Lithuania

Lithuania falls into the sample’s top ranks (rank 4) with regard to vertical accountability.

Elections are free and fair. Political parties receive state funding if they secure at least 2% of votes. Non-party electoral committees can compete in municipal and European Parliament elections, with stricter registration and financial rules introduced in 2022. The Central Electoral Commission carries out elections impartially and without discrimination.

The mixed electoral system combines single-member constituencies and proportional representation. Low barriers to the establishment of political parties allow for a wide choice of political alternatives. In the 2023 municipal elections, 16 parties and 32 public electoral committees participated. Parties must win 5% of the vote to enter the parliament.

No party has secured a parliamentary majority since independence, thus leading to coalition governments typically dominated by centrist conservative or social-democratic parties. Cross-party agreements are possible especially on high-profile issues. Information access rules cover all levels of the executive, but exclude the legislative branch.

Lithuania falls into the upper-middle ranks (rank 9) with regard to diagonal accountability.

The media are free from government influence and censorship. Private-sector newspapers and broadcasters express a wide variety of views. The government generally respects media independence, despite some past attempts to restrict media freedom. However, ownership structures lack transparency, and levels of public trust in the media remain relatively low.

Political and civic groups can generally operate without interference. Since 2022, assemblies supporting Russian or Belarusian military aggression have been restricted.

The government consults with trade unions and business organizations through institutionalized channels such s the Tripartite Council, as well as on an ad hoc basis. Social welfare groups rarely participate actively in policy debates. Environmental organizations are increasingly visible at the policy level, and participated in the preparation of the country’s long-term strategy.

In the category of horizontal accountability, Lithuania falls into the upper-middle ranks (rank 11).

The National Audit Office is independent, monitoring compliance with EU fiscal norms and enhancing budget transparency. The State Data Protection Inspectorate is a government agency that oversees enforcement of legal protections for personal data, with considerable legal and policy independence.

The judiciary in Lithuania is independent, but delays in appointments can result due to disagreements between the president and the parliament. While political rights and civil liberties are generally respected, some human rights concerns such as poor prison conditions and discrimination against minorities are reported.

The country has a robust anticorruption framework against corruption. Nevertheless, several high-profile corruption cases have emerged in recent years, and observers say more awareness-raising is needed. The parliament has sufficient powers and resources to monitor the executive and help shape policy effectively.

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.

In the category of consensus-building, Lithuania falls into the sample’s upper-middle ranks (rank 10).

The government draws on internal and external institutions for scientific advice. The Research Council of Lithuania advises the government on research and higher-education policy, acting as a link between policymakers and the scientific community. However, scientific expertise is not systematically integrated into the legislative drafting process.

The government involves trade unions and business organizations in policy development through the Tripartite Council, as well as through ad hoc groups focused on specific issues. Receptivity to business or labor insights varies by government.

Social welfare groups have limited influence over policy. Environmental CSOs have become increasingly active in the policymaking process. The state’s open data policy has dramatically improved in recent years.

Lithuania falls into the sample’s middle ranks (rank 17) in the category of sensemaking.

The government has sought to strategic foresight, with the Government Strategic Analysis Center playing a key role. The Lithuania 2050 strategy is a key example of this effort.

Regulatory impact assessment are required, but quality is poor. Several governments have sought to improve the process, but the gap between formal requirements and actual process remains wide. Sustainability assessments are formally required, but in practice are typically absent.

Ex post assessments are also typically low quality, with only a few having been completed by the end of 2023. Policy measures that rely on EU funding are an exception.

Lithuania falls into the upper-middle ranks (rank 11) in the category of economic sustainability.

Despite government commits to a circular economy transition, progress remains slow. Critical infrastructure policies focus on protection rather than upgrades. Driven by the need to reduce reliance on Russia, progress toward renewable-energy goals has accelerated.

Labor market reforms have made hiring and firing more flexible, contributing to economic adaptability during crises like COVID-19. Active labor market policies are not a focus. The employment service provides training, but most individuals find jobs independently. Business associations criticize restrictive immigration policies, given the high demand for labor.

Lithuania relies heavily on indirect taxes, especially VAT. A flat income tax rate has been discarded in favor of progressive income tax brackets. Environmental taxes are not ambitious. While budget deficits are moderate, and overall debt is low by cross-EU standards, fiscal sustainability concerns are rising. Fintech sector regulation is highly developed.

In the category of social sustainability, Lithuania falls into the sample’s middle ranks (rank 17).

The country has a high level of tertiary education attainment, but vocational training enrollment rates are low. Students score below the OECD average in reading, math and science. Funding for education has been increased consistently in recent years.

The government has committed to reducing the at-risk-of-poverty rate, increasing social support payments and expanding the list of social services provided. Health outcomes in Lithuania are comparatively poor. While almost all citizens have healthcare coverage, satisfaction with healthcare availability is low, and out-of-pocket expenses are high.

Gender equality is a strong government focus. Family policy is fragmented, and dominated by financial support for families with children. Access to kindergartens and other childcare facilities remains insufficient. Pensions do not prevent senior-citizen poverty. Integration policy has been focused on Ukrainians in recent years, with few services for other immigrants.

Lithuania falls into the sample’s lower-middle ranks (rank 18) with regard to environmental sustainability.

The National Climate Change Management Agenda targets a 30% emissions reduction by 2030 compared to 1990 levels, and net zero emissions by 2050. However, implementation gaps persist, with concerns that fossil fuels facilities are still viewed as strategic. Protests from farmers could also slow progress.

Water supply and sewage infrastructures have improved thanks to the use of EU funds, but challenges remain, particularly in rural areas. Observers have recommended better coordination between national and local governments on environmental issues. The county performs well on measures of biodiversity protection, but ecosystem services and fisheries are weaknesses.

Global environmental protection policy is not seen as a top government priority. The country is particularly active at the regional level, especially addressing Baltic Sea issues.