5

PREFACE

The contributions in this special issue reflect upon the results of the European 
Union’s COST Action IS0601 (2007-2011) called CRIPO (Comparative Research into 
Current Trends in Public Sector Organization), which was led by the prominent 
public administration scholars Geert Bouckaert, Per Lægreid and Koen Verhoest. 
The main objective of the CRIPO project was to increase knowledge about current 
trends in public sector organization in Europe in order to contribute to theoretical 
knowledge and optimize methodologies, and thus to inspire sound and policy-relevant 
research conclusions. The CRIPO project brought together scholars on a European 
platform for comparative and longitudinal research, which led to empirical, theoretical 
and methodological advancements in the field. Ultimately 23 European countries 
and 95 individual researchers cooperated in a research network organized around 
several topics, such as population and proliferation of public sector organizations, 
autonomy, steering and control, performance, accountability and coordination of 
public sector agencies. From Central and Eastern Europe (CEE), Croatia, Estonia, 
Hungary, Lithuania, Romania and Slovakia participated actively in the project.

While the agencification process in Western democracies has attracted enormous 
scholarly interest in the last two decades, similar trends in CEE countries have received 
very little attention so far. In addition, an overwhelming majority of existing public 
administration research in CEE consists of single-country case studies only. It can 
even be said that a tradition of comparative studies is missing in public administration 
scholarship in CEE. In this general context, the international network of researchers 
has provided a much needed framework for, first of all, starting systematic studies of 
agencification and, secondly, for carrying out empirical studies based on a common 
methodology, thus enabling comparisons both within CEE and beyond this region.

The CRIPO network was international in its membership, dynamic in its search for 
comparability and pro-active in searching for combined methods of research, which 
allowed comparisons across countries, policy fields and time. The contributions in 
this special issue are based on various methods used within the CRIPO project. 
Whereas a few CEE countries (Lithuania and Romania) can rely on the results of the 
so-called COBRA questionnaire (“Comparative Public Organization Data Base for 
Research and Analysis”) initiated at the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, the other 
country studies have built their empirical research on joint protocols for dynamic, 
longitudinal mapping of state administrations or on case studies developed within 
the CRIPO network.



6

Since in the majority of CEE states research on public sector organizations is less 
advanced than in most Western European countries, the contributions in this issue 
involve a strong descriptive element outlining the agency landscape and its evolution 
in each particular country. In addition, the authors were able to choose specific sub-
themes that have influenced the design of public sector organization and reforms in 
their respective countries. On one hand, the novelty of such research in CEE has led 
to a replication of methodologies that have been used in Western countries within 
the past decades, by that allowing for cross-country comparisons. On the other hand, 
the CEE country studies have contributed to the existing knowledge of the field, for 
example, in studying the impact of the European Union and of the economic crisis 
on the (de)agencification process.

This special issue features nine original articles. The introductory paper is written 
by B. Guy Peters of the University of Pittsburgh, who, in addition to being one of 
the co-founders of the COBRA network, has demonstrated keen interest in public 
administration reforms in CEE for more than a decade. Sandra van Thiel of the Erasmus 
University Rotterdam offers an important contribution by placing the agencification 
process in CEE countries in a broader international context, which allows it to identify 
“a CEE trajectory” of agencification. This is followed by six country studies on (semi-)
autonomous agencies and other public sector organizations discussing developments 
in Croatia, Estonia, Hungary, Lithuania, Romania and Slovakia, and a summary article 
by the guest editors of this special issue focusing on the similarities and differences 
in the agencification process among the CEE countries.

The aim of this special issue is not only to contribute to the academic studies 
of public sector organization but also to be relevant for policy-makers and agency 
practitioners. As most CEE countries are going through reforms in their public sector 
organizations, we hope that empirical evidence as well as the approaches, analytical 
frameworks and conclusions presented in this issue will be useful in designing, 
implementing and understanding public sector reforms.

Guest editors of the special issue,
Tiina Randma-Liiv, Vitalis Nakrošis and HAJNAL György