Do east-central European bureaucrats more resemble their socialist-era predecessors or their member-state counterparts? Are socialist patterns persisting, or are we witnessing isomorphism toward a European Administrative Space (EAS)? Or both? I examine these questions through the Czech and Slovak cases. I begin by contrasting two ideal types: state-socialist administrative space and EAS. I present evidence from a survey of 296 Czech and Slovak managers and argue that Czech and Slovak administrations occupy interstices between state-socialist and European ideals. Although there is some evidence of convergence, Czech and Slovak administrations operate in spaces considerably distant from the EAS.
Ako d’alej v reforme verejnej správy [How to proceed with public administration reform]. (2002). Retrieved July 28, 2004, from www.unia-miest.sk/welcome_ie.htm
2.
Bennett, R. (Ed.). (1989). Territory and administration in Europe. London: Pinter.
3.
Bossaert, D., Demmke, C., Nomden, K., Pollet, R., & Auer, A. (2001). Civil services in the Europe of fifteen: Trends and new developments. Maastricht, the Netherlands: European Institute of Public Administration.
4.
Byers, J., & Dierckx, G. (1997). Nationality and European negotiations: The working groups of the Council of Ministers. European Journal of International Relations, 3, 435-471.
5.
Cardona, F. (1999). European principles for public administration (Sigma Paper No. 27). Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
6.
Cardona, F. (2000, March). Scope of civil services in European countries: Trends and developments. Paper presented at European Institute of Public Administration,Maastricht, the Netherlands.
7.
Cassese, S. (1990). Toward a European model of public administration. In D. S. Clark (Ed.), Comparative and private international law: Essays in honor of John Henry Merryman on his seventieth birthday (pp. 353-367). Berlin, Germany: Duncker and Humboldt.
8.
Ciechocińska, M. (1989). Poland: Searching for increasing economic effectiveness. In R. Bennett (Ed.), Territory and administration in Europe (pp.138-153).New York: Pinter.
9.
Council of Europe. (1999). The status of public officials in Europe. Strasbourg, France: Council of Europe Publishing.
10.
Čupíková, Z. (2001). Štátna služba: analyza odhal’uje nedostatky v zákonoch; k náprave môže pomôct’ novelizácia niektorých sporných ustanovení [State service: Analysis reveals inadequacies in the laws: Updating could help resolve some deficiencies]. Verejná správa, 20, 12-13.
11.
Dostál, P., & Kára, J. (1992). Territorial administration in Czechoslovakia: An overview. In P. Dostál, M. Illner, J. Kára, & M. Barlow(Eds.), Changing territorial administration in Czechoslovakia: International viewpoints (pp. 17-32). Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam, Charles University, Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences.
12.
Drulák, P., Česal, J., & Hampl, S. (2002). Česká administrativa v procesu přípravy na vstup do EU [Czech administration in the process of preparation for European Union accession]. Prague, Czechoslovakia: Ústav mezinárodních vztahů.
13.
Egeberg, M. (1999). Transcending intergovernmentalism? Identity and role perceptions of national officials in EU decision-making. Journal of European Public Policy, 6(3), 456-474.
14.
Ellis, M. S. (1996). Purging the past: The current state of lustration laws in the former communist bloc. Law and Contemporary Problems, 59(4), 181-196.
15.
European Commission. (1997). Opinions and regular reports. Retrieved July 28, 2004, from http://europea.eu.int/comm/enlargement/intro/ag2000_opinions.htm
16.
Feld, W. J., & Wildgen, J. K. (1975).National administrative elites and European integration: Saboteurs at work?Journal of Common Market Studies, 3(13), 244-265.
17.
Fish, M. S. (1999). The end of Mečiarism. East European Constitutional Review, 1(1/2), 47-55.
18.
Fournier, J. (1998a). Administrative reform in the Commission opinions concerning the accession of the CEECs to the European Union (Sigma Paper No. 23). In Preparing public administrations for the European administrative space (pp. 110-118). Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
19.
Fournier, J. (1998b). Governance and European integration—Reliable public administration (Sigma Paper No.23). In Preparing public administrations for the European administrative space (pp. 119-135). Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
20.
Grzybowski, M. (1994). The transition to competitive pluralism in Hungary. In S. Berglund & J. A. Dellenbrant (Eds.), The new democracies in eastern Europe: Party systems and political cleavages (pp. 169-202). Brookfield, VT: Edward Elgar.
21.
György, I. (1999). The civil service system of Hungary. In T. Verheijen & A. Kotchegura (Eds.), Civil service systems in central and eastern Europe (pp. 131-158). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
22.
Harmsen, R. (1999). The Europeanization of national administration: A comparative study of France and the Netherlands. Governance, 2(1), 81-113.
23.
Holmes, S. (1994). The end of decommunization. East European Constitutional Review, 3(3), 33-36.
24.
Iankova, E. A. (2002). Eastern European capitalism in the making. New York: Cambridge University Press.
25.
Illner, M. (1999). Territorial decentralization: An obstacle to democratic reform in central and eastern Europe? In J. D. Kimball (Ed.), The transfer of power: Decentralization in central and eastern Europe (pp. 7-42). Budapest, Hungary: The Local Government and Public Service Reform Initiative.
26.
Institute for Economic and Social Reforms. (2000). Final report on the findings and recommendations of the audit of financing and activities of the central authorities of state administration. Bratislava, Slovakia: Author.
27.
Jacoby, W., & Černoch, P. (2002). Together we stand: The EU’s pivotal role in the creation of Czech regional policy. Retrieved July 28, 2004, from www.policy.hu/cernoch/regpolicy.html
28.
Kitschelt, H., Mansfeldová, Z., Markowski, R., & Tóka, G. (1999). Post-communist party systems: competition, representation, and inter-party cooperation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
29.
Leško, M. (1996). Mečiar a mečiarizmus [Meèiar and Meèiarism]. Bratislava, Slovakia: Orman.
30.
Linz, J. J., & Stepan, A. (1996). Problems of democratic transition and consolidation:Southern Europe, South America, and post-communist Europe. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
31.
Mesežnikov, G., & Nižňansky V. (Eds.).(2002). Reformaverejnej správyna Slovensku 1998-2002: Súvislosti, aktéri, vol’by [Public administration reform in Slovakia, 1998-2002: Contexts, actors, elections]. Bratislava, Slovakia: Inštitút pre verejné otázky.
32.
Meyer-Sahling, J. (2001). Getting on track:Civil service reformin post-communist Hungary. Journal of European Public Policy, 8(6), 960-979.
33.
National Training Fund. (1998). An analysis of public administration of the Czech Republic (summary report). Prague, Czechoslovakia: Author. Available from www.nvf.cz/versprava/gb/analysis/contents.htm
34.
Nizzo, C. (2000). National public administrations and European integration (Sigma manuscript). Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
35.
No more political bureaucrats. (2002, April 8). Slovak Spectator. Retrieved July 28, 2004, from www.slovakspectator.sk/clanok-7183.html
36.
Nunberg, B. (2000). Ready for Europe: Public administration reform and European Union accession in central and eastern Europe (World Bank Technical Paper no. 466). Washington, DC: World Bank.
37.
Peters, B. G. (1995). The civil service in the consolidation of democracy. International Social Science Journal, 143, 127-140.
38.
Sbírka zákonu České republiky, 2002 [Collection of laws of the Czech Republic, 2002]. (2002). Zákon č. 218 ze dne 26. dubna 2002 o službě státních zaměstnanců ve správních úradech a o odměnování těchto zaměstnanců a ostatních zaměstnanců ve správních úradech (služební zákon) [Law number 218 of April 26, 2002 on the service of state employees in administrative offices and on the compensation of these employees and other employees in administrative offices (service law)].
39.
Sbírka zákonu republiky Československé, 1950 (s prílohami) [Collection of laws of the Czech Republic, 1950]. (1950). Zákon č. 66/1950 o pracovních a platovych poměrech státních zamêstnanců [Law number 66 of 1950 on the employment and compensatory standing of state employees].
40.
Sbírka zákonu republiky Československé, 1965 [Collection of laws of the Czech Republic, 1965]. (1965). Pracovní zákoník č. 65/1965 [Labor Code number 65 of 1965].
41.
Stark, D., & Bruszt, L. (1998). Postsocialist pathways: Transforming politics and property in east central Europe. New York: Cambridge University Press.
42.
Torres-Bartyzel, C., & Kacprowicz, G. (with Krajewski, W.). (1999). The national civil service system in Poland. In T. Verheijen & A. Kotchegura (Eds.), Civil service systems in central and eastern Europe (pp. 159-183). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
43.
Trondal, J. (1999). Integration through participation: Introductory notes to the study of administrative integration. Retrieved July 28, 2004, from http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/1999-004.htm
44.
Verheijen, T. (Ed.). (1999). Civil service systems in central and eastern Europe. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
45.
Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society (G. Ross & C. Wittich, Trans.). Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
46.
Williams, K., & Deletant, D. (2001). Security intelligence services in new democracies: The Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Romania. New York: Palgrave.
47.
Zbierka zákonov Slovenskej republiky, 2001 [Collection of laws of the Slovak Republic, 2001]. (2001). Zákonč. 312 z 2. júla 2001 o štátnej službe a o zmene a doplnení niektorých zákonov [Law number 312 from July 2, 2001 on state serve and on the amendment and completion of certain laws].
48.
Ziller, J. (1998). EU integration and civil service reform (Sigma Paper No. 23). In Preparing public administrations for the European administrative space (pp. 136-154). Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
