Coordination
#20Key Findings
Greece falls into the lower-middle ranks (rank 20) in the area of coordination.
The prime minister’s office, now called the Presidency of the Government, oversees coordination. It evaluates ministry policy proposals to ensure alignment with government priorities. The cabinet regularly discusses draft bills. Any significant amendments to bills must be coordinated with the Presidency.
A government reorganization in 2019 improved coordination within the ministerial bureaucracy. Each ministry contains a Coordination Service unit that interfaces with the Presidency. While informal coordination remains important, significant issues must be escalated though the ministries’ hierarchical structure.
National standards mainly focus on economic performance. There are few national standards for decentralized public services in areas such as environmental services, education, social assistance and land use. Frequent changes in the tasks assigned to regional and local governments have undermined the quality of public service delivery.
The prime minister’s office, now called the Presidency of the Government, oversees coordination. It evaluates ministry policy proposals to ensure alignment with government priorities. The cabinet regularly discusses draft bills. Any significant amendments to bills must be coordinated with the Presidency.
A government reorganization in 2019 improved coordination within the ministerial bureaucracy. Each ministry contains a Coordination Service unit that interfaces with the Presidency. While informal coordination remains important, significant issues must be escalated though the ministries’ hierarchical structure.
National standards mainly focus on economic performance. There are few national standards for decentralized public services in areas such as environmental services, education, social assistance and land use. Frequent changes in the tasks assigned to regional and local governments have undermined the quality of public service delivery.
Graph View
Graph View
To what extent do established coordination mechanisms between the government’s office and line ministries effectively enhance policy coherence?
10
9
9
Functional coordination mechanisms between line ministries and the GO/PMO, aimed at enhancing policy coherence, are in place.
8
7
6
7
6
Largely functional coordination mechanisms between line ministries and the GO/PMO, aimed at enhancing policy coherence, are in place.
5
4
3
4
3
Coordination mechanisms between line ministries and the GO/PMO, aimed at enhancing policy coherence, are only somewhat functional.
2
1
1
Coordination mechanisms between line ministries and the GO/PMO, aimed at enhancing policy coherence, are not at all functional.
Horizontal, interministerial coordination processes have been streamlined since at least 2019 when a new law on government organization was adopted. This coordination is overseen by the Prime Minister’s Office, which was upgraded and renamed the Presidency of the Government in 2019, functioning similarly to a Government Office or Prime Minister’s Office in other countries. The Presidency of the Government is staffed with political appointees and experts in various fields, including law, economics, public administration, foreign relations, and communications. These experts evaluate policy proposals from line ministries and ensure alignment with the broader government priorities.
The cabinet meets regularly to discuss and decide on draft bills after the Presidency of the Government has consulted with the relevant ministry. Although ministers sometimes continue the practice of submitting last-minute amendments during parliamentary debates, they must coordinate with the Presidency of the Government for significant amendments.
After a law is adopted, further coordination between the involved ministries is necessary for its implementation. Often, this requires the issuance of joint ministerial ordinances (the “KYSA”), co-signed by two or more ministers. This process can sometimes lead to delays and implementation gaps, as it requires coordination among numerous officials to finalize the details of policy implementation.
Overall, however, established coordination mechanisms between the GO and line ministries are effective in enhancing policy coherence.
Citations:
The change in 2019 was effected by Law 4622/2019.
The website of the Presidency of the Government: https://www.primeminister.gr/primeminister/proedria-tis-kivernisis
The cabinet meets regularly to discuss and decide on draft bills after the Presidency of the Government has consulted with the relevant ministry. Although ministers sometimes continue the practice of submitting last-minute amendments during parliamentary debates, they must coordinate with the Presidency of the Government for significant amendments.
After a law is adopted, further coordination between the involved ministries is necessary for its implementation. Often, this requires the issuance of joint ministerial ordinances (the “KYSA”), co-signed by two or more ministers. This process can sometimes lead to delays and implementation gaps, as it requires coordination among numerous officials to finalize the details of policy implementation.
Overall, however, established coordination mechanisms between the GO and line ministries are effective in enhancing policy coherence.
Citations:
The change in 2019 was effected by Law 4622/2019.
The website of the Presidency of the Government: https://www.primeminister.gr/primeminister/proedria-tis-kivernisis
To what extent are there positive (formalized) forms of coordination across ministries that aim to enhance policy coherence?
10
9
9
Interministerial coordination mechanisms targeting policy coherence provide incentives for identifying synergies and opportunities.
8
7
6
7
6
Interministerial coordination mechanisms targeting policy coherence sometimes provide incentives for identifying synergies and opportunities.
5
4
3
4
3
Interministerial coordination mechanisms targeting policy coherence rarely provide incentives for identifying synergies and opportunities.
2
1
1
There are no interministerial coordination mechanisms targeting policy coherence that provide incentives for identifying synergies and opportunities.
Coordination within the ministerial bureaucracy, which was somewhat inconsistent in the past, has been improved since the government reorganization in 2019. In each line ministry, a “Coordination Service” unit has been established, staffed by permanent civil servants. Their role is to ensure regular communication and interaction between the ministry and the Presidency of the Government. As a result, the Presidency of the Government receives regular updates from line ministries on policy matters. The Presidency itself is well-staffed, well-resourced, and utilizes modern management methods and digital technologies.
Horizontal coordination also takes place through interministerial committees, most of which are formed to address specific tasks, such as responding to crises caused by natural disasters. However, there are two permanent committees: the Government Council on National Security (KYSEA), which selects the heads of the armed forces and formulates defense and security policy, and the Government Council on Economic Policy (KYSOIP), which formulates and reviews key economic policies.
For minor policy implementation issues, civil servants frequently exchange information across ministerial boundaries. However, for more significant issues, they must escalate information and proposals through their ministry’s hierarchical structure before further collaboration with other ministries can occur. It is typically the top staff of each ministry (“General and Special Secretaries,” “Service Secretaries,” and “Directors General”) who identify synergies and opportunities for coordination.
Due to the strict control and streamlined coordination exercised by the Presidency of the Government, it is extremely rare for ministers to be surprised by initiatives taken by their colleagues in other ministries.
Citations:
For the KYSOIP council, see https://gslegal.gov.gr/?page_id=4587
For the KYSEA council, see https://www.primeminister.gr/governance/collective-bodies
The Coordination Services, found in each ministry, are regulated by Law 4622/2019 (article 38).
In 2015-2019 there were additional interministerial councils. They covered three policy areas: social policy, migration policy, and national communication policy. They were convened infrequently and remained largely inactive.
Horizontal coordination also takes place through interministerial committees, most of which are formed to address specific tasks, such as responding to crises caused by natural disasters. However, there are two permanent committees: the Government Council on National Security (KYSEA), which selects the heads of the armed forces and formulates defense and security policy, and the Government Council on Economic Policy (KYSOIP), which formulates and reviews key economic policies.
For minor policy implementation issues, civil servants frequently exchange information across ministerial boundaries. However, for more significant issues, they must escalate information and proposals through their ministry’s hierarchical structure before further collaboration with other ministries can occur. It is typically the top staff of each ministry (“General and Special Secretaries,” “Service Secretaries,” and “Directors General”) who identify synergies and opportunities for coordination.
Due to the strict control and streamlined coordination exercised by the Presidency of the Government, it is extremely rare for ministers to be surprised by initiatives taken by their colleagues in other ministries.
Citations:
For the KYSOIP council, see https://gslegal.gov.gr/?page_id=4587
For the KYSEA council, see https://www.primeminister.gr/governance/collective-bodies
The Coordination Services, found in each ministry, are regulated by Law 4622/2019 (article 38).
In 2015-2019 there were additional interministerial councils. They covered three policy areas: social policy, migration policy, and national communication policy. They were convened infrequently and remained largely inactive.
How effectively do informal coordination mechanisms complement formal mechanisms of interministerial coordination?
10
9
9
Informal coordination mechanisms complement formal mechanisms of interministerial coordination.
8
7
6
7
6
In most cases, informal coordination mechanisms complement formal mechanisms of interministerial coordination.
5
4
3
4
3
In some cases, informal coordination mechanisms undermine formal mechanisms of interministerial coordination.
2
1
1
Informal coordination mechanisms undermine formal mechanisms of interministerial coordination.
While horizontal coordination in Greece has traditionally been informal, it has become more formalized since the adoption of the 2019 law on government organization. The establishment of the Presidency of the Government and the creation of “Coordination Services” within each ministry have reduced the need for informal coordination, limiting the opportunities for individual ministers to pursue their own policy agendas.
However, during periods of crisis, such as the wildfires in the summer of 2022 and the floods in the summer of 2023, informal coordination did occur. This involved not only the Government Office but also ministers without portfolio who work closely with the prime minister. In 2023–2024, there were three such ministers and three deputy ministers who worked in close coordination with the prime minister and among themselves, taking on various supervisory roles. This team was particularly cohesive, as its members had worked together during the previous term of the New Democracy party (2019–2023).
In summary, informal coordination mechanisms effectively complement formal ones.
Citations:
The change in government organization in 2019 took place through Law 4622/2019.
The team of government ministers without portfolio is announced in the official website of the prime minister: https://www.government.gov.gr/kivernisi/
However, during periods of crisis, such as the wildfires in the summer of 2022 and the floods in the summer of 2023, informal coordination did occur. This involved not only the Government Office but also ministers without portfolio who work closely with the prime minister. In 2023–2024, there were three such ministers and three deputy ministers who worked in close coordination with the prime minister and among themselves, taking on various supervisory roles. This team was particularly cohesive, as its members had worked together during the previous term of the New Democracy party (2019–2023).
In summary, informal coordination mechanisms effectively complement formal ones.
Citations:
The change in government organization in 2019 took place through Law 4622/2019.
The team of government ministers without portfolio is announced in the official website of the prime minister: https://www.government.gov.gr/kivernisi/
Graph View
To what extent does central government ensure that subnational self-governments meet national (minimum) standards in delivering public services?
10
9
9
The central government effectively ensures that subnational self-governments successfully meet national standards for public service delivery.
8
7
6
7
6
Most of the time, the central government ensures that subnational self-governments successfully meet national standards for public service delivery.
5
4
3
4
3
The central government rarely ensures that subnational self-governments successfully meet national minimum standards for public service delivery.
2
1
1
The central government does nothing to ensure that subnational self-governments successfully meet national standards for public service delivery.
In Greece, national standards primarily focus on the economic performance of national and subnational authorities and agencies. The Ministry of Interior, the Ministry of Finance, and the Audit Office (Elegktiko Synedrio), an independent authority, oversee regional governments and municipalities, with an emphasis on sound fiscal management. This focus emerged from the need for stricter fiscal oversight of Greek ministries and public agencies following the economic crisis of the previous decade.
In contrast, there are few national standards for decentralized public services in areas such as environmental services, education, social assistance, healthcare, land use, waste management, public transport, and housing. Greece’s current national reform program emphasizes priorities and numerical targets rather than comprehensive standards and performance indicators in these areas (Hellenic Republic 2023).
Greek authorities generally adhere to standards set by EU institutions and international forums in which the country participates. For example, the Paris Agreement (2015) and annual global climate change meetings (COP 26, COP 27, and COP 28) have established standards and indicators for environmental protection. Additionally, key performance indicators related to social assistance and healthcare, used by the European Commission and Eurostat, provide a basis for comparative evaluation among the 27 EU member states.
Citations:
Hellenic Republic. 2023. “National Reform Program.” https://commission.europa.eu/system/files/2023-05/Greece%20NRP%202023.pdf
In contrast, there are few national standards for decentralized public services in areas such as environmental services, education, social assistance, healthcare, land use, waste management, public transport, and housing. Greece’s current national reform program emphasizes priorities and numerical targets rather than comprehensive standards and performance indicators in these areas (Hellenic Republic 2023).
Greek authorities generally adhere to standards set by EU institutions and international forums in which the country participates. For example, the Paris Agreement (2015) and annual global climate change meetings (COP 26, COP 27, and COP 28) have established standards and indicators for environmental protection. Additionally, key performance indicators related to social assistance and healthcare, used by the European Commission and Eurostat, provide a basis for comparative evaluation among the 27 EU member states.
Citations:
Hellenic Republic. 2023. “National Reform Program.” https://commission.europa.eu/system/files/2023-05/Greece%20NRP%202023.pdf
To what extent do national policymakers effectively collaborate with regional and local governments to improve the delivery of public services?
10
9
9
National policymakers work effectively with regional and local governments to improve the delivery of public services.
8
7
6
7
6
In general, national policymakers work effectively with regional and local governments to improve the delivery of public services.
5
4
3
4
3
National policymakers rarely work effectively with regional and local governments to improve the delivery of public services.
2
1
1
There is no effective multilevel cooperation between the central and subnational governments.
Greece’s governance structure includes 13 self-governed regions and 332 self-governed municipalities, regulated by codified legislation adopted in 2006. Regional governors and mayors, who serve five-year terms (increased from four years in 2023), often belong to political parties different from the ruling national party, exercising significant political discretion.
The central government effectively controls subnational authorities when they execute their administrative competences. Greece is divided into seven “Decentralized Administrations,” which are branches of the central government that oversee regional and local governments and carry out tasks not assigned to subnational authorities.
Compared to other OECD countries, Greece’s local authorities have a narrower scope of tasks and functions, indicating below-average “institutional depth.” Moreover, regional and local governments in Greece have limited fiscal and organizational autonomy (European Commission 2022: 25, 29, 33, 36, and 49). Their revenue primarily comes from the state budget.
Ongoing discussions between the central government, subnational authorities, and experts focus on recalibrating the distribution of tasks and funding between central and subnational governments. For example, an expert committee led by a constitutional law professor engaged with representatives from various levels of government during 2020–2021 to reassess task distribution, but no significant progress was made.
Although the autonomy of subnational self-governments is nominally guaranteed by the constitution, which requires the central government to provide them with the necessary legislative, regulatory, and financial resources to perform their tasks (Article 102), subnational governments have limited financial resources. Additionally, the central government frequently changes the number and nature of tasks assigned to subnational governments, regardless of the ruling party.
The instability in the mandate of subnational governments is rooted in the fiscal mismanagement of funds by municipalities before the economic crisis of the previous decade. As a result, while there is cooperation between national policymakers and subnational authorities, this cooperation rarely translates into effective public service delivery.
Citations:
The legislation regulating subnational authorities is the “Municipal and Community Code,” Law 3463/2006.
European Commission. 2022. “Self-Rule Index for Local Authorities in the EU, Council of Europe and OECD Countries, 1990-2020.” http://www.andreasladner.ch/dokumente/Eigene%20Arbeiten/LAI_2_0%20Final%20report%20published%20on%20the%20website%20of%20the%20EC.pdf
The central government effectively controls subnational authorities when they execute their administrative competences. Greece is divided into seven “Decentralized Administrations,” which are branches of the central government that oversee regional and local governments and carry out tasks not assigned to subnational authorities.
Compared to other OECD countries, Greece’s local authorities have a narrower scope of tasks and functions, indicating below-average “institutional depth.” Moreover, regional and local governments in Greece have limited fiscal and organizational autonomy (European Commission 2022: 25, 29, 33, 36, and 49). Their revenue primarily comes from the state budget.
Ongoing discussions between the central government, subnational authorities, and experts focus on recalibrating the distribution of tasks and funding between central and subnational governments. For example, an expert committee led by a constitutional law professor engaged with representatives from various levels of government during 2020–2021 to reassess task distribution, but no significant progress was made.
Although the autonomy of subnational self-governments is nominally guaranteed by the constitution, which requires the central government to provide them with the necessary legislative, regulatory, and financial resources to perform their tasks (Article 102), subnational governments have limited financial resources. Additionally, the central government frequently changes the number and nature of tasks assigned to subnational governments, regardless of the ruling party.
The instability in the mandate of subnational governments is rooted in the fiscal mismanagement of funds by municipalities before the economic crisis of the previous decade. As a result, while there is cooperation between national policymakers and subnational authorities, this cooperation rarely translates into effective public service delivery.
Citations:
The legislation regulating subnational authorities is the “Municipal and Community Code,” Law 3463/2006.
European Commission. 2022. “Self-Rule Index for Local Authorities in the EU, Council of Europe and OECD Countries, 1990-2020.” http://www.andreasladner.ch/dokumente/Eigene%20Arbeiten/LAI_2_0%20Final%20report%20published%20on%20the%20website%20of%20the%20EC.pdf