DOCSLIB.ORG

An Evaluation of Phare-Financed Telecommunications and Posts Programmes

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
An Evaluation of Phare-Financed Telecommunications and Posts Programmes An Evaluation of Phare-Financed Telecommunications and Posts Programmes )LQDO5HSRUW $SULO This Report was produced by a consortium headed by RAND Europe (Netherlands) with the collaboration of WIK (Germany) and Prognos A.G. (Germany) for the Evaluation Unit of the Common Service for External Relations (SCR) of the European Commission. This is RAND Europe report number RE-2000-03. The views and opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of the European Commission. The European Commission does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this Report, nor does it accept responsibility for any consequence of their use. ii 7$%/(2)&217(176 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................. 2 1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................... 8 1.1. Objective of this Evaluation............................................................................. 8 1.2. Structure of the Report ..................................................................................... 9 2. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY............................................................................. 10 2.1. Introduction .................................................................................................... 10 2.2. Inventory of Phare P&T projects ................................................................... 10 2.2.1. Scope of the inventory and the structure of Phare programmes............. 10 2.2.2. Data collection for the inventory ............................................................ 11 2.2.3. Classification of the projects .................................................................. 12 2.3. Selection of projects for detailed evaluation .................................................. 13 2.4. The Logical Framework Methodology........................................................... 15 2.4.1. Overview of the Logical Framework Methodology ............................... 15 2.4.2. Information gathering for the evaluation................................................ 19 2.4.3. Implementing the Logical Framework Methodology at the project level.......................................................................................................... 19 3. TELECOMMUNICATION AND POSTAL SECTOR ANALYSIS ........................... 22 3.1. Introduction .................................................................................................... 22 3.2. Telecommunications Sector Analysis ............................................................ 23 3.2.1. Evolution and description of the Acquis Communautaire in Telecommunications................................................................................ 23 3.2.2. General development and problems in the CEECMS ............................ 24 3.3. Postal Sector Analysis.................................................................................... 28 3.3.1. Evolution and description of the Acquis Communautaire in the postal sector........................................................................................................ 28 3.3.2. General development and problems in the CEECMS ............................ 30 4. PHARE SUPPORT IN THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND POSTAL SECTORS ................................................................................................................ 33 4.1. Phare Objectives and Strategy........................................................................ 33 4.2. Phare Telecommunications and Postal Programmes and Projects................. 33 5. PROGRAMME LEVEL ANALYSIS........................................................................... 40 5.1. Introduction .................................................................................................... 40 5.2. Relevance to Stakeholder Needs .................................................................... 41 iii 5.2.1. Whose needs are being addressed?......................................................... 41 5.2.2. The post-communist transition ............................................................... 43 5.2.3. Privatisation, liberalisation and restructuring......................................... 45 5.2.4. Preparing for accession........................................................................... 46 5.3. Appropriateness of Intervention Design ........................................................ 47 5.3.1. Salient design features ............................................................................ 47 5.3.2. Direction ................................................................................................. 47 5.3.3. Control and operation ............................................................................. 49 5.3.4. Follow up................................................................................................ 52 5.4. Comparative Advantage of PHARE Support................................................. 53 5.4.1. Phare compared to alternative sources of support .................................. 53 5.4.2. Phare in combination and comparison with other sources ..................... 55 5.5. Is there a continuing need?............................................................................. 56 5.5.1. Relevance to stakeholder needs .............................................................. 56 5.5.2. Appropriateness of design ...................................................................... 58 6. PROJECT LEVEL ANALYSIS.................................................................................... 60 6.1. Overview of Selected Projects and Project Level Analysis ........................... 60 6.2. Training Projects ............................................................................................ 64 6.2.1. Efficiency of training projects ................................................................ 64 6.2.2. Effectiveness of training projects ........................................................... 64 6.2.3. Impact and sustainability of training projects......................................... 65 6.3. Preparation and Implementation of Investment Projects ............................... 65 6.3.1. Efficiency of preparation and implementation of investment projects... 65 6.3.2. Effectiveness of preparation and implementation of investment projects..................................................................................................... 66 6.3.3. Impact and sustainability of preparation and implementation of investment projects .................................................................................. 66 6.4. Organisational Reform and Laws and Regulations Projects.......................... 67 6.4.1. Efficiency of organisational reform and laws and regulations projects . 67 6.4.2. Effectiveness of organisational reform and laws and regulations projects..................................................................................................... 67 6.4.3. Impact and sustainability of organisational reform and laws and regulations projects .................................................................................. 68 7. RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................. 69 7.1. Introduction .................................................................................................... 69 7.1.1. Why further assistance is needed............................................................ 69 iv 7.1.2. Why Phare support is appropriate........................................................... 70 7.2. Posts and Telecommunications Recommendations ....................................... 71 7.2.1. Continue Phare support for organisational and legal reform in the telecommunications sector....................................................................... 71 7.2.2. Increase the leverage of Phare support ................................................... 71 7.2.3. Develop and follow a clear and consistent policy with regard to private sector beneficiaries ...................................................................... 72 7.2.4. Continue support to the postal sector, especially in the areas of liberalisation and universal service.......................................................... 73 7.2.5. Continue to support training and organisational/legal reform projects through the multi-country programme..................................................... 74 7.3. General Recommendations ............................................................................ 74 7.3.1. Increase co-funding................................................................................. 74 7.3.2. Exploit the Logical Framework Methodology........................................ 75 7.3.3. Take full advantage of portfolio structure .............................................. 75 7.3.4. Improve co-ordination ............................................................................ 76 7.3.5. Delay may be a virtue............................................................................. 76 Annex A: Overview of Telecommunications and Postal Issues by Country .................... 77 Annex B: Inventory Results .............................................................................................. 91 Annex C: Details of Selected Projects .............................................................................. 92 Annex D: Selected NP and
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Role of European Union Accession in Democratisation Processes
    The role of European Union accession in democratisation processes Published by Democratic Progress Institute 11 Guilford Street London WC1N 1DH United Kingdom www.democraticprogress.org [email protected] +44 (0)203 206 9939 First published, 2016 DPI – Democratic Progress Institute is a charity registered in England and Wales. Registered Charity No. 1037236. Registered Company No. 2922108. This publication is copyright, but may be reproduced by any method without fee or prior permission for teaching purposes, but not for resale. For copying in any other circumstances, prior written permission must be obtained from the publisher, and a fee may be payable.be obtained from the publisher, and a fee may be payable 2 The role of European Union accession in democratisation processes Contents Foreword: ...................................................................................5 Abbreviations: ............................................................................7 Introduction: ..............................................................................8 I. European Union accession and democratisation – An overview .............................................................................11 A) Enlargement for democracy – history of European integration before 1993 ........................................................11 • Declaration on democracy, April 1978, European Council: .........................................................12 B) Pre accession criteria since 1993 and the procedure of adhesion ..........................................................................15
    [Show full text]
  • Regulation of Professional Services in EU Member States
    SERVICEGAP Discussion Paper No. XXX Regulation of Professional Services in EU Member States Classification, Measurement and Evaluation November 2012 Iain Paterson, Bianca Brandl* and Richard Sellner* * Institute for Advanced Studies, Vienna, Austria Corresponding Author: Iain Paterson ([email protected]) This paper was developed as part of Deliverable 2.3 of SERVICEGAP “Papers on linkages between manufacturing and services, regulation in professional services and banks” SERVICEGAP project is funded by the European Commission, Research Directorate General as part of the 7th Framework Programme, Theme 8: Socio-Economic Sciences and Humanities. Grant Agreement no: 244 552 1 Regulation of Professional Services in EU Member States: Classification, Measurement and Evaluation Iain Paterson Bianca Brandl, and Richard Sellner November 2012 Abstract This paper has a two-fold purpose: on the one hand of presenting methods and results from studies (mainly involving the authors) that have fed into ongoing efforts at European Union level to classify regulatory systems in Member States, to find ways to measure the extent of regulation, and to evaluate whether state-legislated or self-regulation is anti-competitive as distinct from quality- enhancing regulation for consumers’, rather than producers’, benefit. On the other hand, the paper presents results from a partial update of regulatory knowledge (regulation indices) and further develops a new measure of regulatory effect of professional services throughout the Member States’ economies based on newly developed empirical measures of interlinkage (Cf. Paterson and Sellner 2012). The results of the updated indicator show some modest decrease in anti-competitive regulation in professional services, mainly with respect to market conduct behaviour: more openness to new forms of businesses, price setting, fees and advertising.
    [Show full text]
  • The Macroeconomics of Regulation
    International Finance 18:3, 2015: pp. 343–360 DOI: 10.1111/infi.12077 BOOK REVIEW The Macroeconomics of Market Regulation y z Matteo Cacciatore and Giuseppe Fiori y z HEC Montreal, and North Carolina State University. Boeri,T.,M.Castanheira,R. Faini and V. Galasso, eds., Structural Reforms Without Prejudices. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2006. Schindler, M., H. Berger, B. B. Bakker and A. Spilimbergo, eds., Jobs and Growth: Supporting the European Recovery. Washington, D.C.: International Monetary Fund. 2014. Solow, R., ed., Structural Reform and Economic Policy. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 2004. I. Introduction In each country, a complex set of laws and institutions regulates the functioning of product and labour markets. Broadly defined, the regulation of labour directly affects hiring and firing decisions, the number of working hours, the intensity of job search and wage dynamics. Examples include employment protection legislation, the generosity and duration of unemployment benefits, restrictions on the length of contracts, the level of centralization in wage bargaining, labour unions and © 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd 344 Matteo Cacciatore and Giuseppe Fiori minimum wages. Product market regulation affects producer entry and exit in a given market or industry, the incentives to create and commercialize goods and services, and the behaviour of prices. Examples include the procedures governing market entry (e.g. the legal requirements to be met for a business to start operating), the laws and institutions that limit the market supply of goods and services, and price controls. The rationale for the emergence and consolidation of such laws and institutions has been related to various factors, including the promotion of social equity goals, the correction of market imperfections (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 31.5.2018 COM(2018
    EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 31.5.2018 COM(2018) 379 final 2018/0204 (COD) Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending Regulation (EC) No 1393/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters (service of documents) {SEC(2018) 272 final} - {SWD(2018) 286 final} - {SWD(2018) 287 final} EN EN EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 1. CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL • Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Among the EU’s tasks is that of developing a European area of justice in civil matters based on the principles of mutual trust and the mutual recognition of judgments. The area of justice requires judicial cooperation across borders. For this purpose, and to facilitate the proper functioning of the internal market, the EU has adopted legislation on the cross-border service of judicial documents1 and on cooperation in the taking of evidence2. These instruments are crucial in the regulation of judicial assistance in civil and commercial matters between the Member States. Their common purpose is to provide an efficient framework for cross-border judicial cooperation. They have replaced the earlier international, more cumbersome system of the Hague Conventions3 between the Member States4. This legislation on judicial cooperation has a real impact on the everyday lives of EU citizens, be it as private individuals or business operators. It is applied in judicial proceedings with cross-border implications, where its proper functioning is indispensable to ensuring access to justice and fair trials (e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Sourcebook on Environmental Funds in Economies in Transition
    SOURCEBOOK ON ENVIRONMENTAL FUNDS IN ECONOMIES IN TRANSITION A Regional Overview and Surveys of Selected Environmental Funds in Central and Eastern Europe and the New Independent States Edited by: Patrick Francis Jürg Klarer Nelly Petkova ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT Pursuant to Article 1 of the Convention signed in Paris on 14th December 1960, and which came into force on 30th of September 1961, the organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) shall promote policies designed: • to achieve the highest sustainable economic growth and employment a rising standard of living in Member countries, while maintaining financial stability, and thus to contribute to the development of the world economy; • to contribute to sound economic expansion in the Member as well as non-member countries in the process of economic development; and • to contribute to the expansion of world trade on a multilateral, non discriminatory basis in accordance with international obligations. The original Member countries of the OECD are Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States. The following countries became Members subsequently through accession at the dates indicated hereafter: Japan (28th April 1964), Finland (28th January 1969), Australia (7th June 1971), New Zealand (29th May 1973), Mexico (18th May 1994), the Czech Republic (21st December 1995), Hungary (7th May 1996), Poland (22nd November 1996), and the Republic of Korea (12th December 1996). The Commission of the European Communities takes part in the work of the OECD (Article 13 of the OECD Convention).
    [Show full text]
  • Cost of Service Regulation in the Investor-Owned Electric Utility Industry: a History of Adaptation
    Cost of Service Regulation In the Investor-Owned Electric Utility Industry A History of Adaptation Prepared by: Dr. Karl McDermott June 2012 © 2012 by the Edison Electric Institute (EEI). All rights reserved. Published 2012. Printed in the United States of America. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system or method, now known or hereinafter invented or adopted, without the express prior written permission of the Edison Electric Institute. Attribution Notice and Disclaimer This work was prepared by Dr. Karl McDermott. When used as a reference, attribution to EEI is requested. EEI, any member of EEI, and any person acting on its behalf (a) does not make any warranty, express or implied, with respect to the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of the information, advice or recommendations contained in this work, and (b) does not assume and expressly disclaims any liability with respect to the use of, or for damages resulting from the use of any information, advice or recommendations contained in this work. The views and opinions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect those of EEI or any member of EEI. This material and its production, reproduction and distribution by EEI does not imply endorsement of the material. Published by: Edison Electric Institute 701 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20004-2696 Phone: 202-508-5000 Web site: www.eei.org Cost of Service Regulation in the Investor-Owned Electric Utility Industry: A History of Adaptation Table of Contents Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • On Democracy and the “Public Interest”
    Center for European Studies Working Paper No. 93 On Democracy and the “Public Interest”: in the European Union by Andrew Moravcsik Andrea Sangiovanni Professor of Government Department of Government Director, European Union Center Harvard University Harvard University Visiting Fellow (2002) Center for European Studies Cambridge University 27 Kirkland Street [email protected] Cambridge, MA 02138 USA Tel: (617) 495-4303 x205; Fax: (617) 495-8509 e-mail: [email protected] This is a draft. Before citing, please contact the authors at [email protected] or [email protected] ABSTRACT Perhaps the most fundamental question in contemporary European Union politics is whether the existing division and sharing of competences between national and supranational levels is pragmatically and normatively justifiable. In his classic book, Governing in Europe (1999), Fritz Scharpf argues that the current policy mix is sub-optimal and, therefore, democratically illegitimate, because the multi-level European polity lacks the ‘problem-solving capacity’ necessary to permit citizens and their representatives to bargain to optimal outcomes. Instead it is likely to trigger a vicious circle of downward adaptations in social policy and public services that are likely to sap the EU's support. Scharpf recommends granting domestic social welfare policies constitutional status in EU jurisprudence, and permitting ‘differentiated integration’ or ‘flexibility’ for high-standard countries to legislate as an EU sub-group. In this challenge by Scharpf to the ‘output legitimacy’ of the EU, we argue, a number of important issues remain unresolved. First, his argument rests on an implicit and insufficiently elaborated conception of the public interest in maintaining or expanding current patterns of social welfare protection.
    [Show full text]
  • Regulation OTT Regulation
    OTT Regulation OTT Regulation MINISTRY OF SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, INNOVATIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS EUROPEAN UNION DELEGATION TO BRAZIL (MCTIC) Head of the European Union Delegation Minister João Gomes Cravinho Gilberto Kassab Minister Counsellor - Head of Development and Cooperation Section Secretary of Computing Policies Thierry Dudermel Maximiliano Salvadori Martinhão Cooperation Attaché – EU-Brazil Sector Dialogues Support Facility Coordinator Director of Policies and Sectorial Programs for Information and Communication Asier Santillan Luzuriaga Technologies Miriam Wimmer Implementing consortium CESO Development Consultants/FIIAPP/INA/CEPS Secretary of Telecommunications André Borges CONTACTS Director of Telecommunications Services and Universalization MINISTRY OF SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, INNOVATIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS Laerte Davi Cleto (MCTIC) Author Secretariat of Computing Policies Senior External Expert + 55 61 2033.7951 / 8403 Vincent Bonneau [email protected] Secretariat of Telecommunications MINISTRY OF PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT + 55 61 2027.6582 / 6642 [email protected] Ministry Dyogo Oliveira PROJECT COORDINATION UNIT EU-BRAZIL SECTOR DIALOGUES SUPPORT FACILITY Secretary of Management Gleisson Cardoso Rubin Secretariat of Public Management Ministry of Planning, Development and Management Project National Director Telephone: + 55 61 2020.4645/4168/4785 Marcelo Mendes Barbosa [email protected] www.sectordialogues.org 2 3 OTT Regulation OTT © European Union, 2016 Regulation Responsibility
    [Show full text]
  • The Case for Centralized Authority
    Telecommunication Regulation in the United States and Europe: The Case for Centralized Authority William Lehr1 Thomas Kiessling Columbia University & MIT Global One & Harvard University [email protected] [email protected] Paper presented to the Twenty-sixth Telecommunications Policy Research Conference Alexandria, VA First Draft, Comments Welcome October 3-5, 1998 Telecommunications regulators in both the US and the European Union are facing a year 2000 problem: how best to reform the current dual regulatory regime (Federal/State in the US; European Commission/Member States in Europe) in light of industry convergence, globalization, and liberalization. These trends are perhaps best exemplified by the emergence of the Internet as a global communications platform for communications services, as well as, electronic commerce and what it entails. This paper argues that in both the US and the European Union there are important economic reasons why the regulatory balance needs to tilt in favor of a stronger centralized authority. In the US, this means affirming the Federal Communication Commission’s (FCC’s) ability to preempt State authority in areas relating to the promotion of wholesale-level carrier competition; while in Europe, this means interpreting the subsidiarity principle more narrowly to permit the European Commission (EC) to assert more authority over the National Regulatory Authorities (NRA) in the member states. This paper is organized into five sections. Section 1 provides an overview of our main arguments, explaining why it is important to have a stronger centralized authority. Section 2 reviews the economic and legal justification for the dual-regulatory system of centralized/local regulation that exists in both the US and Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • Developing Public Private Partnerships in New Europe
    Developing Public Private Partnerships in New Europe *connectedthinking Executive Summary 3 Introduction 5 Section 1 The need for investment and the role of PPPs Background 7 What are PPPs? 9 Why undertake PPPs? 10 PPPs in the Member States 10 A role for PPPs? 14 Section 2 PPPs and the EU Introduction 15 PPPs in an EU context 17 EU procurement rules and PPPs 17 Accounting and statistical rules for PPPs 19 State Aid issues and PPPs 20 Funding initiatives 21 The role of the EIB 22 The need for a joined up approach to the PPP market in Europe 22 Section 3 Combining EU funding with private finance Introduction 23 Review of co-financing using private funding 25 Review of absorption levels 27 The use of private finance as a means of co-financing 29 Practical issues of co-financing EU funded projects with private funding 30 The Challenge 31 Developing hybrid procurement and funding structures 32 Preparedness of Member States to develop PPP projects 33 Support requirements 34 Section 4 Recommendations and conclusions Recommendations for promoting the development of PPPs 35 Conclusions 39 Appendices EIB funded PPP projects by country and sector 40 EU funding relevant to infrastructure development 41 Glossary 42 Contacts 43 Executive Summary The need for investment public sector officials do not have experience and the role of PPPs of implementing such projects. They therefore need to develop new skills and capabilities in An ‘infrastructure gap’ exists in Europe. order to undertake PPP procurements This has a negative impact on economic growth effectively. This requires an investment on and the prosperity of the citizens of Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • The Use of EU Funds in Macedonia
    The use of EU funds in Macedonia Efficiency, impact and absorption capacity и Collection of studies Working version European Policy Institute November, 2012 Contents Emilija Taseva: IPA COMPONENT I FOR EUROPEAN INSTITUTIONS GUARANTEEING DEMOCRACY, RULE OF LAW, HUMAN RIGHTS, PROTECTION OF MINORITIES IN REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA .................................................................................................................................... 5 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................ 5 Enlargement Policy and Pre-accession Assistance: Copenhagen Political Criteria in Focus ... 7 IPA strengthening democracy, rule of law, human rights and protection of minorities in Republic of Macedonia 9 Implementation of IPA Component I: initial experiences and prospects for efficiency, absorption and impact ..................................................................................................................................... 12 Conclusions .......................................................................................................................................................... 15 Bibliography ......................................................................................................................................................... 16 Drilon Iseni: IPA - “INCENTIVE FOR PROSPEROUS ACTIONS”, CASE STUDY:CROSS-BORDER COOPERATIONIPA PROGRAMME MACEDONIA - ALBANIA 2007-2013 .....................
    [Show full text]
  • Participation of Cassiopee in the Eu Technical Assistance Programmes to Eastern Countries
    BG0100148 PARTICIPATION OF CASSIOPEE IN THE EU TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMMES TO EASTERN COUNTRIES A. R. Beceiro; E. Vico; J.M. Deconinck 1. INTRODUCTION During the last decade important changes have taken place in many Central and Eastern European countries as well as in the former Soviet Union. At present these nations are embarked on a profound transformation of their socio-economic systems, a transition process without parallel in modern history. This changing political and economic landscape has heightened existing concerns about the safety of nuclear power plants designed and constructed more than two decades ago in a closed society and, in particular, on the situation and practices concerning radioactive waste. In the European Union (EU) there was a general consensus that support and assistance were urgently needed to these countries, aiming at improving the living conditions, and thus to social and political stability. Through the TACIS and PHARE technical assistance programmes, the EU provides since the beginning of the 1990's an important support to the Eastern European countries and the New Independent States (NIS) for facilitating their transition to market economics and to democratic societies. These programmes are essentially based on transfer of knowledge and of expertise, and cover a variety of sectors like public administration, enterprises, health, education, agriculture, banks, energy, transport, nuclear safety and environment. An aspect of the nuclear safety and environment which requires a particular attention is the management of radioactive waste. In this area both programmes are a real opportunity to encourage and to facilitate the assessment of the situations in these countries, the definition of improvement actions and their implementation.
    [Show full text]