Vatandaş Sözleşmeleri: Farklı Ülkelerdeki Uygulamalar ve Genel Değerlendirme

Year 2010, Issue: 24, 87 - 102, 01.08.2010

Selim Coşkun

Abstract

VatandaşSözleşmeleri kamu kurumlarının hizmet standartları, bilgi, şikayet, nezaket, seçim ve danışma, erişebilirlik, ayırım yapmama, kamu parasına değer verme bağlamında vatandaşlara/müşterilere yönelik sistematik çabalarınıtemsil eden belgelerdir. VatandaşSözleşmeleri kamu yönetimi reformlarının bir unsuru olarak, daha şeffaf ve hesap verebilir bir kamu hizmeti oluşturmak ve vatandaşların devlete olan güvenini yeniden tesis etmek amacıyla farklıyönetim gelenek ve yapılarına sahip pek çok ülkede uygulama alanıbuldu. Farklıülkelerdeki VatandaşSözleşmesi uygulamalarıbenzerlikler kadar farklılıklar da içermekte, bu anlamda gönüllü politika transferi düşüncesi çerçevesinde değerlendirilmektedir. Bu çalışma farklıyönetim geleneklerine sahip İngiltere, İspanya, Fransa, Avustralya ve Hindistan’daki VatandaşSözleşmeleri uygulamalarınıele almakta, VatandaşSözleşmelerine yönelik ideolojik tartışmalarıve uygulamadaki sorunlarıgenel olarak değerlendirmektedir. VatandaşSözleşmeleri daha şeffaf, hesap verebilir ve ektin bir kamu hizmetlerinin oluşmasına katkıda bulunmakta, kamu yöneticilerine önemli öğrenme fırsatlarısunmaktadır. Diğer taraftan, en iyi şekilde uygulansa bile VatandaşSözleşmelerinin kamu hizmetlerinde etkinliği ve adaleti sağlama kapasitesi sınırlıdır. Kamu hizmetlerinin bir hak olarak, tüm vatandaşların erişebileceği bir nitelikte sağlanabilmesi için yönetimlerin VatandaşSözleşmesinin ötesinde politikalar geliştirmesi gerekmektedir.

Keywords

VatandaşSözleşmeleri, kamu reformları, politika transferi, hizmet standartları, şeffaflık, hesap verebilirlik.

Citizen’s Charters: Applications In Different Countries and General Evaluation

Abstract

More than thirty years, many countries adopted comprehensive public sector reforms which caused important changes in the relationship between national, regional and local administrations, the service of public services, the principles of financial administration, the design of public policies. The reforms also regulated the relationship between state and citizens. In that context, the Citizen’s Charter Programs are adopted by some counties in order to restructure the relationship between the citizens and administration as part of public sector reforms. Citizen’s Charter Programs are adopted by many countries with different administrative traditions and structures in order to create more transparent and accountable public services and restore citizen’s trust on the state. Citizen’s Charter is a document which represents systematic efforts of public organizations towards citizens/clients in terms of standard of services, information, choice and consultation, non-discrimination and accessibility, grievances, redress, courtesy and value for money. The beginning point of the Citizen’s Charter Programs is the standardization the public services. In that sense, Citizen’s Charters are the documents that represent the service standards promised to the citizens. In essence, they can be accepted as a kind of quality assurance system that includes customer satisfaction. The Citizen’s Charter Programs contain a group quality insurance technique including setting service standards, consultative mechanisms, providing information to citizens and clients, complaints and redress mechanisms, and quality awards. The Citizen’s Charters are not programs that have some universal and stick rules and purposes. Rather, every country designed and implemented the Citizen’s Charter Programs in accordance with their administrative, social, political traditions and structures. There are similarities as well as differences among Citizen’s Charter Programs in terms of content, purpose and implementation methodology. Therefore, they could be explained through idea of voluntary policy transfer. This study examines Citizen’s Charter implementation in some countries, namely United States, France, Spain, Australia and India. United Kingdom is the first country which adopted Citizen’s Charter Program in 1991. The main idea for the implementation is to establish the quality standard for the public services and to evaluate and increase performance of the public services based on these standards. The Citizen’s Charter Program is established as ten years program. The general framework of the Citizen’s Charter is based on six principles: setting standards, information and openness, choice and consultation, courtesy and helpfulness, putting things right, and value for money. A Charter Mark award scheme was introduced in 1992 to promote Citizen’s Charter Program. The main charters are controlled by the National Audit Office and the Audit Commission. Later, the Citizen’s Charter Program is supported by Tony Blair Government. On the other hand, content of the program is changed in accordance with by New Left ideology. Therefore, Citizen’s Charter initiative became known as “Service First.” as part of broader Better Government programme. In Spain, ‘citizen first’ was adopted in Spanish central government in 1999 by a Royal Decree, which establishes and links Service charters, prizes to best practices and quality awards. Unlike United Kingdom, the Citizen’s Charters are adopted on voluntary base. They are initiated by the politicians or managers of the area or department which is delivering the service or, sometimes, by quality departments where they exist. Service charters are structured in three parts: general and legal information, quality commitments, and other information which includes procedures about complaint mechanisms. There is widespread usage of Citizen’s Charter in Spain at national, regional and local level. In France, the Citizen’s Charter Program Charte des Services Publics is initiated as part of modernization public administration in 1992. The Charter is based on four public sector principles; transparency and responsibility, simplicity and accessibility, participation and adaptation, confidence and trust in secure public services and judicial protection of rights. While the French version of Citizen’s Charter is inspired by the United Kingdom practices, it has important differences due to French legal system, public service and state tradition. Unlike United Kingdom, the implementation of Citizen’s Charter in France is a matter for the judicial system rather than the executive regulation. In France, the Citizen’s Charter program aims to restore the Republican principle of equal citizenship, legality and due process. The Australian Citizen’s Charter Program is initiated under the title of Putting Service First. The Public Agencies dealing directly with the public are required to identify their ‘customers’ and develop a Service Charter. Charters are intended to guarantee standards for service delivery for customers and stakeholders, and provide a substitute for competition and a benchmark for measuring service quality. The principles of the charter are similar to the UK initiatives. In 1997, the Indian Government adopted an ‘Action Plan for Effective and Responsive Government’, and one of the outcomes of Action Plan was the decision that the public agencies at both the federal and state levels should develop and adopt their own Citizen’s Charters. In India, the formulation, implementation and evaluation of the Citizen’s Charter seem to be structured quite systematically in terms of its development at various stages as well as the main stakeholders involved at each stage. Primarily an adaptation of the UK model, the Indian Citizen’s Charter has an additional component of ‘expectations from the clients’ or, in other words ’obligations of the users’. The involvement of consumer organizations, citizen groups and other stakeholders in the formulation of the citizen’s charters is emphasized to ensure that they meet the needs of the users. Another unique aspect of the Indian initiative is that the banking sector is used as a model of excellence in the implementation of the Citizen’s Charter. Citizen’s Charter programs contribute to establish more transparent, accountable and effective public services and provide valuable learning opportunities for public administrators. On the other hand, Citizen’s Charter programs have limited capacity in providing effectiveness and justice in public services even if it would be adopted in best manner. Therefore, the public administrators should develop policies so that the public services should be accessible to all citizens as a right.

Keywords

Citizen’s Charter, public reforms, policy transfer, service standards, transparency, accountability

References

• Aberbach, J.D. and Christensen, T (2005), Citizens and Consumers. An NPM dilemma. Public Management Review, 7(2), 226-245.
• Ateş, H. & Okur, Y (2009), Kamu Kurumlarında Performans ve Denetim Etkinliğinin Artırılması İçin Bir Alternatif : Yurttaş Şartları, Kocaeli Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi,18 (2), 100- 125.
• Bevir, M., Rhodes, R.A.W. & Weller, P. (2003). The traditions of governance: Interpreting the changing role of public sector. Public Administration, 81 (1), 1-17.
• Bevir, M. and O’Brien, D. (2001), New Labour and the public sector in Britain, Public Administration Review, Vol. 61 (5), 535- 547.
• Bouckaert, G. (1995), Charters as frameworks for Awarding Quality: The Belgian, British, and French Experience. (Hermann, H. and H. Klages), Trends in Public Sector Renewal: Recent Developments and Concepts of Awarding Excellence, Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 185–200.
• Bowerman, M.(1995). Auditing performance indicators: the Role of the Audit Commission in the Citizen’s Charter initiative, Financial Accountability & Management, 11 (2), 171- 183.
• Bynoe, I (1996). Beyond the Citizen’s Charter. London: Institute of Public Policy Research.
• Carty, W. (2004). Citizen’s Charters A comparative global surveys. Paper Presented at the official launch of the Mexican Citizen’s Charter initiative in June 2004.
• Clark, D. (1998). The modernization of French civil service: crisis, change and continuity. Public Administration, 76 (1), 97-115.
• Clark, D. (2000). Citizens, Charters and public service reform in France and Britain. Government and Opposition, 35 (2), 152–169
• Common, R. (1997). The New Public Management and policy transfer: the role of international institutions, paper for the Public Sector Management for the Next Century”, Conference at the University of Manchester, 29 June- 3 July.
• Coşkun, S. (2004). Kamu Reformları: Değişim ve Süreklilik, (Acar, M.& Özgür, H). Çağdaş Kamu Yönetimi II, Ankara: Nobel, 129- 160.
• DARPG (Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances) (2004). Duties and Responsibilities of Nodal Officers of Citizen’sCharter, NewDelhi: DARPG.
• Drewry, G. (2003). Whatever happened to the Citizen’s Charter?, Paper presented at International Symposiumon Service Charters and Customer Satisfaction in Public Services, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, 8 – 9 December.
• Drewry, G. (2005). Citizen’s Charters; service quality chameleons. Public Management Review, 7 (3), 321- 340.
• Ghuman, B. S. (2002), Citizens’ Charter: A new approach towards accountable administration in India, Paper presented at the Second Specialized International Conference of the International Institute of Administrative Sciences, New Delhi, India, November.
• Haque, S. M. (1999), Relationship between citizenship and public administration: a reconfiguration. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 65 (3), 309 – 325.
• Haque, S. M. (2001). The diminishing publicness of public service under the current mode of governance. Public Administration Review 61 (1), 65 – 82.
• Haque, S. M. (2005). Lımıts Of citizen’s charters iIn Indıa. Public Management Review 7(3), 391- 416.
• Harrison, S. (1999). Propaganda, persuasion and symmetry: local and central government perspectives on communicating with citizen. British Journal of Management, 10 (1), 53- 62.
• Hesse, J. J. (1997). Rebuilding the state: public sector reform in central and Eastern Europe. (J.E. Lane), Public sector reform: rationale, trends and problems, London: Sage Publications, 114- 146.
• Hood, C., Peters G, and Wollmann H. (1996), Sixteen Ways to Consumerize Public Services: Pick'n Mix or Painful Trade-Offs? Public Money & Management, 1996. 16(4),. 43-50.
• Im, T. (2003). Bureaucratic power and NPM reforms in Korea. International Review of Public Administration, 8 (3), 89- 102.
• Kaboolian, L. (1998). The New Public Management: Challenging the Boundries of Management vs. Administration Debate,, Public Administration Review, 58 (3), 189- 193.
• Keeble, P. (1996). The concept and operation of the Citizen’s Charter. Management Services, 40 (5), 10- 18.
• Kelly, R.M. (1998). An inclusive democratic polity, representative bureaucracy, and New Public Management. Public Administration Review, 58 (8), 201- 208.
• Kirkpatrick, I. and Martinez Lucio M. (1995), The Politics of Quality in the Public Sector, (Kirkpatrick, I. and Martinez Lucio, M) Politics of Quality in the Public Sector, Routledge, London and New York, 1-15.
• Lewis, N. (1993). The Citizen’s Charter and Next Step: A New Way of Governing, The Political Quarterly, 64 (3), 316- 326.
• Lo Schiavo, L. (2000). Quality Standards in the public dector: differences between Italy and the UK in the Citizen’s Charter initiative. Public Administration, 78 (3), 679–698.
• Madell, T. (2005). From the Citizen’s Charter to Public Service Guarantees: The Swedish Model. European Public Law, Vol. 11 (2), 259- 280.
• McGuire, L. (2001). Service Charters—Global convergence or dational divergence? A domparison of initiatives in Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States. Public Management Review, 3 (4), 493- 524.
• Michalopoulos, N. (2000). Trends of administrative reform in Europe: Towards administrative convergence?, Paper presented at International Conference of the International Institute of Administrative Sciences, University of Bologna, Italy, 19 – 22 June.
• Michalopoulos, N. (2001). Trends of Administrative Reform in Europe: Towards Administrative Convergence. International Public Management Review, 2 (2), 39 – 53.
• OECD (2000), Trust in Government Ethics Measures in OECD Countries, OECD: Paris.
• Osborne, D. and Gaebler T. (1992) Reinventing Government. How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector. Reading: Addison-Wesley.
• Osborne, D. and Plastrik. P. (1997). Banishing Bureaucracy: the Five Strategies for Reinventing Government. Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley.
• Rhodes, R.A.W. (1997). Reinventing Whitehall 1979- 1995. (Kickert, Walter J.M). Public Management and Administrative Reform in Europe, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 4- 58.
• Sharma, A. (2004). Citizen’s Charter Initiative in India. New Delhi: Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances. http://www.goicharters.nic.in/ ccinitives.htm#_ftnref1 12.10.2008
• Sharma, A. and Agnihotri, V. K (2001). New Developments in Public Administration: The Citizen’s Charter: the Indian Experience. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 67 (4), 733- 739.
• Steas, P. and N. Thijs (2005). Quality Management on the European Agenda, European Institute of Public Administration Report, http://www.eipa.nl/CAF/Articles/scop05_1_6.pdf 15.02.2009
• Terry L. D. (1999). From Greek Mythology to the Real World of the New New Public Management and Demomratic Governance, Public Administration Review, 59 (3), 272- 277.
• Terry, L. D. (1998). Administrative Leadership, Neo- Managerialism and the Public Management Movement. Public Administration Review, 58 (3), 184-200.
• Torres, L. (2003). Service Charters: Reshaping the Government- Citizen Relationship: The Case of Spain. Conference of the European Group of Public Administration (ESPA), September 3-6, Lisbon, Portugal.
• Torres, L. (2005). Service Charters: Reshaping Trust in Government- the Case of Spain. Public Administration Review, 65 (6), 687- 699.
• Torres, L. (2006). Service Charters in Spain: Transparency and Citizen Empowerment or Government Marketing. Public Money and Management, 26 (3), 159- 164.
• Üstüner, Y. (2000). Kamu Yönetimi Kuramı ve İşletmeciliği Okulu. Amme İdaresi Dergisi, 33 (3), 15-31.
• Van de W., Thijs, N., and Bouckaert, G. (2005). A Tale of Two Charters: Political Crisis, Political Realignment and Administrative Reform in Belgium. Public Management Review, 7 (3), 367- 390.
• Walsh, K. (1995), Quality Through Markets, the New Public Service Management. (Wilkinson, A. and Hugh, W.), Making Quality Critical, London and New York: Routledge, 82- 104