survey, World Press Freedom Index , own calculation for unified scale (1 better-10 worse). Public administration reform as main prerequisite for deeper cooperation with EU and NATO 53 this category. The further development of relations with major trading partners is accompanied by the absence of a strategic vision for the development of trade and economic cooperation between the EU and Russia. Setting up your own business is still one of the most important things for the initiative (ease of do- ing business, fig. 3). Although it’s observed a signifi- cant improvement in the situation (from 140–150 to 70–80), but the Ukrainian economy has a distorted structure, where the most profitable areas are mo- nopolized by companies that have different prefer- ences, covered by other farm entities. The high level of corruption (Karklis, 2005) is a tes- timony to the brutal violation of the value of public management and public pay for the lack of effective implementation of the value-based public manage- ment, civic passivity and political unwillingness to improve the operation of the state apparatus. De- spite the adoption of legislation regarding access to public information, the ease of its reception has not changed significantly. A low level of accountability and freedom of speech is a logical sign of the prob- lems of the entire public administration system. Unfortunately, there is no statistical data on the number of cases of employment of redundant civil servants in the relevant private sector, which is con- sidered a conflict of interest. The same situation with data evaluating trust in the governmental institu- tions differences between informed public and gen- eral population. A serious drawback is the low public awareness of integration processes. The obstacle on this path is also the low level of autonomy of educational in- stitutions which hinders the process of introducing new courses in the field of European integration. Only regularity in the activities of the media, ana- lytical institutions and educational institutions can change this situation. 4. Conclusions and proposals Summing up, it’s obvious need to put a stress on the approach to the assessment of the ruling bodies to manage the European integration process, which in- volves the use of a dual indicator system (respecting the basic values of public administration, progress in the political, economic, legal, social and humanitar- ian integration). The basis of the first subsystem is a set of indica- tors based on the key values of public administration used by various international and non-governmen- tal organizations. The second subsystem is created on the basis of standards and indicators, compliance with which should be ensured by the public man- agement system in terms of integration. One should agree with the theses of O. Kovryga and P. Nickel (2006) that after regaining independ- ence, there was not enough necessitarian environ- ment in Ukraine to implement reforms in the Western European style. In addition, the lack of deep relations as part of regional trade agreements with democrat- ic countries resulted in low quality of the regulatory environment of Ukraine and low efficiency of gov- ernment functioning, as evidenced by the indicators of achieving the value of public administration. The financial crisis has forced the state’s presence in the economy, which together with the incomplete re- form of the public management system contributed to the increase in irregular spending in the field of public procurement due to low transparency and accountability. Legally unregulated lobbying rules have helped to increase the level of protection in government decisions. You can also talk about the increase in the number of cases of employment of dismissed officials in the relevant private sector seen as a conflict of interest. References 10 pilotnych ministerstv v peredchutti reformy: jak Uriad zby- rajetsia vdoskonalyty ich robotu (Eng. 10 pilot ministries expecting reform: how Government will improve their work), 2017, Center for Political and Legal Reform press- conference http://pravo.org.ua/ua/news/20872184-pres- konferentsiya-10-pilotnih-ministerstv-v-peredchutti- reformi-yak-uryad-zbiraetsya-vdoskonaliti-yih-robotu (accessed 01 February, 2019). Camyar I., 2010, Europeanization, Domestic Legacies and Administrative Reforms in Central and Eastern Europe: A Comparative Analysis of Hungary and the Czech Re- public, Journal of European Integration, 32(2), 137-155. doi: 10.1080/07036330903274664 Dimitrova A., 2002, Enlargement Governance and Institution Building in Central and Eastern Europe: The case of the Euro- pean Union’s administrative capacity requirement, https:// ecpr.eu/Filestore/PaperProposal/ae34171a-929c-4e6a- ac61-f732c8909c50.pdf (accessed 01 February, 2019). Doing business, 2008–2017, International Bank for Recon- struction and Development / The World Bank, 2017 http://www.doingbusiness.org/content/dam/doingBusi- ness/media/Annual-Reports/English/DB17-Report.pdf (accessed 10 February, 2019). European Principles for Public Administration, 1999, SIGMA pa- pers № 27, http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/pub- lic/documents/nispacee/unpan006804.pdf (accessed 01 February, 2019). FH: Freedom House, https://freedomhouse.org/report/na- tions-transit/2018/ukraine (accessed 30 October, 2018). 54 Volodymyr Streltsov, Viktoria Shvedun, Juri Klejshmidt Fournier J., 1988, Governance and European Integration – Reliable Public Administration, [in:] Preparing Public Administrations for the European Administrative Space, SIGMA papers, 23, 119-135, http://www.oecd.org/datao- ecd/20/56/36953447.pdf (accessed 01 February, 2019). GCI: Global Competitiveness Index, http://reports.weforum. org/global-competitiveness-index-2017-2018/coun- tryeconomy-profiles/#economy=UKR (accessed 10 Octo- ber, 2018). Government at a Glance 2017, 2017, OECD Publishing, Paris, doi:10.1787/gov_glance-2017-en (accessed 01 February, 2019). Ioniţa A.-L., Freyberg-Inan A., 2008, Public administration reform in the context of European integration: continu- ing problems of the civil service in Romania, South- east European and Black Sea Studies, 8(3), 205-226. doi: 10.1080/14683850802338403 Ivan A.L., Iov C.A., 2010, Croatia: Administrative Reform and Regional Development in the Context of EU Accension, Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, 31E, 93-113. Joint Staff Working Paper “Implementation of the European Neigh- bourhood Policy in 2010”, 2011, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/ legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A52011SC0645 (ac- cessed 01 February, 2019). Kabmin zlytia ta sproshchenia, (Eng. Cabinet of Ministers merges and simplification), 2010, https://news.finance. ua/ua/news/-/220271/kabmin-zlyttya-ta-sproshhennya (accessed 01 February, 2019). Karini A., 2013, Aid-Supported Public Service Reform and Ca- pacity Development in Post-Communist Albania, Interna- tional Journal of Public Administration, 36(7), 469-481. doi: 10.1080/01900692.2013.772634 Karklis R., 2005, The System Made Me Do It: Corruption in Post- Communist Societies. M.E. Sharpe, Armonk. Koliushko, I., 2017, Piat umov dla efektyvnoi roboty derzavnych secretariv (Eng. Five conditions for effective work of the State Secretaries), Center for Political and Legal Reform, http://pravo.org.ua/ua/news/20872109-pyat-umov-dlya- efektivnoyi-roboti-dergeavnih-sekretariv (accessed 01 February, 2019). Kovryga O., Nickel P.M., 2006 In a Cycle of False Necessity? Es- caping from Embedded Quasi-Institutions and Building a New System of Public Administration and Management in Ukraine, International Journal of Public Administration, 29(13), 1151-1166. doi: 10.1080/01900690600927815 Leitch D., 2017, International assistance to democratic re- form in Ukraine: an opportunity missed or an opportu- nity squandered?, Democratization, 27(6), 1142-1158. doi: 10.1080/13510347.2017.1289177 Mayhew A., 2000, Enlargement of the European Union: An Analysis of the negotiations with the Central and Eastern European candidate countries, Sussex European Institute Working Paper, 39. PFI: Press Freedom Index, https://rsf.org/en/ukraine (accessed 27 October, 2018). Public Administration in EU Eastern Partner Countries: Com- parative Report 2011, 2011, Estonian Center of Eastern Partnership, http://www.eceap.eu (accessed 01 February, 2019). Rozporiadzenia Kabinetu Ministriv Ukrainy vad 24 chervnia 2016 r. № 474-р „Dejaki pytannia reformuvania derzavnogo upravlinia Ukrainy (Eng. Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine decree on 24 June 2016 „Some issues of reforming public administration of Ukraine”), 2016, http://kmu.gov.ua (ac- cessed 01 February, 2019). Shchorichna dopovid Upovnovazenogo Verhovnoi Rady z prav ludyny pro stan doderzania ta zahystu prav i svobod lud- yny i gromadianyna v Ukraini (Eng. Ukrainian Parliament Commissioner for Human Rights year report on issues concerning with providing and defending human and citizens rights and freedoms), 2018, Secretariat of the Ukrainian Parliament Commissioner for Human Rights, Kyiv. http://www.ombudsman.gov.ua/files/Dopovidi/Re- port-2018-1.pdf (accessed 25 February, 2019). Solonenko I., 2009, External democracy promotion in Ukraine: the role of the European Union, Democratization, 16(4), 709-731. doi: 10.1080/13510340903083851 Swianiewicz P., Mielczarek A., 2010, Georgian Local Gov- ernment Reform: State Leviathan Redraws Boundar- ies?, Local Government Studies, 36(2), 291-311. doi: 10.1080/03003930903560687 The 2018 Edelman TRUST BAROMETER, 2018 https://www.edel- man.com/sites/g/files/aatuss191/files/2018-10/2018_ Edelman_Trust_Barometer_Global_Report_FEB.pdf (ac- cessed 1 February, 2019). Transparency International, https://www.transparency.org/ cpi2018 (accessed 30 October, 2018). UN E-government survey, https://publicadministration.un.org/ egovkb/en-us/Reports/UN-E-Government-Survey-2018 (accessed 25 October, 2018). Verheijen A., 1999, Civil Service Systems in EU Candidate States: Introduction, [in:] T. Verheijen (ed.), Civil Service Systems in Central and Eastern Europe, Edward Elgar, Chel- tenham, 85-92. WGI: World Governance Indicators, The World Bank, https:// datacatalog.wor ldbank .org/search?sor t_by=field_ wbddh_modified_date&sort_order=DESC (accessed 10 October, 2018). World Press Freedom Index, Reporters without borders, https:// rsf.org/sites/default/files/import_good_-_index_2018_ pour_import.csv (accessed 25 February, 2019).