Participare Public

(Public Participation)
Curs universitar
2014
Oana Alman
Zeno Reinhardt

Cuprins
1. CADRU CONCEPTUAL _____________________________________________3
1.1 Ce este participarea public ____________________________________________ 3
1.2 Caracteristici ale participrii publice_____________________________________ 3
1.3Context istoric din perspectiva relaiilor publice ____________________________ 4

2. EVOLUIA PARTICIPRII PUBLICE ________________________________5

2.1 De la guvernarea tehnocratic la democraia participativ ___________________ 5
2.2. Participarea public condiionri societal-sistemice i realiti______________ 6
2.3 Cetenia activ ______________________________________________________ 7

3. PRACTICA PARTICIPRII PUBLICE ________________________________9

3.1 Importana participrii publice n practica guvernrii ______________________ 9
3.2 Categorii de procese participative _______________________________________ 9
3.3 Principii i valori ale proceselor participative_____________________________ 10
3.4 Tipuri de public. Nivel de participare. Promisiuni ctre public ______________ 11
3.5 Tehnici participative _________________________________________________ 13
3.6 Alte elemente practice ________________________________________________ 16
3.7 Implementarea practic a participrii publice n diverse sisteme democratice __ 18
3.8 Legislaia asociat proceselor participative n Romnia ____________________ 25

1. CADRU CONCEPTUAL
1.1 Ce este participarea public
Definiii:
Comisia Economic pentru America Latin (1973): definete participarea
public drept o contribuie financiar voluntar a cetenilor ntr-unul sau mai
multe programe/proiecte publice menite s contribuie la dezvoltarea naional, dar
nu se menioneaz clar participarea cetenilor la modelarea programului sau alte
ci prin care acetia i-ar putea aduce contribuia la dezvoltarea coninutului
acestuia.
United Nations Research Institute for Social Develop-ment (UNRISD, 1979):
participarea public reprezint efortul organizat al unor grupuri, prin care se urmrete s se
obin creterea controlului asupra resurselor i institu iilor cu atribuii de reglementare,
n condiiile n care grupurile respective nu au acces nici la resurse, nici la decizie. The
World Bank, (1996, p. xi): un proces prin care publicurile influeneaz i controleaz, alturi
de ali actori sociali, acele iniiative de dezvoltare, decizii i modaliti de alocare a resurselor
care i afecteaz n mod direct. Thomas Dietz i Paul C. Stern (2008) in Public Participation
in Environmental Assessment and Decision Making: o aciune consimit a autoritilor
publice prin care se cedeaz ctre ceteni parte din autoritatea decizional legitim pentru a
se asigura o ct mai mare implicare a celor care sunt afectai de decizii n procesul de
formulare a politicilor publice i/sau de adoptare a unor decizii.

Gene Rowe i Lynn J. Frewer (2005, p.235) vad participarea publica sub
forma implicarii membrilor publicului n definirea agendei publice, n adoptarea
deciziilor, n formularea politicilor publice etc.

1.2 Caracteristici ale participrii publice

Participarea public este asociat procesului de adoptare a unei decizii
administrative (n cadrul unei organizaii publice sau private), guvernamentale sau
politice, care are efecte asupra diferitelor categorii de public. Scopul principal al
participrii publice este acela de a implica un numr ct mai larg de categorii de
public n procesul de luare a deciziilor pentru a asigura nelegerea nevoii de
adoptare a msurii, a contribui la definirea/modelarea acesteia i eventual a
contribui/facilita procesul de implementare a msurii. Procesul de interaciune cu

publicul este unul proactiv i structurat, care se bazeaz pe ideea de colaborare i

nu pe ignorarea sau confruntarea categoriilor de public implicate. Intregul proces
decizional este transparent i permite identificarea acelor contribuii care au venit din
partea stakeholderilor.

1.3Context istoric din perspectiva relaiilor publice

Caract
Scopu
comu
Natur
comu
Model
comu
Cercet
Anul
Promo
ai
Dome
aceste
modele

Adevrul
neimportant
EmitorRec

Informrii
publice
Diseminar
informaiil
Adevrul
Important
Emitor

Puin

Puin

1850
P.T. Barnum

1900
Ivy Lee

Modelul
Bidirecional
i asimetric
Persuadarea
tiinific
Efect dual
neechilibrat
EmitorRecept
(Feed-back)
Important,
evaluarea
1919
Edward
L.

Agenii
guvernam

Business,
anumite tipuri de

Impresariat/
Publicitate
Propaganda

Sport,
aciuni
promovare, publicitate

Proce

de
entale,

agenii

15%

50%

Sursa: Grunig i Hunt (1984), p. 22.

Bidirecional
i simetric
nelegerea
Reciproc
Efect dual
Echilibrat
InterpretInte
Important,
evaluarea
1960/1970
Edward
L.
Business,
anumite tipuri
de agenii

20%

15%

2. EVOLUIA PARTICIPRII PUBLICE

2.1 De la guvernarea tehnocratic la democraia
participativ
Noi mecanisme i instrumente n abordarea problemelor specifice
administrrii afacerilor publice centrale sau locale:

the new public management, noua guvernan - the new

governance, e-guvernana - e- governance, micarea deliberartiv - the

deliberative movement i, mai recent, participarea publicurilor - public
participation i cetenia activ - active citizenship,

o serie de teoreticieni i practicieni din domeniul tiinelor sociale au

ncercat s neleag mai bine care este rolul cetenilor / publicurilor /

stakeholderilor / membrilor comunitii ntr-un proces de guvernare cu adevrat
democratic, ce fel de raporturi exist ntre guvernani i guvernai i n ce msur
comunicarea poate juca un rol important n formularea unei opiuni pentru o
anumit politic public, ceea ce a condus, de-a lungul timpului, la o serie de
dezbateri i polemici aprinse n spaiul public internaional (Bernays, 1923,
1928, 1947; Lippmann, 1920, 1922, 1925; Dewey, 1927, 1939; Dewey &
Childs, 1933; Thomas, 1995; Agranoff & McGuire, 2003; Creighton, 2005; Lynn,
Jr., 2006; IAP2, 2006a, 2006b, 2006c; Agranoff, 2007; Lovan et al., 2004; De
Souza- Briggs, 2008).

Un prim pas important nspre asocierea publicurilor cu procesul

guvernrii acest sens a fost realizat n Statele Unite ale Americii, unde, n anul
1917,

luat

fiin

Comitetului

Informrii

Publice,

cea dinti instituie

guvernamental din lume cu atribuii clare n zona comunicrii cu cetenii (Wilson,

1941; Martin, 1988).

Lippmann nu a fost un suporter al implicrii publicurilor n actul

procesului decizional corespunztor guvernrii ci promovarea la putere a uneia

dintre alternativele de guvernare propuse de diversele elite (grupuri restrnse de
personaliti, n principal tehnocrai) aflate n competiie politic (Lippmann, 1920,
1925)
La polul opus al acestei dezbateri s-a aflat, printre alii, John Dewey
care considera c fr implicarea cetenilor n construcia deciziilor care i privesc
5

nu putem discuta despre democraie, Dewey (1927, 1939) arat c cetenii trebuie
privii ca o mare comunitate, care trebuie s fie capabil s ia singur deciziile
care-i influeneaz viaa i dezvoltarea,

iar pentru aceasta membrii comunitii

trebuie educai i dotai cu informaiile, instrumentele i mecanismele necesare

pentru a putea lua decizii proprii n cunotin de cauz (Dewey & Childs, 1933).
Dewey nu neag importana experilor tehnocrai n cadrul aparatului
administrativ, dar rolul pe care el l atribuie acestora este acela de consultani,
respectiv de experi care contureaz i propun soluii pentru diversele probleme cu
care se confrunt cetenii, dar nu decid care dintre aceste soluii s fie
implementat, alegerea soluiei celei mai potrivite fiind atributul publicurilor /
stakeholderilor, fr a cror existen i recunoatere o societate nu este cu
adevrat democratic, este o democraie ciuntit, ale crei lipsuri pot fi vindecate
doar prin adoptarea unui nivel i mai ridicat de democraie. De foarte multe ori, din
cauz c deciziile asumate de oamenii politici sau de specialiti nu reuesc s
vizeze sau nu sunt percepute ca viznd interesul public, cetenii ajung s ignore sau
s resping msurile propuse de managerii publici.
n acest context, participarea publicurilor / stakeholderilor n procesele
decizionale n ceea ce privete soluionarea problemelor publice, precum i
necesitatea acut a transparenei n actul de guvernare i a descentralizrii acestuia
prin orientarea ctre comunitate au devenit imperative n remodelarea i
restructurarea sistemelor de management public cu precdere n rile cu democraie
avansat (Osborne & Gaebler, 1993; Agranoff & McGuire, 2003; Creighton, 2005;
IAP2, 2006a, 2006b, 2006c; Pricopie, 2005; Alman & Reinhardt, 2009)

2.2. Participarea public condiionri societalsistemice i realiti

Pentru ca participarea publica s devin un instrument functional i eficient in
gestionare problemelor publice este necesar indeplinirea simultan a trei condiii
contextuale (Thomas, 1995; Agranoff & McGuire, 2003; Creighton, 2005; Lynn, Jr.,
2006; IAP2, 2006; Agranoff, 2007; de Souza-Briggs, 2008):
existena

unei

culturi

deliberative

la

nivelul

decidenilor

guvernanilor (politicieni, specialiti etc.);

existena unei culturi deliberative la nivelul stakeholderilor, fie
acetia ceteni sau a diferite alte categorii de public implicate, la un moment dat,
6

n adresarea unor probleme publice;

existena unor modele, instrumente i mecanisme de dialog public,
de participare i implicare a cetenilor n actul (auto)guvernanei, modele,
instrumente i mecanisme cunoscute, nsuite i practicate att de guvernani,
ct i de guvernai.
Pretextul managerilor publici pentru lipsa implicrii stakeholderilor este lipsa
de pregtire / cunotine / informaii a ceteanului de rnd, lipsa aadar a
discernmntului i a competenei acestuia n a se pronuna n probleme importante
i cu un grad ridicat de complexitate. Societile democratice se afl din nou ntr-un
impas de legitimitate a actului guvernrii, generat, pe de o parte, de lipsa de implicare
a publicurilor / stakeholderilor n procesele decizionale specifice, att la nivel
local, ct i la nivel central i, pe de alt parte, de relativ frecventa utilizare a
tehnicilor de pseudo-comunicare n care oamenii sunt mai degrab bombardai cu
informaii, dect informai despre ceea ce se ntmpl n procesul de guvernare
sau n procesele decizionale a cror finalitate le va afecta viaa i activitatea
(Ramonet, 2000; Agranoff & McGuire, 2003; Lynn, Jr., 2006; Blomgren & Sahlin,
2007)

2.3 Cetenia activ

Problema participrii este indisolubil legat de dezvoltarea durabil,
deoarece, fr o pluralitate a actorilor i abordrilor, dezvoltarea durabil nu
poate fi realizat (Green & Chambers, 2006, p.2). Problemele de mediu se rezolv
cel mai eficient prin participarea tuturor cetenilor interesai (United Nations 1992,
p.2). Participarea larg a publicului n procesul decizional este o condiie sine-quanon a dezvoltrii durabile. De aceea, se consider c fiecare individ trebuie s aib
acces corespunztor la informaii i posibilitatea de a participa la procesele
decizionale (Thomas, 1995; Creighton, 2005; IAP2, 2006a, 2006b, 2006c; Petrescu,
Nbrjoiu & Braboveanu, 2008; Civitas, 2008).
Statul trebuie s faciliteze i s ncurajeze contientizarea publicului privind
problemele generale i specifice i participarea cetenilor n procesul decizional
prin informarea corespunztoare a acestora. Trebuie s se asigure accesul efectiv al
cetenilor la procedurile juridice i administrative (UNESCO, 2001; United Nations
Division for Sustainable Development, 2005). Participarea activ la dezvoltarea

durabil face posibil ca indivizii afectai de schimbri s fie chiar cei care determin
modul, gradul i punerea n aplicare a schimbrilor. Participarea reprezint un proces
incluziv, ce asigur un input echitabil, autodeterminare i responsabilizare
indiferent de sex, ras sau apartenen cultural a tuturor celor interesai
(stakeholderi) (Creighton, 2005; IAP2, 2006a, 2006b, 2006c).
Multe structuri administrative consider c dialogul dintre guvernani i
guvernai este, ab initio, o comunicare asimetric, de sus n jos, opiniile i interesele
comunicate de ceteni nefiind percepute ca avnd valoare egal cu elementele
comunicate de guvernani. Guvernele, ageniile de finanare, donatorii i actorii
societii civile, inclusiv O.N.G.urile i ageniile multilaterale, precum Banca
Mondial i Fondul Monetar Internaional, au ajuns cu toii la un consens, i anume
c dezvoltarea societii nu poate avea o baz solid i durabil, dac participarea
cetenilor nu se afl n centrul procesului de dezvoltare (Creighton, 2005; Alman
& Reinhardt, 2009).

3. PRACTICA PARTICIPRII PUBLICE

3.1 Importana participrii publice n practica guvernrii
Creterea eficienei managementul public prin practici colaborative conduce
la dezvoltarea unor avantaje esentiale pentru succesul politicilor publice sau a altor
activiti din sectorul public avute in vedere: (i) inelegerea de ctre factorii
decizionali a nevoilor, dorinelor i preferinelor publicului (Susskind & Cruikshank,
1987; Thomas, 1995; Scott, 2003; Innes, 1996; Innes & Booher, 2003; Creighton,
2005; Campbel, 2006); (ii) atragerera sprijinului cetenilor pentru politicile
implementate (Susskind & Cruikshank, 1987; Thomas, 1995; Scott, 2003; Innes &
Booher, 2003; Creighton, 2005); (iii) evitarea cheltuielilor de timp i bani n
discuiile contradictorii asupra validitii politicilor (Susskind & Cruikshank, 1987;
Thomas, 1995; Scott, 2003; Innes, 1996; Innes & Booher, 2003; Creighton, 2005;
Campbel, 2006); (iii) responsabilizarea cetenilor i organizaiilor n raport cu
crearea i implementarea de politici publice (Berry, Portney & Thompson, 1993;
Friedmann, 1992; Thomas, 1995; Creighton, 2005; Campbel, 2006);

creterea satisfaciei i ncrederii cetenilor n factorii de decizie

(Creighton, 2005; IAP2, 2006a);

creterea gradului de democratizare i eficientizare a societii

(Friedmann, 1992; Fung, 2004; Campbel, 2006).

3.2 Categorii de procese participative

participarea direct se bazeaz pe dreptul fundamental al fiecrui

individ de a-i putea exprima i urmri propriu interes; rolul managementului public
este acela de a garanta libertatea individului i de a nu interveni n numele nici unui
interes particular. Astfel, participarea direct asigur individului oportunitatea de a
verifica i aviza personal activitile instituiilor managementului public (Rawls,
1971);

participarea comunitar / participarea comunitii aceast perspectiv

pune accent nu pe interesul individual, ci pe cel al comunitii, pe sarcinile i

drepturile asociate cu asigurarea bunstrii comune. Pentru susintorii participrii

comunitare (Henton et al., 2006; Innes & Booher, 2003), participarea nu este privit
ca fiind opional, ci ca o obligaie fundamental a fiecrui individ din comunitate. n
acest caz, rolul managementului public este acela de a facilita i ncuraja participarea
unui numr ct mai mare de indivizi sau, aa cum arat Daniell (2011), egalitatea
dintre ceteni n procesul decizional devine elementul central al acestei abordri;

democraia deliberativ pune accentul pe crearea contextului i

practicilor instituionale ce promoveaz dialogul deschis bazat pe informare corect i

complet i ncurajeaz apariia de soluii comune prin identificarea de noi forme de
cunoatere i nelegere (Gutmann & Frank, 1996). Implicarea activ a unei game
largi de participani, stakeholderi, reprezint fundamentul acestei perspective. n acest
context, rolul managementului public este acela de a facilita schimbul deschis de idei
i propuneri ntre participanii care nu trebuie s se considere ca pri ntr-o lupt a
intereselor, ci mai degrab deliberatori pregtii s nvee unii de la ceilali i, astfel,
s ajung, pe de o parte, la un grad nalt de nelegere a problemelor asupra crora
trebuie s decid, iar pe de alt parte, la soluii care s includ perspectivele i
rspunsuri la nevoile tuturor stakeholderilor implicai.

3.3 Principii i valori ale proceselor participative

Principii de baz ale participrii:
a.

fundamentarea pe valori

b.

urmrirea unor obiective clare

c.

orientarea spre decizie

Valori:
1. Publicul are dreptul s-i spun cuvntul n deciziile care-i afecteaz viaa.
2. Procesele participative includ promisiunea c inputul de la public va influena

decizia.
3. Procesele participative promoveaz decizii sustenabile prin recunoaterea

comunicarea nevoilor i intereselor tuturor participanilor la proces,

inclusiv ale decidenilor.

4. Procesele participative caut s atrag i s faciliteze implicarea tuturor

celor potenial afectai de decizie sau interesai de aceasta.

5. Cetenii implicai n procesele participative aleg singuri nivelul de

participare pe care l doresc i felul n care doresc s se implice.

10

6. n cadrul proceselor participative, cetenilor trebuie s li se ofere toate

informaiile necesare pentru ca acetia s se poat implica ntr-un mod

eficient.
7. Pe tot parcursul proceselor participative, cetenii trebuie informai cu

privire la modul n care implicarea lor n proces influeneaz rezultatul final.

De asemenea, trebuie avut n vedere pe tot parcursul proceselor
participative c toi participanii, (indiferent de nivelul de participare - inclusiv
decidenii), implic n proces speranele, temerile, ngrijorrile, problemele i
opiniile proprii, toate bazate pe valori proprii, ceea ce influeneaz n mod decisiv
felul n care fiecare dintre actori va percepe procesul i rezultatul final. Astfel,
rolul facilitatorilor este de a traduce i expune n limbaj comun valorile
individuale ale participanilor pentru a putea fi nelese de ctre toi actorii
implicai (valorile indviduale trebuie nelese, nu asumate de ctre ceilali, sau
impuse altora).
B.

Obiective clare

Pentru fiecare etap a procesului participativ exist obiective specifice

clare ce trebuie atinse (e.g.: stabilirea listei complete de stakeholderi, informarea
corect i complet, nregistrarea de feedback, stabilirea de criterii, etc.)
C.

Orientarea spre decizie

Procesele

participative

urmresc

ntotdeauna

luarea

unei

decizii.

Participarea cetenilor n aceste procese influeneaz rezultatul procesului

decizional.

3.4 Tipuri de public. Nivel de participare. Promisiuni

ctre public
Pentru un proces de participare real i funcional trebuie luate toate
msurile pentru a nu se exclude (intenionat sau din greeal) nici o categorie de
public. Toate categoriile de public trebuie s tie c acest proces are loc. n
procesele de participare publicul se autoselecteaz, att ca nivel de interes ct i ca
nivel de participare, incluznd aici energie, timp i alte resurse alocate. n urma
informrii vor rezulta urmtoarele categorii de publicuri (n tabelul de mai jos):
Categorie de public

Nivel de participare autoselectat*

1. decideni

empowerment

2. planificatori

colaborare
11

3. consilieri

implicare

4. analiti

consultare

5. observatori

informare

6. apatici informai

lips de interes / neparticipare

*prin ateptri ale publicului fa de proces

n funcie de:
i)

reglementrile legislative ale unor probleme (securitate naional, politic

extern, situaii de urgen etc.) i

ii) nivelul de implicare autoselectat de public (vezi Tab.1)

exist cinci niveluri legitime de participare a publicurilor n procesele decizionale:

a.

Informare

Scop: oferirea ctre public de informaii corecte, clare, complete i echilibrate

pentru a ajuta la nelegerea problemelor, alternativelor, oportunitilor i soluiilor
existente.
Promisiunea ctre public: v vom oferi continuu informaii noi i complete

b.

Consultare

Scop: obinerea de input / feedback de la public (stakeholder-i) cu privire la anumite

analize, alternative i/sau decizii;
Promisiunea ctre public: v vom ine la curent cu procesul decizional, vom
asculta i lua n considerare problemele i dorinele voastre i v vom oferi
feedback asupra modului n care prerea voastr a influenat decizia final.

c.

Implicare

Scop: lucrul direct cu publicul (stakeholder-ii) pe parcursul ntregului proces

participativ pentru a se asigura faptul c problemele i dorinele publicului sunt pe
deplin i corect nelese i avute n vedere;
Promisiunea ctre public: vom lucra mpreun pentru a fi siguri c problemele i
dorinele voastre se reflect n mod direct n variantele de proiect propuse i v vom
oferi feedback asupra modului n care prerea voastr a influenat decizia final.

d.

Colaborare

Scop: parteneriatul cu publicul (stakeholder-ii) n abordarea fiecrui aspect al

deciziei, inclusiv n dezvoltarea de alternative i n identificarea soluiei preferate;
Promisiunea ctre public: ne vom adresa vou pentru sfaturi i idei inovatoare n
formularea de variante de proiect i soluii pentru implementarea acestora i vom
12

include sfaturile i recomandrile voastre n decizia final, n cel mai mare grad
posibil.

e.

Empowerment

Scop: plasarea deciziei finale n minile publicului

Promisiunea ctre public: vom implementa orice vei decide voi.
Pentru fiecare nivel de participare exist tehnici specifice de implementare
a procesului participativ

3.5 Tehnici participative

Open House
Nivel participativ: Informare;
n ce const: Un cadru informal, cu o serie puncte de informare grupate pe teme si
subiecte, unde participanti schimba locurile prin rotatie si discut cu organizatorii
diverse subiecte de interes. Informaia este prezentat in stil expoziie/trg, iar
publicul participa la un tip de sesiune de achiziii de informaii de interes;
Utilizare:
-

mbuntirea nivelului de

nelegere a

publicului fa de un

proiect (de dezvoltare/investiii, etc.);

-

colectarea de input de la stakeholder-i

Observaii:

Open House nu reprezint un substitut pentru ntlnirile formale cu

cetenii

Tehnica are utilizri specifice i trebuie folosit doar atunci cnd se

urmrete n special informarea publicului

Spaiul trebuie s aib ct mai puine scaune

Standurile i panourile de prezentare trebuie s fie adaptate la public i

s ofere informaiile ntr-un mod util, simplu i eficient

Fiecare dintre organizatorii care vor discuta cu cetenii va trebuie s

fie instruit() foarte bine asupra elementelor pe care le va face
cunoscute pentru a nu informa greit i pentru a putea comunica
simplu, clar i eficient cu publicul.

La intrare participanii trebuie instruii scurt i eficient despre ce se

13

prezint la fiecare stand.

-

Trebuie fcut o planificare clar a resurselor, logisticii i materialelor

necesare pentru sesiunea Open House ce e bine s includ:
o

Standuri pentru nregistrarea de feedback inclusiv cu flipchart

pentru scrierea de comentarii

Formulare de feedback (care s includ i un numr de fax,

adres de email sau potal pentru cei care nu vor s completeze
pe loc formularul)

Personal organizator desemnat s noteze/nregistreze feedback

la fiecare stand

Teancuri de bileele tip PostIt la fiecare stand i un panou pe

care acestea s poat fi lipite de ctre ceteni dup ce i-au
scris ideile/comentariile/prerile/problemele.

Interaciune mediat de computer

Nivel participativ: Consultare, Implicare, C olaborare;
n ce const: O tehnic ce implic utilizarea computerelor i a reelelor
informatice (Internet i intranet) pentru a promova, eficientiza i dinamiza
interaciunea de grup i soluionarea de probleme. Tipuri de interaciune mediat
de computer: rspunsuri la ntrebri (cu opiuni date), sondaje de opinie, forumuri
de discuii/dezbateri, conferine online sincrone i asincrone, vot electronic etc.
Utilizare:
-

ajut oamenii s realizeze potenialul forei i eficienei lucrului n

echip;

creeaz conexiuni pasive ntre ceteni i catalizeaz lucrul n

echip, nelegerea conceptelor utilizate, construirea unui fundament
comun i descoperirea de noi posibiliti de abordare;

faciliteaz interaciunea i accesul la informaii pentru grupuri mari de

ceteni, fr bariere

de timp i spaiu
-

ajut la crearea unei zone interactive unde toi participanii au voci

egale

pune n lumin i punctele de vedere ale grupurilor minoritare

descurajeaz poziionrile de superioritate i dominarea procesului de

14

ctre un singur punct de vedere

-

focalizeaz discuiile i scurteaz timpul de obinere a unui rezultat

sprijin grupurile s parcurg procese multi-step pentru obinerea

unor rezultate mai relevante

Observaii

Trebuie avute n vedere limitele software-ului utilizat

Trebuie s li se comunice participanilor regulile de interactiune

Organizatorii/moderatorii trebuie bine instruii cu privire la regulile de

lucru

Organizatorii trebuie sa aiba o atitudine echilibrata, de arbitru, pentru

a nu se implica prtinitor n discuii, dar si pentru a elimina din discuie
participanii care ncalc repetat sau grav regulile de interaciune

Moderatorii nu au voie sa abuzeze de poziia de arbitru

Trebuie evitat tendina de a pune accent pe cifre i statistici

Trebuie asigurat un back-up al datelor obinute i discuiile trebuie

arhivate pentru a fi accesibile oricnd i oricui

Scopul i obiectivele utilizarii unui astfel de proces trebuie definite clar,

iar resursele i logistica trebuie planificate cu atenie i cu implicarea
specialitilor din domeniul IT, juridic i al comunicrii

Workshop
Nivel participativ: Implicare, Colaborare;
n ce const: un forum public unde participanii, dei numeroi, lucreaz n grupuri
restrnse (ntre 5-10 persoane) pentru a analiza i dezbate probleme clar predefinite.
Utilizare:
-

ajut oamenii s nvee / dezbat / analizeze prin colaborare i schimb

de opinii i informaii;

pentru a focaliza participanii pe furnizarea de input care poate fi

folosit direct n procesul decizional;

Observaii

Construcia procesului trebuie s urmreasc atingerea obiectivelor

stabilite pentru activitile participative

Este bine s se combine cu o prezentare introductiv pentru a se

asigura un minim de date de pornire pentru participani

15

Dac procesul este unul complex, pregtii voluntari sau membrii ai

echipei de proiect care s faciliteze interaciunea n fiecare grup de
lucru

Materialele informative trebuie s prezinte informaiile ntr-un

mod

simplu, clar i eficient

-

Utilizai instrumente grafice (hri, matrici, diagrame, etc.) pentru a

facilita activitatea grupurilor

Este recomandat s avei disponibile pentru fiecare grup de lucru

instrumente i echipamente precum flipchart-uri, markere, bileele Postit, semne autocolante de marcaj etc.

ntlniri publice
Nivel participativ: Informare, Consultare;
n ce const: O ntlnire cu un grup mare de persoane, ce se utilizeaz n special
pentru a face o prezentare i a da publicului posibilitatea de a pune ntrebri i de a
comenta. ntlnire publice sunt deschise tuturor celor ce doresc s participe.
La ce se folosete:
-

Pentru

se

realiza

ncadrarea

cerinele

legale

privind

informarea/consultarea public;
-

Ofer cetenilor ansa de a-i face cunoscute opiniile

Permite tuturor s aud exact aceleai informaii i comentarii

Permite cetenilor s-i exprime opinii i s-i defuleze frustrrile i

nemulumirile

Observaii

Aceste evenimente pot scpa de sub control (mai ales dac ncrctura
emoional este prea ridicat)

Este recomandat prezena a cel puin unui oficial de rang nalt (de
preferat primarul) din cadrul administraiei locale

3.6 Alte elemente practice

Facilitarea
nu este leadership; nu este conducere; nu nseamn oferire de soluii; nu
nseamn direcionare; nu este un proces individual, ci unul de echip.

16

Concepte cheie asociate termenului de facilitare:

descoperire de potenial;
ajutor dat comunitii de ctre persoane din afar;
activiti de mobilizare a comunitii;
formarea unui grup;
consultan;
oferirea de informaii pentru a uura procesul de facilitare comunitar;
ndrumarea comunitii;
suport oferit pentru identificarea unui lider din comunitate;
activiti de mentorat.

Portretul facilitatorului comunitar

Facilitatorul comunitar este o persoan care trece orice barier de necomunicare
i nencredere din partea comunitii; reuete s stabileasc o bun relaie cu
membrii comunitii; ascult, vorbete, mediaz conflicte, vine cu idei, experiene;
ndrum paii comunitii ctre o via mai frumoas; face vocea comunitii auzit;
este un bun asculttor; este optimist; primete orice idee din partea membrilor
grupului; mprtete din experiena pe care o are; creeaz un cadru favorabil
pentru discuii, n care toat lumea i poate exprima deschis opiniile; ndrum
oamenii n procesul de analiz i prioritizare a nevoilor, mobilizeaz i
organizeaz oamenii din comunitate, dar fr a crea dependen, astfel nct, atunci
cnd procesul de facilitare ia sfrit, las n urm o comunitate puternic i
independent.
Abilitile facilitatorului comunitar
O persoan care i asum rolul de facilitator comunitar n relaia cu un
grup trebuie s dein o serie de abiliti:

s fie un bun vorbitor;

s poat exprima ideile n mod clar;

s foloseasc un limbaj adecvat;

s fie un model de exprimare, s nu se impun, s aib o tonalitate

plcut a vocii i s fie suficient de flexibil i adaptabil;
17

s fie stpn pe sine i ncreztor, dar nu arogant;

s accepte eecurile;

s fie bun observator i asculttor - asta presupune ca un facilitator s

aib abilitatea de a pune ntrebri, de a parafraza, sumariza, ncuraja.

3.7 Implementarea practic a participrii publice n

diverse sisteme democratice
3.7.1 Statele Unite ale Americii: participarea, o constant a
managementului public n care autoritatea eman de la cetean, garantul
legitimitii guvernanei
Ageniile federale americane au pus n practic elemente i procese de
participare public nc de la mijlocul anilor 1960 ai secolului trecut. De-a lungul
timpului, conceptul de participare public a cptat un neles tot mai clar, iar
procedurile privind implicarea activ a cetenilor au fost adaptate tot mai mult la
realitile nconjurtoare.
n timpul celui de-al doilea rzboi mondial, dar i n cele dou decenii
imediat urmtoare, majoritatea ageniilor guvernamentale funcionau conform
paradigmei informrii publicului (Creighton, 1995; Dewey, 1927). Aceast
abordare permitea, ns, doar o comunicare unidirecional, dinspre stat spre
cetean. Mai precis, guvernul considera c, pentru a crea suport i legitimitate
public pentru aciunile i politicile promovate, era suficient s informeze publicul
cu privire la necesitatea i ateptatele rezultate pozitive ale acestora. Pn n prima
jumate a deceniului ase din secolul trecut, aceast premis se pare c a reuit s dea
rezultate (Bleiker & Bleiker, 1994).
La mijlocul anilor 1960, preedintele american Lyndon Johnson a lansat
apelul su pentru participarea activ a fiecrui cetean american la Rzboiul
mpotriva

Srciei

un

program

guvernamental

ce

susinea

dezvoltarea

comunitilor locale. Acest program, ns, nu a dat rezultatele dorite pe termen lung,
fiind axat pe dezvoltarea infrastructurii de locuine, fr ca infrastructura
economic s-i poat ine pasul. Din perspectiva participrii publice, ns, acest
proiect a marcat o schimbare de paradigm de care America avea nevoie
pentru lansarea noului val al participrii publice, care includea, pe lng informarea
cetenilor, i consultarea acestora n procesul politicilor publice (Parr, 2008).

18

n anii 1970, elementele de participare public au devenit din ce n ce mai

prezente n cadrul legislaiei nou aprute, un exemplu relevant n acest sens fiind

Legea Mediului, care solicita pentru orice fel de intervenie cu impact asupra
mediului publicarea unei notificri de intenie, a unui studiu de impact cu variante
alternative, organizarea de edine publice, ntocmirea unui dosar formal de decizie
ce includea propunerile cetenilor, hotrrile luate i notificrile transmise
(Wolman, 1996). n aceast perioad se nregistreaz un interes din ce n ce mai
mare din partea ageniilor federale i statale pentru participarea public. Acest
interes este dovedit i de participarea foarte mare la prima conferin inter-agenii
referitoare la participarea public, organizat la nceputul mandatului preedintelui
Jimmy Carter i la care au participat reprezentani provenind de la peste 80 de
agenii guvernamentale (Creighton, 1999).
Administraia Reagan a reprezentat, ns, o perioad mai dificil pentru
suporterii participrii publice. Motivele acestei antipatii demonstrate de guvern
pentru participarea public nu sunt foarte clare, ns se crede c era vorba de
influena negativ pe care o aveau grupurile de activiti ecologiti i alte asociaii
civice asupra dezvoltrii industriei grele i de combustibili. n cei opt ani de guvernare
Reagan, programele de participare public ale ageniilor guvernamentale au fost
reduse substanial.
La sfritul anilor 1980, domeniul participrii publice a nceput s ia o
nou turnur. Din cauz c aplicarea prevederilor impuse de legi n ceea ce
privete

participarea

public

nu

aducea

ntotdeauna

rezultatele

scontate

(acceptarea politicilor de ctre ceteni), s-a trecut la un nou stil de participare

public atingerea consensului. n acest tip de participare, ageniile statului fac mai
mult dect s asculte opiniile cetenilor ncearc s creeze un soi de acord
acceptat de ambele pri (Bleiker & Bleiker, 1994).
n anii care au urmat, pn n prezent, au fost dezvoltate mai multe
tehnici de implementare a participrii publice, pentru obinerea unor rezultate
optime n implementarea politicilor publice. Exemple n acest sens sunt
negocierea generatoare de reguli pus n practic de Agenia de
Protecie a Mediului (acordul rezultat n urma negocierii a dou pri aflate n
conflict nate reguli de mediu impuse ulterior de Agenie terilor) sau soluionarea
mediat a disputelor (alternative dispute resolution, ADR un tip de mediere a
conflictelor inspirat din domeniul juridic) (Creighton, 1999).

19

Din perspectiv local, comunitile de succes onoreaz i promoveaz

infrastructurile lor civice. Acestea nu cer tot timpul guvernului de la Washington
ajutor

financiar

sau

logistic.

Dimpotriv,

liderii

acestora

apeleaz

la

interdependena dintre mediul de afaceri, guvern, ONG-uri i cetenii ca indivizi.

Aceste comuniti i-au dat seama c rezolvarea problemelor i identificarea
oportunitilor nu reprezint atributul exclusiv al guvernului. Un element comun
al comunitilor de succes este efortul continuu de susinere a proceselor formale i
informale de identificare a obiectivelor comune i de a rspunde nevoilor i
aspiraiilor individuale i comunitare. Comunitile de succes fac s dispar graniele
dintre guvern, mediul de afaceri i sectorul non- profit (Creighton, 1999; Parr, 2008).
Un motiv important pentru care comunitile americane caut noi moduri de
abordare a problemelor este faptul c acestea sunt tot mai contiente c
provocrile crora trebuie s le fac fa nu sunt numai ale lor. Aa cum
sublinia Parr (2008), toate comunitile au n comun aceste realiti:

finanarea de la bugetul de stat va continua s fie limitat i astfel

problemele i rezolvarea lor vor cdea tot mai mult n sarcina comunitii locale;

creterea responsabilitii comunitare va pune un accent sporit pe

integritatea i eficiena managementului public local;

colaborarea i inter-dependena vor fi concepte cheie pentru

aciunile locale i regionale;

dezvoltarea

guvernul este un actor-cheie, dar nu este singurul actor implicat n

i implementarea de soluii pentru problemele comunitii;
creterea diversitii (rasial, etnic, cultural, de gen, socio-

economic, fizic, de abiliti mentale, etc.) i polarizarea potenial reprezint

realiti pentru orice

comunitate. Comunitile trebuie s se concentreze pe

dezvoltarea de noi strategii i instrumente pentru a pune cetenii de acord asupra

unui plan de msuri i aciuni i de a lucra mpreun pentru realizarea acestuia.
n concluzie, se observ c n Statele Unite ale Americii relaia dintre stat i
cetean este construit destul de diferit fa de alte pri ale lumii. Mai precis,
democraia american se bazeaz pe credina, nsuit de majoritatea cetenilor,
c autoritatea eman de la cetean i nu de la stat (Sharpe, 1973; Creighton, 1999;
Parr, 2008), astfel c activitatea i aciunile guvernului trebuie s fie n mod constant
obiectul analizei publice i a limitrilor impuse de ceteni. Drepturile de
reprezentare ale individului sunt extinse ntr-o anumit msur la cele ale grupului,
20

dar importana participrii individuale n actul de guvernare i n cenzura puterii

statului sunt de o importan covritoare.

3.7.2 Marea Britanie, managementul public, un mix de putere ntre

guvern i publicurile interesate
Att la nivelul administraiei publice centrale, ct i la nivelul celei locale
procesul decizional din Marea Britanie face apel la mecanisme menite s asigure
includerea punctelor de vedere ale cetenilor afectai de politicile puse n discuie.
Raportul Beveridge, subliniaz importana acestui aspect, artnd c securitatea
social trebuie realizat prin cooperarea dintre stat i individ (Beveridge, 1942).
Cu toate acestea, trecerea de la consultarea cetenilor la implicarea
direct i activ a acestora n procesul decizional din Regatul Unit a nceput doar
n deceniul opt al secolului trecut, odat cu regimul Thatcher, care a demarat
reformarea administraiei publice britanice. Schimbarea de paradigm a impus
trecerea de la managementul public clasic, bazat pe tehnocraie i decizii
ierarhice, la Noul Management Public, centrat pe eficien i pe rezultate, pentru
satisfacerea nevoilor ceteanului. Procesul a fost unul cu multe obstacole, dar a
nsemnat descentralizarea serviciilor publice i aducerea lor mai aproape de
comunitate i cetean (Rhodes, 1997).
Cercetri recente arat c, ntre 2003 i 2006, proporia de ceteni care
consider c pot influena deciziile de la nivel local a crescut semnificativ, odat cu
proporia cetenilor mulumii de zona n care locuiesc (DCLG, 2006).
Participarea cetenilor i responsabilizarea actorilor implicai n managementul
public colaborativ sunt strns legate de ncrederea pe care cetenii o acord factorilor

de decizie. Un studiu desfurat n anul 2006 arat c 70% dintre cei care au afirmat
c pot influena deciziile locale aveau ncredere n consiliul local, spre deosebire
de cei care nu credeau ca pot influena deciziile publice 48% (DCLG, 2007).
Cartea verde a Guvernrii Marii Britanii (Governance of Britain Green
Book) descrie strategia de rennoire fundamental a procesului guvernrii. n acest
context, n prezent, n Marea Britanie este ncurajat funcionarea unei multitudini
de iniiative i programe, susinute att din fonduri publice ct i private, care
urmresc creterea implicrii comunitilor i cetenilor n procesul politicilor
publice, att la nivel naional, ct i regional i local. Dintre acestea, pot fi

21

menionate: mpreun reuim (Together We Can), nvare activ pentru cetenie

activ (The Active Learning for Active Citizenship) sau Program ndrumtor pentru
comunti locale (The Guide Neighbourhoods Programme). Toate aceste iniiative
se ghideaz dup trei principii fundamentale (Munton, 2003):

creterea participrii directe, a aciunii comunitii i a implicrii

individuale n actul guvernrii democratice;

schimbarea n atitudinea individual prin promovarea responsabilizrii

comunitii i ceteanului;

creterea eficienei serviciilor publice cu reflectare direct n

calitatea vieii individului.

n termeni de participare i implicare a cetenilor n managementul public

local, un grup instituional important, specific Marii Britanii, este reprezentat de
Consiliile Comunitilor. Aceste organisme nu au puteri statutare, dar reprezint
grupuri cheie ce vin n sprijinul autoritilor regionale i centrale n vederea atragerii
i implicrii active a cetenilor n procesul politicilor publice. Acestea sunt
fondate de stat i au dreptul statutar de a fi consultate n probleme de interes
public de ctre factorii de decizie (Munton, 2003). Membrii acestor consilii sunt
alei de ctre membrii comunitii, dar nu dup criterii politice, ci mai degrab dup
criterii civice i sociale.
Cu toate c participarea public este n prezent parte a procesului politicilor
publice din Marea Britanie, eficiena sa este variabil. Unii autori care consider c
participarea public din Regatul Unit nu a depit nc gradul de consultare a
cetenilor (Rhodes, 1997; Munton, 2003). n contextul Scrii de Participare a lui
Arnstein (Arnstein, 1969), procesul decizional din Marea Britanie nu favorizeaz pe
deplin puterea din partea cetenilor, ci mai degrab un mix de putere ntre guvern i
publicurile interesate.

3.7.3 Olanda, tradiie liberal i nevoie de legitimizare: implicarea

comunitii ca instrument de baz al guvernrii
Participarea public n Olanda are rdcini istorice. nc din secolul XIX
au aprut dezbateri intense privind protecia cetenilor mpotriva nclcrii
drepturilor individuale de ctre stat. Acest fapt este reflectat ndeosebi de filosofia
liberal care st n cultura olandez la baza relaiei dintre cetean i stat (Wijk et

22

al., 2002). nc de la sfritul sec. XIX, anumite legi olandeze cereau instituiilor
publice s consulte cetenii cu privire la politicile i hotrrile statului i s accepte
propuneri de modificare a acestora. Din pcate, eventualele obiecii apreau prea
trziu, cnd procesul de implementare a deciziilor era deja demarat (Plomp, 1982).
n a doua jumtate a secolului al XX-lea, odat cu modernizarea societii
i emergena statului bunstrii, participarea public a primit un nou impuls, iar
impactul su asupra procesului politicilor publice a crescut semnificativ (Kalk,
1978, Coenen et al. 2000). Creterea influenei directe a cetenilor asupra
designului i implementrii deciziilor a ntmpinat rezisten att din partea
politicienilor alei, ct i din cea a funcionarilor publici, care vedeau n procesul
participrii publice un inamic al autoritii lor.
Participarea public ar fi fcut imposibil confidenialitatea edinelor de
guvern i ar fi cauzat ntrzieri ale proceselor legislative i executive.
Majoritatea oficialilor publici acceptau ideea participrii publice, dar rmneau la
prerea c tot guvernul i politicienii alei sunt cei care trebuie s aib ultimul
cuvnt n procesul decizional (RARO, 1978; VNG, 1983). Alte instituii publice se
declarau n favoarea participrii active a cetenilor la luarea deciziilor, dar fceau
aceasta mai mult la nivel declarativ (Berg & Rubingh, 1979).
Aceste puncte de vedere diferite demonstreaz ambiguitatea abordrii
fenomenului participrii publice din partea instituiilor statului olandez n timpul
acelei perioade de tranziie.
n anii 1980, situaia s-a schimbat din nou. Din cauza recesiunii,
prioritile economice s-au schimbat, iar criticii participrii publice au ctigat din nou
teren. Implicarea direct a cetenilor era vzut ca i cauz principal a
ntrzierilor n aplicarea unor legi sau n implementarea unor politici publice,
chiar i atunci cnd ntrzierile proveneau din cu totul alte surse.
Din 1990 pn n prezent, participarea public a devenit din nou popular,
n principal ca mijloc de a crete gradul de acceptare, din partea cetenilor, a
deciziilor administraiei publice i a modului lor de implementare. Noile forme de
creare i implementare de politici publice implicau participarea activ a cetenilor
nc din primele stadii ale procesului, n care stakeholderii pot avea o influen
major att n definirea problemelor, ct i n modul de abordare i de soluionare
a acestora.
Experimentele de management colaborativ includ proiecte de management
23

comunitar, panel-uri de discuii ale cetenilor, conferine urbane, forumuri publice,

workshop-uri etc. (Veldboer, 1996).
n acelai context, este interesant de menionat cazul ctorva ministere
care au experimentat noi forme de participare public precum procese decizionale
interactive,

planificare

deschis,

managementul

procesual colaborativ,

etc.

(Edelenbos, 1999; Bruijn & Heuvelhof, 2002; Enserink & Monnikhof, 2003).
La nivel local, procesul decizional interactiv a devenit mult mai prezent
dect la nivel naional. Explicaia este c autoritile locale par s fi pierdut din
legitimitate, fapt demonstrat i de participarea foarte redus la alegerile locale din
anul 1990. Interactivitatea procesului politicilor publice este vzut n Olanda, n
general, ca un instrument de reconectare a lumii politice cu cetenii, obiectivul
general fiind de a integra ideile i obiectivele cetenilor, vzui ca indivizi i
organizaii sociale, n procesul de design i implementarea a politicilor publice i de a
le oferi acestora un rol semnificativ n procesul decizional la nivel local (Bruijn &
Heuvelhof, 2002).
3.7.4 Australia: participarea public, principiu-cheie al managementului
public local i federal
Implicarea comunitii a devenit din ce n ce mai important pentru
activitatea guvernrii n Australia, iar n prezent participarea public a devenit un
principiu-cheie al managementului public local i federal (Mostert, 2003). Acest
fenomen este, ns, unul relativ nou, aprut ca urmare a practicilor internaionale din
aria managementului public colaborativ i a promovrii participrii publice ca
instrument fundamental al eficientizrii procesului politicilor publice.
Guvernarea n Australia a trecut de-a lungul timpului printr-o serie de
abordri succesive: epoca guvernrii prin edicte i hotrri ale guvernului federal
(1945-1970);

epoca

managerialismului

instrumentalist,

bazat

pe

eficiena

tehnocrailor (1970-1990); apariia i dezvoltarea abordrii participative, marcat de

asemenea, de o descentralizare masiv a procesului decizional (1994-prezent) (Tan,
2006; Connel et al., 2005; McKay, 2006).
n prezent, rolul participrii publice este recunoscut pe scar larg n
Australia (Mostert, 2003), ns nu pare s existe nc un nivel adecvat al nelegerii
proceselor i mecanismelor participrii publice (Tan, 2006). n plan general,
implicarea comunitilor n procesul politicilor publice a crescut semnificativ n
24

ultimii 20 de ani, dar acest indicator global nu reflect, ns, toate realitile locale sau
regionale.
mbuntirea procesului implicrii active a comunitilor n viaa public
este un proces continuu, bazndu-se pe nelegerea tot mai clar a naturii i
activitilor cuprinse de acesta. O parte dintre specialitii n tiine politice subliniaz
importana participrii comunitii n mbuntirea procesului politicilor publice
prin democratizarea formulrii politicilor, contieni fiind de faptul c politicile
publice nu pot fi create ntr-un spaiu care ignor n mare msur interesele i
preferinele cetenilor. Un alt interes constant n managementul public australian
este legat de crearea de spaii de discuie pentru a identifica i a promova
interese publicurilor (Wallis & Dollery, 1999; Saward, 2001; Green, 2003).
Dei legislatorii i oficialii australieni i-au exprimat entuziasmul cu privire
la

implicarea

comunitii

ca

vehicul

eficientizarea

designului

implementriipoliticilor publice de pe continentul de la antipozi (Catt & Murphy

2003; VLGA 2001), muli cercettori i practicieni arat c procesul participrii
publice ar avea de suferit n anumite zone, cum ar fi, de exemplu, Statul Victoria,
unde rolul Avocatului Poporului i Legea Libertii Informrii au fost modificate
recent

sens

restrictiv,

fapt

care,

potrivit

specialitilor,

reduce

att

responsabilizarea tuturor actorilor publici, ct i implicarea cetenilor (Connel et. Al,

2005, McKay, 2006).
Cu toate acestea, n Australia, participarea public a cunoscut un avans
semnificativ n sectorul energetic i al administrrii apelor, precum i n
transporturi sau alte activiti ale sectorului public ce au fost externalizate. Este
interesant de observat, ns, faptul c participarea public asociat activitilor din
sectorul privat este nc foarte redus, dei prezint un curent cresctor (Tan,
2006).

3.8 Legislaia asociat proceselor participative n

Romnia
Cadrul general

Legea 544/2001 privind liberul acces la informatii de interes public

(modificata de: Legea 371/2006; Legea 380/2006; Legea 188/2007) reglementeaza
accesul tuturor celor interesai la informaii si documente care rezult din
activitatea autoritatilor si institutiilor publice, precum i a regiilor autonome.

25

Normele metodologice de aplicare a Legii 544/2001 includ Model Cerere, Modele

reclamatie administrativ, Model Raspuns la reclamatie, Model Raspuns la cerere, etc.

Legea 52/2003 privind transparenta decizionala in administratia

publica reglementeaza posibilitatea de a interveni in procesul decizional si obligatiile

pe care le au autoritatile in sensul facilitarii participarii publicului la procesul
decizional. Aceasta a fost completata de Legea 242/2010.

Legea 24/2000 privind normele de tehnica legislativa pentru

elaborarea actelor normative, republicata cu modificari in aprilie 2010 republicata

cu modificari in august 2004. De la republicare a mai fost modificata de: Legea
49/2007; Legea 173/2007; Legea 194/2007.Fara a introduce obligativitatea
consultarilor, ultima modificarea din 2007 (L. 194/2007)prevede includerea in
prezentarea evaluarii impactului actelor normative a unei sectiuni referitoare la
consultarile derulate in vederea elaborarii proiectului de act normativ, organizatiile si
specialistii consultati, esenta recomandarilor primite; precum si o sectiune despre
activitatile de informare publica privind elaborarea si implementarea proiectului de act
normativ.

Legea 60/1991 privind organizarea si desfasurarea adunarilor

publice, modificata si republicata in 2004, asigura si reglementeaza dreptul

cetatenilor de a-si exprima opiniile politice, sociale sau de alta natura, de a organiza
si de a participa la mitinguri, demonstratii, manifestatii, procesiuni si orice alte
intruniri. Republicat n MO nr. 223/ 15 martie 2004, dndu-se textelor o nou
numerotare.
Procesul decizional la nivelul administratiei locale
Legea 215/2001 privind administratia publica locala republicata

cu modificari in februarie 2007.

Reglementeaza

regimul

general

al

autonomiei

locale,

organizarea si functionarea administratiei publice locale. Contine

precum

si

prevederi

importante pentru participarea cetatenilor la luarea deciziilor publice: principiul

consultarii cetatenilor in solutionarea problemelor locale; publicarea proceselorverbale ale sedintelor de consiliu si a hotararilor cu caracter normativ; dreptul
cetatenilor de a propune Consiliului Local sau Judetean proiecte de hotarari; obligatia
consilierilor locali de a organiza periodic intalniri cu cetatenii si de a acorda audiente;
delegatii satesti; dreptul cetatenilor de a cere dizolvarea consiliului local; etc.

26

Republicata in: MO nr. 123/ 20 februarie 2007. Dupa republicare, a fost

modificata de OUG 20/2008; Legea 35/2008; OUG 66/2008; Legea 131/2008, OUG
105/2009, legea 375/2009, legea 59/2010, legea 264/2010.

Legea 273/2006 privind finantele publice locale. Modificata de: OUG

nr. 46/2007 aprobata prin L 34/2008; OUG nr. 64/2007 aprobata cu modificari
prin Legea 109/2008;OUG nr. 28/2008, OUG 91/2009, OUG 111/2009, Legea
329/2009, OUG 57/2010,OUG 63/2010. Stabileste principiile, cadrul general si
procedurile privind formarea, administrarea, angajarea si utilizarea fondurilor publice
locale, precum si responsabilitatile autoritatilor administratiei publice locale si ale
institutiilor publice implicate in domeniul finantelor publice. Din perspectiva
participarii publice, Legea finantelor publice locale: afirma transparenta procesului
bugetar; contine prevederi legate de obligatia autoritatilor de a publica proiectului de
buget; contine prevederi cu privire la dezbaterea publica a proiectului de buget local,
cu prilejul aprobarii acestuia si cu privire la prezentarea contului anual de executie
a bugetului local in sedinta publica; stabileste procedura prin care cetatenii pot
depune contestatii cu privire la proiectul de buget local.

27

BIBLIOGRAFIE
[1]. ***, Bilan du quinquennat en matire de transparence, dintgrit et
de lutte contre la corruption, Transparence International France, 2012 [online] la
www.transparence-france.org
[2]. ***, National Integrity System Assessment Poland, Transparency
International & Instytut Spraw Publicznych, Warsaw: ISP.org, 2012
[3]. ***, The Civil Service An Introduction to French Administration,
Paris: La Documentation Francaise, 1996
[4]. Abbott, J. 1996. Sharing the City: Community Participation in urban
Management. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd
[5]. Adnan S., Barrett A., Alam S. M. N., Brustinow A., People's
Participation, NGOs and the Flood Action Plan: An Independent Review. Oxfam,
Dhaka,
Bangladesh, 1992

[6]. Agranoff, R. & McGuire, M, Big Questions in Public Network

Management Research. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 11(3)
2001, pp. 295-396
[7]. Agranoff, R., Collaboration for Knowledge: Learning in Public
Management Networks. In Lisa Blomgren Bingham and Rosemary OLeary (eds.),
Big Ideas in Collaborative Public Management. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe, 2008,
162-194.
[8]. Agranoff, R., Managing Within Networks: Adding Value to Public
Organizations. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2007
[9]. Agranoff, R., McGuire, M., Collaborative Public Management,
Georgetown University Press: Washington D.C., 2003
[10]. Agranoff, R., Pattakos, A. N., Dimensions of Services Integration:
Service Delivery, Program Linkages, Policy Management and Organizational
Structure. Washington, DC : U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
1979
[11].Alexandrescu, I., Bulei, I., Mamina, I., Scurtu, I., Enciclopedia de
Istorie a Romaniei, Bucuresti: Ed. Meronia, 2000
[12]. Alexandrescu, I., Urmri produse n evoluia economico-social a
Romniei de legislaia adoptat dup Marea Unire, n Parlamentul Romniei.
Istoria Senatului Romniei. Ed. Monitorul Oficial, Bucureti, 2004
[13].Alexandru, I., Drept administrativ n Uniunea Europeana. Drept
administrativ comparat. Drept administrativ al Uniunii Europene, Bucureti:
Ed.Lumina Lex, 2006
[14].Al-Kodmany, K., Public Participation: Technology and Democracy,
2000, Journal of Architectural Education, vol. 53, no. 4, p. 220228.
[15]. Alman, Oana, Miscomprehension Of Meaningful Public
Participation And Its Consequences On Effective Policy-Making, n the Review of
Management and Economical Engineering, special issue, (no.5) November 2008
[16]. Alman, Oana, Reinhardt, Z., The Negative Impact of Legislation
Pitfalls on Meaningful Public Participation, Efficient Policy-making and Effective
Governance, n the Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, no. 1(25)/
2009
[17]. Almond, Gabriel; Verba, Sidney. The Civic Culture: Political
Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP, 1963.
[18]. Almond, M., The Rise and Fall of Nicolae and Elena Ceauescu, London:

28

Chapmans, 1992
[19]. Alter, C., Hage, J., Organizations working together, Newbury Park,
CA:Sage, 1993

[20]. Amos, S., The Science of Law, London, King, 1874

[21]. Anderson, E.N., Anderson, P.R., Political Institutions and Social
Change in Continental Europe in the 19th Century, Berkley, University of California
Press, 1967
[22]. Anderson, J. E., Public Policymaking: An Introduction, Houghton
Mifflin Company: TX, 2005
[23]. Aristotle, Politics, traducere de Benjamin Jowett, NY: Dover
Publications, 2000
[24]. Arnstein, Sherry R. "A Ladder of Citizen Participation," JAIP, Vol. 35, No.
4, July 1969, pp. 216-224

[25].Arnull, A. and Wincott, D., Accountability and Legitimacy in the

European Union, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.
[26]. Atkinson, A. C., 2003, "Income Inequality in OECD Countries:
Data and Explanations," CESifo Working Paper Series 881, CESifo Group Munich
[27].Atkinson, R.D. and Castro, D.D., Digital Quality of Life:
Understanding the Personal and Social Benefits of the Information Technology
Revolution, 2008 lucrare prezentat la The Information Technology and Innovation
Foundation Forum in Washington, DC, May 1st, 2008.
[28].

Aucoin, P., Administrative Reform n Public Management: Paradigms,

Principles, Paradoxes and Pendulums, in Governance 3/1990, pp. 115-137

[29]. Aulich, C., Halligan, J., and Nutley, S., Australian handbook of public sector
management. Crows Nest, NSW, Australia: Allen and Unwin, 2001

[30]. Aulich, C., J. Halligan, S. Nutley, Australian Handbook of Public

Sector Management, Allen & Unwin, Crows Nest, 2001
[31]. Austin , J. E .,The Collaboration Challenge, San Francisco : JosseyBass, 2001
[32]. Baldwin R., R. Forslid, P. Martin, G. Ottaviano, F. Robert-Nicoud,
Economic Geography and Public Policy, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New
Jersey, 2003
[33]. Baldwin, E.,"The Private Finance Initiative - What opportunities for
facilities management?", Journal of Facilities Management, Vol. 2 Issue 1,2003, pp.
54- 68
[34].Bara, V., Despre principiul legalitaii n activitatea administraiei
publice, 2000, Revista transilvana de tiine administrative, 1(4), pp. 232-236
[35]. Barker, E., The Development of Public Services in Western Europe, London,
Oxford University Press, 1944
[36]. Barnes, M.N., Bauld, L., Benzeval, M., Judge, K., Mackenzie, M.,
and Sullivan, H., Building capacity for health equity, London, Routledge, 2005
[37]. Barnes, M.N., Sullivan, H.,Discursive arenas: Deliberation and the
constitution of identity in public participation at a local level, Social Movement
Studies, Vol. 5,No. 3, 2006, pp. 193207
[38]. Barzelay, M., The New Public Management: Improving Research and
Policy Dialogue, University of California Press, 2001
[39]. Brbulescu, M., Deletant D., Hitchins, K., Papacostea, S., Teodor,P., Istoria
Romnieit, Bucureti: Corint, 2007, p. 350

[40]. Beder, Sharon, Danes involve laypeople in technological issues, n

Engineers Australia, January 1999, p. 48
[41].Bekkers, V., Virtual Policy Communities and Responsive Governance:

29

Redesigning On-line Debates, 2004, Information Polity, no. 9 (3-4), p. 118-129.

[42]. Berg, G.J.; A. Rubingh 1979: Waartoe inspraakverlening bij
streekplannen? Verslag van een methodologische verkenning. (Why public
participation in regional land-use plans? Report of a methodological search).
Groningen: Interfacultaire Sonderzoeksorganisatie, Planologisch Studiecentrum.
[43]. Bernays, E. L., The Engineering of Consent, The Annals of the
American Academy of Political and Social Science, no. 250, 1947, p. 113
[44]. Bernays, E.L., Crystalizing Public Opinion,NY: H.Liveright, 1923
[45]. Bernays, E.L., Propaganda, NY: Horace Liveright, 1928
[46]. Berry, J., Portney, K.E., and Thomson, K. The Rebirth of Urban Democracy.

The Brookings Institution. Washington, D.C. 1993

[47]. Beryl, R., Beyond Machiavelli: Policy Analysis Comes of Age,
Georgetown University Press, 2000
[48]. Beveridge, W., (1942) Social insurance and allied services (The
Beveridge
Report),
publicat
online
la
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/19_07_05_beveridge.pdf, accesat la 10
oct. 2009.
[49].Biskupski, M. B., The History of Poland, Westport, CT:
Greenwood, 2000.
[50].Black, H.C., Black's Law Dictionary, 1st ed., St. Paul: West
Publishing, 1891.
[51].Blakely, E. J., Planning local economic development: Theory and
practice. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1994
[52]. Bleiker, A. Bleiker, H., Citizen Participation Handbook for Public
Officials and other Professionals Serving the Public, (8th Edition), Monterez,
CA: Institute for Participatory Management and Planning, 1994
[53]. Blomgren, M. & Sahlin-Andersson, K., Quests for transparency: Signs of a
New Institutional Era in the Health Care Field? In Christensen, P. & T. Lgreid (eds.),
Transcending New Public Management, Ashgate, 2007

[54].Blundell-Wignall, A., Slovik, P., A Market Perspective on the

European Sovereign Debt
and
Banking
Crisis,
2011,
[Online]
la
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/19/9/46970598.pdf
[55]. Bonham, G.M., Seifert, J. M., Thorson, S. J., The
Transformational Potential of e-Government: The Role of Political Leadership,
presented at the 4th Pan European International Relations Conference of the
European Consortium for Political Research, Kent at Canterbury, U.K., 9
September 2001.
[56].Bouvier, J., A Law Dictionary, Philadelphia: T. and J. W.
Johnson, 1839. 2 vols
[57]. Bruijn, J.A. de, Heuvelhof E.F., 2002. Policy analysis and decisionmaking in a network: how to improve the quality of analysis and the impact on
decision-making. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, Volume 20, 4.
[58].Brundtland, G. H. (coord.), Our Common Future - Report of the
World Commission on Environment and Development, United Nations, Oxford
University Press, 1987
[59].Bryer, T.A., Bureaucratization and Active Citizenship: Approaches to
Administrative Reform, 2004, Pi Alpha, Alpha Online Journal, vol. 5, [Online] la
http://www.naspaa.org/initiatives/paa/journal/volume_5.asp,accesat n noiembrie 14,
2008.
[60]. Bunschuch-Riesender, F., Good governance: characteristcs, methods

30

and the Austrian example, n Transylvanian Review for Administrative Sciences,

no. 24 (4) / 2008, Cluj, Romania
[61]. Caiden, G.E., Administrative Reform Comes of Age, New York,
Walter de Gruiter, 1991
[62]. Caiden, G.E., What Lies Ahead for the Administrative State, n
Henderson i Dwivedi, Bureaucracy and the Alternatives in the World Perspective,
New York, St. Martins Press, 1999
[63].Campbel, C., Comparative Trends in Public Management: Smart
Practices Toward Blending Policy and Administration, Ottawa: Canada School of
Public Service, 2006.
[64]. Campbell, A., Gould, M., The Collaborative Enterprise, MA: Perseus Books,
1999

[65]. Carroll, J.D., The Rhetoric of Reform and Political Reality in the
National Performance Review, n Public Administration Review 55 / 1998, pp. 302312
[66]. Catt, H. and M. Murphy. 2003. What Voice the People? Categorising
Methods of Public Consultation. Australian Journal of Political Science 38(3): 407
21.
[67].Center for Civic Education & Council for the Advancement of
Citizenship, (2008), Civitas, [online]
http://www.civiced.org/index.php?page=civitas_executive_summary
[68].Cernea, M., Putting People First: Sociological Variable in Rural
Development, New York: Oxford University Press, 1985.
[69]. Chambers, R., Paradigm Shifts and the Practice of Participatory
Research and Development. n Nelson N. and Wright S. (eds): Power and
Participatory Development: Theory and Practice. Intermediate Technology
Publications, London, 1995
[70].Chevalier, T. B. J., Public Administration in statist France, 1996,
Public Administration Review, 56 (1), pp. 67-73
[71].Chinese Government, (2008). Chinas White Paper on Sustainable
Development, Beijing, [online]: http://www.acca21.org.cn/ca21pa.html
[72].Chodakiewicz, M. J., Radzilowski J., Tolczyk D. (eds.), Poland's
Transformation: A Work in Progress, Charlottesville, VA: Leopolis Press, 2003, pp.
157-193.
[73]. Chrislip, D.D., Larson, C.E., Collaborative Leadership, San Francisco: Jossey
Bass, 1994
[74].Christensen, K. and Rongerude, J., The San Diego Dialogue: Reshaping
the San Diego Region, 2004, Working Paper for the Collaborative Regional
Initiatives Program, in eScholarship Repository, Institute of Urban and Regional
Development, UCLA at Berkeley, [Online] la
http://repositories.cdlib.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1037&context=iurd,accesat n
noiembrie 15, 2008.
[75]. Clarke, J., Newman, J., The Managerial State: power, politics and
ideology in the remaking of social welfare. London: Sage, 1997
[76]. Clarke, S.E., Gaile, G.L., The work of cities, University of Minnesota
Press, 1998
[77]. Clay, E. Schaffer, B. Room for Manoeuvre: an exploration of public
policy planning in agricultural and rural development, London:Heinemann, 1984
[78]. Clegg, S.R., Modern Organizations: Organization Studies in the
Post Modern World, London: Sage, 1990
[79]. Clift, S., E-Democracy, E-Governance and Public Net-Work,
31

Publicus.Net,
September,
2003,
online
la
http://www.publicus.net/articles/edempublicnetwork.html>
[80].Closca, C., Asandului, G., Administratia Publica in Istoria
Romanilor, Iasi: Ed. Universitatea Ecologica D. Cantemir, 2000
[81]. Coenen, F.; R. van de Peppel; J. Woltjer 2000: "De ecvolutie van
inspraak inm de Nederlandse planning." Beleidswetenschap 2000 (4), 313- 332.
[82]. Cohen, A. P. (1985) The Symbolic Construction of Community,
London: Tavistock.
[83].Coleman, S., Gotze, J., (2001). Bowling together: Online Public
Engagement in Policy Deliberation, London: Hansard Society;
[84]. Common, R., The New Public Management and Policy Transfer, n M.
Minogue, Beyond the New Public Management: Changing Ideas and Practices in
Governance, UK, Edward Elgar, 1998
[85].Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the
Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the
Regions Debate Europe building on the experience of Plan D for Democracy,
Dialogue and Debate, COM(2008) 158/4, Brussels,[Online] la
http://ec.europa.eu/commission_barroso/wallstrom /pdf/com_2008_1584_en.pdf,accesat n noiembrie 15, 2008.
[86].Compact Oxford English Dictionary of Current English, 3rd Edition,
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
[87]. Connell, D., Dovers, S. & Grafton, R. (2005). A critical analysis
of the National Water Initiative. In Australasian Journal of Natural Resources
Law and Policy 10, pp.81107.
[88]. Constituia
Republicii Socialiste
Romnia,
1965,
[Online]
la http://legislatie.resurse-pentrudemocratie.org/const_1965.php
[89]. Constituia
Romniei,
2003,
[Online]
[90].Cook, D., Charles de Gaulle: A Biography, New York, NY: Putnam,
1983

[91]. Creighton, J. L. The Public Participation Handbook: Making Better

Decisions Through Citizen Involvement. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons, 2005.
[92]. Creighton, J.L., (1999), Public Participation in Federal Agencies
Decision Making in the 1990s, National Civic Review, vol.88, 3, pp. 249-258.
[93]. Creighton, J.L., Trends in the Field of Public Participation in the
United States, Interact, 1995, no. 1(1), pp. 7-23
[94]. Cummiskey, C., A strategic outcome for e-government solutions,
Phoenix: Government Information Technology Agency, 2003
[95].Daly, H. E. (1973). Towards a Steady State Economy. San Francisco:
Freeman.
[96].Daly, H. E. (1991). Steady-State Economics (2nd ed.). Washington,
D.C.: Island Press
[97].Daniell, K.A., Enhancing collaborative management in the Basin,
Chapter 26, n: Connell, D., Grafton, R.Q. (eds.) Basin Futures: Water reform in the
Murray-Darling Basin, ANU E-Press, Canberra, 2011, pp. 413-438.
[98].Darrier, E., Gough, C., De Marchi, B., Funtowicz, S., Grove-White, R.,
Kitchener, D., Guimaraes Pereira, A., Hackley, S., Wynne, B., Between Democracy
and expertise? Citizens participation and environmental integrated assessment in
Venice (Italy) and St Helens, UK, in Journal of Environmetal Policy and Planning, 1,
1999, pp. 103-120
[99].Davies, N., Europe: A History, New York, NY: HarperPerennial, 1998

32

la http://www

[100].DCLG (Department for Communities and Local Government),

(2006)
Research Report 28. Neighbourhood Management: An Overview of the
2003 and 2006 Round 1 Pathfinder Household Surveys, [online] la
http://www.sqw.co.uk/file_download/20, accesat 10 oct. 2009
[101].DCLG (Department for Communities and Local Government),
(2007) Best Value User Satisfaction Survey 2006-07: General Survey National
Report,
[online]
la
http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/localgovernment/pdf/324097.pdf, accesat
la 10 oct. 2009
[102].De Burca, G. and Scott, J. (eds.), Law and New Governance in the EU
and the US, Oxford and Portland, Oregon: Hart Publishing, 2006.
[103].de Souza Briggs, X.,Democracy as Problem Solving: Civic
Capacity in Communities Across the Globe, Cambridge: MIT Press, 2008
[104].De Tocqueville, A., The Old Regimes and the French
Revolution, Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1955, pp. 201-203.
[105].Debicki, M., Country public management profile: Poland, New York,
NY: UN-PAN, 2006
[106].Denhardt, J.V. and Denhardt, R.B., The New Public Service: Serving,
Not Steering, Armonk, NY: ME Sharpe Inc., 2007.
[107].des Roziers, E. B., "Role du Conseil d'Etat dans l'ecriture de la
constitution" in Didier Mans, Favoreu, Louis, Parodi, Jean-Luc, eds., L 'Ecriture
de la Constitution de 1958, Paris: Economica, 1992
[108].Dewey, J. & Childs, J. L. (1933). The social-economic situation and
education. In W. H. Kilpatrick (Ed.) The Educational Frontier, New York: D.
Appleton-Century, pp. 32-72
[109]. Dewey, J., Freedom and Culture, New York: G. P. Putnam's
Sons, 1939.
[110].Dewey, J., The Public and its Problems. New York: Holt, 1927
[111].Dicionarul explicativ al limbii romne (DEX), Bucureti: Editura
Univers Enciclopedic, 1998.
[112].Directive 2003/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council
of 26 May 2003, O.J.L 156/17, [Online] la
http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file34357.pdf,accesat n noiembrie 14, 2008.
[113].Dobrescu, P., Bargaoanu, Alina, Mass-media i societatea,
Comunicare.ro:Bucuresti, 2003

[114].Drucker, P.F., The Essential Drucker: Selections from the

management works of Peter Drucker, NY: Harper Collins, 2001
[115].Duhamel, O., Meny, Y., Dictionnaire constitutionel, Paris:
Presses Universitaires de France, 1992
[116].Dunleavy, P., The Globalization of Public Services Production, n
Public Policy and Administration 9/1994
[117].Edelenbos, J. Design and management of participatory public
policy making. Public Management, Volume 1,4, 1999, pp.569-578
[118].Ehrmann, H. W., Schain, M. A., Politics in France, 5th ed., New York:
Harper Collins, 1992
[119].Eliade, P., Influena franceza asupra spiritului public n Romnia,

Bucureti: Humanitas, 2000

[120]. Elsenhans, H., Kulke, R. and Roschmann, C., Globalization and
Administrative Reforms in Germany, in Jain, R. B. (ed.), Globalization and Good

33

Governance: Pressures for Constructive Reforms, New Delhi: Deep & Deep, 2005, p.
61-102.
[121].Enserink, Bert and Ren A.H. Monnikhof, 2003. "Impact
Assessment and public participation: Facilitating co-design by information
management - an example from the Netherlands." Journal of Environmental
Planning and Management Volume 46(3), 315-344, May 2003.
[122].Esping-Andersen, G., The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism,
Princeton, New Jersey, Princeton University Press, 1991
[123].Euchner, C., Urban Policy Reconsidered: Dialogues on the Problems
and Prospects of American Cities, Routledge, New York, 2003
[124].Fank, Z., E-Government in digital era: Concept, practice, and
development, International Journal of The Computer, The Internet and Management,
10(2), 2002, pp.122.
[125].Fischer, F., Citizens, Experts, and the Environment: The Politics of
Local Knowledge, Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2002
[126].Fischer, F., Miller G. J., and Sidney Mara S. (Eds.), Handbook of
Public Policy Analysis: Theory, Politics, and Methods, CRC Press: Boca Raton FL,
2006
[127].Fischer, M. E., The New Leaders and the Opposition, in
Romania after Tyranny, Daniel N. Nelson (ed.), Boulder: Westview Press, 1992
[128].Fishkin, J. S., Luskin R.C.,. Experimenting with a Democratic Ideal:
Deliberative Polling and Public Opinion, n Acta Politica 40/2005, pp.284-298.
[129].Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), Strategy for Fisheries
Management and Development. Rome, Italy, 1986
[130].Foreign Broadcast Information Service Dailly Report (FBISDR),
East Europe, 18.06.1990, pp. 67-70
[131].Freedom House, Nations in transit report 2005: Romania, accesat
online la 02.04.2012: http://freedomhouse.org/report/nations-transit/2005/romania
[132].Freedom House, Nations in transit report 2007: Romania, accesat online la
02.04.2012: http://freedomhouse.org/report/nations-transit/2007/romania

[133].Freedom House, Nations in transit report 2012: Romania, accesat

online la 02.04.2012: http://freedomhouse.org/report/nations-transit/2012/romania
[134].Frentzel-Zagorska, J., Zagorski, K., Polish Public Opinion on
Privatisation and State Interventionism, Europe-Asia Studies, Vol. 45, No. 4
(1993), pp. 705-728
[135].Friedmann, J., Empowerment. The politics of an alternative
development. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1992
[136].Friedmann, T., The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-first
Century, NY: Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 2005
[137].Frucht, R., Encyclopedia of Eastern Europe: From the Congress
of Vienna to the Fall of Communism, New York, NY: Garland Publishing, 2000
[138].Fuhr, H., Constructive Pressures and Incentives to Reform, n Public
Management Review 3/2001, pp. 419-443
[139].Fung, A., Empowered Participation: Reinventing urban democracy,
Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004
[140].Gaetani, F., Heredia, B., The political economy of civil service
reform
in
Brazil:
The
Cardoso
years,
2002,
[Online]
la
http://idbdocs.iadb.org/wsdocs/getdocument.aspx?docnum=626929
[141].Gaitanaru, A., Microcalculatorul mediu i canal de comunicare,
Comunicare.ro: Bucuresti, 2004
[142].Galpin, C.J., The Social Anatomy of an Agricultural Community.
34

Madison: University of Wisconsin Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 34, 1915

[143].Garson, G. D., Public Information Technology and E-governance:
Managing the Virtual State, Sudbury, MA, Jones and Bartlett, 2006, pp.162-168
[144].Gastil, J., Levine, P. The Deliberative Democracy Handbook: Strategies for

Effective Civic Engagement in the Twenty-First Century. San Francisco: John

Wiley & Sons, 2005.
[145].Gaunt, T.P., Communication, Social Networks, and Influence in
Citizen Participation,1998, Journal of the Community Development Society, vol. 29,
no. 2, p. 276-297.
[146].Ghitulescu, M., Principii de organizare a administratiei publice in
Romania moderna. Aspecte teoretice, legale si politice, 2010, [Online] la
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Principii+de+organizare+a+administratiei+public
e+in+Romania+moderna....-a0251277945
[147].Giurescu, D. C., Stefanescu, Al., Tiu, I., Romania si comunismul. O
istorie ilustrata, Bucuresti: Ed. Corint, 2010

[148].Green, C. 2003. Handbook of Water Economics: Principles and

Practices. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons
[149].Green, Jessica, Chambers, Bradnee, (Eds.) (2006). The Politics of
Participation in Sustainable Development Governance, Tokyo: United Nations
University
[150].Greve, C., Jespersen, P.K., New Public Management and Its Critics, n
L. Rouban, Citizens and the New Governance: Beyond New Public Management,
Amsterdam, IOS Press, 1999
[151].Grindle, M. and Thomas, J.,After the Decision: Implementing
Policy Reforms in Developing Countries. World Development. Vol. 18 (music), 1990
[152].Gruber, J., Controlling Bureaucracies:Dilemmas in Democratic
Governance, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1987
[153].Guess, M.G., Farnham, P.G., Cases in Public Policy Analysis, 2nd
Edition, Georgetown University Press: Washington D.C., 2000
[154].Gutmann, A., Frank, D., Democracy and Disagreement,
Cambridge:Harvard university press, 1996
[155].Guvernul Romnie, H.G. nr..128/2006, publicat n M. O. nr. 90 din
31/01/2006.
[156].Habermas, J., Theory of communicative action, vol.1-2,
Boston:Beacon Press, 1985
[157].Halvorsen, E.K., Assessing the Effects of Public Participation, 2003, Public
Administration Review, vol. 63, no. 5, p.535-543.

[158].Handy, C., Understanding Organisations. Harmondsworth: Penguin,

1976 [159].Hansen, H. K. and Salskov-Iversen, D., Managerialized Patterns of
Political Authorities: Partners, Peddlers and Entrepreneurial People, Critical
Quarterly, vol. 44(3), 2002, pp. 4-19.
[160].Harper, E. H. and Dunham, A. (1959) Community Organization in
Action. Basic literature and critical comments, New York: Association Press.
[161].Harrington, H.J., Harrington, J.S., Management Total n firma Secolului 21,
Ed. Teora, Bucuresti, 2000
[162].Hart, R., Children's Participation from Tokenism to Citizenship,
Florence, Unicef Innocenti Research Centre, 1992
[163].Henton , D. , Melville, J., Amsler, T., Kopell, M., Collaborative
Governance:A Guide for Grantmakers. Menlo Park, CA : William and Flora Hewlett
Foundation, 2006
[164].Heredia, B., The Political Economy of Reform of the Administrative
Systems of Public Sector Personnel in Latin America: An Analytical

35

Framework,2002,[Online]la
http://idbdocs.iadb.org/wsdocs/getdocument.aspx?docnum=626931
[165].Heywood, P., Meyer-Sahling J.-H., Corruption Risks and
Management of the Ministerial Bureaucracy in Poland, Warsaw: Ernst&Young, 2008

the

[166].Hofstede, Geert, Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind Revised and expanded 2nd Edition, New York: McGraw-Hill USA, 2005
[167].Hollyday, I., Is the British State Hollowing Out?, n Political Quarterly
71/2000, pp. 167-176
[168].Holtman, R.B., The Napoleonic Revolution, Baton Rouge, Louisiana
State University Press, 1981
[169].Hood, C., A Public Management for All Seasons, n Public
Administration 69/1991, pp. 3-19
[170].Hood, C., Jackson, M.W., Administrative Argument, Aldershot, UK,
Dartmouth Publishing, 1991b
[171].Hood, C., Jackson, M.W., The New Public Management: a Recipe for
Disaster?, n Canberra Bulletin of Public Administration, 64/1991a, pp. 16-24
[172].Hood, C., Public Administration and the Public Policy: Intellectual
challenges for the 1990, n Australian Journal of Public Administration 48/1989, pp.
346-358
[173].
Howarth, D., Comparing Public Administrative Reform in
France and the UK, 2001, Public Policy and Administration, London, vol.16, no. 4,
pp. 1-8.
[174].Hudspith, R., Using a Consensus Conference to Learn about Public
Participation in Policymaking in Areas of Technical Controversy, n Political
Science & Politics, 34:2/2001, pp. 313-317
[175].Huntington, S. P., The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late
Twentieth Century (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1991)
[176].Iacob, D; Cismaru, D.; Pricopie, R., Relaii publice: Credibilitate
prin comunicare, Ed. comunicare.ro, 2005;
[177].Iancu, G., Unificarea legislativa. Sistemul administrativ al romniei
(1919-1939), in Vese, Puca (eds.), Dezvoltare i modernizare n romnia
interbelica, Bucureti: Ed. Politica, 1988, pp. 38-46
[178].Inglehart, R., Welzel, C., Modernization, Cultural Change and
Democracy: The Human Development Sequence, New York: Cambridge University
Press, 2007
[179].Innes, J.E. and Booher, D.E., The Impact of Collaborative Planning on
Governance Capacity- Working Paper for the Collaborative Regional Initiatives
Program, 2003, in eScholarship Repository, Institute of Urban and Regional
Development, UCLA at Berkeley, [Online] la http://wwwiurd.ced.berkeley.edu/pub/WP-2003-03.pdf,accesat n noiembrie 15, 2008.
[180].Innes, J.E., Planning through consensus building: a new view of the
comprehensive planning ideal, Journal of the American Planning Association, 62(4),
pp. 460472, 1996
[181].International Association for Public Participation (IAP2),
Communications for Effective Public Participation, student manual, Denver, CO:
IAP2, 2006c.
[182].International Association for Public Participation (IAP2), Planning for
Effective Public Participation, student manual, Denver, CO: IAP2, 2006a.
[183].International Association for Public Participation (IAP2), Techniques
for Effective Public Participation, student manual, Denver, CO: IAP2, 2006b.
[184].Ionescu, D., Romanias ruling party splits after congress,

36

RFE/RL Research Report 1, nr. 16, 1992, pp. 8-12

[185].Ionita, S., O perspectiva institutionala asupra reformei
administratiei centrale, in Mungiu-Pippidi, Ionita (eds.), Politici Publice. Teorie si
Practica,
Bucuresti: Polirom, 2002, pp. 23-36
[186].Ionita, S., Fartusnic, C., Grassroots of Government. Strategies,
attitudes and effectiveness in the Romanian local administration, 2002, n
Pippidi, Ionita (eds.), Public Policies Theory and Practice, Iasi: Polirom, 2002,
pp. 2-28.
[187].Jain-Palvia, S.C. and Sharma, S.S., E-Government and E- Governance:
Definitions/Domain Framework and Status around the World, in Agarwal, A. and VenkataRamana, V. (eds.), Foundations of E-government, Hyderabad, India: ICEG, 2007, p. 1-12.

[188].Jennings, R., Participatory Development as New Paradigm: The

Transition of Development Professionalism, 2000, [Online] la:
http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/crosscutting_programs/transition_initiatives/pubs/ptdv1000.pdf, accesat n noiembrie 15,
2008.
[189].Jeong,
C.H.,
Fundamental
of
Development
Administration.
Selangor: Scholar
Press, 2007
[190].Juma, C. and Clark, N., Policy research in sub-Saharan Africa: An
Emploration. Public Administration and Development, Vol 15, 1995, pp121 137
[191].Kalk, E. 1978: "De Moeizame driehoeksverhouding tussen
inspraak, bewoners en overheid" (The difficult relation between public participation,
inhabitants and government). In: B. Samsom (ed.): Omgaan met inspraak.
Alphen aan den Rijn: Samsom. pp. 15-20.
[192].Kalus, S., Habdas, M., Family Law in Poland, Netherlands: Kluwer
Law International, 2011
[193].Kaufmann, R.,. Toward Total Quality Plus. Training 28, 12, 1991,
pp. 5054
[194].Keeling, D., Management in Government, London, Allen & Unwin,
1972 [195].Kemp-Welch, A., Poland under Communism: A Cold War History,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008
[196].Kessler, Marie-Christine, Les Grande corps de L'Etat, Paris: Presses
la Fondation Nationa1e des Sciences Politiques, 1986
[197].Kettl, D.F., The Global Public Management Revolution, Washington,
DC, Brookings Institution, 2000
[198].Kettl, D.F., The Transformation of Governance: Public Administration
for the 21st Century, Baltimore MD, Johns Hopkins University Press, 2002
[199].Kickert, W.J., Klijn, E.H. & Koppenjan, J.F.M., Managing complex
networks: strategies for the public sector, Sage, London, 1997
[200].Kieniewicz, S., History of Poland, New York, NY: Hippocrene
Books, 1982
[201].Kikert, W.J.M., Public Management in the United States and Europe,
n Kikert Ed., Public Management and Administrative Reform in Western Europe,
Cheltenham, UK, Edward Elgar, 1997
[202].Killian, J., Eklund, N., Handbook of Administrative Reform
An International Perspective, Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2008
[203].King, C. S., Feltey, K. M., & Susel, B. O., The question of
participation: Toward authentic public participation in public administration. Public
Administration Review, 58(4), 1998, pp.317326
37

[204].Kirby, J., Neighborhood Policing: The Story so Far, 2006,

Community Safety Journal, UK, vol. 5, no. 4, p. 24-30.
[205].Kligman, G., Reclaiming the Public: A Reflection on Creating Civil
Society in Romania, East European Politics and Societies 4/3, 1990, pp. 393-437
[206].Knill, C. The Europeanization of National Administrations:
Patterns of Institutional Change and Persistence, Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2001
[207].Konig, K., Entrepreneurial Management or Executive
Administration: the Perspective of Classical Public Administration, n Kikert (Ed.),
Public Management and Administrative Reform in Western Europe, Cheltenham, UK,
Edward Elgar, 1997
[208].Kooiman, J., Eliassen, K.A., Managing Public Organizations: Lessons
from Contemporary European Experience, London, Sage, 1993
[209].Koppenjan, J., Klijn, E.H., Managing Uncertainties in Networks: A
network Approach to Problem Solving and Decision Making, London, Rutledge, 2005
[210].Kushchu, I. and Kuscu, M.H., From e-Government to m-Government:
Facing the Inevitable, Proceedings of European Conference on EGovernment (ECEG 2003), Trinity College, Dublin, July 3-4, Reading, UK: Academic
Conferences International, 2003, pp. 253-260.
[211].Lane, J.E., New Public Management, London, Rutledge, 2000
[212].Lankina, T. V., Hudala, A., Wollmann, H., Local governance in
Central and Eastern Europe, New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008
[213].Lasswell, H.D., Politics: Who gets What, When and How, New
York:
Peter Smith Pub Inc., 1990
[214].Leana, C. R. i Van Buren, H. J., Organizational Social Capital and
Employment Practices, Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 1999, pp. 538-555.
[215].Lee, D. and Newby H., The Problem of Sociology: an introduction
to the discipline, London: Unwin Hyman ,1983.
[216].Legea 52/2003 privind transparena n procesul decizional din
administraia public, publicat in M.O. nr. 70, Februarie 3, 2003
[217].Legea 57/1968 privind organizarea i funcionarea Consiliilor
Populare, n M.Of. nr. 168/26 dec. 1968
[218].Leigh, A., Effective Change, London: Institute of Personnel
Management, 1988
[219].Leitmann, J., Sustaining Cities: Environmental Planning and
Management in Urban Design. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1999
[220].Lepawsky, A., Administration: the art and science of organization and
management, NY, Knopf, 1949
[221].Lindblom, C.E., The Policy-Making Process, New York: Prentice Hall, 1980
[222].Lipnack , J., Stamps, J. The Age of the Network . New York : Wiley. 1994
[223].Lippmann, W., Liberty and the news, NY: Harcourt,Brace & Howe, 1920
[224].Lippmann, W., Public Opinion, NY: Harcourt,Brace & Howe, 1922
[225].Lippmann, W., The Phantom Public, NY: Harcourt, Brace &Howe, 1925
[226].Loffler, E., Best-practice cases reconsidered from an international
perspective, International Public Management Journal, 3/2000, pp. 191204
[227].Lovan, W. R., Murray, M., Shaffer, R. (eds), Participatory Governance:
Planning, Conflict mediation and public decision-making in Civil Society, Aldershot,

Ashgate, 2004
[228].Lupan, S., Onofreiu, A., Poruncile Primriei Nsud, 1863-1867, ed.
a doua, Nsud, Editura George Cobuc, 2006

38

[229].Lynn, L.E. jr, Globalization and administrative reform: what is

happening in theory, in Public Management review, no. 3/2001, pp. 191-208
[230].Lynn, L.E. jr, Public Management: Old and New, Routledge, NY, 2006
[231].Lynn, L.E., Public Management: a Concise History of the Field,
Oxford
University Press, UK, 2005

[232].Lyons, W.E. and Lowery, D., Citizen Responses to Dissatisfaction in

Urban Communities: A Partial Test of a General Model, The Journal of Politics,
Vol. 51, No. 4 (Nov., 1989), pp. 841-868
[233].Mabey, C., Mayon-White, B., Managementul Schimbrii, The Open
University Press, 1993
[234].Machiavelli, N., Il Principe, editie bilingv it-ge, Berlin:Philipp Reclam
Jun Verlag GmbH, 1986

[235].Marsh, D. and Rhodes, R.,Policy Networks in British Government,

Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992.
[236].Marshall, T., 1964, apud Trushnet, M.V., Kennedy, R.
(eds.)Thurngood Marshal - His Speeches, Writings, Arguments, Opinions, and
Reminiscences, Chicago: Lawrence Hill, 2001
[237].Martin, D., The Fading Legacy of Woodrow Wilson, 1988, Public
Administration Review, vol. 48, no. 2, p. 631-636.
[238].Matheson, A., et al. (2007), "Study on the Political Involvement in
Senior Staffing and on the Delineation of Responsibilities Between Ministers and
Senior Civil Servants", OECD Working Papers on Public Governance, 2007/6,
OECD Publishing
[239].Matichescu, O., Istoria Administratiei Publice Romanesti, Bucuresti:
Ed. Economica, 2000
[240].McCarthy, J.D., Zald, M.N., Resource Mobilization and Social
Movements: a partial theory, in The American Journal of Sociology, vol.82,
no.6/1977, pp. 1212-1241
[241].McGuire, M., Collaborative Public Management: Assessing What We
Know and How We Know It, n Public Administration Review, December 2006,
Special Issue, pp. 33-43
[242].McKay, J., (2006), Issues for CEOs of Water utilities with the
Implementation of Australian Water Laws, in Journal of Contemporary Water
Research and Education no.135
[243].McKeown, Rosalyn, (2002). Education for Sustainable Development
Toolkit, Portland State University, [online] http://www.esdtoolkit.org/
[244].Meadows, D., Meadows, D. L., Randers, J., & Behrens, W. (1971).
The Limits to Growth. New York: Universe Books;
[245].Meier, K.J., Politics and the Bureaucracy: Policy Making in the Fourth
Branch of Government, 2nd ed., Monterey, CA: Brooks-Cole Publishing, 1987.
[246].Metcalfe, L., Richards, S., Improving Public Management, London,
Sage, 1987
[247].MIAA, 2010, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Administration, EPUAP, [accesat
oct. 2010]. http://www.mswia.gov.pl/portal/pl/267/3897/Wrota_Polski.html
[248].Ministerul Romn al Internelor i Reformei Administrative (MIRA),
Programul Operaional pentru Dezvoltarea Capacitii Administrative, 2007, [Online] la
http://modernizare.mai.gov.ro/documente/PODCA_propunere%20oficiala_RO%2026.09.200
7.pdf, accesat n Decembrie 15, 2008.

[249].Minogue, M., Changing the state: Concepts and practice in the reform
of the public sector, UK, Edward Elgar, 1998

39

[250].Modrzejewski, A., Selection Process and Employment Policy in

Polish Local Government Administration n Soa Skulov i Luk Potil
(eds.), Principles of good governance-COFOLA 2009, Brno: Masaryk University,
2009
[251].Moore, M. H. 1995. Creating Public Value. Strategic Management
in Government. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
[252].Morison, J., The government-voluntary sector compacts:
governance, governmentality and civil society, Journal of Law and Society,
27.1.,2000, pp. 98-132
[253].Mosher, F.C., Democracy and the Public Service, 2nd ed., New York:
Oxford University Press, 1982.
[254].Moss Kanter, E., Frontierele Managementului, Ed. Meteor Press,
Bucuresti, 2007
[255].Mostert, E., (2003), The Challenge of Public Participation, in Water
Policy, no. 5/2003, pp. 179-197
[256].MSHE, 2010 - Ministry of Science and Higher Education. Science
Matters
[accesat
oct.
2010].
http://www.sprawynauki.waw.pl/?section=article&ref=issue&art_id=294
[257].Mungiu-Pippidi, A., Ionita, S., Public Policies. Theory and Practice,
Iasi: Polirom, 2002
[258].Munton, R. (2003 ) Deliberative democracy and environmental
decision making, in: F. Berkout, M. Leach and I. Scoones (Eds) Negotiating
Change: Advances in Environmental Social Science, Camberley: Edward Elgar,
pp. 109136
[259].Nagel, S. S. (Ed.), Policy Analysis Methods. New Science Publishers,
Inc., 1999
[260].NCOC National Conference on Citizenship, Civic Health Index
2009 accesat online la 03.04.2012, www.ncoc.net
[261].Nef, J., Public administration and public sector reform in Latin
America, in Peters and Pierre (eds.) Handbook of Public Administration,
London: Sage, 2003
[262].Nieuwazny, A., Napoleon and Polish identity, in History Today,
Vol. 48, May 1998
[263].O' Toole, L. J.,Treating Networks Seriously: Practical and Research
Based Agenda in Public Administration. Public Administration Review. 57, 1997,
pp. 45-52
[264].Oakley P., Projects with People. International Labour Office, Geneva,
1991
[265].OECD, (2001). Citizens as Partners: Information, Consultation and
Public Participation in decision making, USA: OECD Publishing
[266].OECD, [online] la http://www.oecd.org, accesat la 23.09.2011
[267].Olsen, J.P., Towards a European Administrative Space?, in Journal of
European Public Policy, 10/2003, pp. 506-531
[268]. Ongaro, E., The Napoleonic Administrative Tradition and Public
Management Reform in France, Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain, in M.
Painter, G.B. Peters (eds.), Tradition and Public Administration, New York, NY:
Palgrave Macmillan, 2010, pp. 174-190
[269].Osborne, D. and Gaebler, T., Reinventing Government: How the
Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector, New York: Plume, 1993.
[270].Osborne, D., Gaebler, T., Reinventing Government: How the
entrepreneurial spirit is transforming the public sector, MA:Addison Wesley, 1992
40

[271].Owen, H., Wave Rider: Leadership for High Performance in a SelfOrganizing World, Berrett-Koehler Publishers: San Francisco, CA, 2008
[272].Oxford Online Dictionary, Oxford University Press, online la
http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/50045241, accesat in August 2009.
[273].Painter, M., Peters, B. G., Administrative traditions in comparative
perspective: families, groups and hybrids, in Painter and Peters (eds.), Tradition and public
administration, NY: Palgrave &Macmillan, 2010

[274].Panozzo, F., Management by Decree. Paradoxes in the reform of

the Italian Public Sector, 2000, Scandinavian Journal of Management, 16, pp.
357-373
[275].PAP - Pagina PAP a administraiei locale poloneze, EPUAP starts
[accesata
n
oct.
2010].
http://www.samorzad.pap.pl/palio/html.run?_Instance=cms_samorzad.pap.pl&_P
ageID=2&s=depesza&dz=szablon.depesza&dep=36092&data=&_CheckSum=17
1210868.
[276].Parr, J., Civic Infrastructure a new approach to improving community
life, National Civic Review, 10.1002, ncr.210, 2008

[277].Perry, J.L., Kraemer, K.L., Public management, Palo Alto, Mayfield,

1983 [278].Peters, B. Guy, "The policy process: an institutionalist
perspective."
Canadian Public Administration 35(2), 1992

[279].Peters, G. and Pierre, J., Development in intergovernmental relations:

towards multilevel governance, Policy and Politics, 29.2., 2001
[280].Petrescu, M., Nbrjoiu, N., Braboveanu, M., Managementul
Informaiei,
Ed. Bibliotheca, Trgoviste, 2008
[281].Pierre, J., Peters G.B., Governance, Politics and the State, NY: Saint
Martin's press, 2000
[282].Platon, Republica, n Cooper, J.M., Hutchinson, D.S., Plato:
Complete Works, NY:Hackett Publishing Co., 1997
[283].Plomp, B. 1982: De openbaarheid van het handelen (The
publicness of the waterboards's actions) in: B. de Goede et al.: Het Waterschap;
recht en werking (The waterboard; law and functioning). Deventer: Kluwer, 9-34.
[284].Ploug, N., Denmark conditions of life the Scandinavian Welfare
Model, Copenhaga, The Royal Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2010
[285].Pollit, C., Bouckaert, G., Public Management Reform, Oxford
University Press, 2004
[286].Pollit, C., Managerialsm and the Public Services, Oxford, basil
Blackwell, 1990
[287].Porter, RW., Knowledge Utilization and the Process of Policy
Formation: Toward a Framework for Africa. Washington, DC: SARA Project,
Academy for Educational Development, 1995
[288].Powell, W., Neither market nor hierarchy: Network forms of
organization. Research in organizational behavior, 12, 1990, pp. 295-336
[289].Preda, M., Dobos, C., Grigoras, V., Sistemul de asigurari de pensii
n Romnia n perioada de tranziie: probleme majore i soluii, 2004, [Online] la
http://www.ier.ro/documente/studiideimpactPaisII_ro/Pais2_studiu_9_ro.pdf
[290].Pretty, J., Guilt, I., Thompson, J. and Scoones, I., A Trainers
Guide for Participatory Learning and Action, International Institute for
Environment and Development, London, 1995

41

[291].Pretty, J., Training for Learning, Special Issues on Training, RRA

Notes, IIED Sustainable Agriculture Programme, London, 1994
[292].Price, R., Sustainable development what does it mean, how does it
affect decision-making, and can economics help?, GES / SDC Sustainability
Conference, London, 2008
[293].Pricopie, R., Participarea public. Comunicare pentru dezvoltarea
durabil, Ed. Comunicare.ro, Bucureti, 2010
[294].Pricopie, R., Policy Dialog: The Missing Link in the 2008 Romanian
Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccination Program, n Transylvanian Review of
Administrative Sciences, 1(25)/2009,
[295].Pricopie, R., Simion, A.R., Almasan, O.L., Policy dialog and the
decisional process of educational public policies the Romanian case,Proceedings
of the International Technology, Education and Development Conference (INTED
2009), 2009,Valencia
[296].Pricopie, Remus, Relaiile publice, evoluie i perspective,
Bucureti, Ed. Tritonic, 2005, p. 41;
[297].PSMPC, Serving the Nation: 100 Years of Public Service, PSPMC,
Canberra, 2001
[298].Public Act 095-0506, the Citizen Participation Act, enacted by the
People of the State of Illinois, on 8/28/2007, [Online] la
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/publicacts/95/PDF/095-0506.pdf, accesat n
Decembrie 15, 2008.
[299].Putnam, R. D., The prosperous community: social capital and public
life in the American Prospect, 1993, pp.4-13
[300].Raadschelders, J.C.N., Toonen, T.A.J, Public Sector Reform, in J. Perry,
Research in Public Administration, Greenwich, JAI Press, 1999
[301].Rainey, H.G., Public management: recent developments, Chatham, Chatham

House, 1990
[302].Ramessur, T. S., E-governance and Online Public Service: The Case
of a Cyber Island. International Journal of Computing and ICT Research, Vol. 3,
No. 2, 2009, pp. 12 19
[303].Ramonet, I., Tirania Comunicrii, Bucureti: Ed. Doina, 2000
[304].RARO 1978: Advies over inpsraak op de drie niveau's. Den Haag:
Raad van Advies voor de Ruimtelijke Ordening.
[305].Rawls, J.B., A Theory of Justice. Massachusetts: Belknap Press of
Harvard University Press, 1971
[306].Reich, R.K., The Work of Nations: Preparing Ourselves for 21stCentury Capitalism, New York: Vintage Books, 1991
[307].Reimers, F., McGinn, N., Informed Dialogue: Using Research to
Shape Education Policy Around the World, Praeger, 1997
[308].Rvision Gnrale des Politiques Publiques, 2010,

http://www.rgpp.modernisation.gouv.fr, accesat n oct. 2011

[309].Rhodes, R. (1997), Understanding Governance: policy networks,
governance, reflexivity and acountability, Buckingham: Open University Press.
[310].Rhodes, R.A.W, The Hollowing out of the state, Political Quarterly,
65/1994, pp.138-151
[311].Ritzer, G., The McDonaldization of Society. Los Angeles: Pine Forge
Press, 1993
[312].Rose, N. and Miller, P., Political power beyond the state:
problematics of government, British Journal of Sociology, 43.2, 1992, pp. 173-205
[313].Rowe, G., Frewer, Lynn, Public participation methods: A

42

framework for evaluation. Science, Technology & Human Values, 25(1), 2000,pp. 329
[314].Safran, W., The French Polity, 5th ed, New York: Longman, 1998
[315].Salamon, L.M. (ed.), The Tools of Government: A Guide to the New
Governance, USA: Oxford University Press, 2002a.
[316].Salamon, M. L. (2002b). The New Governance and the Tools of
Public Action: An Introduction. In L.M. Salamon (Ed.), The Tools of Government:
A Guide to the New Governance (pp. 1 47). New York: Oxford University Press.
[317].Saward, M. 2001. Democratic Innovation. London: Routledge
[318].Schmitt, C., The Concept of the Political, trans. George Schwab,
Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 2006
[319].Schophaus, M., Dienel, H.-L. Brgerausstellung ein neues
Beteiligungsverfahren fr die Stadtplanung. Forschungsjournal Neue Soziale
Bewegungen, Vol. 15, No. 2, 2002, pp. 90-96,
[320].Scot, J., Wanna, J., Trajectories of public administration and
administrative history in Australia: Rectifying a curious blight?,Australian Journal
of Public Administration, vol.64, no.1, 2005, pp. 11-24
[321].Scott, R., Political science and public administration: The saga of a
difficult relationship, n Australian Journal of Public Administration, 62(2), June
2003, pp. 113-20
[322].Scurtu, I., Bulei, I., Democraia la romni 1866-1938, Ed. Tipo
Moldova, Iai, 2010
[323].Shafir, M., Iliescu encourages vigilante violence in Bucharest,
Report on Eastern Europe 1, no. 27, 1990, pp.32-39
[324].Sharpe, J. (1973) American democracy reconsidered, Parts I and II,
British Journal of Political Science, 3(12), pp. 129167
[325].Sheldon, O., The Philosophy of Management, NY, Arno Press, 1924,
1979 [326].Small, A., The Cameralists, University of Chicago Press, 1909
[327].Smith, G.R. and Taylor, J.R., Achieving Sustainability: Exploring
Links Between Sustainability Indicators and Public Involvement for Rural
Communities, 2000, Landscape Journal, vol. 19, no. 1-2, pp. 179-190.
[328].Snyder, T., The Reconstruction of Nations, New Haven & London:
Yale University Press, 2003, pp. 60-65
[329].Sotiropoulos, D. A., Southern European public bureaucracies
in comparative perspective, 2004, West European Politics, 27 (3), pp. 405-422
[332].Stivers, R., (1976). The Sustainable Society: Ethics and Economic
Growth. Philadelphia: Westminster Press;
[333].Stoker, G., Governance as theory: five propositions, International Social
Science Journal, Volume 50, Issue 155, pages 1728, March 1998

[334].Stone, C.N., Regime Politics. University Press of Kansas, 1989

Linz, J., Stepan. A., Problems of democratic transition and consolidation.
Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996
[335].Stone,

Deborah,

Policy

Paradox:

The

Art

of

Political

Decision

rd
Making, Revised (3 ) Edition, W. W. Norton: NY, 2001
[336].Strauss, L., Cropsey, J., Eds., History of Political Philosophy,
Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1987
[337].Susskind, L. & Zion, L., Can Americas Democracy be
Improved?,
Cambridge, MA: Consensus Building Institute, 2002
[338].Susskind, L., Cruikshank, J., Breaking the impasse: Consensual
approaches to resolving public disputes. New York: Basic Books, 1987
43

[339].Sutton, Rebecca, The policy process: an overview, Overseas

Development Institute, Working Paper 118, August 1999
[340]. Szafraski, B., The EPUAP Role in Modernizing the Informational
Infrastructure
of
the
State
[accesat
oct.2010]
http://egov.pl/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=3530
[341].Tan, P.L., (2006), Legislating for Adequate Public Participation in
Allocating Water in Australia, in Water International 31(1), pp. 12-22.
[342].Tanasescu, E. S., Use of Foreign Precedents by the
Constitutional Court
of
Romania,
[Online]
la
http://info.juridicas.unam.mx/wccl/ponencias/12/2011.pdf
[343].Taylor, F. W., The Principles of Scientific Management, NY, Dover
Publications, 1997
[344].Teodosiu, Carmen, Alexandrescu, Irina, The Romanian Scenario
Workshop Report, n INTERACTS report No. 3g, Decembrie 2008
[345].The Economist Inteligence Unit, The democracy index 2011,
online la https://www.eiu.com, accesat in 02.04. 2012
[346].The
World Bank,
[online]
la
[347].Thomas, Y., Histoire de l'administration, Paris, La Dcouverte, 1995
[348].Thornley, A., "Theoretical Perspectives on Planning Participation. Progress
in Planning 7:1, 1977, pp.1-57.
[349].Tismaneanu, V., Alexandrescu, S., Berindei, M., Dumitrescu, C. T., et al.,
Raport final al Comisiei Prezidentiale pentru analiza dictaturii comuniste din Romania,

2006, [Online]
la
http://www.corneliucoposu.ro/u/m/raport_final_cadcr.pdf
[350].Toffler, A., The third wave, NY:Bantam Books, 1980
[351].Toonen, T.A.J., Networks, Management, and institutions, Public
Administration, 76/1998, pp. 229-252
[352].Toonen, T.A.J., The Comparative Dimension of Administartive
Reform:
Creating Open Villages, NY, Routledge, 2004
[353].Town Planning Institute, Journal of the Town Planning Institute, vol.
56, London, 1970
[354].Tran, V., Teoria Comunicrii, Comunicare.ro: Bucuresti, 2003
[355].Tribe, K., Cameralism and the science of Government, in Journal of
Modern History, 56/1984, pp. 263-284
[356].UK Government, (2008). Department for environment, Food, and
Rural affairs, [online]:
http://www.defra.gov.uk/sustainable/government/what/principles.htm
[357].UNCG, UNCG guide to collaborative competencies, Policy Consensus
Initiative, Portland, 2011
[358].UNESCO, (2001). The Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity,
[online]: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001271/127160m.pdf
[359].UNESCO, (2008). Quality Education, Equity and Sustainable
Development: A holistic vision through UNESCOs Four World Education
Conferences, [online] http://www.unesco.org/education/Synergies4conferences.pdf
[360].UNESCO, [online] la http://www.unesco.org, accesat la 23.09.2011
[361].Ungureanu, A. Istoria constitutionala a Romaniei, 2009,
Analele Universitatii Constantin Brancusi Seria Stiinte Juridice, 2, pp. 129-142
[362].United Kingdom Government, [online] la http://ukgov.uk, accesat la
23.09.2011
[363].United Nations (1992). Rio Declaration on Environment and
44

http://www.w

Development, A/CONF.151/26 (Vol. I), [online]:

http://www.un.org/documents/ga/conf151/aconf15126-1annex1.htm
[364].United Nations Division for Sustainable Development (2005). Agenda
21, [online]: http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/agenda21/index.htm
[365].United Nations, [online] la http://www.un.org, accesat la 23.09.2011
[366].United Nations, Resolution 57/277 of the General Assembly on Public
Administration and Development, December 20, 2002, [Online] la
http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N02/557/65/PDF/N0255765.pdf?
OpenElement, accesat n Decembrie 15, 2008.
[367].United Nations, Public Administration and Development: Improving
Accountability, Responsiveness and Legal Framework, IIAS Working Group, United
Nations, NY: IOS Press, 1997.
[368].United Nations, The Copenhagen declaration and programme of
action World Summit for Social Development, Department of Public Information,
NewYork: United Nations, 1995
[369].United States Department of Education, [online] la
http://www.useducation.gov accesat la 23.09.2011
[370].Veenswijk, M. (ed.), Organizing Innovation: New Approaches
to Cultural Change And Intervention in Public Sector Organizations, Amsterdam:
IOS Press, 2005
[371].Veldboer, L. (1996), De inspraak voorbij, Instituut voor Publiek en
Politiek: Amsterdam 3-43
[372].Verba, S., Schlozman, K.L., and Brady,H.E.,. Voice and
Equality, Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Cambridge: Harvard University
Press, 1995
[373].VLGA
[Victorian
Local
Governance
Association],
(2001),
Community Consultation
Resource Guide. Melbourne: VLGA
[374].VNG 1983: Gemeente en inspraak. (Municipality and public
participation). Groene reeks nr. 62. Den Haag: Vereniging van Nederlandse
Gemeenten. [375].Wallis, J. and B. Dollery. 1999. Market Failure,
Government Failure,
Leadership and Public Policy.London:Macmillan.
[376].Wanna, J., Public policy and public administration in Ian McAllister
et al. eds. The Cambridge Handbook of Social Sciences in Australia, Cambridge
University Press, Port Melbourne, 2003, pp. 406-30
[377].Weber, E., Romania in Hans Roger i Eugene Weber (eds.) The
European Right: A Historical Profile, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1966
[378].Weigle, M. & Butterfield, J., Civil Society in Reforming
Communist Regimes: The Logic of Emergence Comparative Politics, Oct, Vol. 25,
No. 1, 1992
[379].White, L.D., Trends in Public Administration, New York, McGraw Hill, 1933

[380].Wijk, H.D.; W. Konijnenbelt; R.M. van Male 2002: Hoofdstukken

van bestuursrecht (Administrative law). 12th revised impression. Den Haag:
Elsevier
[381].Willoughby, W.F., Principles of Public Administration, Baltimore,
Johns Hopkins University Press, 1927
[382].Wilson, Woodrow, The study of Administration, reedit. n Political
Science Quarterly 56, dec. 1941, pg. 494;
[383].Wolman, H. (1996) Theories of local democracy in the United States,
in: D. King & G. Stoker (Eds) Rethinking Local Democracy, Basingstoke:
45

Macmillan, pp. 158173.

[384].Wood, M. R., Standards of Excellence in Civic Engagement, The
Harwood Institute for Public Innovation, Bethesda, MD, 2005;
[385].Wren, D., The Evolution of Management, NY, John Wiley, 1979
[386].Wright, V. Reshaping the State: The Implications for Public
Administration, n West European Politics 17(3), 1994, pp. 102137

[387].WVS - World Values Survey, Online Data Analysis: Romania 2005,

accesat online la 03.04.2012: http://www.wvsevsdb.com
[388].Young, Ein i Quinn, Lisa, Cum se scrie un Studiu de Politici
Publice efectiv - Ghid pentru Consilierii de Politici Publice din Europa Central i
de Est, Institutul pentru o Societate Deschis, Budapesta, 2002

46