Evаluаtion of government progrаms аnd policies: foreign experience аnd Kаzаkhstаn

The effectiveness of regional governance can be viewed in different ways. Currently, at the regional level are most commonly used and the indicative criteria approach to the assessment of the effectiveness of the regional government, based mainly on an assessment of the managed subsystem management. Comprehensive assessment of the effectiveness of regional governance should be multilateral and consist of a system of indicators characterizing regional management in different aspects.  Over  the  last decade we have developed various systems and methods for assessing management effectiveness. Evaluation question management at the regional level is still relevant. For example, Volkov AM [1] offers the efficiency of regional management present as a generalized category in the following series of concepts:

  1. Productivity, as the ratio of the results achieved and used by regional authorities of resources (financial, property, personnel, information);
  2. Cost-effective, the ratio between the input of resources and the minimum possible taking into account that the quality of public services to the accepted standards (administrative regulations) and, ultimately, the needs of the business community of the region;
  3. efficiency, as the ratio achieved over a certain period of changes in the socio-economic situation in the region with planned or predicted.

According to Volkova MA, all of these components are interconnected and interchangeable. The effectiveness of regional governance can be viewed in different ways: from a position of control and manageable sub-systems from the perspective of subsystems management subsystem, from the perspective of the individual functions of the regional administration. Comprehensive assessment of the effectiveness of regional governance should be multilateral and to provide a system of indicators characterizing the regional administration in various aspects.

The most currently used is an indicative approach to assessing the effectiveness of the regional government, which is based  on a comparison of actual indicators of development of the region with target indicators that are set initially at the time of planning in accordance with the main purpose of development of the territories.

Another currently used approach to assessing the effectiveness of the system of regional government is the criteria approach. The main indicators   for   assessing   the   effectiveness  of the   mechanism   of   state   administration  regions AM Volkov’s group recommends the following criteria: the outcome measures, intermediate indicators of effect parameters of the intermediate results, performance workflows, wasted resources indicators (see. Table. 1). 

Table 1 – Criteria of efficiency of public administration regions (regional economies) by the method A.M.Volkovoy [1]

 Criteria of efficiency of public administration regions (regional economies) by the method A.M.Volkovoy [1]    

According to other authors, in particular, Zueva SE, Vasetskaya AA, when assessing the effective- ness of regional management [2] should provide the position and role of each individual ministry (de- partment) in the context of the implementation of all areas of regional responsibility and further specific indicators that capture these activities. This criterion is the level of implementation of all areas of regional responsibility (to be understood as - the politician), and the most common integrated indicators are qual- ity of life index («internal» regional environment) and  the  index  capitalization  of  the  territory  (the «external» integration into the national and global development processes) each key policies character- ized by its own parameters, and accordingly may be detailed in the following figures (see. Table. 2):

Table 2 – Basic parameters of key policies.

Basic parameters of key policies.

In assessing the level of implementation of the regional areas of responsibility, the authors propose the new conditions the  transition  to  new indicators to measure and argued that the new performance indicators like «absorb» the traditional sectoral indicators – without denying them, but, at the same time, introducing a framework of strategic expediency. The   author  of thefollowing techniques Dubrovin NA [3] offers as the criterion of assessing the effectiveness of the control region of the level of effective utilization of the resource potential of the region when a certain condition of social and economic development of the  region,  which can be  calculated  using  an  index  of  socio-economic

development and resource potential region.

We believe that it is necessary for the further development of the sweep of the new model of regional management performance criteria, ie, in the context of an innovative economy is necessary to make innovation in the evaluation of the effectiveness of regional management. For this purpose, the most appropriate method of assessing  the effectiveness of the strategic management of socio-economic development of the region, authored by IG     Piven

[4]. According to the proposed method assessment is carried out in three stages:

  1. The calculation of the integral index of premade selection and ranking of indicators, their weights are determined and calculated integral preliminary index of evaluation. Indicators should be formulated so as to ensure the simultaneous evaluation of social, economic, financial and budgetary. For this analysis are four blocks: the social and environmental performance, investment performance, economic performance indicators of the financial sector and budget. (see Table 3);
  2. Determination of correction factors - due to the influence of internal and external factors should be applied special adjustment coefficients to assess the impact of significant factors in the context of each of the analytical group of It is expedient to use the tempo indicators that correlate with each other parameters that can not be compared to the absolute values;
  3. The calculation of the total integral index - is determined on the basis of the calculation of the total consolidated integral index, as the product of a preliminary summary of the integral index, and total correction factor for each group of indicators. 

Table 3 – Blocks of indicators to measure the effectiveness of the method Piven [4].

Blocks of indicators to measure the effectiveness of the method Piven [4].

After that, within each group according to the priority indicators are assigned weighting coef- ficients, in descending order, that is, the indicator having the highest priority is assigned to the  maximum value of the coefficient [4]:

Qi= Q min Q1 (4)

1 +          2uVn (1)

Comparingtheanalyzedvaluesofintegralindices produced with the value of the integral indicator of the  effectiveness  of  strategic  management  in the

Хi= n(âêâàäðàòå)

region, taken as a benchmark, which is defined   by where Xi - weighting factor of a single indicator, n - serial number of the coefficient of weight,

u - t - t-test (stored in the table, depending on the likelihood ratio y and the degree of freedom (n-1)

n - the number of coefficients,

V - coefficient of variation is determined depending on its level = 0.2.

The resulting numerical series of weighting coefficients is distributed in descending order, the maximum value assigned to the first member of the the formula [4]: 

P standard = å XiQi max  (5) 

i=1 

where Qi max - the maximum value of reference calculated by the formula Q max series. The total sum of the weighting coefficients of each row equals unity.

Further,  the integral  index is determined  by   the Q I max = Q max (6).

effectiveness of strategic management (P Preview.) [4]:

P Preview = å XiQi ,  (2) i=1 Q1

Thus, the standard P calculated by formula (5) is equal to 1. The reference region is determined by the index of the largest value among the regions examined.

Table  4  shows  the  results  of  evaluation    of where Qi= Q max (3)

the  effectiveness  of  the  strategic  management of socio-economic development of the regions of Kazakhstan,  according  to  preliminary  figures for Assuming that the growth rate increases efficiency control value [4]:2003-2015, ranked by assessing the level of control in Table 5. 

Table 4 – Results of the effectiveness of the strategic management of socio-economic development of the regions of Kazakhstan, according to preliminary figures for 2003-2015

 Results of the effectiveness of the strategic management of socio-economic development of the regions of Kazakhstan, according to preliminary figures for 2003-2015

Table 5 – Comparative results of the second stage of the methodology for assessing the effectiveness of the strategic management of regions of the Republic of Kazakhstan for 2003-2015

Comparative results of the second stage of the methodology for assessing the effectiveness of the strategic management of regions of the Republic of Kazakhstan for 2003-2015

Evaluate the effectiveness of regional gover- nance for the period from 2003 to 2015 in the re- gional context in Kazakhstan, we reached the fol- lowing conclusions:

According to this technique the regions of Ka- zakhstan should be subdivided as follows:

  • The maximum level control (stability con- trol), Almaty (2007, 2009), Astana in
  • The average level of control (stability con- trol): Atyrau region (2005-2015), Astana (2004- 2010, 2015) and Almaty (2004-2006, 2008, 2010- 2015).
  • The average level of control (not stable man- agement): Atyrau (2003), Astana (2003), Almaty (2003) and Makngistauskaya region (2004-2009).
  • The low level of control (not sustainable man- agement): Akmola, Aktobe, Almaty, East Kazakh- stan.
  • The low level of control (not sustainable man- agement): Aktobe (2003-2015), Almaty (2003-2004, 2005-2015), Akmola (2004-2015), Karaganda (2003- 2015), Kostanay (2004-2015) Kyzylorda (2003-2015), Mangistau (2003, 2010-2015), South Kazakhstan (2004-2015), Pavlodar (2003-2015), North Kazakhstan (2004-2015), East Kazakhstan (2004-2015) Zhambyl (2007-2015), West Kazakhstan (2003-2015).
  • The low level of management (critical con- trol): Akmola (2003), Zhambyl (2003-2006), North Kazakhstan (2003), East Kazakhstan (2003), South Kazakhstan (2003), Kostanay (2003).
  • Thus, for 2003-2015, the regions have shown consistent results. Leading regions with a high evaluation of the effectiveness of management are Astana, Almaty, Atyrau and Mangistau oblasts. 12 regions of Kazakhstan for the period illustrated the low evaluation of the effectiveness of management. 

 

References

  1.  Volkov, MA Evaluating the effectiveness of the mechanism of state management of the economy in the region in support of small business // Bulletin of the Siberian State Aerospace Academician MF Reshetnev. 2009. № 2. pp 438-442.
  2. Zuev SE, Vasetsky AA State Regional Policy: approaches to evaluating the effectiveness // Management – 2009.– № 4. – S. 52-70.
  3. Dubrovin Evaluating the effectiveness of regional management // Vestnik of Samara State University. – 2006. – № 8. – S. 54-59.
  4. Piven IG Methods of assessing the effectiveness of the strategic management of socio-economic development of the region [electronic resource] // Access: http://www.teoria-practica.ru/-3-2015/economics/piven.pdf
Magazine: KazNU BULLETIN
Year: 2016
City: Almaty
Category: Economy