Coordination
#6Key Findings
Lithuania performs well in international comparison (rank 6) with regard to coordination.
The prime minister’s office evaluates policy proposals and ensures they align with government priorities. It monitors policy implementation through administrative tracking and performance indicators. Progress is discussed in cabinet meetings and other government deliberations.
Regular interministerial coordination forums such as interinstitutional meetings allow for ministries to align positions. However, coordination is often weak in practice, especially on overlapping policy areas. Informal coordination mechanisms, especially meetings between coalition parties, complement formal channels.
Lithuanian municipalities handle a wide range of state-delegated and autonomous functions. A new program seeks to enhance the central government’s monitoring of public services. Municipalities have criticized the government for limiting their fiscal flexibility. A recently created Bilateral Commission aims at coordination between the central and local governments.
The prime minister’s office evaluates policy proposals and ensures they align with government priorities. It monitors policy implementation through administrative tracking and performance indicators. Progress is discussed in cabinet meetings and other government deliberations.
Regular interministerial coordination forums such as interinstitutional meetings allow for ministries to align positions. However, coordination is often weak in practice, especially on overlapping policy areas. Informal coordination mechanisms, especially meetings between coalition parties, complement formal channels.
Lithuanian municipalities handle a wide range of state-delegated and autonomous functions. A new program seeks to enhance the central government’s monitoring of public services. Municipalities have criticized the government for limiting their fiscal flexibility. A recently created Bilateral Commission aims at coordination between the central and local governments.
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.
The prime minister’s office has the capacity to evaluate policy proposals from line ministries and assess their alignment with the government’s priorities. The government office effectively monitors policy proposals and their implementation through several channels. First, it administratively tracks the execution of government actions assigned to different ministries and other state institutions. Second, through its information system of monitoring, it assesses the achievement of government priorities and linked policy objectives based on performance indicators. Progress in policy implementation is discussed during cabinet meetings and other government-level deliberations.
Information derived from the monitoring process is infrequently used to propose corrective action when progress is deemed insufficient. Thus, the monitoring process does not always prevent the prioritization of sectoral or bureaucratic interests over full-government and horizontal interests in policy implementation. In one EU-funded project, the government office reviewed monitoring and evaluation practices and made several recommendations to improve performance measurement in line ministries, including the development of key performance indicators or indicator libraries in various policy areas. Despite the implementation of this project, the National Audit Office stated that the country’s monitoring and reporting system continues to lack quality information. Additionally, the government and line ministries often provide incomplete information regarding the achievement of their policy aims and objectives in their reports.
The coalition government, formed in late 2020, strengthened the monitoring of policy proposals from the line ministries by introducing questionnaires to check the alignment of their content with government priorities and their potential impact. The chancellor and advisers to the prime minister play important roles in coordinating policy processes with the line ministries.
Information derived from the monitoring process is infrequently used to propose corrective action when progress is deemed insufficient. Thus, the monitoring process does not always prevent the prioritization of sectoral or bureaucratic interests over full-government and horizontal interests in policy implementation. In one EU-funded project, the government office reviewed monitoring and evaluation practices and made several recommendations to improve performance measurement in line ministries, including the development of key performance indicators or indicator libraries in various policy areas. Despite the implementation of this project, the National Audit Office stated that the country’s monitoring and reporting system continues to lack quality information. Additionally, the government and line ministries often provide incomplete information regarding the achievement of their policy aims and objectives in their reports.
The coalition government, formed in late 2020, strengthened the monitoring of policy proposals from the line ministries by introducing questionnaires to check the alignment of their content with government priorities and their potential impact. The chancellor and advisers to the prime minister play important roles in coordinating policy processes with the line ministries.
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.
Regular interministerial coordination forums such as interinstitutional meetings allow chancellors from line ministries and vice ministers to discuss policy initiatives and align the positions of different ministries before these polices are adopted by the government. These forums sometimes provide incentives for identifying synergies and opportunities for policy coherence among various ministries.
Additionally, a network of chief scientific officers in line ministries was established in 2023 to facilitate interministerial coordination in the field of innovation. It is too early to evaluate its effectiveness.
Despite formal arrangements, interministerial coordination tends to be rather weak in practice, especially among civil servants and on issues overlapping several policy areas. Typical issues include addressing skill mismatches and bottlenecks in labor market regulation. Another area in which interministerial coordination is lacking is in reducing the regulatory and administrative burden for businesses.
The positions on draft EU legal initiatives are debated within the Governmental European Union Commission, which includes vice ministers from line ministries, the vice-chancellor of the government and the permanent representative at the EU. This commission typically adopts the national position before EU Council meetings, which the government then approves with minimal substantial debate. For example, during the term of the current coalition government, formed at the end of 2020, only one EU-related policy issue – the Fit for 55 package – was debated in substance at a government meeting. The LINESIS digital system is used to coordinate the positions of different line ministries on draft EU initiatives in real time.
Additionally, a network of chief scientific officers in line ministries was established in 2023 to facilitate interministerial coordination in the field of innovation. It is too early to evaluate its effectiveness.
Despite formal arrangements, interministerial coordination tends to be rather weak in practice, especially among civil servants and on issues overlapping several policy areas. Typical issues include addressing skill mismatches and bottlenecks in labor market regulation. Another area in which interministerial coordination is lacking is in reducing the regulatory and administrative burden for businesses.
The positions on draft EU legal initiatives are debated within the Governmental European Union Commission, which includes vice ministers from line ministries, the vice-chancellor of the government and the permanent representative at the EU. This commission typically adopts the national position before EU Council meetings, which the government then approves with minimal substantial debate. For example, during the term of the current coalition government, formed at the end of 2020, only one EU-related policy issue – the Fit for 55 package – was debated in substance at a government meeting. The LINESIS digital system is used to coordinate the positions of different line ministries on draft EU initiatives in real time.
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.
In most cases, informal coordination mechanisms complement formal mechanisms of interministerial coordination. Sometimes these informal meetings are organized between representatives of political parties that form the ruling coalition with the goal of aligning positions on sensitive or divisive policy issues, such as tax reform.
The coalition government formed in 2020 relied mostly on informal coordination between the coalition partners until June 2023, when the three ruling parties decided to establish a Coalition Council. This council was subsequently used as a forum for discussing the draft budget for 2024 and other matters important to the coalition parties.
Informal meetings are also used to coordinate positions between the prime minister and the president. Sometimes these meetings occur regularly, but most of the time they depend on the political situation and policy agenda. Approaching elections often affect the routines of such informal coordination, as political competition reduces the incentives for it.
The coalition government formed in 2020 relied mostly on informal coordination between the coalition partners until June 2023, when the three ruling parties decided to establish a Coalition Council. This council was subsequently used as a forum for discussing the draft budget for 2024 and other matters important to the coalition parties.
Informal meetings are also used to coordinate positions between the prime minister and the president. Sometimes these meetings occur regularly, but most of the time they depend on the political situation and policy agenda. Approaching elections often affect the routines of such informal coordination, as political competition reduces the incentives for it.
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.
National public-service standards at the subnational level are ensured through centralized or regional governance arrangements. For example, landfills are connected in a regional network of service providers. The decentralized provision of other public services at the local level has produced uneven quality in areas such as school education and the accessibility of primary healthcare services. The Public Management Improvement Program aims to define minimal quality standards for various public functions such as healthcare, education and social services. A recent report from the National Audit Office found that the central government still lacks reliable and comprehensive data on the provision of public services, which is necessary for the effective modernization and standardization of services. More specifically, the National Audit Office recommended improving the accessibility of personal healthcare services in Lithuania.
In March 2022, the government adopted the Public Administration Development Program 2022 – 2030. It acknowledged that the quality of public administration and public services was not systematically monitored and committed to improving it, along with the quality and accessibility of public services across the country. One of the government’s priorities for 2023 was to improve the quality of public services provided by municipalities and their infrastructure by implementing innovative technological solutions.
Citations:
Ministry of Interior of Lithuania. 2023. “The Public Administration Development Program of 2022-2030.” https://vrm.lrv.lt/lt/administracine-informacija/planavimo-dokumentai-2/pletros-programos/2022-2030-metu-viesojo-valdymo-pletros-programa/
In March 2022, the government adopted the Public Administration Development Program 2022 – 2030. It acknowledged that the quality of public administration and public services was not systematically monitored and committed to improving it, along with the quality and accessibility of public services across the country. One of the government’s priorities for 2023 was to improve the quality of public services provided by municipalities and their infrastructure by implementing innovative technological solutions.
Citations:
Ministry of Interior of Lithuania. 2023. “The Public Administration Development Program of 2022-2030.” https://vrm.lrv.lt/lt/administracine-informacija/planavimo-dokumentai-2/pletros-programos/2022-2030-metu-viesojo-valdymo-pletros-programa/
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.
According to the constitution and the Law on Self-Government, Lithuanian municipalities are responsible for a wide range of state-delegated and autonomous functions. The Law on Local Self-Government regulates and approves the list of municipal tasks. Autonomous functions regulated by the constitution and related legislation include municipal budget drafting; the management, use and disposal of land and other property; the organization of general education; public transportation; the provision of social services; social housing; territorial planning; and infrastructure. State-delegated tasks encompass various fields, from state land management to social protection and active labor market programs.
In general, national policymakers work effectively with regional and local governments to improve the delivery of public services. Municipalities use different channels to participate in higher-level decision-making processes through formal consultations and other procedures. In terms of formal representation structure, the Association of Local Authorities of Lithuania is the main actor in political deliberation and consultation processes such as governmental working groups, legislative amendment suggestions and processes of municipal interest representation. Representatives of the association have criticized the government for the lack of fiscal flexibility allowed to municipalities seeking to borrow capital to fund investments.
In March 2021, the prime minister and the president of the Association of Local Authorities of Lithuania signed an agreement to establish a permanent Bilateral Commission. This commission, chaired by the prime minister, will include representatives from the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Economy and Innovations and the Ministry of Interior, the president, and three representatives from the Association of Local Authorities. The commission aims to better coordinate decisions important to local governments, contribute to the economic and social development of regions, foster economic convergence, and reduce disparities in public services provided by different municipalities. The prime minister also has an adviser on local government and regional policy.
The National Regional Development Council is an advisory body established by the government and the Ministry of Interior. It includes representatives from other ministries and state institutions; heads of regional development councils; a representative of the Association of Local Authorities of Lithuania; and representatives of business associations, trade unions and NGOs. The council plans and coordinates the implementation of national regional policy and promotes social and economic development. According to the Ministry of Interior, the council met twice in 2022 – February and May – and once in 2023, in October.
Citations:
Jurga Bučaitė-Vilkė. 2015-2020. “Local Autonomy Index 2.0: Lithuania.” https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/information/publications/studies/2021/self-rule-index-for-local-authorities-in-the-eu-council-of-europe-and-oecd-countries-1990-2020
National Regional Development Council (in Lithuanian), https://vrm.lrv.lt/lt/veiklos-sritys/regionu-pletra/nacionaline-regionines-pletros-taryba/
In general, national policymakers work effectively with regional and local governments to improve the delivery of public services. Municipalities use different channels to participate in higher-level decision-making processes through formal consultations and other procedures. In terms of formal representation structure, the Association of Local Authorities of Lithuania is the main actor in political deliberation and consultation processes such as governmental working groups, legislative amendment suggestions and processes of municipal interest representation. Representatives of the association have criticized the government for the lack of fiscal flexibility allowed to municipalities seeking to borrow capital to fund investments.
In March 2021, the prime minister and the president of the Association of Local Authorities of Lithuania signed an agreement to establish a permanent Bilateral Commission. This commission, chaired by the prime minister, will include representatives from the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Economy and Innovations and the Ministry of Interior, the president, and three representatives from the Association of Local Authorities. The commission aims to better coordinate decisions important to local governments, contribute to the economic and social development of regions, foster economic convergence, and reduce disparities in public services provided by different municipalities. The prime minister also has an adviser on local government and regional policy.
The National Regional Development Council is an advisory body established by the government and the Ministry of Interior. It includes representatives from other ministries and state institutions; heads of regional development councils; a representative of the Association of Local Authorities of Lithuania; and representatives of business associations, trade unions and NGOs. The council plans and coordinates the implementation of national regional policy and promotes social and economic development. According to the Ministry of Interior, the council met twice in 2022 – February and May – and once in 2023, in October.
Citations:
Jurga Bučaitė-Vilkė. 2015-2020. “Local Autonomy Index 2.0: Lithuania.” https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/information/publications/studies/2021/self-rule-index-for-local-authorities-in-the-eu-council-of-europe-and-oecd-countries-1990-2020
National Regional Development Council (in Lithuanian), https://vrm.lrv.lt/lt/veiklos-sritys/regionu-pletra/nacionaline-regionines-pletros-taryba/