Role of “entrepreneurs” in implementation of international regulation

  • Svitlana Maistruk Rule of Law for Development Institute, Loyola University Chicago School of Law – John Felice Rome Center
Keywords: e-government, public procurement, international treaty, public administration, Association Agreement, legal transplants

Abstract

Purpose. The purpose of the study is to show the decisive role of a new group of dynamic actors (social, economic and political “entrepreneurs” according to R. Koppl, S. Kauffman, T. Felin, and G. Longo) in implementation of international treaty obligations in the developing country and describe the algorithm of this process. The study also examines the necessary conditions for the successful implementation of international obligations, in particular, approximation of national legislation with EU legislation.

Methods. Qualitative method is used to explore the role of “entrepreneurs” in implementation of international treaty obligations and examine theories of transplant effect and spontaneous legal order in adaptation of international regulation by the developing country. Such scholarly approach as case study is used for exploration of the role of “entrepreneurs” in creation of the “ProZorro” platforms and fulfillment of international obligations in the sphere of public procurement (according to the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the EU). Non-empirical scholarly approach helped to analyze the particularities of the Association Agreement in terms of standards for public procurement and evolution of relevant Ukrainian legislation.

Results. Successful implementation of international treaty is impossible without taking into account the following conditions. First, institutional capacity is crucial for implementation of treaty obligations. However, when the capacity is low, it can be built due to creative initiative and professional ability of dynamic actors from business, civil society, international organizations. Second, familiarities of legal systems are also very important. However, the case of public procurement demonstrated that effective transplantation was ensured by “entrepreneurs” through their freedom to chose appropriate version of “legal transplant”. Third, demand for implementation of the obligations in the area of public procurement was created by “entrepreneurs”, who passed the way from the initiative group of volunteer to the public procurement officials. Four, international assistance, both expert and financial, attracted by entrepreneurs was extremely important for elaboration of the legal basis for implementation of the EU regulation.

Conclusions. There in no clear algorithm for implementation of regulation. The case of public procurement was characterized by the spontaneity of interactions that were difficult to predict. However, emergence of a new group of dynamic actors in the public administration was decisive for success of the reform. Therefore, to enhance the implementation of regulation of other sectors of the Association Agreement, it is important to create an opportunity for initiative “entrepreneurs” and their cooperation with business, public officials, NGOs, international experts and other stakeholders.

References

1. European Commission (2014). Association Agreement between the European Union and Its Member States, of the One Part, and Ukraine, of the Other Part. Retrieved from: https://trade. ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2016/november/tradoc_155103.pdf [in English].

2. European Commission (2018). Association Implementation Report on Ukraine. Retrieved from: https://cdn3-eeas.fpfis.tech.ec.europa.eu/cdn/farfuture/aZnrbQ70ZJtiXaRXV69qTtPI-d-gbCzZxpirQUpU6EY/mtime:1541749617/sites/eeas/files/2018_association_implementation_report_on_ukraine.pdf [in English].

3. Berkowitz, D., Pistor, K., Richard, J.-F. (2003). The Transplant Effect. The American Journal of Comparative Law, vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 163–203 [in English].

4. Institute for Development of Freedom of Information (2016). Comparative Analysis of Public Procurement Legislations and Practice in Eastern Partnership Countries. Retrieved from: https://www.tpp-rating.org/public/uploads/PPL%20Assessments%20ENG/Comparative_Study_of_Public_Proc.pdf [in English].

5. Transparency International (2015). Corruption Perception Index. Retrieved from: https:// www.transparency.org/cpi2015#results-table [in English].

6. Devins, C., Koppl, R., Kauffman, S., Felin, T. (2015). Against Design. SSRN Electronic Journal, February 25, pp. 611–681 [in English].

7. Dmytryshyn, B., Zhovnovach, R., Levchenko, O., Malakhovskyi, Yu., Gonchar, V. (2018). Practical Aspects of Assessing the Efficiency of the Modern System of Public Procurement in Ukraine. Problems and Perspectives in Management, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 353–363 [in English].

8. World Bank (2016). Effectiveness of Law-making Bodies. Retrieved from: https://tcdata360.worldbank.org/indicators/entrp.law.eff?Country=UKR&indicator=3366&viz=line_chart&years=2012,2016 [in English].

9. Global Innovation Index Report (2018). Retrieved from: https://www.globalinnovationindex.org/gii-2018-report# [in English].

10. Transparency International Ukraine (2017). Implementation Assessment of the Ukrainian Public Procurement Legislation. Retrieved from: https://www.tpp-rating.org/public/uploads/data/3/AOIL/5914ba099412aPPL_Implementation-Assessment-Ukraine.pdf [in English].

11. Koppl, R., Kauffman, S., Felin, T., Longo, G. (2014). Economics for a Creative World. Journal of Institutional Economics, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 1–33 [in English].

12. Marín, J.M. (2016). Co-creation of ProZorro: an account of the process and actors. Report. Berlin: Transparency International [in English].

13. McInerney, T.F. (2015). Strategic Treaty Management: practice and implications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press [in English].

14. Freedom House (2018). Nations in Transit. Retrieved from: https://freedomhouse.org/report/nations-transit/2018/ukraine [in English].

15. Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine (2016). Pro Stratehiiu reformuvannia systemy publichnykh zakupivel (“dorozhniu kartu”): Rozporiadzhennia Kabinetu Ministriv Ukrainy vid

24 liutoho 2016 r. № 175-р [On the Strategy for the Reform of the Public Procurement System (Roadmap): Order of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine dated February 24, 2016 № 175-p]. Retrieved from: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/175-2016-р [in Ukrainian].

16. Sushko, O., Zelinska, O., Khorolskyy, R., Movchan, V., Solonenko, I., Gumeniuk, V., Triukhan, V. (2012). EU-Ukraine Association Agreement: Guideline for Reforms. Retrieved from: https://www.kas.de/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=3fe7c9ce-c727-8fcb-a0f4-2620a59a5341&groupId=252038 [in English].

17. NGO “Ukrainian Center for European Policy” (2018). Ukraina ta Uhoda pro asotsiatsiiu: monitorynh vykonannia 2014–2018 [Ukraine and the Association Agreement: monitoringimplementation of 2014–2018]. Retrieved from: http://ucep.org.ua/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Report_2014-2018_WEB_FINAL.pdf [in Ukrainian].

18. WJP (2018). Rule of Law Index (2017–2018). Retrieved from: http://data.worldjusticeproject.org/#/groups/UKR [in English].
Published
2019-06-10
How to Cite
Maistruk, S. (2019). Role of “entrepreneurs” in implementation of international regulation. Administrative Law and Process, (1(24), 95-106. https://doi.org/10.17721/2227-796X.2019.1.09
Section
Foreign administrative law and procedure