In the Message of the Head of State Kassym-Jomart Tokayev to the people of Kazakhstan «Fair Kazakhstan: law and order, economic growth, social activism» dated September 2, 2024, one of the areas of work was indicated to improve the efficiency of public administration^[73].

In particular, the President noted that more than five years have passed since the introduction of the concept of a «listening state», during which time it was possible to change the culture of interaction between the authorities and society. Mechanisms for expressing opinions have been developed, dialogue platforms have been established, and direct communication between Stateofficials and citizens has become the norm. The concept contributed to the formation of a more open and responsible model of public administration.

In particular, the President of Kazakhstan stressed that «inthe Council of Europe, appointments should be made taking into account the professional and moral qualities of candidates, as well as their performance in previous positions. The principles of meritocracy have not been abolished. There are positive changes in this work. All state bodies were transferred to a single personnel information system. Now the Agency for Civil Service Affairs and the Government should ensure the automation of personnel issues of organizations funded from the state budget».

Improving the efficiency of state and local governance in Kazakhstan is a strategic task aimed at improving the quality of life of the population, sustainable economic development and rational use of resources. This process requires a systematic approach, taking into account national specifics and adapting international experience.

The main directions for improving the effectiveness of Kazakhstan's state policy include the following:

Strengthening accountability and transparency:

- development of «Open Government» mechanisms, including the publication of open data on the activities of state bodies;

- expansion of e-government services (eGov) to increase accessibility and ease of interaction between citizens and government agencies;

- encouraging public monitoring and citizen participation in the decision-making process through feedback platforms, public councils, and public-led budget planning.

Optimization of processes and procedures:

- digitalization and implementation of advanced digital technologies in public administration, including artificial intelligence, Big Data and blockchain to ensure transparency and optimize processes;

- further decentralization and transfer of powers and resources to the regional and local levels, strengthening the role of maslikhats and local executive bodies in decision-making;

- reform of the state apparatus, including. reducing the bureaucracy, improving the skills of state employees, further introducing and deepening the principles of meritocracy;

- simplification of administrative procedures and reducing the regulatory burden on citizens and businesses, reducing the number of approvals and permits.

Risk and crisis management:

- development of a national system for monitoring and analyzing risks, including economic, social and environmental threats;

- to approve programs to improve regional resilience to crisis situations, including early warning and crisis response systems;

- funding of reserve funds at the state and regional levels for rapid response to emergencies.

Cooperation with business and society:

- developing public-private partnerships (PPPs) to attract investment in infrastructure and social projects;

- strengthening the dialogue between the state, business and civil society through consultation platforms, public hearings and forums;

- supporting social initiatives and developing civil society through grant programs and creating favorable conditions for NGO activities.

The key success factors in implementing the above-mentioned areas should be:

- political will, namely, consistent implementation of reforms and creation of conditions for their effective implementation;

- human resources, including training of highly qualified specialists in the field of public administration, strengthening the professional development of civil servants;

- financial security, i.e. effective budget planning, rational use of budget funds;

- informational openness and ensuring transparency of the activities of state bodies and accessibility of information to citizens.

Improving the efficiency of state and local governance in Kazakhstan is a long-term process that requires continuous improvement, taking into account regional characteristics and active involvement of society. Successful implementation of the reforms will not only improve the quality of governance, but also ensure sustainable development of the country as a whole.

 

Control questions

 

1. What are the main indicators used to assess the effectiveness of public policy?
2. Indicate the differences between quantitative and qualitative assessment indicators.
3. What are the main methods of monitoring public policy and their features?
4. Tell us about the impact of digital technologies on public policy monitoring.
5. Name the institutions responsible for monitoring and controlling the implementation of government programs in Kazakhstan.
6. Expand the involvement of civil society in monitoring and evaluating government programs.
7. Identify key social effects resulting from the implementation of government programs.
8. Indicate the relationship between public policy and the level of investment in the economy.
9. What are the risks of data manipulation in evaluating the effectiveness of government initiatives?
10. What are the main difficulties that researchers face when evaluating government programs?

 

Questions for discussion

 

1. Explore the possibilities of using artificial intelligence and big data to improve the efficiency of public administration.
2. Think and argue your point of view on how to balance the need for control and the risk of excessive administrative pressure.
3. How do you think we should deal with political bias and data manipulation when evaluating public policy?

 

Case studies

 

Case 1. Social and economic consequences of the pension reform in France.

France has one of the most generous pension systems in Europe, but by 2019, the increasing burden on the budget led to the need for reforms. In 2019, the government proposed a reform aimed at unifying pension schemes and raising the retirement age from 62 to 64 years. This caused a wave of protests, mass strikes and political crises.

The main goals of the reform are:

- creation of a single pension system instead of 42 different schemes;

- raising the retirement age to 64 (later changed to 62 with a transition period);

- maintaining a point-based pension calculation system based on total career contributions;

- reducing the burden on the state budget.

Economic consequences:

- an increase in expenditures during the transition period – protests and strikes resulted in business losses and loss of tax revenues;

- reduction of the pension fund deficit – a reduction in the deficit was expected in the long term;

- increased employment of older workers – the government expected people to work longer hours, but the labor market was not ready for this.

- lower consumption – due to uncertainty, many people started saving more, reducing economic activity.

Social consequences:

- Protests and political crisis – trade unions, youth, and social groups opposed the reform, leading to the largest protests since 1968.

- distrust of the government – despite attempts at dialogue, the reform was perceived as a violation of citizens' rights;

- a gap between generations – young people reacted negatively, fearing a further increase in the retirement age in the future;

- changes in social policy – the government was forced to take support measures (allowances, benefits for low-paid workers).

Tasks:

- what are the main reasons that led to the need to reform the pension system in France?

- why did the proposed measures cause such mass protests?

- which economic consequences of the reform can be considered positive, and which – negative?

- how much did the reform comply with the principles of social justice?

- what alternative solutions could reduce social tension?

- was it possible to carry out the reform more smoothly, softening its consequences?

- how much does the French experience apply to other countries with similar problems?

- how can the long-term effectiveness of pension reform be measured?

 

Case 2. Effectiveness of the state digitalization policy in Estonia.

Estonia is considered a leader in digital public administration. In the 2000s, the country adopted a digitalization strategy aimed at creating effective public services and transparent governance.

Key initiatives:

- electronic government (e-Government) – access to public services via the Internet;

- electronic voting (i-Voting) – the possibility of remote participation in elections;

- the e-Residency system – a digital residency program for foreign entrepreneurs;

- electronic healthcare (e-Health) – digital medical records and prescriptions.

Success Factors:

- flexible legislation – laws quickly adapt to digital technologies.

- investments in cybersecurity –Estonia has developed an advanced data protection system since the 2007 cyberattack.

- a high level of digital literacy – training citizens in the use of digital technologies;

- trust in technology – the state guarantees the protection of personal data.

Results and effectiveness:

- economy of time and resources – digital government services allow citizens to solve most issues online;

- e-Residency attracted thousands of businessmen from other countries;

- transparency and reduction of corruption – the use of blockchain technologies in public administration;;

- scalability-the Estonian model has become an example for other countries (Ukraine, the United Arab Emirates, Georgia).

Tasks:

- what are the key factors that ensured the successful digitalization of public administration in Estonia?

- what role did public investment and legislative reforms play in this process?

- how did digitalization affect the level of corruption and transparency of public administration?

- what are the advantages and risks of an electronic voting system?

- what lessons can other countries learn from Estonia's experience?

- is it possible to successfully transfer the Estonian model of digitalization to larger countries with different political cultures?

- how to evaluate the economic efficiency of digital solutions for the state and citizens?

- what new directions of digital policy can become promising in the future?

 

Case 3. The failure of the price control policy in Venezuela.

Since the 2000s, Venezuela has imposed strict price controls on food, fuel and services to combat inflation. However, this measure led to an economic crisis, hyperinflation and a shortage of goods.

Key public policy measures:

- lower prices for basic foodstuffs;

- control over the currency exchange rate.

- nationalization of enterprises and restriction of private business.

Economic consequences:

- hyperinflation – price controls led to a shortage of goods, and then to the depreciation of the national currency;

- growth of the «black market» – goods began to be sold illegally at inflated prices;

- reduced production – farmers and entrepreneurs have lost their incentives to work;

- mass emigration – millions of Venezuelans have left the country.

Social consequences:

- increase in poverty – due to shortages of goods and declining wages;

- political instability – mass protests against the government;

- humanitarian crisis – lack of food, medicines and basic goods;

- reduced confidence in the authorities-price control did not solve the problem of inflation, but only worsened the situation.

Monitoring and evaluation issues:

- lack of transparent data on the real state of the economy;

- ignoring signals about the growing crisis;

- decision optimization instead of economic analysis.

Tasks:

- what were the goals of the price control policy in Venezuela? How realistic were they?

- why did this policy lead to exactly the opposite results?

- what factors (economic, political, social) have increased the negative consequences?

- how was it possible to assess the effectiveness of this policy in advance and foresee the risks?

- what role did external economic factors (sanctions, falling oil prices) play in the development of the crisis?

- what alternative strategies could avoid the crisis?

- what experience can other countries that are considering price control measures draw from this case?

- why correctly assess the consequences of government interventions in the market economy?

---

^[73] Message from the Head of State Kassym-Jomart Tokayev to the people of Kazakhstan «Fair Kazakhstan: Law and Order, Economic Growth, Social Activism» dated September 2, 2024. https://www.akorda.kz/ru/poslanie-glavy-gosudarstva-kasym-zhomarta-tokaeva-narodu-kazahstana-spravedlivyy-kazahstan-zakon-i-poryadok-ekonomicheskiy-rost-obshchestvennyy-optimizm-285014. Access date 25.03.2025