Модели развития местного самоуправления и опыт децентрализации: институциональный подход

CC BY f
84-86
4

Скачивания

Данные скачивания пока недоступны.
Поделиться
Муминов, Н., & Алиджанова, О. (2023). Модели развития местного самоуправления и опыт децентрализации: институциональный подход. in Library, 19(3), 84–86. извлечено от https://inlibrary.uz/index.php/archive/article/view/21321
Crossref
Сrossref
Scopus
Scopus

Аннотация

Модели, используемые в практике территориального управления, отличаются самостоятельностью территориального уровня власти в принятии политических решений независимо от центральной власти и достаточностью необходимых ресурсов. Идеальная автономная модель местного самоуправления представляет собой систему с горизонтальным управлением, в которой каждый орган территориального уровня обладает своей, исключительной компетенцией, не пересекающейся с вышестоящими уровнями власти по полномочиям и обязанностям.

Похожие статьи


background image

- 84 -

MODELS OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF LOCAL SELF-GOVERNMENT AND THE

DECENTRALIZATION EXPERIENCE: AN INSTITUTIONAL APPROACH

NOZIM MUMINOV

Associate Professor, Department of Economic Theory

National University of Uzbekistan

OZODA ALIDJANOVA

Associate Chief of the Research Bureau of Training Center

the Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Uzbekistan


The models used in the practice of territorial administration differ by the

autonomy of territorial level of government to make political decisions

independently of the central government and the sufficiency of the
necessary resources.

The ideal autonomous model of local self-government is a system with
horizontal management, in which each territorial level authority possesses

its own, exclusive competence, not intersecting with the higher levels of

government in terms of powers and responsibilities.


By such management, the control over the activities of local authorities is

exercised not by the upper levels of government, but by the population,

either directly through such forms of direct democracy as referendums,
elections and others, or through representative bodies and officials

elected by direct voting. In this case, the central executive authorities,

such as ministries, administrative agencies mainly perform methodical,
forecasting and analytical functions, and their decisions are of a

recommendatory nature for the structures of a lower level.


At the same time, the management system with a completely horizontal

nature does exist nowhere in the world. Even in the United States of

America, a country standing as close as possible to the horizontal

management of territorial structure, some governmental regulations of the
activities of state, county and city authorities exist, which is conducted by

ministries and departments indirectly - by funding or co-funding a variety

of national programs.

So-called integrated Soviet system of local self-government could serve

as an example of vertical management. The most important political
decisions in this system were made on the upper "floor" of the government,

being then transferred through "single-channel" scheme along the entire

vertical chain of territorial management.


The matrix scheme of management involves the interaction of the

authorities, both vertically and horizontally, thus providing levels of

management with the possibility of "multi-channel" interaction. The


background image

- 85 -

horizontal interaction acquires great importance under these conditions;
between departments within a single governing structure, between

various

autonomous

levels

of

management

(inter-municipal

cooperation).

Thereby, there are four systems of local government are distinguished:

Anglo-Saxon model;

French or Napoleonic model;

German or mixed model;

Soviet integrated model.

The Anglo-Saxon model includes a certain amount of latitude for

municipalities, and the absence of specifically authorized state officials
controlling the executive bodies at the local level, with management

predominantly possessing a horizontal nature. This type of management is

common in English-speaking countries such as Great Britain, the United
States of America, Canada, Australia, etc.

The French model assumes a local public official responsible for

coordination of the activities of public services. Often, these public officers
are entitled to control the activities of local self-government. With this

scheme of management, a vertical of public administration operates

simultaneously with the system of horizontal decentralized management
which deals with the issues of the territory life-support. Elements of the

French model are used in France, countries of Scandinavia, Latin America,

etc.

The German model combines the features of both models mentioned

above. Thus, the simultaneous existence of municipalities as the form of
territorial administration and government districts without elected local

authorities is adopted in Germany and Austria. In Germany, alongside this,

the right of communities to interact horizontally, thus forming various

municipal intercommunal unions for joint management is legislated.
Involvement of the one governing officer is allowed to manage such

agglomerations of communities, thereby considerably cutting down costs

for the maintenance of the administrative apparatus.

All three models, to some extent, incorporate elements of the matrix,

vertical and horizontal models of management.

The Soviet integrated model is a system of territorial management,

primarily based on vertical management.


In the frames of the research, it would be most appropriate to investigate

the experience of decentralization of government in the countries of


background image

- 86 -

Eastern Europe and the CIS in depth, since this experience is closest to
Uzbekistan.

Summarizing the analysis of the process and results of decentralization, it
can be noted that there is a direct dependency between political, legal

and economic factors. The criterion for the overall assessment of the

degree of decentralization is the distribution of functions (or financial
responsibility) for the provision of public services between levels of

government. This criterion is one of the main indicators of fiscal

decentralization, along with the distribution of income, intergovernmental

transfers, the system of borrowings of local governments, etc. It should be
noted that such distribution of responsibilities is quite monotonous and

requires further development in the direction of a delegation of greater

empowerment to the local level as well as towards the application of
various forms and the performance modalities of functions of public

administration.

inLibrary — это научная электронная библиотека inConference - научно-практические конференции inScience - Журнал Общество и инновации UACD - Антикоррупционный дайджест Узбекистана UZDA - Ассоциации стоматологов Узбекистана АСТ - Архитектура, строительство, транспорт Open Journal System - Престиж вашего журнала в международных базах данных inDesigner - Разработка сайта - создание сайтов под ключ в веб студии Iqtisodiy taraqqiyot va tahlil - ilmiy elektron jurnali yuridik va jismoniy shaxslarning in-Academy - Innovative Academy RSC MENC LEGIS - Адвокатское бюро SPORT-SCIENCE - Актуальные проблемы спортивной науки GLOTEC - Внедрение цифровых технологий в организации MuviPoisk - Смотрите фильмы онлайн, большая коллекция, новинки кинопроката Megatorg - Доска объявлений Megatorg.net: сайт бесплатных частных объявлений Skinormil - Космецевтика активного действия Pils - Мультибрендовый онлайн шоп METAMED - Фармацевтическая компания с полным спектром услуг Dexaflu - от симптомов гриппа и простуды SMARTY - Увеличение продаж вашей компании ELECARS - Электромобили в Ташкенте, Узбекистане CHINA MOTORS - Купи автомобиль своей мечты! PROKAT24 - Прокат и аренда строительных инструментов