Egypt has progressively strengthened its strategic, legal and institutional framework for public administration reform through its Public Administration Reform Plan (PARP) and the central role played by the Central Agency for Organization and Administration (CAOA). It has made strides in modernising its public administration, particularly in terms of public sector effectiveness, competencies and digitalisation. This chapter explores the evolutions and progress made in modernising the public administration in Egypt, looking at the achievements and remaining challenges when it comes to co‑ordinating and implementing public sector reform. It explores practices that could help Egypt further achieve its objectives in reforming public governance in support of Egypt Vision 2030 through a revised PARP and new co‑ordination and implementation mechanisms.
OECD Public Governance Reviews: Egypt
Abstract
Modernising the public administration to support Egypt’s long-term development
As highlighted in the United Nations’ 2030 Agenda, notably Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 16 on peace, justice and strong public institutions, a well-functioning public administration is central to pursuing a country’s national development through improved public policy and service design and delivery to all, especially in priority sectors as health, education, mobility and security (UN, 2015[1]). Public administration reform (PAR) is an important reform area in public governance as it constitutes the basis for a successful design and implementation of strategic frameworks, regulations, policies and public services that meet the needs of people in pursuit of the SDGs (OECD/SIGMA, 2017[2]).
Modernising the public administration can help adapt public services, policies and capacities to constantly changing societies as well as to the latest social, economic and technological developments (OECD, 2005[3]). Public administrations need to transform and innovate to embrace change while responding to citizens’ growing demands to enhance their well-being. Efficient, inclusive, open and citizen-oriented public administrations can best respond to citizens’ needs, expectations and concerns, including in addressing global challenges, ultimately increasing trust in public institutions (OECD, 2022[4]). It also requires fostering public participation in the design, implementation and monitoring of public services, policies and regulations for the benefit of citizens and society.
A modernised, fit-for-purpose public administration, including a well-trained and corruption-free civil service, can foster the development and pursuit of inclusive public policies and services.
More than half of OECD countries are currently pursuing ambitious PAR plans to modernise their public administration, most often aimed at making public policies and service delivery more efficient, transparent and citizen-oriented. Modernising public administration is also a key lever identified in long-term strategies to achieve development objectives in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region, for instance, in Morocco’s New Development Model (OECD, 2023[5]). The modernisation of public administration is intrinsically linked to the broad global context and the specific challenges and strategic reform objectives that this environment generates in each country.
Like most OECD member countries, Egypt has put in place an institutional and strategic framework to support PAR. It has established a governance structure supervised by the Higher Committee for Administrative Reform (HCAR), developed a strategic document to guide public administration reform efforts, namely the Public Administration Reform Plan (PARP) and tasked a dedicated institution – the Central Agency for Organization and Administration (CAOA) – to steer and implement the PARP. Public administration and the civil service are also governed by a fast-evolving legal framework composed of a large body of laws, decrees and regulations, including, for instance, the 2016 Civil Service Law and recent decrees in areas such as ministries’ organisational structures, digitalisation, performance budgeting or performance evaluation. Several initiatives to improve and digitalise public services and processes are being implemented, such as Digital Egypt and the creation of a digital service platform. Enhancing public governance and administration around the principles of the rule of law, justice, participation, accountability, transparency and anti-corruption is one of the key objectives to achieve Egypt Vision 2030 (MPED, 2023[6]).
These reform efforts led by CAOA have translated into achievements and new developments in the public administration system in Egypt over the past years. Further modernisation efforts of the public administration are in line with the government policy to adapt to new global trends and context and aim to contribute to achieving the country’s ambitious goals enshrined in Egypt Vision 2030. These efforts include updating the public administration framework, increasing the effectiveness, integrity and citizen-centricity of public administration and enhancing the quality, reach and accessibility of public services to respond more effectively to the expectations of citizens and improve their well-being.
Overview of the achievements and challenges of the public administration in Egypt
Egypt has made progress in reforming and modernising its public administration under CAOA’s impulse and through different priority initiatives regarding the effectiveness of public institutions, digitalisation, civil service and public services, which are all key themes for public sector transformation. This progress has been measured through improvements in international indices and indicators of public governance. More reform efforts are intended to fulfil Egypt’s ambitious PAR agenda to achieve the country’s long-term goals highlighted in Egypt Vision 2030.
The effectiveness of the public administration has recorded progress over recent years, but there is scope to scale the impact of ongoing reforms
Enhancing the effectiveness of the public administration is a key objective in Egypt, considering the size and importance of the public sector in the economy and employment. Thanks to a number of key reforms and measures, the country has recorded progress in recent years, with Egypt’s government effectiveness score increasing from 20 in 2016 to 33.96 in 2022 in the latest edition of the World Bank Worldwide Governance Indicators (World Bank, 2023[7]). Egypt has, in particular, improved on five dimensions out of six in the index: voice and accountability; political stability and absence of violence; regulatory quality; rule of law; and control of corruption (NIGSD, 2023[8]). Egypt still fares lower than the MENA average, which stands at 42.35 (World Bank, 2021[9]), underlining the need to modify some public administration features to further deliver progress as regards its effectiveness and delivery and in order to reach the objective of 45 outlined in the revised Egypt Vision 2030.
As a core element of public sector effectiveness, the relatively large size of the public sector in Egypt renders imperative its improvement to deliver quality and cost-effective public policies and services and enhance fiscal sustainability. As in a number of MENA countries, the public sector in Egypt is one of the largest employers in the nation, with public jobs representing an estimated 22% of total employment in 2019, compared to 18.6% on average in OECD countries in 2021 (World Bank, 2016[10]; OECD, 2023[11]). Streamlining the civil service has been recognised as a key reform priority by successive governments (see further details in Chapter 4). Efforts to limit and cap the number of employees in the public sector led to a significant decline in the share of compensation of employees as a proportion of total government spending from 27.1% in 2015 to 19.8% in 2022, slightly below the OECD average (20.1%) (OECD, 2024[12]). While the government raised the minimum wage and created additional bonuses for the civil service through several packages in 2022 and 2023 to mitigate these effects, financial conditions have tightened in Egypt and increased the need to improve the effectiveness and streamline the public administration (OECD, 2024[12]).
Egypt has engaged in efforts to enhance citizen-oriented public service delivery
Enhancing public service delivery remains a key area for future reform, as acknowledged in the PARP. This is particularly important as satisfaction with key public services remains below that of OECD member countries and some MENA countries. While Egypt has no comprehensive government data on public service satisfaction, independent local sources point out satisfaction rates of 61% in education and 57% in health in 2019 (Baseera, 2019[13]). These results remain below OECD member countries in the same years, with 71% of citizens satisfied with health services and 67% with the education sector (OECD, 2021[14]).
Egypt’s strategic priorities, in particular those enshrined in the PARP, also underline the need for improvements in the quality of public services and to track progress made over recent years. The GovTech Maturity Index also shows that Egypt’s performance on the Public Service Delivery Index has significantly progressed over recent years, which can be linked to the implementation and development of the Digital Egypt portal (NIGSD, 2023[8]). While the Egyptian public administration has developed some feedback mechanisms for administrative and public services, it is developing surveys and other means to collect data and information on public services that could better inform service design and delivery and assess the levels of satisfaction on a regular basis. These data should constitute a baseline, allowing for comparisons and measuring progress over time.
Egypt has digitalised a number of public services and has launched government portal Digital Egypt for online procedures and services (Government of Egypt, n.d.[15]). Egypt recorded significant improvements in the United Nations E-Government Development Index (EDGI) in 2022 compared to the previous 2020 edition. The country ranks high in the Online Service Index, the Human Capital Index and the Telecommunications Infrastructure Index but lags in the E-Participation Index and its different components (e-information, e-consultation, e-decision-making) (UN, 2022[16]). Egypt ranks 103rd in EDGI in 2022 and could further embrace the digital transformation of the public sector (UN, 2022[16]). The digital transformation objective is also identified in Egypt Vision 2030 as a means to improve the functioning of the government, the delivery and inclusiveness of public services and the transparency of public administration, ultimately aiming to increase citizens’ trust in the government (MPED, 2023[6]). The digital divide is still prevalent in Egypt, as acknowledged by Egypt Vision 2030 (MPED, 2023[6]). Egypt has been recognised as a top improver in Roland Berger’s Digital Inclusion Index but is ranked 50th out of 82 countries assessed in 2020 (Roland Berger, 2021[17]).
Public participation and the involvement of citizens in the design and implementation of public policies and services are key drivers to enhance trust in the performance of government. The further strengthening of the engagement of citizens with the public administration has been recognised as a pillar of the PARP. The public administration has been making efforts to engage citizens further and collect their feedback, for instance on public services. More progress can be made as Egypt still scores lower (8.21) than the MENA average (23.74) and the OECD average on voice and accountability (86.21) in the Worldwide Governance Indicators (World Bank, 2021[9]).
In light of the above, significant efforts, including the development of the PARP, the implementation of the new Civil Service Law and the move to the New Capital, are being undertaken to modernise and enhance the effectiveness of the public administration, streamline hiring processes and combat nepotism, including by introducing a fair, merit-based and standardised competition process for candidates. Training programmes, including those in the context of the move to the New Capital, have also been delivered by CAOA over the past years to increase the competencies of the public sector.
The updated Egypt Vision 2030 highlights the need to enhance governance and modernise the public administration as a priority to support the country’s long-term development. In fact, “Enhanced governance and partnerships” stands as the sixth objective of Egypt Vision 2030, framed by principles of a citizen-centred, transparent, accountable and corruption-free public administration (MPED, 2023[6]). This reinforces and updates the priorities identified in the PARP. Modernising and improving the effectiveness of the public administration and adopting more comprehensive whole-of-government approaches and co‑ordination are key aims of the Egyptian PAR efforts, which CAOA leads.
CAOA, the key institution in charge of PAR
CAOA is the leading agency in charge of PAR and human resources management
Created in 1964, replacing the Bureau of Personnel, CAOA is the custodian of the public administration reform agenda in Egypt. While CAOA is an institution with a long-standing mandate for civil service management, its portfolio expanded when assigned PAR in 2018 following the restructuring of the MoPMAR (the former Ministry of Planning and Administrative Reform, now the Ministry of Planning, Economic Development and International Cooperation, MPEDIC). In line with Law No. 6 of 2021, CAOA is mandated to “enhance the efficiency of the state’s administrative body and promoting its human resources (HR) to enable the governmental sector to provide high quality public services”. In particular, the law emphasises the agency’s role in the administrative reform process by proposing draft laws for administrative reform, approval of regulations, reforming the job grade system and employment in the country, providing a degree of flexibility for employment in the administrative body of the state and regulating the administrative body in charge of training plans, inspection and judicial control. CAOA is also tasked with preparing the PAR plans and co‑ordinating and establishing mechanisms to implement them, increasing the capabilities and efficiency of the public administration, including through training, and improving the quality of public services.
The 2016 Civil Service Law (No. 81) underpins Egypt’s institutional framework for public administration reform. It regulates appointments and promotions within the civil service, establishes wage scales and provides means for capacity building and the development of higher public service standards. The law requires governmental entities to create a HR plan to govern the hiring of new employees. It also establishes a Civil Service Council to manage Egypt’s public workforce. Besides representatives of the government, the head of the Egyptian Trade Union Federation and four independent non-governmental experts are members of the Council. The Civil Service Law is a key tool underpinning the government’s efforts to make public service merit-based, cost-effective and responsive. In short, it modernises the methods and techniques of the civil service.
To deliver on its ambitious agenda, CAOA’s current work plan identifies three work areas:
Updating the PARP and other key organisational and legal documents.
Public employment and civil service reform.
The move to the New Capital as one of the means to upgrade and modernise the civil service performance.
Indeed, CAOA has been at the forefront of ambitious PAR efforts in Egypt. In doing so, it has spearheaded reforms in this regard under the PARP by leading its implementation across sectors and levels of government. Following the adoption of the 2014 PARP, regulatory and institutional reforms have been the focus of PAR efforts to set the basic structures and mechanisms to ensure the success of subsequent implementation efforts. Indeed, the Government of Egypt has achieved key progress to date with the adoption of the Civil Service Law.
CAOA has achieved key progress in operationalising the Civil Service Law and gradually consolidating formal organisational structures across public entities in Egypt to ensure a fit-for-purpose civil service. It is the leading entity responsible for public employment by issuing job classifications, supporting the amendment of the organisational charts of new institutions, supervising HR management policies and supporting HR planning and execution (see Chapter 4 for further information). The agency also manages the overall recruitment process of civil servants through a job portal administered by CAOA, which then manages the selection process. It has developed a competency framework to further professionalise these efforts to assess employee capacities through the Capability Assessment and Competition Centre. This has been recognised as a best practice of meritocratic civil service in the 2020 African Peer Review Mechanism report on Egypt (APRM, 2020[18]).
CAOA also plays a key role in capacity building and training, which is widely and positively recognised by line ministries (see Chapter 4 for further information). It assesses, identifies and monitors training needs and refers staff to various training programmes both inhouse and externally. It offers inhouse training in its Leadership Training Centre and its Centre for Capability Assessment and Competition. CAOA is the leading agency mandated to train civil service employees. It also approves the civil servant training programmes of other institutions providing training in specific areas.
In view of its role, CAOA collects and disseminates data and information about civil service employees, ministerial assistants and senior assistants, and the implementation of prime minister’s decrees related to the civil service, such as the establishment of specific units planned by the PARP in each government entity. CAOA prepares, delivers and publishes reports and data for the Prime Minister’s Office, government, parliament and general public. To support its activities, the agency has launched a number of applications for a more accessible and faster delivery of its services. This includes a national database of civil servants that has been recently updated, which resulted in the collection of more than 3.5 million records and profiles. CAOA is aiming to establish an integrated digital system to collect, analyse and disseminate data related to public employment, particularly considering that HR databases are not connected across government entities.
While CAOA has undertaken regulatory and organisational reforms to advance PAR efforts, current internal arrangements governing the implementation of the PARP could benefit from being further institutionalised. CAOA is headed by a President and organised into 2 sectors, 21 central departments and 90 general departments respectively (Figure 3.1). It reports regularly to the Prime Minister, and co‑ordinates and supports decision-making on key aspects of the public administration.
CAOA has consolidated a robust structure to deliver on this mandate, as the relevant departments are in charge of advancing the PAR agenda in their areas of expertise. Findings from OECD interviews revealed that a dedicated unit or team following the implementation of the PARP is needed. Therefore, CAOA could leverage its positioning within the administration to establish a unit or dedicated task force for leading, co‑ordinating and ensuring the implementation of the PARP within CAOA and with relevant line ministries. This structure would enable CAOA to further consolidate several implementation mechanisms of the NAR, such as the implementation plan, monitoring and evaluation tools, awareness raising, heightened capacity building and feeding the HCAR with data such as audits and client satisfaction reports to ensure evidence-based decision-making.
Source: Organisational chart provided by CAOA as part of the project.
A number of OECD member countries have dedicated departments or units in charge of those tasks to clarify roles and responsibilities and ensure a whole-of-government implementation of priority reforms. For instance, the Government of France established the Inter-ministerial Directorate for Public Transformation (DITP) for such a purpose (Box 3.1).
France’s DITP is responsible for accelerating public transformation and reform in the country, including co‑ordinating and implementing the public transformation programme defined by the Inter-ministerial Committee for Public Transformation. The DITP acts as the committee’s secretariat and is located under the Ministry of Public Transformation and Service.
The DITP also monitors the implementation of the French government’s priority reforms in liaison with line ministries and departmental prefectures. In particular, the DITP is leading the implementation of the Public Services+ programme that aims to improve and modernise public service delivery in France. In addition to its steering and monitoring roles, the DITP also supports the implementation of key administrative reforms by line ministries and agencies through consulting, training and innovation support.
Source: French Ministry of Transformation and Public Service (n.d.[19]), Direction interministérielle de la transformation publique (DITP), https://www.modernisation.gouv.fr/.
A Higher Committee for Administrative Reform is charged with steering and advancing PAR
Egypt established the HCAR to steer and co‑ordinate the PAR agenda under the PARP across sectors and levels of government. The Committee was set up at the highest level by Prime Minister’s Decree No. 1321 of 2017 and is led by the Prime Minister (MoPMAR, 2017[20]). The HCAR is considered a decision-making body, as all of its recommendations are presented in the form of PM decrees.
The mandate of the HCAR includes four main activities:
Approving the governmental programme in the field of administrative reform, developing public state institutions and raising the efficiency of the administrative system.
Establishing mechanisms for implementing the PARP, determining timelines, following up and supporting the stages of implementation.
Setting up a programme for improving public services on the central and local levels.
Endorsing training programmes for the state’s administrative leaders and other high-level executives, and developing HR.
The HCAR holds regular meetings and includes relevant actors involved in PAR efforts. It includes the MPEDIC, the Ministry of Finance (MoF), the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology (MCIT), the Ministry of Local Development and CAOA represented by its president. Additional members are four non-governmental experts in the area of work. Recent meetings of the Committee have focused on the move to new capital and support to civil servants and social distancing in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.
In light of the objective of updating the PARP, the HCAR could be a valuable platform through which CAOA engages with relevant government interlocutors to identify and align high-level priorities for the updating of the PAR. This would be all the more important, as the PARP covers a wide range of sectors and policies that require whole-of-government co‑ordination to succeed, including key government strategic frameworks such as Egypt Vision 2030 and the annual Government Programme. Enhancing the flow of information towards the technical subsidiary committee would also contribute towards more action and better knowledge sharing and would diminish isolated interventions while ensuring the necessary organisational attention for the PARP. Indeed, it would enhance CAOA’s leadership role in the implementation of the PARP and ensure greater co‑ordination with other key institutions.
Indeed, there is room to strengthen the role of the HCAR and its subsidiary committee to develop a more systematic framework for horizontal co‑ordination in the updating and implementation of the PARP. The subsidiary committee is comprised of experts at the technical level representing different policy sectors within the administration. This committee is more technical and follows efforts more closely under the different pillars and measures of the PARP. A number of informal working groups also meet to discuss and address different themes related to PAR under the leadership of CAOA or other line ministries (i.e. the MCIT with digital transformation efforts). CAOA also has direct interactions with government entities on public administration matters and can report issues and items to the HCAR. While this system is thorough, since discussions involve subject matter experts in specific policy issues, this could be further organised to report on and link sector-specific efforts with overall PARP implementation.
A number of other public institutions are involved in PAR initiatives with different roles and responsibilities
As in many OECD member countries, the implementation of the PAR agenda involves a large number of ministries and public entities, as well as other external stakeholders. This is no different in Egypt, where the public administration is one of the largest in the world, with several ministries involved in efforts to further professionalise the civil service, strengthen existing regulatory and institutional frameworks, provide better quality services and usher in the digital transformation of the public sector. While this system is thorough, findings from OECD interviews reveal that the present complex interplay of actors, processes and reporting lines can result in large amounts of information that are difficult to centralise, leading to unclear roles/responsibilities and potential duplication. Therefore, strengthening co‑ordination mechanisms among relevant actors involved in PAR efforts will be of utmost importance for CAOA to ensure their success.
Through its role in steering Egypt Vision 2030, the MPEDIC has an important role, as the vision represents an umbrella framework that sets common objectives as well as measures to modernise the public administration for the attainment of greater socio-economic development. Notably, it identifies relevant commitments under SDG 16 on peace, justice and strong public institutions relevant to the work led by CAOA under the PARP. This underlines the importance of aligning commitments between Egypt Vision 2030 and the PARP. At present, OECD evidence revealed that interactions between both institutions could be further strengthened, as these take place during bilateral ad hoc meetings and as part of different high-level committees, including the HCAR and the Committee for the Move to the New Capital.
The MCIT is another relevant entity involved in PAR efforts, given its mandate to lead the digital transformation of Egypt under the Digital Egypt Strategy (MCIT, n.d.[21]). The ministry has been a key partner of CAOA in digitalising key public services, consolidating digital infrastructure in the public sector and developing the Digital Egypt platform. The digitalisation of public services is an important aspect of the PARP that will require close co‑ordination with CAOA moving forward to advance the implementation of the PARP and consolidate the entity’s efforts to establish a Public Service Observatory.
While CAOA is leading training activities for civil servants, a number of other public institutions are also developing and supporting training activities on specific matters, including but not limited to the National Training Academy, the National Anti-Corruption Academy, the National Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development (NIGSD) and public universities. Together, these actors contribute to CAOA’s efforts to professionalise the civil service to meet the most pressing challenges currently facing the administration (see Chapter 4 for further details).
Egypt has defined and is implementing a PARP to modernise the public administration
The plan was defined in 2014 around a number of crucial strategic objectives and further revised
Egypt has a long history of implementing PARs to improve policy and service design and delivery, and address long-standing public administration issues. The latest effort is the 2014 PARP, developed and launched after a consultative exercise led by the then-Ministry of Administration Development. In 2014, a committee of experts identified the challenges facing the Egyptian public administration and drafted the vision of the plan and its pillars. To do so, several sub-committees were formed to discuss each pillar with representatives of ministries, the private sector, trade unions, university students and the media. This process led to the articulation of the first version of the PARP. The PARP has been progressively updated to record progress made since 2014 and the HCAR was formed to supervise and support the implementation of the PARP (see Chapter 2 for further information). These efforts align with good practices across OECD member and partner countries, with the regular revision and update of strategic reform plans – for example, against changes in the country and the broader global landscape - to ensure its relevance.
The PARP takes the form of a short, high-level strategic document underlining a vision and identifying objectives, guiding principles and high-level actions for modernising the public administration. The PARP articulates a vision of “an efficient, effective, competent, transparent, fair and responsive governmental administrative body that provides high-quality services, maintains accountability, increases citizens’ satisfaction, and contributes significantly to the realization of the national development goals and improvement of the country status” (MoPMAR, 2017[20]). The reform plan was explicitly developed to increase the effectiveness of the public administration in Egypt and address a number of challenges listed in the document, including the complex organisational structure of the public administration, inflated employment and high wage costs, the large number of regulations and their contradictions/overlaps, the need to improve the state asset management system, enhancing transparency and accountability, the high level of centralisation and the high cost of corruption.
To address these challenges, the PARP was built around five pillars, each containing a number of desired results, objectives and actions (Table 3.1):
1. Increasing the effectiveness of the public administration through institutional reforms, including restructuring and reorganising government agencies and ministries through the creation of new units.
2. Developing public administration and civil servant’s capabilities to increase civil service performance and develop their competencies.
3. Strengthening the legal framework for civil service reform and management through legislative reforms to develop a conducive and well-defined legal framework for the public administration that would increase its agility and support the leadership’s capacity to manage and deliver.
4. Improving and digitalising government services to serve citizens better, enhance the interactions between citizens and public administration, and enhance the digitalisation and functioning of public administration.
5. Improving the governance and legal framework for information and information technology (IT) systems in order to better develop, manage and connect databases across the public administration.
Source: MoPMAR (2017[20]), National Public Administration Reform Plan (PARP), Revised Version, Ministry of Planning, Monitoring and Administrative Reform.
The structure of the PARP has evolved since 2014. The latest revision takes stock of progress made since 2014, identifies challenges to overcome and sets priorities moving forward in terms of activities and actions expected under each pillar. It also provides quantitative evidence on certain public services and issues, such as death and birth certificates. While the PARP underwent a thorough review process, this strategic framework remains high-level in nature and there is a need to ensure its operationalisation with concrete targets, performance indicators, actions and expected impact.
While the development of this strategic framework to spearhead the reform of the public administration represents a key milestone, opportunities remain to translate its commitments into further action. Indeed, PAR is not always a linear journey, as it is a gradual process that introduces profound transformations to public institutions’ structures, working methods and processes. CAOA has made important progress in setting the main strategic directive of the reform through the PARP and would further benefit from ensuring the operationalisation of these strategic goals towards an evidence-based transformation strategy of the public administration. First, the PARP lists a series of issues that the strategy aims to address that could benefit from a full diagnosis and analysis based on data and evidence. The PARP identifies a series of results to be achieved and include concrete quantitative or qualitative targets to measure progress and success, such as the number of units to be created in line ministries and their expected outcomes, the number of employees to be trained and the expected level of competencies for them to acquire, or the expected progress in the delivery of public services and in citizen satisfaction. The link between the results and actions to attain them would benefit from further clarification on how one would lead to the other, who should undertake such efforts and in what time frame.
The need for a comprehensive approach to several themes included in the strategy is one key issue of the document. Some pillars include a series of detailed, technical actions but need to provide a clear path on how these actions can contribute to the greater objective of each pillar. Pillar 1 envisages a restructuring of the public administration but the goals and content of each objective and action could be further clarified and specify how they will contribute to reaching the overall result of enhancing the efficiency of the administration. This includes bringing indicators linked to public sector effectiveness. Other examples include Pillar 5, which focuses on databases rather than setting goals and targets for digital government transformation, including governance, resources, processes and platforms, user experience and key issues such as the digital divide. These challenges underline the importance of aligning the strategic objectives of the PARP with the relevant frameworks across ministries (Egypt Vision 2030, Digital Egypt, etc) and with the government programme.
The PARP focuses on providing the main thematic directives (the “what”) but, to a lesser extent, information on how to operationalise these commitments (the “how”). PAR strategies across OECD countries are often presented in the form of a comprehensive strategic document that, in addition to the “why” and the “what” of the reform, include relatively detailed annual and medium-term action plans on the “how” of implementing the strategy. These plans often include elements such as planning horizons, annual and multi-year planning with performance goals, targets and indicators and resource allocations. While the PARP establishes a clear vision through its pillars, CAOA could leverage the forthcoming PARP updating process to further align its approach with similar plans developed in OECD member countries to provide more robust, evidence-based analysis, detailed objectives and measurable targets. As an additional good practice in OECD countries, the PARP could be made available online to enhance communication and information sharing with other public entities and citizens.
For example, the Italian government’s digitally interactive Riforma della Pubblica Amministrazione is available on a webpage (Italiadomani, 2021[22]). The Czech Citizen-Oriented Public Administration Reform strategy 2030 establishes a vision and key strategic objectives but also includes analyses supporting those elements, as well as detailed actions, timelines and measures of success (Czech Ministry of the Interior, 2020[23]) (Box 3.2).
The Czech Republic has a well-established tradition and methods for designing whole-of-government PAR plans. The PAR strategy Client-oriented Public Administration 2030 (KOVES) is managed by the Ministry of the Interior and follows the Strategic Framework for the Development of Public Administration 2014-2020.
The overarching vision of the strategy is to support a citizen-oriented public administration to increase its citizens’ quality of life. Achieving the vision is conditional on the fulfilment of five strategic objectives:
1. Focusing on increasing the quality and availability of services.
2. Establishing an efficient public administration.
3. Improving the functioning of the public administration system and individual institutions.
4. Increasing the competency of HR.
5. Improving information and facilitating citizen participation.
Action plans determine the specific implementation method, the first two of which will be for three years. The first action plan covers the period 2021-23 and includes goals that reflect the strategic objectives of the strategy and specific activities to reach them with indicators and leading agencies. The document has not been revised in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Source: Czech Ministry of the Interior (2020[23]), Client-oriented Public Administration 2030, https://www.mvcr.cz/soubor/client-oriented-public-administration-2030.aspx.
In this regard, OECD/SIGMA provides a toolkit that offers concrete guidance and steps for countries to design their national PAR. This toolkit could support CAOA as it undertakes its most recent update of the PARP (Box 3.3). The preparations of the new PARP will be supported by the United States Agency for International Development moving forward.
Alongside this update process, CAOA could consider preparing an action plan to formalise and set up the required co‑ordination mechanisms within the institution and across the administration. In this regard, CAOA could establish an internal task force composed of representatives from the main thematic areas of the PARP’s pillars. This task force could draft the main elements for the updated PARP (vision, objectives, priorities, roles, timeline, key performance indicators), co‑ordinate the update process of each of the five pillars in the PARP – internally within CAOA and externally with other government actors –, compile the necessary data, documents and information, and implement and ensure the delivery of commitment results in each of the thematic pillars of the PARP.
Importantly, this task force would need to be supported by an inter-ministerial working group that would co‑ordinate, share and revise the elements and the overall vision and objectives with other line ministries and provide input to be involved in the implementation. Inter-ministerial sub-working groups on the new pillars envisaged in the PARP could also ensure better assessment and preparation of new activities and alignment with existing strategies, such as the Digital Egypt Strategy. The preparation of a new PARP should include an evaluation of the implementation of the existing one in terms of activities and results, identifying gaps and achievements. This would help prioritise future objectives and activities as part of the PAR and build key performance indicators to track their progress. The draft revised plan should then be officially submitted for consultation with line ministries and presented for discussion and approval to the political level committee (the HCAR in the case of Egypt). Once the strategy is approved, an action plan to implement the revised PARP could be designed to reach the objectives and targets set in the new PARP and be shared and agreed upon with relevant ministries and agencies.
The toolkit developed as part of the OECD/SIGMA programme provides concrete guidance and steps for countries to design their national PAR. It goes through the entire cycle of the preparations of a reform, from problem analysis and identification of priorities to objectives setting, indicator development, action plan preparation, and the costing, monitoring and evaluation of the plan.
The toolkit provides guidance on key steps in the preparations and revisions of reform strategies, which are estimated to take a minimum of 12 months. This includes the analysis and prioritisations of issues using a prioritisation tool developed by SIGMA that encompasses the steps set out in Table 3.2.
Source: Adapted from Vági, P. and E. Rimkute (2018[24]), “Toolkit for the preparation, implementation, monitoring, reporting and evaluation of public administration reform and sector strategies: Guidance for SIGMA partners”, https://doi.org/10.1787/37e212e6-en.
The link with Egypt Vision 2030 could be further enhanced and built on in the upcoming updating process of the PARP
Both the original and revised versions of Egypt Vision 2030 (see Chapter 2) place public governance high on Egypt’s reform agenda. Through its sixth objective, together with its principles and enablers, Egypt Vision 2030 highlights the importance of grounding PAR efforts to promote a more citizen-centred administration, public participation, better public services, transparency and civil service, as well as digitalisation built on strong regulatory and institutional frameworks (MPED, 2023[6]).
“The objective “enhanced governance and partnerships” embodies the comprehensive plan for institutional development under the rule of law. It ensures the participation of all parties in the decision-making process at both the national and local levels, within a legislative and institutional framework that fosters transparency and accountability, thereby combating corruption and improving citizen services. This entails enhancing human capabilities and promoting a shift in societal culture and administrative behaviour. Furthermore, these objective endeavours to uphold overall security and stability while strengthening partnerships between Egypt and various countries, as well as relevant international and regional organisations, donors, and development partners.”
The 2016 version of Egypt Vision 2030 also identified six guiding principles for PAR alongside the pillars of the PARP:
1. Apply the concept of inviolability.
2. Follow a comprehensive approach as well as gradual and sustainable reform processes.
3. Adopt elements of proficiency and competency in employment, promotion and wages.
4. Adopt standards of quality and excellence in the provision of public services.
5. Expand the usage of technology in public administration.
6. Hold partnerships with civil and private sectors.
Together, these principles aim to underpin a coherent approach under which PAR must be undertaken to achieve policy results for SDG 16. These directives also underline the need to adopt a comprehensive and whole-of-government approach that can introduce gradual and sustainable PAR in Egypt. In particular, it highlights areas of priority that could benefit ongoing efforts on proficiency and competency in employment (i.e. promotion and wages, standards of quality of public services), expanding the usage of technology in government and establishing partnerships with civil society and the private sector.
The PARP establishes a link with the original version of the Egypt Vision 2030 document referring to its vision of an efficient and effective government administrative body, particularly connecting PAR and the country’s long-term development. While Egypt Vision 2030 is referenced under the PARP, further efforts are needed to align and operationalise commitments between both strategic frameworks. In fact, findings from OECD interviews revealed that the link between both frameworks’ objectives and activities needs to be clearer, particularly in public administrative reform (see Chapter 2). Strengthening this link would call for reflecting the key actions included in Egypt Vision 2030 in the PARP and adapting the strategic objectives of the PARP to the vision of public administration set out in Egypt Vision 2030. It would also require that new key performance indicators (KPIs) developed for the PARP feed or mirror those of Egypt Vision 2030 to track the progress towards reaching its objective on public governance.
In this context, strengthening the strategic and operational alignment between PARP and Egypt Vision 2030 will be crucial to ensure that PAR efforts support greater socio-economic development in Egypt. The current process of updating the PARP could provide an opportunity to strengthen these links by further aligning and developing objectives, activities and targets based on the new version of Egypt Vision 2030. For instance, this alignment would allow for improving public services through enhanced public participation to increase well-being and reduce inequalities, two key objectives stated in Egypt Vision 2030 (Objective 1: “Improve Egyptians’ quality of life and raise their living standards” (objective 1) and Objective 2: “achieve social justice and equality”) (MPED, 2023[6]). As discussed in the previous section, the HCAR is a key platform at the ministerial level that could be further built on to support PAR alignment and implementation in Egypt.
Enhancing such coherence in the implementation of these policy frameworks should be based on active and constant collaboration between CAOA and MPEDIC (and all public entities) to support continuous alignment and progress throughout their implementation. Co‑ordination between CAOA and MPEDIC could be further strengthened in a more institutional manner to translate the SDG indicators into the national context with CAOA’s technical expertise on administrative reform and ensure constant reporting and discussions on progress to reach those objectives.
In its new version, Egypt Vision 2030 lists a number of ways to achieve its sixth objective on governance, in particular within the first sub-goal on implementing administrative reform (MPED, 2023[6]). While a number of these actions echo those already included in the PARP, several of them include a more in-depth and ambitious accounting of digitalisation, citizens’ participation, monitoring Egypt’s performance in international governance and more broadly in the area of citizen-centred administration. This could be a relevant starting point for CAOA in its process to update the PARP and reflect the priorities of the Government of Egypt to ensure a whole-of-government implementation of the PAR. While significant achievements have been made to pursue these objectives, further progress could be made to demonstrate the impact and measure the progress of both strategic frameworks.
An additional reform area that will be paramount to inform the PARP updating process will be that of digital transformation led by the MCIT, in particular aligning commitments with those on Digital Egypt for pillars on improving service delivery, staff training and digital databases. Reforms on the digitalisation pillar have been driven by the MCIT and close co‑ordination is important to ensure that the implementation of Digital Egypt is consistent with the PARP as well as Egypt Vision 2030This might require the development of a formal mechanism between these entities, such as a dedicated working group that would include the MCIT, MPEDIC and CAOA, and the alignment of measures and indicators in the different implementation plans.
The PARP has been progressively and partly implemented since 2014 along its different strategic pillars
Since 2014, progress has been made across the different areas of the PARP and a number of significant actions have been taken to achieve its ambitious objectives. Some of these achievements include the creation of governance and internal audit units, new legislation on civil service, the development of new training curricula for civil servants and the issuance of the National Anti‑Corruption Strategy and of a code of conduct for the public sector. A dedicated budget as part of the national budget is allocated to the PARP to support the delivery of the plan. Progress has been achieved and there is a need to further implement the commitments within the PARP, particularly those not directly under the sole purview of CAOA (i.e. digital transformation, public service delivery, database consolidation, etc). This can be explained in part by the decentralised implementation model of the PARP within CAOA that assigns responsibilities to its various technical units rather than establishing a dedicated unit to steer, track and monitor progress in this regard.
Institutional reform has been a particular focus area where key milestones achieved provide a solid foundation for the subsequent rollout of PAR efforts. Indeed, institutional reform foreseen under Pillar 1 has been pursued through the restructuring of the central government, namely ministries and agencies, and by the creation of new units within ministries (MoPMAR, 2017[20]) (Box 3.4). Aligning structures within government entities has, on the one hand, enhanced capabilities to deliver results for citizens while, on the other, allowed CAOA to gradually combat past fragmented and one‑off measures undertaken for PAR.
Pillar 1 of the PARP on institutional reforms included activities that all aim to increase public sector effectiveness through raising the efficiency of the State’s administrative organisation, restructuring the ministries, introducing new organisational units and applying supporting reform procedures.
Regarding the revision of the organisational structures of public entities in Egypt, new organisation charts for ministries were designed around different functions and job groups (Minister’s office, technical and administrative). CAOA leads the process of analysis, discussions and approval of the new structure’s final draft. It bases its evaluation of the organisational structure on official mandates, institutional relationships with other entities, the number and workload of employees and a number of other data provided by the entity. It also discusses the final analysis with the entity concerned. CAOA follows five principles in its approach: no harm to any employee, clarity of perimeter and hierarchy, law enforcement, co‑ordination and co‑operation, and capacity building.
The establishment of units involved the creation of new ministerial units on internal audit and good governance, strategic management and policies, evaluation and monitoring, HR, legislative support and information systems, and digital transformation. CAOA was mandated to issue the regulations that govern these units, including their functions and sub-divisions. It also provided advice on drafting laws and decrees on the establishment of new organisational units and jointly developed the organisational chart of a new governmental body with the related organisation. The establishment of HR units has helped build the conditions for the modernisation of HR policies and management.
CAOA has helped establish a strategic management unit in each ministry responsible for strategic planning and for reviewing and updating the SDGs in connection with Egypt Vision 2030, with sub‑departments for strategic planning and policies, monitoring and evaluation, project management and crisis management, and risk mitigation. The aim is to ensure the link between SDGs and the strategic plan of each ministry.
These measures have led to the creation of several units and restructuring activities in the Egyptian administration on functions essential for good governance. CAOA has listed and mapped the units established in the various ministries and entities. There is a need to assess the overall impact of these measures on the good governance and effectiveness of public administration. CAOA and the relevant ministries concerned with each unit could further work together to assess their achievements and provide additional support as needed (regulations, training, tools and guidance manuals). In particular, for strategic management units, CAOA and MPEDIC, with the support of the NIGSD, could consider assessing the achievements of these units, developing co‑ordination mechanisms and providing further support (see Chapter 2).
Enhancing learning and development systems within the civil service has also been a priority in recent years to catalyse PAR efforts under the PARP (see Chapter 4 for further details). Notably, in Pillar 2 related to building capacity in the civil service, key developments include the delivery of training, the launch of a training platform for civil servants and the establishment of a database on training providers (MoPMAR, 2017[20]).These achievements were reported in the PARP and emphasised the number of training sessions organised in partnerships with universities and international organisations.
CAOA has also focused on the design and delivery of training for civil servants based on its competency framework and needs for the move to the New Capital (see Chapter 4 for further information). In addition to upskilling the Egyptian public workforce, onboarding training has also been delivered along with training for civil servants who are about to retire. The present training framework aims to promote a more inclusive civil service by offering opportunities for learning and development across the different stages of the professional career of a civil servant. This topic will be further analysed in Chapter 4.
Establishing a robust legal framework has moreover contributed to an enabling environment that allows for PAR efforts to flourish gradually. As part of Pillar 3 of the PARP, the new Civil Service Law was adopted in 2016, along with several decrees to ensure more discipline, flexibility and accountability in public administration. These regulatory frameworks include, for example, Prime Minister’s Decree No. 612 of 2017 related to ministerial assistants and deputies and Prime Minister’s Decree No. 1146 of 2018 on new units in the public administration (MoPMAR, 2017[20]). Subsidiary laws and regulations have also been subsequently adopted for recruitment, selection, personnel planning, job classification, mobility and promotion, senior civil servants, training and performance appraisal. While this pillar has recorded important developments, it will be further studied in Chapter 4 of this review.
Efforts for the digitalisation of the public sector and the establishment of governance arrangements to consolidate and facilitate the sharing of datasets have progressively been implemented and remain an area to be further evaluated to identify targets for the short, medium and long terms. Notably, Pillar 4 saw the development of a government online platform and the growing digitalisation of services for firms and businesses with more than 200 online services provided, even though the challenge to integrate databases is acknowledged as part of Pillar 5 (MoPMAR, 2017[20]). In addition, the government reports the development of service centres as one-stop shops for citizens and firms, establishing 82 technology centres across the country that offer 222 public services in local offices (MPED, 2023[6]). Once the move to the New Capital is completed, digital infrastructure and capabilities within the administration need to be reviewed in close collaboration with MCIT to continue advancing efforts under this pillar.
Pillar 4 has seen additional developments with the adoption of ad hoc feedback mechanisms and reporting channels for citizens to the public administration. This could be further enhanced towards a more citizen-centred administration as foreseen in Egypt Vision 2030 (MPED, 2023[6]). Acknowledging this importance, CAOA has recently undertaken efforts to establish an observatory for public services. It could build on its efforts to enhance public service delivery models under a user-centric approach that also involves citizens in its design, implementation and review.
While these achievements together show the ample scope and breadth of the PAR in Egypt, recording and communicating outputs, progress and the impact of results will help further solidify gains achieved thus far. The inclusion of indicators to measure outcomes and impact could support more efficient processes by examining whether initiatives reached their target audiences and achieved their intended goals. Doing so would also provide timely insights on challenges or unintended consequences to adjust a given course of action. Such a framework should facilitate measuring progress against key performance indicators of Egypt Vision 2030, for example including the number of citizens per government employee, the share of funds allocated to training as a percentage of the wage bill and the overall government efficiency score. In particular, efforts could focus on developing a methodology to measure the quality and satisfaction of citizens with public services as part of Pillar 4. These areas have been acknowledged and underlined by CAOA as a high priority for reform and a key objective in the updated version of the PARP.
More is to be done in several other fields, such as digitalisation. Egypt currently ranks 103th on the UN EDGI, as also noted in Egypt Vision 2030 (UN, 2022[16]; MPED, 2023[6]). The COVID-19 context has given a new impulse to the government’s digital transformation in Egypt through the Digital Egypt strategy. While this theme was already identified in two pillars (4 and 5) of the PARP, the priority put on digitalisation in Egypt has heightened and is reflected in Egypt Vision 2030 as a key enabler to achieve the long-term development of the country. The global digital progress and new innovations in this field – including in areas such as mobile technologies, online consultation, digital payment, cyber security and artificial intelligence – can support the revision of the PARP on this topic (OECD, 2023[25]).
New objectives have been developed since, especially with the move to the New Capital
Six years after its announcement, the Government of Egypt is now undertaking the move to its new Capital - built 28 miles (45 kilometres) east of Cairo. While the New Capital should ease congestion and alleviate pressure from the housing market in Cairo, the government of Egypt is using this move to modernise public administration and group key parts of the government in a single location (see Chapter 4 for further details).
As such, administrative reform has been a key aim of this move since its announcement. By bringing several ministries and departments physically together, the aim is to foster increased co‑ordination and coherence. The move also offers the opportunity to restructure existing public organisations and establish new divisions, such as units responsible for internal auditing, strategic planning, monitoring and evaluation, HR, legislative support, information systems and digital transformation, as stipulated by a Prime Minister’s Decree No. 1146 of 2018. Furthermore, the move is accompanied by significant efforts to pursue the digitalisation of public administration by investing in a paperless working environment and building capacities for civil servants moving to the new premises. In doing so, the move to the new capital aims to further enhance the professionalisation and upskilling of civil servants in change management, digital transformation, ethics, problem solving, decision-making and strategic policy areas. It is important to note that in this process, special attention is being paid to building awareness around Egypt Vision 2030, efforts that could be built upon to disseminate information further and engage civil servants in the PARP’s updating process.
CAOA is charged with leading the move to the New Capital (see Chapter 4 for further details). Its strategic positioning at the forefront of this high-priority and transformative process could be leveraged to advance the overall PAR agenda under the PARP. The ongoing upskilling and other efforts to modernise the administrative machinery with the move would benefit from further articulating and anchoring its efforts alongside the implementation of the PARP. This would not only enhance their impact but also ensure high-level political support, strategic direction and visibility for their long-term sustainability following the completion of the move.
Indeed, the move to the New Capital should continue to be seen by all public institutions as an accelerator for transformation rather than a goal in itself. While it is important to link the move and related digitalisation efforts with administrative reform, the success of these efforts requires a two-pronged approach where efforts mobilised across entities in the New Capital would extend to those public institutions who did not move to the capital and at the governorate level. The interactions between staff and entities transferred and those who were not will require special attention to ensure the continuity and consistency of public administration to ensure the delivery of vital public services across Egypt. In this regard, the PARP update process could consider that its pillars and programmes for public administration transformation go beyond the objectives and context of the move, for instance on digitalisation and citizen-centred administration. In doing so, the move could be considered as a separate objective to be monitored or streamlined as a horizontal pillar across all thematic areas of the plan. Specific targets and measures should be included, such as the number of staff trained and transferred or the number of entities transferred.
The modernisation of public administrations in OECD member and non-member countries covers areas and trends that could further enhance and inform the updating of the PARP
Public administration reform is a field in constant evolution. Technological developments are creating new opportunities for governments to connect with citizens in new places, at new times and in new ways. In addition, recent global trends and multiple crises impacting the functioning of public administrations have emerged and accelerated in the context of the COVID-19 crisis. These transformations, however, are taking place faster than the pace at which governments can effectively or consistently adopt them in their reform plans. Therefore, ensuring governments have the capabilities to readily embrace novel trends is critical to developing ambitious PAR that delivers results for citizens.
Most current reform strategies in OECD member countries were developed in response to the COVID-19 crisis and the disruptive challenges that arose in its wake, which exposed the significant vulnerabilities of public administrations to shocks along with key limitations on their capacity to tackle cross-cutting challenges quickly and successfully. These linkages are particularly evident in EU Member States, many of which have launched PAR strategies as part of the European Union National Recovery and Resilience Plans (NRRPs) to further modernise their public administrations in the wake of the COVID-19 crisis. For example, Italy’s current PAR strategy Riforma della Pubblica Amministrazione seeks to build the administrative capacity necessary to implement the country’s national recovery and resilience plan (Italiadomani, 2021[22]). In the case of Australia, the 2022 strategy Delivering for Australians: The Government’s APS Reform Agenda addresses the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic yet has its origins in the independent 2019 Thodey Review (PMC, 2022[26]).
Current PAR strategies across OECD member countries largely reflect governments’ interests in strengthening their capacity to deliver public services in a volatile, disruptive era of cross-cutting crises. Elements shaping these reforms range from those embracing the digital transition and developing institutional processes to fostering public engagement and participation in the policymaking process. These developments aim to further involve citizens in public service design and delivery and restore public trust in government in OECD member countries in the context of fragile trust in government, with only 4 out of 10 citizens trusting their government (OECD, 2023[11]; 2022[4]). Many OECD countries have, therefore, adopted a whole-of-government approach to current PAR strategies, seeking to bolster resilience to exogenous shocks and deliver citizen-oriented results by addressing key characteristics of public sector modernisation.
The digitalisation of government processes across OECD member countries has greatly accelerated since the COVID-19 pandemic and represents a key pillar of most PAR strategies, which aim to apply technological advancements to improve the design and delivery of public services, reduce spending and enhance citizen participation. Digital processes already in place prior to the pandemic demonstrated their potential to streamline and improve access to public services and strengthen government resilience and transparency. Digitalisation is sometimes embedded as a theme within a PAR plan, such as in Finland’s Strategy for Public Governance Renewal (Finnish Ministry of Finance, 2020[27]) or is included in a more focused government strategy to digitise the economy and society, for instance, Germany’s Shaping Digitalisation: Implementation Strategy of the Federal Government (BMDV, 2018[28]).
Public participation is a feature common to all those plans and has been promoted through a number of deliberative and consultative mechanisms, such as citizen assemblies, citizen panels and juries, national dialogues in several OECD member countries (Box 3.5) and online digital platforms in Belgium (Box 3.6). Some countries, such as Finland, have also fostered the involvement of civil servants in the development of the PAR plan itself as the country has carried out extensive consultation and co-creation of the strategy. The involvement of agents is an essential lever for implementation; plans such as Ireland’s Civil Service Renewal 2030 Strategy: ‘Building on our Strengths’ seek to strengthen avenues for public engagement to reinforce evidence-based policy responses (Government of Ireland, 2021[29]).
Citizen assemblies: The example of Ireland
The Irish Citizens’ Assembly provides a strong case study on how citizen engagement can contribute to decision-making and reaching strategic objectives on cross-cutting issues through a deliberative approach. The Citizens’ Assembly on climate was established by the Irish government in late 2016 and operated through to early 2018. It consisted of a chairperson and 99 citizens who were selected by a leading market research company to be randomly representative of the Irish electorate in terms of age, gender, social class and regional spread. It included presentations from 15 climate change experts and 6 individuals championing low carbon transition. A dedicated secretariat drawn from staff across the public service further ensured the smooth running of each event. The secretariat wrote the final report with input from citizens and sent it back to a sub-group of citizens for comment and then to the entire group for validation. Ireland established a dedicated parliamentary committee for elected politicians to consider the assembly’s recommendations and bring them to the country’s legislative agenda.
Citizen and users’ panel: The examples of France and the United Kingdom
In the United Kingdom, the Forest of Dean District Citizens Jury takes place over several days. National Health Service bodies commission a citizens’ jury to provide residents with the chance to evaluate prospective hospital locations and choose the one that best suits citizen needs.
France has established user panels to support public service reform and co-design new approaches to public services. Usually mobilised ad hoc with a specific objective, these panels help better understand the experiences and issues faced by citizens and businesses when interacting with public administration on specific life events. For instance, France has mobilised up to 650 users to improve the life event of reporting a death in the family, in order to produce a guidance note on what to do when someone dies, with a focus on administrative procedures.
National dialogue: The example of Ireland
The government of Ireland developed a Climate Action Plan in 2019 and then, in 2021, created the National Dialogue on Climate Action (NDCA) to further increase societal engagement and public participation in the Climate Action Plan. The NDCA aims to establish a new social contract on climate, to engage, enable and empower everyone in society, including politicians, policymakers, stakeholders and the public, to co-create and deliver practical climate actions and to inform strategies and policy responses. The NDCA is led by Ireland’s Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications and supported by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which also plays the secretariat role.
The NDCA relies on a number of tools and platforms, including in 2022 alone:
The Climate Conversations 2022, which involved more than 400 stakeholders, 4 300 members of the public, young people, populations vulnerable to the transition to carbon neutrality, and local and community organisations.
Three National Climate Stakeholder Forum events, which took the form of deliberative workshops inviting over 300 stakeholders from a wide range of organisations to discuss challenges and solutions to delivering climate actions.
The first National Youth Assembly on Climate, which engaged over 40 young people to capture views and suggestions from their peers on how the country delivers climate actions.
The EPA Climate Change in the Irish Mind study, which provided nationally representative data on the attitudes and behaviours to climate change of 4 000 citizens.
The EPA Climate Conference 2022, Creating Ireland's Climate Future, which examined the vision for a climate-neutral and resilient Ireland by 2050 and how that vision will be achieved in terms of strategic planning, built and natural environments.
The National Social and Behavioural Advisory Group, which met three times and was established to provide ongoing expert insight into research findings and help inform policy.
Further examples of national dialogues are presented as part of Chapter 6 of this review.
Sources: OECD (2020[30]), Innovative Citizen Participation and New Democratic Institutions: Catching the Deliberative Wave, https://doi.org/10.1787/339306da-en; Government of Ireland (2022[31]), Climate Conversations 2022, https://climateconversations.citizenspace.com/decc/climate-conversations-2022/; Government of France (2023[32]), “« Moments de vie » : la DITP associe les usagers à la création du guide « Un de mes proches est décédé en France »”, https://www.modernisation.gouv.fr/actualites/moments-de-vie-la-ditp-associe-les-usagers-la-creation-du-guide-un-de-mes-proches-est.
The Belgian federal platform for citizen consultation, MonOpinion, was created to meet growing public entity demand to offer new ways to connect with citizens. The MonOpinion platform is a Federal Public Service Strategy and Support initiative that renews the relationship between citizens and policymakers. The federal government offers a public service open to all public entities, with a user-friendly platform for both citizens and the administration. Some members of the administration are also invited to participate in a short workshop.
MonOpinion makes it possible to organise participatory processes, such as calls for ideas, participatory budgets or surveys. Its goal is to further engage citizens through inclusive processes on this platform. It enables discussions with citizens and stimulates political debate. To actively participate in a debate, citizens can formulate proposals, react, vote for, follow or comment on existing proposals and recommend them to other users. Once the consultation is closed, a presentation of the results is posted on line.
For instance, the platform was used in 2018 by the municipality of Nivelles for a month to feed the municipal authorities’ reflection on the management of the city, resulting in 130 participations, 25 proposals generated and 253 votes. The results of the consultation were presented to the town hall, confirming the validation of the 25 proposals and their integration into a multi-year action plan.
Source: SPF Stratégie et Appui (SPF Stratégie et Appui, 2022[33]), Mon Opinion, https://bosa.belgium.be/fr/services/monopinion; Ville de Nivelles (2022[34]), Homepage, https://www.nivelles.be/.
Most strategies also underline the need to further improve and modernise public services and ensure equal access and quality for all citizens through a variety of channels. The trend of using public service improvement approaches based on life events is also expanding in OECD member countries and has been implemented in a number of them, including Canada, France, Germany (Box 3.7) and the United Kingdom over the past several years. For instance, France has prioritised improving ten key life events for citizens in its most recent high-level strategic PAR document (Government of France, 2023[35]).
Civil service reform is a major cornerstone of these plans, is sometimes the subject of a dedicated plan or can constitute the main axis of the reform, as in Ireland. Reforms to HR and personnel management, with a particular interest in attracting, retaining and building skills, are fundamental pillars of overall PAR strategies. For instance, particular attention to civil service reform has been given priority in countries such as Australia, Canada, Ireland, the United Kingdom (Box 3.8) and the United States.
The need to develop a civil service that is fit for the future is seen as a major challenge. A civil service that can anticipate and respond to emerging policy challenges to meet the needs of citizens successfully in a constantly changing environment is expected to be forward-looking and able to anticipate the emerging technical skillsets that will be required of civil servants and candidates for civil service jobs, including the capacity to serve citizens effectively in a paperless, digitalised environment and the ability to learn and adapt to constant change, demonstrating agility, flexibility and the capacity to manage change effectively (OECD, 2021[36]).
Public sector effectiveness is also a central objective of most of these plans. Targets in this regard aim to ensure that the public administration is adequately equipped with the organisation, capacity and resources to perform and deliver cost-effective, quality and inclusive public policies and services. This translates inter alia into measures related to reorganising and improving the agility, performance and co‑ordination of government entities, strengthening the evidence base for policy and rulemaking, adapting the composition, skillset and structure of the civil service to the changing needs and demands of citizens and modernising and streamlining public service delivery. However, budgetary considerations are rarely a key component of contemporary PAR strategies; these tend to be the subject of separate plans or initiatives linked to spending review development. This represents a stark departure from turn-of-the-century or post-financial-crisis PAR strategies, which framed public management reforms within the context of fiscal constraints and optimisation efforts (OECD, 2005[3]).
The Federal Statistical Office, commissioned by the Federal Government, has interviewed citizens and businesses since 2015 about how they perceive co‑operation with public authorities and offices in certain life situations.
Based on comprehensive preliminary surveys, citizens’ 22 most significant life situations, like the birth of a child, death of a family member/close friend or unemployment, were selected for further analysis. In the business sector, a total of ten central situations, such as a business start-up or appointment of employees, were identified after interviews with representatives of business associations and trade unions.
In the 2019 round of interviews, nearly 6 000 citizens were interviewed about roughly 7 700 situations and their satisfaction with the relevant authorities. More than 3 300 interviews were conducted in the business sector. The respondents assessed the authorities on the basis of certain criteria, such as comprehensibility of the law, digital administration options or opening hours and waiting times. Both surveys were conducted on behalf of the Federal Statistical Office by the Institute for Applied Social Science (infas).
Using this information, the Federal Government will design further activities to achieve significant simplification and improvement for those concerned.
Source: German Federal Statistical Office (2022[37]), “Bureaucracy costs”.
Since the PARP was designed in 2014, several recent global trends and multiple crises impacting PAR have emerged, which could be further reflected in the upcoming review process of Egypt’s PARP. Therefore, undergoing efforts to update the PARP could incorporate those evolutions and translate them into the Egyptian context to be leveraged as key drivers for modernising public administration. While some of those trends are already mentioned in the pillars of the PARP, and further reflect the ambition, measures and innovations currently observed within such themes as digital transformation, stakeholder participation and civil service reform. In fact, Egypt Vision 2030 emphasises citizen-centricity of development policies and the digitalisation of the public administration, which are critical for modern public administrations and would further efforts under the PARP by closely aligning objectives under these two strategic frameworks.
In this regard, CAOA could define new objectives and measures in a revised version of the PARP that would be aligned with the revised Egypt Vision 2030 and embrace new global trends and challenges for modernisation public administration (see Table 3.3 for suggestions). This could be based, inter alia, on a thorough evaluation of the current PARP and a new assessment of the situation and its needs. In this regard, the implementation of the PARP could benefit from the adoption of steering, co‑ordination and monitoring mechanisms.
Since 2014, CAOA has undertaken an ambitious process to modernise the public administration through the rollout of the PARP. While progress has been achieved, challenges remain to fully deliver on all strategic commitments across its five pillars. Indeed, this historic reform is taking place within – and in response to – challenging circumstances, including the COVID-19 pandemic, slow economic growth and food insecurity, which is accelerating and posing barriers to modernising the state’s machinery. These factors and administrative challenges have contributed to the uneven implementation of the PARP, with some areas, such as institutional and regulatory reform, achieving impactful results. In contrast, other areas remain to be further catalysed.
In this regard, gains could be consolidated and gaps could be addressed by instilling steering capacities and instruments as well as implementation mechanisms in support of PAR in general, particularly the implementation of the PARP across sectors and levels of government. Instruments observed in OECD member countries, such as inter-ministerial working groups and task forces, dedicated structures responsible for monitoring the PAR and implementation plans could be useful in the Egyptian context and support CAOA in this endeavour.
The steering responsibilities for PAR have been clearly assigned to CAOA and it would benefit from a dedicated unit and more capabilities, formal co‑ordination instruments and accountability mechanisms with line ministries
Due to their cross-cutting nature, PAR calls for continued high-level political support, dedicated steering and co-ordination structures with clear roles and responsibilities and formalised working procedures (Vági and Rimkute, 2018[24]). The development of a comprehensive PAR strategy in of itself does not guarantee its successful implementation across all sectors and levels of government. Indeed, strong political support and clear roles and responsibilities for the reform remain essential. These factors have been essential for developing and delivering the United Kingdom (UK) Declaration on Government Reform, with the programme signed by the prime minister, the head of the Cabinet and all ministers (Box 3.8).
PAR is one important area covered by the current delivery structure in the UK Government. The Declaration on Government Reform represents the guiding strategic document for PAR in the United Kingdom and outlines how the civil service and ministers will reform the public administration together to better deliver services and policies for citizens.
The declaration sets priorities for reform in three areas:
People, ensuring that the right people are working in the right places with the right incentives.
Performance, modernising the operation of government, being clear-eyed about its priorities and objective in their evaluation of what is and is not working.
Partnership, strengthening the bond between ministers and officials, always operating as one team from policy through to delivery, and between the central government and institutions outside it.
Each minister officially signed the declaration to ensure buy-in.
Source: UK Cabinet Office (2021[38]), Declaration on Government Reform, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/993902/FINAL_Declaration.
Mandating CAOA in 2019 to lead the implementation of the PARP had the merit of strengthening institutional clarity. Efforts by CAOA to advance the PAR agenda have also benefitted from the anchoring and articulation of its mandate in the Civil Service Law. In addition, CAOA plays a key role in civil service reform, an essential component of the PARP and any PAR, and is part of the HCAR, the most important body supervising the PARP.
CAOA’s organisational structure and evidence from the OECD fact-finding mission suggest that it is well equipped to implement objectives supported by the Civil Service Law. However, it relies on the willingness and capacity of other ministries to deliver on other sectoral pillars of the PARP. CAOA could, therefore, further strengthen its positioning and ability to spearhead the PARP across sectors and levels of government by establishing a dedicated unit or team charged with the operationalisation of this reform. Indeed, CAOA reports that all departments are involved in the PARP implementation based on their respective scope and expertise. However, resources could be clearly assigned to co‑ordinate, manage and support the implementation of the PARP within CAOA and with other public institutions. This would help clarify the process, introduce reporting lines to ensure accountability for delivery and facilitate the flow of information between relevant stakeholders. A dedicated unit or task force, which can be a separate unit or part of a strategic planning unit, would also allow for enough capacity to deliver on this ambitious whole-of-government reform and centralise efforts to avoid duplication.
Indeed, these efforts could build on and enhance existing relationships that CAOA has established with key government partners to deliver the PARP. In fact, CAOA has frequent bilateral interactions with Ministries on public administration matters. With the HCAR as a high-level, strategic steering and decision-making committee on PARP implementation, this platform could be leveraged to promote formal inter-ministerial mechanisms to support CAOA in steering, discussing and monitoring the implementation of the PARP at the administrative and technical levels. This would enhance CAOA’s structures and convening power to bring together Ministries to steer and co‑ordinate the implementation of the entire PARP.
The HCAR sub-committee could further act as a dedicated inter-ministerial working group at the operational level and be chaired by CAOA with the specific objective of monitoring and co‑ordinating the implementation of the PARP and preparations for the future version. Line ministries should appoint sub-committee participants to supervise the respective PARP pillar relevant to their ministry (which goes beyond the HR and IT departments). This body could be complemented by technical sub-working groups or communities of practices in dedicated areas of the PARP, which would report to the main inter-ministerial working group. CAOA’s dedicated unit could act as these committees’ technical secretariat and provide ongoing support to them and to the HCAR.
A number of OECD member countries have designed dedicated inter-ministerial committees for the steering and implementation of the public administration plan, usually with bodies at the political (typically a PAR Ministerial council) and at the administrative and operational levels (e.g. inter-ministerial working groups) to ensure proper decision-making and implementation (Vági and Rimkute, 2018[24]). For instance, France has set up an Inter-ministerial Committee for Public Transformation (CITP) that focuses on supervising PAR, but also two additional strategic and operational inter-ministerial committees to co‑ordinate and monitor the progress of specific administrative reform initiatives (Box 3.9); the Czech Republic has established a Public Council steered by the Ministry of the Interior and brings together different ministries and local entities to guide, co‑ordinate and monitor the national Public Administration Reform Strategy, as well as a sub-working group that focuses on operational follow-up of the strategy. Those structures are supported by a Secretariat that is in charge of preparing the meetings, following up on the implementation of decisions made and, in between meetings, following up on the implementation of the PARP.
In addition, further articulation and awareness raising within the administration will be critical to catalysing the implementation of the PARP across sectors and levels of government. This will be particularly important as, even though PAR is a priority in Egypt Vision 2030, various stakeholders reported during OECD interviews that they were unaware of the existence of the PARP. This can be explained in part due to the absence of a written and formal communication strategy and of stakeholder engagement mechanisms beyond the involvement of experts associated in previous PARP updates.
France’s public transformation programme and initiatives are led by a department of the Ministry of Public Transformation and co‑ordinated by two strategic committees and an operational monitoring committee:
As part of the Action Publique 2022 programme, an Inter-ministerial Committee for Public Transformation (CITP) was established to ensure the reform plan’s operational implementation, monitoring, inter-ministerial co‑ordination and political steering. It assembles members of the government two or three times a year and is chaired by the Prime minister; the role of secretariat is held by the Inter-ministerial Delegate for Public Transformation within the DITP. One of the seven commitments made at the sixth committee meeting in 2021 was the full rollout of the Public Services+ programme by the end of 2021 to work towards the continuous improvement of public service efficiency.
A high-level strategic committee is comprised of central administration directors and the Minister for Public Transformation.
An operational monitoring committee assembles the directors of administration at the local level to discuss compliance to commitments made and measured across indicators.
Source: French Ministry of Transformation and Public Service (2021[39]), Comité interministeriel de la transformation publique - Dossier de Presse 23 juillet 2021, https://www.modernisation.gouv.fr/files/2021-09/DP%206e%20CITP%20Maquett%C3%A9%20DEF%202109.pdf.
The PARP could be devolved into concrete action plans complemented by implementation mechanisms, tools and instruments for its effective delivery
The PARP remains a high-level strategic document that sets the overall direction and priorities for PAR in Egypt. While the PARP consolidates its vision for the modernisation of the Egyptian State, the plan should include practical elements on how to translate its commitments, such as planning, key performance indicators and a split of roles and responsibilities across the different players to reach its intended objectives. Thus, its implementation by the whole of the government would benefit from devolving commitments therein into an action plan with sector-specific objectives alongside defined responsibilities, actions per objective determined, KPIs to set targets and track progress, as well as timelines and resources assigned. The implementation plan would act as a roadmap for all relevant actors involved in attaining the defined objectives.
OECD/SIGMA Principles of Public Administration underline the importance of having clear planning documents, such as implementation plans that contain objectives and targets, actions to reach those objectives, costs, timelines and defined roles and responsibilities (OECD/SIGMA, 2017[2]). The action plan usually takes a table format, including those different elements and linking them with the objectives and issues identified in the strategy document (Vági and Rimkute, 2018[24]).
Robust performance management and review systems can help better track implementation and make policy adjustments during implementation to achieve policy objectives. Managing performance and reviewing and measuring progress and results can inform policymaking, feed the performance dialogue and provide accountability (OECD, 2020[40]). They rely on strong institutional setups, processes and tools, such as a dashboard with KPIs, regular reporting through progress reports, data collection systems and well-established performance dialogue mechanisms. In Egypt, OECD evidence suggests that the use of KPIs and monitoring tools remains underutilised in the implementation of the PARP. The development of an action plan with targets, KPIs and a supporting dashboard would significantly enhance CAOA’s evidence-based decision-making capacity and identify areas that are overperforming or underperforming to modify its course of action. It would also allow CAOA to build a solid information base and evidence to support discussions with the Prime Minister and other government entities in the HCAR.
In particular, the design and selection of PAR KPIs could include a prominent focus on assessing outputs, outcomes and impact. In doing so, such an exercise would also benefit from including concrete means to measure how specific objectives of the PARP are contributing to the attainment of broader policy goals in government to showcase progress and maintain the present momentum (Box 3.10). This would entail aligning objectives, KPIs and activities across all strategies, including Egypt Vision 2030 and the Government Programme.
The revised version of Egypt Vision 2030 has identified a number of KPIs for public governance, including the World Economic Forum’s general institutions indicator, the World Bank Government Effectiveness and Government Performance Overall Indices, EDGI, Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index and the World Bank’s Transparency Index, which should all be reflected as key targets in the revised PARP (MPED, 2023[6]).
In this regard, the development of review activities can also be supported by the creation of an integrated digital platform to compile, analyse and share indicators related to the implementation of the PARP and the public administration. For its effective adoption, training CAOA and public entity civil servants on quantitative skills and new digital systems would be paramount to ensure take‑up of such a new system (see Chapter 2).
Indicators can be categorised into three general categories according to what is measured: input, output and outcome indicators. The three different indicators can all be part of a framework to monitor the effectiveness of policies but it is important that each type of indicator is used to monitor only the aspects of a policy it is designed to monitor.
Input: These indicators measure the resources spent on policies and measures (money, staff and time). Thus, they are measures of effort.
Output: These indicators measure how efficiently policies are executed, for instance on the number of staff trained or new organisational units set up. They are produced because policymakers expect them to contribute to desirable outcomes.
Outcome/Impact: These indicators measure the results achieved by the outputs, looking, for instance, at the quality of services and satisfaction of users. Outcome indicators are used to monitor the effectiveness of policies in achieving their objectives.
Indicators need to be accompanied by information that helps interpret their significance and connect them with actions and objectives. That is why, regardless of their typology, all indicators should be presented in a way that provides enough information:
Description of the indicator: name, a unit of measurement, data source and formula.
Responsibility for the indicator: institution, department or authority responsible for gathering the data.
Frequency of data collection and update of the indicator.
A baseline that serves as a starting point to measure progress.
Target or expected result.
Source: Schumann, A. (2016[41]), “Using Outcome Indicators to Improve Policies: Methods, Design Strategies and Implementation”, https://doi.org/10.1787/5jm5cgr8j532-en.
Further articulating the PARP in measurable targets through the use of KPIs will also benefit from enhancing existing data and evidence collection and dissemination mechanisms. In particular, OECD evidence suggests the need for appropriate data and measurement tools on satisfaction, quality and access to public services, which makes identifying issues and designing relevant solutions more efficient.
A number of OECD member countries have developed surveys of citizens and users to collect information on their satisfaction with public policies and services and their interactions with the public administration. These evidence and data support policymaking and help redesign services in response to the needs and expectations of users. France has, for instance, developed a barometer of the complexity of public services that relies on a survey of firms and citizens (Box 3.11). In the French institutional setting, it should be noted that the survey and data analysis on public service satisfaction is led by the independent Institut Paul Delouvrier, in co‑ordination with the French public administration (DITP), and a private company implements the survey to ensure the independence, transparency and integrity of results. In that regard, CAOA is envisaging the development of a Public Services Observatory that could help collect and disseminate data on public services.
The government of France is carrying out a regular barometer (survey) of citizens, called the Baromètre Delouvrier, on satisfaction with key life events, the obstacles they face and the public service improvement priorities they perceive. The barometer is implemented by independent and public institute Institut Paul Delouvrier as well as a survey company; it is supervised by the DITP. Two thousand five hundred citizens responded to the survey, which was carried out on line over a period of a month in 2021.
The results of the most recent edition, published in January 2022, highlight that satisfaction with the state is high in France and that users are generally happy with public services, though disparities can be observed depending on services. In particular, less than 40% of citizens are satisfied with justice and employment services. In a post-COVID-19 context, priorities identified by citizens relate to health, education and security. They also underlined that further efforts need to be made regarding the access and proximity of public services.
The results of these surveys are shared with the whole government and the general public. They also help inform policies and decisions made by the French public administration, especially during high‑level inter-ministerial Committees (CITP) and operational levels when targeting priority services and measures to be improved.
Source: French Ministry of Transformation and Public Service (2022[42]), Barometer Delouvrier of Public Services, https://www.modernisation.gouv.fr/publications/22eme-edition-du-barometre-delouvrier-lopinion-des-francais-legard-de-leurs-services.
In OECD member countries, PAR plans often include or are complemented by an action plan detailing policy implementation across a specific timeframe and paired with performance indicators, though these characteristics are not always made public. In the United States, the annual performance goals, priority‑level success metrics and strategy leads of the Biden-Harris Management Agenda have been fully digitised and made accessible to the public via the performance.gov website (U.S. GSA, 2021[43]). In the Czech Republic, detailed action plans are prepared every three years and include a series of actions for each objective with roles and responsibilities, timeline and budget assigned to each. Such action plans are prepared, co‑ordinated and monitored by a specific department in charge of public administration in the Ministry of the Interior, which supervises the overall PAR strategy (Czech Ministry of the Interior, 2020[23]).
Egypt has been carrying out significant PAR in the past decades, most recently through the PARP. While important progress and achievements have been made through implementing the PARP led by CAOA, a number of key challenges related to the effectiveness and agility of the public administration, the quality and access to public services and the adaptation of the civil service to the future remain. This calls for a new impulse in the revision of the PARP to assess the progress made and the remaining gaps, to ensure alignment with Egypt Vision 2030, as well as new challenges for Egypt and global trends in public administration.
Egypt could strengthen its institutional framework and inter-ministerial co‑ordination to further modernise the public administration, particularly in implementing and delivering its strategic objectives as defined by the PARP. CAOA has been leading the PARP’s implementation but needs to further strengthen its convening power, the inter-ministerial co‑ordination mechanisms and the capabilities to steer, co‑ordinate, implement and monitor reforms across the whole of administration. CAOA will need a new set of instruments and mechanisms to further promote and steer the implementation of the PARP, tools that have been successfully implemented in OECD member countries, from dedicated capabilities to robust performance dialogue framework and mechanisms and implementation plans. This includes updating the HCAR to ensure all key high-level stakeholders are present and creating a new inter-ministerial co‑ordination working group on the PARP led by CAOA.
1. Revising and modernising the PARP
The PARP under current review could reflect the latest developments and issues for public administration, taking into consideration the priorities highlighted in Egypt Vision 2030 as well as innovations and new trends in global public administrations:
Ensure the continuation of political support for the PARP along with its design and implementation and organise regular discussions with the HCAR Secretariat on the implementation of the PARP. These discussions could focus on selecting key measures for decision by the Prime Minister and be based on an executive dashboard on PAR with KPIs.
Organise a formal evaluation process of the PARP to help identify success and remaining gaps that should be further addressed:
Initiate CAOA’s self-assessment based on the PARP 2014 and its pillars, involving other relevant ministries and external stakeholders.
Assess the progress made on each pillar and the impact; in particular, evaluate the effectiveness of the new institutional structure and of the redefinition of mandates and roles and the progress made in the establishment of new units in ministries.
Assess the progress against public administration objectives and indicators in Egypt Vision 2030.
Develop the updated PAR plan to address the new issues and needs for a modern public administration in support of the long-term development of the country:
Consider designing objectives and measures on a citizen-centred administration, public participation, digitalisation and public sector effectiveness (see Table 3.3).
Regarding public participation and citizen-centred administration, consider introducing regular innovative deliberative and consultative mechanisms, such as online digital consultation platforms or focused workshops (see Box 3.5 for examples), increasing the involvement of citizens in public service design.
Implement an Observatory of public services with a certain degree of autonomy and using surveys such as the Delouvrier barometer in France (see Box 3.11).
Include clear KPIs on inputs, outputs and outcomes in the strategy and ensure clear links and connections between measures and indicators with key strategic plans (Egypt Vision 2030, Digital Egypt, the National Anti-Corruption Strategy, etc).
Organise a consultation process on the revision of the PARP involving the whole of government, experts and civil society to gather inputs and ideas and help identify priorities.
Connect and reflect the strategies and objectives that relate to public administration transformation in the PARP by adapting the existing ones or including new ones, in particular: take into account the progress achieved and include public administration measures related to the government’s move to the New Capital in the updated PARP; refer to the Digital Egypt strategy and its links with the PARP’s digitalisation and IT objectives.
Ensure that the PARP fully reflects the revised Egypt Vision 2030 by aligning the vision of the public administration, developing and adapting strategic objectives in the PARP and Egypt Vision 2030 and incorporating measures included in the sixth objective on “Enhanced Governance and Partnerships” and on enabling digital transformation; make sure that KPIs are developed and in line with the objectives of Egypt Vision 2030, United Nations 2030 Sustainable Development Goals and Africa’s Agenda 2063.
2. Strengthen the institutional framework and the inter-ministerial co‑ordination mechanisms for PAR
The institutional framework and the inter-ministerial co‑ordination mechanisms related to the PARP could be enhanced to further implement PAR plans (see Chapter 2):
Strengthen the role of the HCAR and strengthen CAOA’s role as technical Secretariat.
Task CAOA's strategic management and policies unit – or establish a new one – with co‑ordinating and monitoring the revision and implementation of the PARP to ensure that there is a horizontal, comprehensive view of the strategy, as well as dedicated capabilities to co‑ordinate and follow up internally and externally; this unit would:
Collect information and exchange with the different CAOA units in charge of each area.
Co‑ordinate the revision and preparation of the updated PARP with other CAOA units (this internal co‑ordination work can be organised as a task force), based on an action plan design modelling the prioritisation tool of the OECD/SIGMA toolkit.
Support the co‑ordination and implementation of the PARP with government entities, particularly through the different task forces and committees linked to the PARP (see below).
Establish an effective monitoring and evaluation framework and tools for the PARP.
Prepare for HCAR meetings.
Establish an inter-ministerial working group led by CAOA, including representatives from ministries involved in the sectoral pillars of the PARP to co‑ordinate and monitor the implementation of the PARP and co-develop and consult on the updated plan:
Ensure that this group meets regularly and involves all relevant ministries to discuss, steer and monitor the progress of the PARP based on the strategic document and its future implementation plans and KPIs, and make key operational decisions or report to the HCAR for decisions on the PARP when needed.
Establish, when necessary, ad hoc working groups assigned to CAOA to co‑ordinate and accelerate the implementation of specific actions and areas.
Encourage the appointment of contact points and develop a community of practices on public administrative reform across line ministries.
Design regular consultation mechanisms, such as interactive workshops and online consultations, to involve experts, civil society and citizens in revising and implementing the PARP. Using online consultation mechanisms, in-person focused workshops or launching a roundtable on the updated PARP considering Costa Rica’s experience (also see Chapter 6 of the Review on Promoting Transparency and Participation) is an example of this.
Continue co‑ordination with MPEDIC on integrating the PARP implementation plan within Egypt Vision 2030 and aligning it fully with the Government Programme; install formal co‑ordination and reporting mechanisms on the dimensions related to PAR, particularly between the MPEDIC strategy unit and the new CAOA unit in charge of the PARP (also see Chapter 2).
Support CAOA’s efforts and initiatives to further mobilise the public administration through communications and stakeholder engagement by designing and implementing a comprehensive communications and outreach strategy for the PARP, including on government and CAOA websites and participative mechanisms to involve civil servants and citizens in the design and implementation of PARP measures, e.g., citizen panels, workshops or online consultations.
Further develop and formalise partnerships (including objectives, ways of working, resources and mechanisms) with MPEDIC, MCIT, MoLD and other training partners by enhancing co‑ordination mechanisms, such as the creation of regular bilateral meetings or working groups, to align training offers and regularly engage with them and with the rest of the line ministries to identify, plan and execute training programmes for strategy, implementation of Egypt Vision 2030, audit, governance and IT units in different line ministries and governorates.
Establish and steer multi-year actionable implementation plans to ensure the satisfactory delivery of the pillars of the PARP, with a concrete timeline on how to deliver clear objectives, identifying intermediate goals and confirming the allocation of the human and financial resources required to achieve them; use the format of a table splitting key objectives by actions and sub-actions, assigning roles and responsibilities, allocating resources and indicating KPIs.
3. Establishing review mechanisms for the implementation of the PARP
Monitoring tools and evidence-based approaches could further help CAOA assess the progress in implementing the PARP and identify gaps and needs for adjustment and support:
Establish a review framework and instruments by mandating the existing or new CAOA PARP unit to monitor the PARP and its implementation plans:
Design a dashboard and KPIs tracking the implementation of the PARP based on the action plans and complete with KPIs that track those used in Egypt Vision 2030 to measure progress in the pursuit of relevant SDGs.
Further develop the existing digital systems to collect data and evidence that can track and monitor the KPIs included in the PARP with other government agencies.
Task CAOA's unit with leading the generation of evidence and data on PARP implementation, whether from audits, surveys, client satisfaction reports or technical studies, to support the pursuit of the PARP, working with key stakeholders from across the government, and ensure evidence-based decision-making of the highest quality.
Train the unit’s specialised staff on monitoring objectives and processes and the use and analysis of KPIs and data, and digital tools used for the monitoring activities.
Develop a yearly progress report on the implementation of the PARP that will be shared and discussed with the HCAR and published.
References
[18] APRM (2020), Egypt Country Review Report, African Peer Review Mechanism, https://www.aprm-au.org/publications/egypt-country-review-report/.
[13] Baseera (2019), “Press release on the public opinion poll conducted by the Egyptian Center for Public Opinion Research “Baseera” on satisfaction with general performance”, Egyptian Center for Public Opinion Research, http://baseera.com.eg/en/PressPoll-Ar/Performance%20Approval%20Rate-June%202019-%20En.pdf.
[28] BMDV (2018), Shaping Digitalisation: Implementation Strategy of the Federal Government, German Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure, https://www.bundesregierung.de/resource/blob/992814/1605342/284988700922725d63a0fb95db824024/digitalsierung-gestalten-englisch-download-bpa-data.pdf (accessed on 19 July 2023).
[23] Czech Ministry of the Interior (2020), Client-oriented Public Administration 2030, https://www.mvcr.cz/soubor/client-oriented-public-administration-2030.aspx (accessed on 19 July 2023).
[27] Finnish Ministry of Finance (2020), Strategy for Public Governance Renewal, https://julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/162573/Public_governance_strategy_2020.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y (accessed on 19 July 2023).
[42] French Ministry of Transformation and Public Service (2022), Barometer Delouvrier of Public Services, https://www.modernisation.gouv.fr/publications/22eme-edition-du-barometre-delouvrier-lopinion-des-francais-legard-de-leurs-services.
[39] French Ministry of Transformation and Public Service (2021), Comité interministeriel de la transformation publique - Dossier de Presse 23 juillet 2021, https://www.modernisation.gouv.fr/files/2021-09/DP%206e%20CITP%20Maquett%C3%A9%20DEF%202109.pdf (accessed on 19 July 2023).
[19] French Ministry of Transformation and Public Service (n.d.), Direction interministérielle de la transformation publique (DITP), https://www.modernisation.gouv.fr/.
[37] German Federal Statistical Office (2022), “Bureaucracy costs”.
[15] Government of Egypt (n.d.), Egypt Digital Platform, https://digital.gov.eg/.
[32] Government of France (2023), “« Moments de vie » : la DITP associe les usagers à la création du guide « Un de mes proches est décédé en France »”, https://www.modernisation.gouv.fr/actualites/moments-de-vie-la-ditp-associe-les-usagers-la-creation-du-guide-un-de-mes-proches-est.
[35] Government of France (2023), Des services publics au rendez-vous, https://www.modernisation.gouv.fr/files/2023-05/Dossier%20de%20presse%20-%207e%20Comit%C3%A9%20interminist%C3%A9riel%20de%20la%20Transformation%20publique%20-%2009.05.2023.pdf.
[31] Government of Ireland (2022), Climate Conversations 2022, Official website of the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications, https://climateconversations.citizenspace.com/decc/climate-conversations-2022/.
[29] Government of Ireland (2021), Civil Service Renewal 2030 Strategy: ’Building on our Strengths’, Irish Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, https://www.gov.ie/pdf/?file=https://assets.gov.ie/135476/ab29dc92-f33f-47eb-bae8-2dec60454a1f.pdf#page=null (accessed on 19 July 2023).
[22] Italiadomani (2021), Reform of the Public Administration, Italiadomani, https://www.italiadomani.gov.it/en/Interventi/riforme/riforme-orizzontali/riforma-della-pubblica-amministrazione.html#:~:text=The%20Reform%20of%20the%20Public,equity%2C%20efficiency%20and%20competitiveness%20of (accessed on 19 July 2023).
[21] MCIT (n.d.), Digital Egypt, Ministry of Communications and Information Technology, https://mcit.gov.eg/en/Digital_Egypt.
[20] MoPMAR (2017), National Public Administration Reform Plan (NARP), Revised Version, Ministry of Planning, Monitoring and Administrative Reform.
[6] MPED (2023), Egypt Vision 2030, Updated Version, Egyptian Ministry of Planning and Economic Development.
[8] NIGSD (2023), Egypt’s Performance in Governance Indices, National Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development.
[12] OECD (2024), OECD Economic Surveys: Egypt 2024, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/af900de2-en.
[5] OECD (2023), Examens de l’OCDE sur la gouvernance publique : Maroc: Pour une administration résiliente au service des citoyens, Examens de l’OCDE sur la gouvernance publique, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/1a0272c0-fr.
[25] OECD (2023), Global Trends in Government Innovation 2023, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/0655b570-en.
[11] OECD (2023), Government at a Glance 2023, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/3d5c5d31-en.
[4] OECD (2022), “Executive summary”, in Building Trust to Reinforce Democracy: Main Findings from the 2021 OECD Survey on Drivers of Trust in Public Institutions, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/be3102b5-en.
[14] OECD (2021), Government at a Glance 2021, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/1c258f55-en.
[36] OECD (2021), Public Employment and Management 2021: The Future of the Public Service, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/938f0d65-en.
[30] OECD (2020), Innovative Citizen Participation and New Democratic Institutions: Catching the Deliberative Wave, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/339306da-en.
[40] OECD (2020), Policy Framework on Sound Public Governance: Baseline Features of Governments that Work Well, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c03e01b3-en.
[3] OECD (2005), Modernising Government: The Way Forward, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264010505-en.
[2] OECD/SIGMA (2017), The Principles of Public Administration: A Framework for European Neighbourhood Policy Countries, https://www.sigmaweb.org/publications/principles-public-administration-european-neighbourhood-policy.htm.
[26] PMC (2022), Albanese Government’s APS Reform Agenda, Australia’s Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Australian Government, https://ministers.pmc.gov.au/gallagher/2022/albanese-governments-aps-reform-agenda (accessed on 19 July 2023).
[17] Roland Berger (2021), Bridging the Digital Divide, https://www.rolandberger.com/en/Insights/Publications/Bridging-the-digital-divide.html.
[41] Schumann, A. (2016), “Using Outcome Indicators to Improve Policies: Methods, Design Strategies and Implementation”, OECD Regional Development Working Papers, No. 2016/02, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/5jm5cgr8j532-en.
[33] SPF Stratégie et Appui (2022), MonOpinion, https://bosa.belgium.be/fr/services/monopinion.
[43] U.S. GSA (2021), The Biden-Harris Management Agenda Vision: Toward an Equitable, Effective and Accountable Government that Delivers Results for All, United States General Services Administration, https://assets.performance.gov/PMA/Biden-Harris_Management_Agenda_Vision_11-18.pdf (accessed on 19 July 2023).
[38] UK Cabinet Office (2021), Declaration on Government Reform, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/993902/FINAL_Declaration_on_Government_Reform.pdf (accessed on 19 July 2023).
[16] UN (2022), United Nations E-Government Survey 2022, United Nations, https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/en-us/Reports/UN-E-Government-Survey-2022.
[1] UN (2015), Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015, United Nations, https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda.
[24] Vági, P. and E. Rimkute (2018), “Toolkit for the preparation, implementation, monitoring, reporting and evaluation of public administration reform and sector strategies: Guidance for SIGMA partners”, SIGMA Papers, No. 57, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/37e212e6-en.
[34] Ville de Nivelles (2022), Homepage, https://www.nivelles.be/.
[7] World Bank (2023), Worldwide Governance Indicators, https://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/worldwide-governance-indicators (accessed on 9 September 2024).
[9] World Bank (2021), Worldwide Governance Indicators, Governance Effectiveness, 2021, World Bank, Washington, DC, https://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/Home/Reports.
[10] World Bank (2016), Middle East and North Africa: Public Employment and Governance in MENA, World Bank, Washington, DC, https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/339381472236811833/pdf/Public-employment-and-governance-in-Middle-East-and-North-Africa.pdf.