blossom-coach domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /home3/kolozegi/public_html/sumkoski1/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6131SOVEREIGN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FOR ALL – Has an aim to ensure the principles of good, happiness, prosperity, accountability, participation in the economic institutions, governing, policies and administration of the sovereign state.
Sovereign economic development in a sovereign state is every possible economic development that ensures welfare, survival and betterment of the sovereign nation and is implemented equitably and seen as legitimate by the sovereign nation. While the Sovereign State is not prescriptive of the choice of the economic model, it develops the recognizable features that any equitable economic system should have in order to properly represent and uphold the essence, survival, and better life for the sovereign state as community of the ethnos, nation, people that have formed it.
The sovereign economic development doctrine based on the sovereign state doctrine, and that amalgamates both 1) philosophical, economic theory and ideological aspects of sovereign economy, with 2) the tried and time-tested practical application of economic principles, expertise, knowledge, platforms, tools and instruments of how to create conditions conducive to their flourishing for the benefit of the nation, providing fair and equitable economy for all.
Goal of this first textbook of the Sovereign Economic Doctrine series, The Foundations of the Economic Development, is to enable you to:
Define the Sovereign Economic Development model in relations to other development models; Understand origins, foundations and roots of economic development; Understand the need and necessity of sovereign economic development; Identify the elements that have passed the test of time and practice to be used as building blocks in Economic Development Doctrine and its implementation; Identify the entry points for implementing a Sovereign Economic Development; Define the objectives & stages of implementation of Economic Development Model for sovereign nations.
The Sovereign Economic Doctrine series begins with the first textbook laying down the theoretical foundations and embedding the Sovereign Economic Development Model in widest possible scientific and human knowledge and in the wider Social, State, Political, Human and National Development framework. The interdisciplinary nature of the economic development requires embedding the sovereign economic development doctrine in the deeper theories and practice of state, international relations, economics, philosophy, psychology, sociology and other disciplines that affect the way the people organize their way of life in general and in the economic sphere in particular.
The entire remaining chapters/books of the textbook focus on: Practical Skills in All Areas of Economic Development. Building on this, the course presents a comprehensive and wide range of practical areas of economic development interventions and its cross-cutting social, political and economic dimensions that the sovereign nation-states are using in the emerging multipolar world. The course is intended to equip the nation-states’ governments, public and private sector companies as well as emerging international cooperation bodies with vision, skills and tools to envision, strategize and operationalize their sovereign national economic development doctrines and plans
This book is intended for state officials, academia, businessmen and people
The knowledge of designing, implementing and operationalizing a sovereign equitable system is of essential importance for the nation-states from the Global South as an alternative to the neoliberal model, and equally important, for the West’s nation-states that after the end of the current financialization will be rebuilding their real economies again.
Order here, on Amazon or ask for promo code on: study@sumkoski.com
]]>
I understand that many of you share my view that we had enough of simply explaining and complaining how bad the global neoliberal order is, since most of the people around the world already understand this very well and have felt its negative impact on their own skins. What we need is to move forward with developing the framework of this new, fair and just multipolar international world order that is currently taking shape, and within it produce and systematize the theoretical and practical content, tools and instruments in various concrete areas, for the sovereign nation-states to be able to use them in this process of reviving their sovereign mandates and powers, lost or diminished in the last decades by the global neoliberal agenda. Hence, here is an article excerpted from the full study on the same topic published in RUDN academic journal International Relations that provides such an approach.
The current and until recently near universal acceptance by academia, governments and experts, of the Washington Consensus “one-size-fits-all” policies that it prescribed to nation-states has now been challenged in both theory and practice. This process has been marked by removing the mandates and powers of the nation-state, that now, with the emergence of a new multipolar world, has been provided with another and sovereign alternative path to development. While the alternatives are sprouting everywhere, the “new normal” of the global development of sovereign nations has not still been agreed upon, though the key features are beginning to shape up. It becomes clear that the “old’ global development governance institutions will not be able to adjust to the new reality and become both more inclusive in decision making processes and in allowing more and varied content or paths to development of sovereign nations. Hence, there a number of separate and competing versions of regional and global approaches to development that will cater for needs and preferences of sovereign nations.
The ongoing fall of the neoliberal ideology worldview, predominant since 1990s in the area of international relations, global and states’ ideology, political and social institutions, economy, sciences, and universities and consequently enshrined almost universally in vast majority of countries’ national development strategies as state ideology, has created a vacuum not only in competing ideology, but in practical skills, visions, strategies and capabilities to implement sovereign economic doctrine. This is due that the neoliberal ideology that demoted the nation-states to regional purely executive administrations without policy-making and policy-implementing roles. This content-free governing was enabled by such purely executive roles being translated into states’ education systems from the 1st class to the universities and master and doctoral studies, leaving a deep void for a sovereign nation-state in terms of the vision, strategy, plans and capacities to perform their roles in what lies ahead in the new multipolar order.
The new emerging multipolar world based on international theories of realism does not need a prescriptive ideology at the nation-state level, beyond the fundamental one, the sovereign will of its people to establish and govern their affairs and way of life according to their preferred traditional, moral, social norms and values. Is there a need for a sovereign state doctrine or sovereign economic development in that case? Yes, because the neoliberal agenda stripped away through the process of de-statization, all levers and instruments for a state to be able to formulate and provide such a sovereign vision, strategy and practical implementation. The neoliberal void, where the states were reduced to local administrators and executives of the globalist agenda for the benefit of the trans-national corporations, has to be filled by the process of re-statization. That requires rediscovering the origins and the purpose of the nation-state since the times of Aristotle, through medieval states and the nation-state of 19th and early 20th century along the entire vertical chain, starting from adopting its own ideology, vision, strategy and plans as well as ability and capacity for providing political, economic and social development for its sovereign, the people.
Only one fundamental change drawn from the theory and practice of the statehood, now embedded in the sovereign state doctrine, will in turn affect all aspects of the sovereign-state such as its ideology, institutions, governing, administration work and practices in all of its economic, political and social spheres further down the line. That fundamental change away from the current globally-imposed neoliberal model is: that the state serves its sovereign, the people, and not any other higher international global interest groups. Such a sovereign state doctrine will provide foundations for developing equitable economic systems in each country that best reflects its potential, culture, tradition and reflects its natural and human potential. Hence, without being prescriptive in the ideological and political aspects that are unalienable rights for each sovereign nation-state to define according to its values, traditions, culture, similarly, the economic concept in such a sovereign state allows for any model from public, state-led to private, market-led and any mix-models variations in between.
Based on the analysis of the neoliberal areas of interventions where the state capacities have been weakened, the article develops analysis of the potential entry points for re-building the ability to formulate a sovereign state doctrine, vision and strategy. As importantly for the sovereign states in the multipolar world, is to develop the skills and capacities to design and implement operational plans for rebuilding their nation states, something that we are illustrating it on the example of the sovereign economic doctrine.
And while developing countries and practitioners in the field have been re-introducing (or have never stopped using) using a near-industrial policy reforms which allows for a greater state role – and more of an enabler this time round – and not in the role of picking the winners and with all qualifiers and caveats of not distorting the economy-wide or sectoral competition and impact of the market forces, the field is now open for an ascent of a comprehensive development theory that would connect all partial economic, social and institutional approaches towards reinstating the role of the institutions, both formal and informal, and nation-states as a predominant development paradigm of the 21st century.
There are already many and significant efforts in the last decades in this direction that assume and include the role of the state and institutions into the development and growth equations and drawing policy lessons on this basis. Some of them are the New Structural Economics (Lin 2006) or the concept of “binding constraints” and “growth diagnostics” (Rodrik 2005). However, they both attempt only to improve the western Bretton Woods institutions, something that was unsuccessfully tried – for example “there is a more than one path to development” failed World Bank reform attempt (Stiglitz, 2003,2011), and, something for which we don’t see support by the western political elites. A new sovereign economic doctrine is to be built, based on the sovereign nation-state doctrine establishing the general framework for sovereign nation-states finding its own ways to political, social and economic development in the multipolar world based on the realism in the international relations theory and practice.
What the doctrine of sovereign economic development will provide, is tools and instruments for designing and implementing the institutional, strategy, policy framework for a government of a sovereign state, provide comparative analysis of all these models in order for the states to devise the one that is most suitable to its nation and to enshrine it in its long-term economic development platforms and visions. Until now, all nations have similar National Development Plans, Visions, Strategies, and corresponding strategic documents in economic, social, education, health and other areas drawn from the key national documents. However, the current strategic national documents in most of the countries are stripped of any significant sovereign policy content are seldom agreed with the people and mostly produced by small technocratic elite that mostly take a guidance[i] from the similar national documents prepared for them by World Bank, IMF, ADB, EBRD, AfDB etc. Coupled with the fact that there is no reward or punishment or review of the outcomes and impact of these plans, correspondingly, and in line with stripped mandates and powers of the state, these documents do not require any grander work more than purely executive and administrative one, and contrary to the sovereign states’ interests, often not in the interest of the people of the given nation-state.
Hence, the paradigm change from the benefit for the globalist transnational corporations to the benefit for the people will put great strain on the state to be able to devise, plan and operationalize the more complex and demanding requirements that sovereign state doctrine and sovereign equitable economic development will put on them, starting with the governments, public administrations and all other political, economic and social institutions.
What will this entail. This study focuses on the sovereign economic development but similar profound changes from the ideology to implementation will take place in all other areas of the political, social development of the re-born nation state. Even more, the sovereign economic development and other fields will have to be deeply embedded and interwoven with the political and social development in the implementation of the sovereign state doctrine. The current partialization of these key areas, and even further partialization within each of these fields and creating silos where nobody has the entire picture, was the tool of the global neoliberal agenda to be able to implement its policies without larger opposition. The sovereign economic doctrine will require activating and utilizing all of the nations’ intellectual, human and institutional capacity and resources to be put in work on translating its sovereign state doctrine into a viable equitable sovereign economic doctrine:
First, the profound ideological change towards the sovereign – the people of the nation-state – will mean bringing changes into incentive structure between all economic, political and social factors – that should be enshrined in the foundation acts such as constitutions of nation-states. The current incentive structures in the neoliberal economies are unbalanced and biased towards the actors that are the local implementors of the global neoliberal agenda, that is harming domestic economy, its productivity, natural and human resources diverting them into non-productive activities that neither create value nor bring added value to domestic economy or to the welfare of its people.
Second, sovereign science and education and economic science and education in particular, has to be revised in line with the sovereign state doctrine and embedded both domestically and within the international network of academia of the sovereign nations, in different languages, journals, think-tanks, to provide an authentic knowledge base for providing skills for implementation of the doctrine, beyond and in competition to the current and English-only based hijacked science that has been fully captured by the neoliberal agenda. This means establishing own parallel system of accreditation of the educational platforms, creating a network of educational and training platforms such as training centres in addition to the existing schools, universities where lecturers now are squeezed out of the current academic and education system that in many countries is hijacked by the neoliberal global agenda.
Third, each country’s adopted sovereign ideology, and the systematized indigenous scientific and practical knowledge, will have to be distilled into a profound sovereign economic development national vision and strategy documents that will be supported by the political, governing and administrative structures and by the people that аre to be involved through consultation, information dissipation and participation. These strategic vision and operational documents will be a base for developing operational and implementation plans accompanied with goals and corresponding indicators, monitoring and evaluation, early warning systems, rectification and adjustment. These documents will have impact on all sectors of the state and the society and will be supported by other sectoral development visions and strategies such as political and social development.
Fourth, based on its ideology, vision and strategy, and the operational plan for implementation, this will require both institutional changes as well as capacity and human resources development for the entire public administration, political and government structures, judiciary, central and commercial banking, education system from primary to universities programmes, government financial support, and incentive structures that will have to be adjusted to be able to support and implement this sovereign equitable economic development vision and strategy.
Fifth, implementation and support for the economic actors from individual entrepreneurs through MSME to large national corporations through providing access to finance, developing know-how for increased productivity in goods and services, hard and soft infrastructure development, innovation, technological advances, increase of quality, access to markets, trade and export development, fair investment promotion, branding of products, services and nation’s economy, etc.
Based on this vision and strategy, the implementation of the sovereign economic doctrine should include the following components of sovereign national development: institutional development, governance and administration of economic development; building, operationalization and implementation of a just economic system; public and private investment support; sectoral economic policy and sector-unique advantages focused support; international economic cooperation; sovereign financial flows for development; infrastructure development; skills, know-how and knowledge development and human development; efficient public administration; restructuring of the public companies and business process reengineering; increasing productive and service capacity through technology and innovation; micro-, small- and medium-enterprise development; local and regional economic development; natural and mineral resources development and protection; trade and export promotion, marketing, and branding of national economy; regulation and deregulation for economic development; digitalization, e-governance, blockchain, AI.
Thus, the doctrine of sovereign economic development, with the doctrine of the sovereign state at its core, fills the de-statization vacuum left by decades of neoliberal models. This is achieved by (i) providing a broad ideological and philosophical basis and understanding of the essence of the sovereign economy, enabling the formulation of one’s own sovereign economic doctrine, and (ii) developing practical skills, knowledge, platforms, levers and tools to implement the provisions of economic theory that will enable national economies to prosper in the common interest. A similar approach is needed in the development of appropriate sovereign doctrines of political and social development.
Given the failure of the neoliberal development model to bring sustainable development to the nation-states, and failure to devise alternative theoretical and practical sources of legitimacy processes and outcomes in dissipation of neoliberal models, there is a need for establishing a new model that is taking into consideration the need for a sovereign development of a nation-states in the multipolar world that is currently taking shape. Creating an efficient and responsive nation-state educational, scientific, analytical, think-tank, as well as implementation platforms and supporting international networks will help advance the sovereign state doctrine and help the nation-states share and exchange information, experience, knowledge in developing and implementing ideological, strategic and operational plans. These are the areas where a lot of work lies ahead in the new multipolar world.
Attend free online masterclass on economic development for sovereign nations on Sovereign Statecraft Lyceum:
https://lyceum.international/economic-development/
Drop an email to study@lyceum.international and get a free access to all modules of the Chapter 1 of the Economic Development for Sovereign Nations:
Sumkoski, G, (2022). Global Dissipation of Neoliberal Models and the Sovereign State Doctrine. Vestnik RUDN. International Relations. – 2022. – Vol. 22. – N. 4. – P. 771-787. doi: 10.22363/2313-0660-2022-22-4-771-787.
Goran Sumkoski – Independent development expert, scholar, mentor, trainer and lecturer on economic, political and social development, author of the Sovereign Development Doctrine, founder of Sovereign Statecraft Lyceum, taught and conducted research at universities on three continents, having worked with governments, presidents, businesses and people in 30 countries across the world as a director, consultant, adviser, and as an independent expert with organizations such as the World Bank, Asian Development Bank, IMF, BBC, UN, OSCE, EU, etc. A postgraduate of University of Minnesota, USA; London School of Economics and Political Science, University of Manchester, University of East Anglia, UK; the University of St. Cyril and Methodius, Macedonia; Meiji University, Japan. Can be reached at goran@sumkoski.com and through www.sumkoski.com
References:
Abelson, D. E. (2002). Do think tanks matter? Assessing the impact of public policy institutes. Montreal: McGillQueen’s University Press.
Barrientos, A., & Powell, M. (2004). The route map of the Third Way. In S. Hale, W. Leggett & L. Martell (Eds.), The Third Way and beyond: Criticisms, futures, alternatives (pp. 9—27). Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Berkowitz, D., Pistor, K., & Richard, J.-F. (2003). Economic development, legality, and the transplant effect. European Economic Review, 47(1), 165—195. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0014-2921(01)00196-9
Bernstein, S., & Cashore, B. (2000). Globalization, four paths of internationalization and domestic policy change: The case of ecoforestry in British Columbia, Canada. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 3(1), 67—99. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008423900000044
Blagescu, M., & Young, J. (2006). Capacity development for policy advocacy: Current thinking and approaches among agencies supporting civil society organisations. Overseas Development Institute Working Paper, (260), 1—50. Retrieved from https://www.gichd.org/fileadmin/GICHD-resources/rec-documents/CapacityDevelopment-for-Policy-Advocacy.pdf
Boas, M., & McNeill, D. (Eds.). (2004). Global institutions and development: Framing the world? London: Routledge.
Boettke, P. J., Coyne, C. J., & Leeson, P. T. (2008). Institutional stickiness and the New Development Economics. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 67(2), 331—358. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1536-7150.2008.00573.x
Buchanan, A., & Keohane, O. R. (2005). The legitimacy of global governance institutions. Ethics & International Affairs, 20(4), 405—437. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7093.2006.00043.x
Busch, P. O., & Jörgens, H. (2004). The international sources of policy convergence: Explaining the spread of environmental policy innovations. Journal of European Public Policy, 12(5), 860—884. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760500161514
Cisse, O. (2008). Mineral policy in developing countries: Copy and paste? CEPMLP Annual Review, (12), 1—15. Retrieved from https://www.dundee.ac.uk/download/17271/media
Clark, I. (2003). Legitimacy in a global order. Review of International Studies, 29(S1), 75—95. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210503005904
Court, J., Hovland, I., & Young, J. (2005). Bridging research and policy: Evidence and the change process. Rugby: ITDG Publishing.
D’Aspremont, E., & de Brabandere, A. (2011). The complementary faces of legitimacy in international law: The legitimacy of origin and the legitimacy of exercise. Fordham International Law Journal, 34(2), 190—235.
Deacon, B. (2007). Global social policy & governance. London: Sage. https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446212219
Degterev, D. A. (2011). International development assistance: Evolution of international legal regimes and effectiveness of foreign aid. Moscow: Lenand publ. (In Russian).
Degterev, D., & Kurylev, K. (Eds.). (2019). Foreign policies of the CIS states: A comprehensive reference. Boulder: Lynne Rienner. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781626378087
Dementiev, V. E., & Ustyuzhanina, E. V. (2016). The problem of power: Institutional approach. Journal of Institutional Studies, 8(3), 91—101. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.17835/2076-6297.2016.8.3.091-101
Dolowitz, D., & Marsh, D. (1996). Who learns what from whom? A review of the policy transfer literature. Political Studies, 44(2), 343—357. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.1996.tb00334.x
Domjahn, T. (2013). What (if anything) can developing countries learn from South Korea? Asian Culture and History, 5(2), 16—24. https://doi.org/10.5539/ach.v5n2p16
Drezner, D. W. (2001). Globalization and policy convergence. International Studies Review, 3(1), 53—78. https://doi.org/10.1111/1521-9488.00225
Duan, Y., Nie, W., & Coakes, E. (2010). Identifying key factors affecting transnational knowledge transfer. Information & Management, 47(7—8), 356—363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2010.08.003
Dunning, T., & Pop-Eleches, G. (2004). From transplants to hybrids: Exploring institutional pathways to growth. Studies in Comparative International Development, 38(4), 3—29. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02686326
Evans, P. (2004). Development as institutional change: The pitfalls of monocropping and potentials of deliberation. Studies in Comparative International Development, 38(4), 30—53. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02686327
Gilardi, F., & Wasserfallen, F. (2019). The politics of policy diffusion. European Journal of Political Research, 58(4), 1245—1256. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12326
Goderis, B., & Versteeg, M. (2013). Transnational constitutionalism: A conceptual framework. In D. J. Galligan & M. Versteeg (Eds.), Social and political foundations of constitutions (pp. 103—133). Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139507509.007
Hausmann, R., Pritchett, L., & Rodrik, D. (2005). Growth accelerations. Journal of Economic Growth, 10(4), 303—329. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10887-005-4712-0
Hennink, M., & Stephenson, R. (2005). Using research to inform health policy: Barriers and strategies in developing countries. Journal of Health Communication, 10(2), 163—180. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730590915128
Holzinger, K., Knill, C., & Sommerer, T. (2008). Environmental policy convergence: The impact of international harmonization, transnational communication, and regulatory competition. International Organization, 62(4), 553—587. https://doi.org/10.1017/S002081830808020X
Jacoby, W. (2008). Minority traditions and post-communist politics: How do IGOs matter? In M. A. Orenstein, S. Bloom & N. Lindstrom (Eds.), Transnational actors in Central and East European transitions (pp. 56—76). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt7zwb44
Jones, N., & Young, J. (2007). Setting the scene: Situating DFID’s research funding policy and practice in an international comparative perspective. London: Overseas Development Institute.
Jones, N., Jones, H., Steer, L., & Datta, A. (2008). Improving impact evaluation production and use. Overseas Development Institute Working Paper, (300), 1—78. Retrieved from https://cdn.odi.org/media/documents/4158.pdf
Jörgens, H. (2004). Governance by diffusion: Implementing global norms through cross-national imitation and learning. In W. M. Lafferty (Ed.), Governance for sustainable development: The challenge of adapting form to function (pp. 246—283). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781845421700.00017
Kahler, M. (2009). Global governance redefined. In A. Sobel (Ed.), Challenges of globalization: Immigration, social welfare, global governance (pp. 174—198). London: Routledge.
Kelley, J. (2004). Ethnic politics in Europe: The power of norms and incentives. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Knill, C. (2005). Introduction: Cross-national policy convergence: Concepts, approaches and explanatory factors. Journal of European Public Policy, 12(5), 764—774. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760500161332
Kramer, A., & Pahl-Wostl, C. (2014). The global policy network behind integrated water resources management: Is it an effective norm diffusor? Ecology and Society Research, 19(4), 11.
Kurylev, K., Degterev, D., Smolik, N., & Stanis, D. (2018). A quantitative analysis of geopolitical pluralism in the post-Soviet space. International Organisations Research Journal, 13(1), 134—156. https://doi.org/10.17323/1996-7845-2018-01-08
Lazer, D. (2001). Regulatory interdependence and international governance. Journal of European Public Policy, 8(3), 474—492. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760110056077
Leimgruber, M. (2012). The historical roots of a diffusion process: The three-pillar doctrine and European pension debates (1972—1994). Global Social Policy, 12(1), 24—44. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468018111431668
Levi, M., Sacks, A., & Tyler, T. (2009). Conceptualizing legitimacy, measuring legitimating beliefs. American Behavioral Scientist, 53(3), 354—375. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764209338797
Lin, J. Y. (2012). New structural economics: A framework for rethinking development policy. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.
Maggetti, M. (2009). The role of independent regulatory agencies in policy-making: A comparative analysis. Journal of European Public Policy, 16(3), 450—470. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760802662854
Maggetti, M. (2010). Legitimacy and accountability of independent regulatory agencies: A critical review. Living Reviews in Democracy, 2, 1—10.
Manshin, R. V., & Ghafari, A. L. (2021). Investment cooperation between Russia and India. RUDN Journal of Economics, 29(3), 490—501. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-2329-2021-29-3-490-501
Margulis, M. E. (2021). Intervention by international organizations in regime complexes. The Review of International Organizations, 16(4), 871—902 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11558-020-09403-z
Merrien, F. X. (2001). The World Bank’s new social policies: Pensions. International Social Science Journal, 53(170), 537—550. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2451.00343
Minogue, M. (2002). Governance-based analysis of regulation. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 73(4), 649—666. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8292.00209
Moran, T. H. (2011). Foreign direct investment and development: Launching a second generation of policy research: Avoiding the mistakes of the first, re-evaluating policies for developed and developing countries.
Washington, D.C.: Peterson Institute for International Economics.
Potoski, M., & Prakash, A. (2005). Green clubs and voluntary governance: ISO 14001 and firms’ regulatory compliance. American Journal of Political Science, 49(2), 235—248. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0092-5853.2005.00120.x
Reinicke, W. H., Deng, F., Witte, J. M., et al. (2000). Critical choices: The United Nations, networks, and the future of global governance. Ottawa: International Development Research Centre.
Risse, T. (2006). Transnational governance and legitimacy. In A. Benz & Y. Papadopoulos (Eds.), Governance and democracy: Comparing national, European and international experiences (pp. 179—199). London: Routledge.
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. 5th edition. New York: Free Press.
Rosenau, J. (1995). Governance in the twenty-first century. Global Governance, 1(1), 13—43.
Scott, C. (2010). Regulatory governance and the challenge of constitutionalism. In D. Oliver, T. Prosser & R. Rawlings (Eds.), The regulatory state: Constitutional implications (pp. 15—33). Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199593170.003.0002
Stallings, B. (2007). The globalization of capital flows: Who benefits? The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 610(1), 201—216. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716206297918
Stiglitz, J. (2001). Redefining the role of the state: Joseph Stiglitz on building a “post-Washington consensus”. An Interview with introduction by Brian Snowdon. World Economics, 2(3), 45—86.
Stiglitz, J. (2002). Globalization and its discontents. New York: Norton & Company.
Stone, D. (2004). Transfer agents and global networks in the ‘transnationalization’ of policy. Journal of European Public Policy, 11(3), 545—566. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760410001694291
Sumkoski, G. (2016). Towards socio-economic theory and practice of regulation. Evidence from OECD countries and Bangladesh. Cogent Social Sciences, 2(1), 1—22. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2016.1254840
Sumkoski, G. (2017). Building reform capacity. In A. Farazmand (Ed.), Global encyclopedia of public administration, public policy, and governance (pp. 1—6). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_3306-2
Sutinen, J. G., & Kuperan, L. (1999). A socio-economic theory of regulatory compliance. International Journal of Social Economics, 26(1/2/3), 174—193. https://doi.org/10.1108/03068299910229569
Trein, P. (2015). Literature report: A review of policy learning in five strands of political science research. INSPIRES Working Paper Series, (26), 1—22. Retrieved from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2707344
True, J., & Mintrom, M. (2001). Transnational networks and policy diffusion: The case of gender mainstreaming. International Studies Quarterly, 45(1), 27—57. https://doi.org/10.1111/0020-8833.00181
Tyler, T. R. (1990). Why people obey the law. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Uhlin, A. (2010). Democratic legitimacy of transnational actors: Mapping out the conceptual terrain. In E. Erman & A. Uhlin (Eds.), Legitimacy beyond the state? (pp. 16—37). London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230283251_2
Vachudova, M. A. (2005). Europe undivided: Democracy, leverage, & integration after Communism. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/0199241198.001.0001
Verger, A., Novelli, M., & Kosar Altinyelken, H. (2012). Global education policy and international development: An introductory framework. In A. Verger, M. Novelli & H. Kosar Altinyelken (Eds.), Global education policy and international development: New agendas, issues and policies (pp. 3—32). London: Bloomsbury.
Weaver, R. (Ed.). (2000). Think tanks and civil societies: Catalysts for ideas and action. London: Sage.
Weyland, K. (2005). Theories of policy diffusion lessons from Latin American pension reform. World Politics, 57(2), 262—295. https://doi.org/10.1353/wp.2005.0019
Young, O. R. (1979). Compliance and public authority. New York: RFF Press.
]]>Goran Sumkoski – Independent development expert, scholar, mentor, trainer and lecturer on economic, political and social development, author of the Sovereign Development Doctrine, founder of Sovereign Statecraft Lyceum, taught and conducted research at universities on three continents, having worked with governments, presidents, businesses and people in 30 countries across the world as a director, consultant, adviser, and as an independent expert with organizations such as the World Bank, Asian Development Bank, IMF, BBC, UN, OSCE, EU, etc. A postgraduate of University of Minnesota, USA; London School of Economics and Political Science, University of Manchester, University of East Anglia, UK; the University of St. Cyril and Methodius, Macedonia; Meiji University, Japan.
Dec 2018 – July 2023 Worldwide
Trainer and mentor of thousands of professionals in sovereign economic development doctrine and its practical implementation.
Dec 2019 – Mar 2020 Saudi Arabia KSA
Economic Development Expert for Diversification of Saudi Economy
January 2017 – 2018 Central Asia EU – DEVCO
Project Director, Team Leader, Private Sector Development Study for Central Asian countries of Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan
Identifying the private sector features and using latest statistical data on the private sector (e.g. number of SMEs, size and definition of SMEs, employment by SMEs, financial situation of SMEs, trade patterns of SMEs, percentage of GDP, breakdown per sectors in connection with regional and international market, etc.) from all 5 Central Asian countries
Identifying national and regional sectors with high growth and job creation potential.
Assessing private sector development opportunities enhanced by regional cooperation settings such as the Eurasian Economic Union and facilitated by recent GSP+ status, concerning Central Asian countries’ access to EU markets.
Analyzing characteristics, capacity and training needs of Government ministries & agencies and Business Intermediary Organizations in all 5 Central Asian countries and logistic services.
Analyzing State Owned Enterprises in each of the five countries, notably regarding their share in the economy, the sectors they are represented in, and the plans of the Governments to privatize.
Provide recommendations to be taken on board by the national beneficiaries and EU to strengthen the business climate, facilitate private sector development and improve development effectiveness of EU projects.
Analyzing the development effectiveness of the EU programmes, CAI and IFCA, in Central Asia.
May 2016 – January 2017 Turkey UNDP
HQ Economic Development Expert for Eastern Europe, Former Soviet Union and Turkey.
Provide strategic advice to country offices on building capacities to improve private sector development and productive capacity enhancement;
Provide strategic advice to country offices on building capacities to improve trade-related projects;
Propose UNDP approach to Sustainable Local Development and propose service lines for the Sustainable Development Cluster and concrete actions products, tools, platforms and instruments within the local economic development context.
Prepare methodology for operationalizing SDGs for ongoing and incoming UNDP programmes and projects;
Develop minimum standards for microfinance loans for trade, private sector development, greening agriculture, micro-insurance, developing capacities in private sector development.
Develop service-lines on building productive capacities, trade and local development for the SD Cluster;
Mapping of potential new partners, including from the private sector for the region for Turkey.
2015 – 2016 Kyrgyzstan, Asian Development Bank
Project Director, Team Leader, Improving the Effectiveness of International Development Funds
Provide training to Government and ministries on best practices of Project Management
Produce Development Effectiveness Guidelines and Manual for all Investment Implementation
Producing sets of legal and regulatory acts for improved efficiency of project implementation
Informational campaign for promoting development effectiveness
Improving development effectiveness in Infrastructure, Energy, Education, Health and Social sectors
2016 Kyrgyzstan International Monitory Fund (IMF)
IMF International Economic Expert
Help Kyrgyz Republic evaluate the strength of the public investment management practices through IMF’s Public Investment Management Assessment (PIMA).
The PIMA evaluated Kyrgyz Republic’s institutions that shape public investment decision-making at the three key stages
Planning sustainable investment across the public sector;
Allocating investment to the right sectors and projects;
Implementing projects on time and on budget
2015 Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan
UNDP International Economic Expert on Economic Development
Review of the National FEZ Development Strategy, FEZ Laws and Regulations
Marketing Strategy For Investment Promotion in Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan
Training for local SME on value chain approach
Investment Promotion Campaign training for Ministry of Economy
2014 – 2015 Kyrgyzstan OSCE
International Expert on Regulatory Managament
Managing large Regulatory Impact Analysis and introducing e-Guillotine project in the Kyrgyz Republic with key government, private sector and civil society.
Establishing 25-member Regulatory Reform Unit made up of local experts and guiding their work and the work international partners such as Jacobs &Cordova and Associates.
Establishing Regulatory Reform Council led by the Prime Minister and developing all strategic and operational plans as well as legal framework for introducing RIA and e-Guillotine in the Kyrgyz Republic.
2014 Uzbekistan UNDP International Expert
Regional Local Economic Development Adviser for Eastern Europe, Former Soviet Union and Turkey
Review of the curricula of the Academy of Public Administration under the president of Uzbekistan
Four new subjects recommended and concept notes developed
Several public lectures to M.Sc. students on Public Administration, HR, E-government, Local Government
2011 – 2014 Bangladesh India, Nepal, Bhutan and Sri Lanka World Bank Group/IFC
Regional Program Manager for Investment Climate/Business Environment in South Asia
Managing 6.5 M USD program per year and 10 staff on time within budget and with highest standards of outcomes.
Managing complex stakeholders’ relationship between government officials, businesses, international donor community and leading Bangladeshi donor & government sub-committee on investments.
Designs and sets regional standards for Business Regulations aligned with the Global IFC/WB products for South Asia with a focus on high developmental impact, ensuring strategy is in line with IFC strategic objectives and regional business model.
Provides sound technical expertise to regional Business Regulations teams and regional internal clients (investment and advisory) ensuring the product meets high quality standards, and has a clear development and exit strategy;
Ensures the development of and adherence to a solid measurement and evaluation framework for the product in collaboration with M&E staff and in line with WB practices and policies, including setting guidelines for pre-implementation scoping and post-project monitoring; Promotes cooperation within WBG through FPD, PREM etc.
Takes responsibility for development and design of new programs/ projects.
As Program Manager works closely with project leaders and monitors implementation and progress of projects focused and recommends corrective actions when and if necessary; Contributes to the knowledge management agenda taking accountability for gathering, managing and disseminating global best practice and institutional knowledge across IFC;
Supports the Global Product Specialists from HQ and jointly develops new initiatives/global projects, leading innovation and keeping abreast/influencing industry developments;
Works on Access to Finance, Sustainable Business Advisory, Inclusive Business Models, Investment Facilitation.
Leads on PSD, business regulations, institutional & regulatory reforms, governance initiatives in 5 South Asian countries.
Leads South Asia Business Regulation Practice Group for India, Bangladesh, Nepal ,Bhutan & Sri Lanka.
Implement Tax Administration Reform, Introduction of Alternative Dispute Resolution systems.
Led Bangladeshi Government Delegation to a one week study tour in Jakarta, Indonesia, hosted by Indonesian Ministry of Local Government.
Introducing 10M USD Regulatory Enforcement & Inspections program in Bangladesh, Nepal and India
Investment climate work in regulatory simplification, BPR, PPPs, climate change and sector specific work in infrastructure, transport, power and energy, gas & oil, water, health, food, SME, agri-business, tourism, local economic development etc.
SEZ regulatory simplification issues form identification, designing interventions & implementation, investment promotion.
Developed & introduced Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) in Bangladesh, scoped regional RIA opportunities.
2013 – 2014 DC Washington DEC/World Bank
Visiting Expert to World Bank DEC
Visiting Expert as part of a program to foster knowledge sharing between researchers and operational staff to conduct 2 months research with the Development Economics Vice Presidency (DEC), chaired by Kaushik Basu.
Publish a paper and help develop channels to put research findings into good use, especially in World Bank/IFC operations: Regulatory governance, economy-wide and sectoral, and links with private sector investment in OECD countries, extending findings into sector regulatory frameworks/investment link in developing countries.
2009 -2011 Tajikistan UNDP
Strategic Adviser to UNDP and Tajikistan Government, Economic Development Expert
Strategically positioned UNDP interventions for working in Private Sector Development, and Local Economic Development with national & local government
Developing institutional capacity, design regulatory reforms and improved governance initiatives for government ministries, national level agencies as well as regional and local level government outlets.
Provided advisory support on approach to value chain analysis, marketing strategies, economic growth for rural communities
International Strategic Economic Advisor provides coordination, managerial, technical and policy advisory support.
Provided strategic advice on policy dialogue, advocacy, knowledge transfer on rural economic development
Monitored program’s operational plans & external environment and advised timely readjustment of programme activities.
Provision of expert analysis on mobilizing government structures to provide favorable support to the business sector at local level with the view to improve good governance and economic growth, infrastructure, power, water-supply
Investment facilitation in manufacturing, agroprocessing, water-supply, export promotion, marketing etc.
2010 – 2011 Philippines Asian Development Bank
Advising and Training the Management of the Asian Development Bank, Team Leader, Key Expert in Internal & External Communication
Improved implementation of ADB Communication strategy in complex international organization with diverse staff
Developing institutional capacity for inclusive and culturally and gender sensitive working environment in ADB
ADB key leaders and managers helped to review current implementation of communication strategy.
Improved ability of ADB’s Management, senior staff and lead sector/thematic specialists to raise ADB’s profile by delivering their key messages in a clear, effective and timely manner to a diverse audience,
Participants reviewed own communication styles and approach and improved their ability to communicate with clarity to staff, colleagues, subordinates and superiors.
Greater awareness developed about impact of senior managers’ communication skills on organizational performance,
Skills to overcome own unconscious bias and recognize it in others acquired and implemented,
Gender bias interference on communications and organizational performance addressed,
150 professionals coached on awareness and challenges & opportunities of better communications among diverse staff.
Management of project activities, experts, budget and donor reporting and coordination.
2010 – 2011 Tajikistan OSCE
Team Leader, Free Economic Zones Development
Identification of main economic sectors for Tajikistan’s Ishkashim Free Economic Zone on Pamir;
Definition of opportunities of potential domestic & international trade, with Afghanistan, Pakistan and China;
Study of international investment opportunities, factors positively and negatively impacting international investment.
Private Sector Development strategy and operationalization plan for Tajikistan region of Gorno Badakshan.
Attracting investment in agriprocessing, tourism, water-supply, mining, private sector power-generation Pamir Energy
Analysis of infrastructure development required to support the proposed industries / businesses;
Design of the administrative, human resources and related financial requirements, operational implementation plan
On basis of my proposal donors and commercial sector pledged 5M USD for development of infrastructure of Ishkashim FEZ.
2009 – 2010 Bosnia and Herzegovina Germany European Commission Naturex Consulting, BBC WST
Team Leader, Restructuring and Transformation of Bosnian State Owned Institutions
535.000 EUR EC funded project: Establishing the Public Broadcasting System of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Providing restructuring plan for the Public Broadcaster with 2,000 employees in cooperation with management.
Restructuring plan on legal, organizational, human resources, finance, production programming, communication, marketing.
Managing team of 10 international experts on restructuring and media and team of around 10 local experts and support staff.
Strategic, organizational, operational, financial management of the complex project.
Providing intensive training in institutional reforms, transformation of state owned institutions and management.
2006– 2009 Kyrgyzstan GTZ
Strategic Adviser, International Business Council of Kyrgyzstan
Providing strategic and operational guidance to the private sector of all Kyrgyz-based local and foreign businesses.
Member of President’s Investment Council, PPD platform sponsored by EBRD.
Member of Supreme Economic Council advising the Kyrgyz Prime Minister.
Member of the government-business working group that in 3 years brought Kyrgyzstan to the 2nd best reformer in the world according to World Bank’s Doing Business Indicators for 2009.
Lobbying and influencing government and parliament for adoption of business-friendly laws.
Regular reporting and contacts with donors, partners, government officials.
Managing a team of around 10 local experts and support staff.
Private Sector Development, implementing business regulatory reforms and improving governance.
Managing complex negotiations between all stakeholders, businesses, governments and citizens.
Conducting public opinion campaigns in order to galvanize support for better investment climate.
Strategic, organizational, operational, financial management of a complex project with many stakeholders.
Helped develop Mining Code, Tax Code, Import-Export simplification program, National Development Strategy, development of tourism sector, agro-business, mining and hydro power, infrastructure development etc.
2007 – 2009 Bosnia and Herzegovina France European Commission Naturex Consulting
Team Leader, Transformation of Bosnian State Owned Institutions
585.000 EUR EC project: Standardization of News Workflow and Archiving Processes in Public Broadcasting Services.
Providing intensive training programme for news production to 500 staff and management
Regular reporting and contacts with donors, partners, government officials
Strategic, organizational, operational, financial management of this complex project.
Managing team of 25 renowned international experts on restructuring and 10 local experts and support staff.
2008 – 2009 Central Asia
Professor MBA program of American University
Teaching at MBA level courses of Strategic Management and Business Negotiations.
Overseeing master thesis of number of students.
Providing advice to AUCA Business Clinic in market analysis, project proposals and fundraising.
Establishing sustainable and ongoing links between AUCA and the business community.
2008 Central Asia MCG,
Naturex Management Consultant
Producing operational and marketing strategy for Central Asia News Service that is providing news and information to users in Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan.
Providing market analysis, recommendations in terms of content, operations, finances and marketing.
2008 Russian Federation MCG,
Naturex Management Consultant
Feasibility study for multi-million dollar launch of new Mini-Movies Channel in 6 EU countries.
Providing market analysis and recommendations in terms of content, operations, finances.
Detailed complex analysis for the launch of a digital launch of a channel for the Western Market financed by the consortium of companies from countries from Former Soviet Union.
2005 – 2006 Bosnia and Herzegovina Germany European Commission AHT Deutsche Welle
Team Leader, Transformation of Bosnian State Owned Institutions
500.000 EU funded project: Restructuring state-owned Bosnia and Herzegovina into public broadcasting services
Providing training in institutional reforms, transformation of state owned institutions.
Regular reporting and contacts with donors, partners, government officials.
120 top directors and governing bodies executives trained in leadership, management
Managing a team of 5 international experts on restructuring and media and team of around 10 local experts, support staff.
Developing institutional capacity, design and implement reforms for improved governance.
Managing complex project of negotiating the transformation to Public Service Institutions trough coaching and advising senior leadership and government officials.
Providing intensive training in institutional reforms, transformation of state owned institutions and management. General management, Change Management, HR management, Financial Management. Executive coaching
Strategic, organizational, operational, financial management of the complex project.
1997 –present UK WM Enterprise – Naturex
International Consultant/ Project Director
Implementing, backstopping for Private Sector Development, investment attraction, agriculture, tourism, infrastructure, health, SME, training projects in the following countries: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Macedonia, Moldova, Romania, Serbia, Montenegro, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, Bangladesh, Vietnam.
Working with partners such as OSCE, EC, USAID, UNDP, SDC, SECO, GTZ, DFID, UN, ADB etc.
2006 Vietnam WM Enterprise – Naturex International Consultant/, Director Project director for 2,700,000 EUR Vietnam Private Sector Support Programme.
The overall objective of the project is job creation via the promotion of the private sector and SME development and the integration of Vietnam into the international economy
2006 Croatia WM Enterprise – Naturex
International Consultant/, Director
Project director for 1,500,000 Euro Cross-border cooperation EC-funded project with implementing and backstopping.
Overseeing work of 10 international and local short term experts and 5 permanent project staff
2004–2005 Uzbekistan Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan Switzerland Swiss-based CIMERA Consulting
Project Director, Media Project in Central Asia
Building a network of partners among leading regional media organizations for improving quality of journalism.
Regional project director and team leader managing long term Access to Information project with three country offices and over 60 highly professional employees.
Managing 1,000,000 EUR worth development project in Central Asia funded by Swiss Development Corporation on time and within budget. Offices in Tashkent, Uzbekistan, Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan and Dushanbe, Tajikistan..
Developing institutional capacity, promoting good governance initiatives and introducing the concepts of transparency and accountability.
Regular reporting and contacts with donors, partners, government officials.
On basis of my proposals OSCE awarded media monitoring projects to our organization, public service announcements, production of election guidebook etc worth 250,000 EUR.
2004–2005 Afghanistan European Commission
Senior EC Consultant Restructuring Radio Television Afghanistan and Bakhtar News Agency
EC project: Identification mission into restructuring state-owned RTA / Bakhtar agency, Senior EU Consultant Economist into public broadcasting services. Project size was 200,000 EUR.
Project resulted in proposal for EC engagement in restructuring Afghan public media with investment budget of 64M EUR.
Producing Formulation Proposal with financing plans for restructuring state-owned Radio Television Afghanistan/News Agency.
Producing cost-benefit analysis of the proposed project worth 64M EUR with accompanying detailed budget, organizational chart, job descriptions, training plans and funding proposals.
Developing institutional capacity for reforming public institutions and improved management and governance.
Oct 2003 /Feb 2004 Kyrgyzstan ACTED – French Development Agency
Team leader EuropeAid, USAID, DFID, ADB
Business environment improvement, agriculture development, infrastructure development, tourism, health,
This project was aimed at increasing food security and poverty alleviation for vulnerable households resulting in a more peaceful and dynamic environment in the Ferghana Valley by promoting cross-border cooperation, increasing food security, supporting income generation and rural development and building the capacity of community based organisations.
Aug 2003–2003 Tajikistan ACTED – French Development Agency
Deputy Team Leader EuropeAid
Objective of this three-year project was to contribute to the development of a better economic environment and participatory governance in Tajikistan promoting economic development in vulnerable rural areas of country.
Business environment improvement, agriculture development, infrastructure development, tourism, health,
Infrastructure Rebuilding, Microfinance, Capacity Building, Business Training, Health Education, Conflict prevention, Poverty
May 2003–Aug 2004 Uzbekistan ACTED – French Development Agency
Deputy Team Leader EuropeAid, USAID, DFID
This project was aimed at supporting in participatory and sustainable way the private sector development as well as economic and social development of vulnerable populations in Uzbekistan’s southwestern provinces Syrhandarya and Kashkadarya,
Agriculture development, food security, cross-border cooperation, conflict prevention, local capacity building
The project to develop business opportunities in Uzbekistan benefited up to 10,000 individuals.
1995 – 2002 London, United Kingdom BBC World Service
Editor, Journalist Producer
Producer, editor of BBC World Service flagship Newshour programme, interviewed number of presidents, prime ministers, including Mary Robinson, Evgeniy Primakov, Robin Cook on international political and economic issues.
Provided advice to government officials, corporations, on political and economic situation in the Balkans
2000 – 2003 London, UK Help North Korean Kids
Director
Managed and oversaw the work of NGO in UK for collecting aid for North Korean Children.
Developed network of individual and institutional donors as well as channels for delivery of aid.
1989–1994 Russia, Sochi 1989– Mavrovo Construction
Project Manager
Managed 50M USD projects and up to 250 employees on time and within budget.
Oversaw and planned big hotels and hospital projects built in Sochi, Russia.
1989–1994 Macedonia 1989– Mavrovo Construction
Project Manager
Planned the construction of big infrastructure projects in Germany, Russia, Middle East (Libya, Iraq, Iran, etc).
Certified Company Valuation Expert of Macedonian Privatisation Agency.
| Experience |
UNDP, Regional Consultant for Eastern Europe and CIS May 2016 – Present
ADB, Team Leader, Kyrgyz Republic May 2015 – Apr 2016
Development Effectiveness Promotion for the Kyrgyz Republic
Investment Climate Program Manager, South Asia, IFC/World Bank Feb 2012 – Oct 2014
Program Manager, World Bank Group, Dhaka, Bangladesh
Visiting Expert to Development Economics Department, DEC, World Bank 2013 – 2014
Visiting Expert, World Bank Group, DEC, Washington DC, USA
Naturex Consulting, CEO, Senior Consultant, UK, Worldwide Feb 1997 – Dec 2012
CEO & Senior Consultant: International Economic Development, Management,
Executive Communication Project Director, ADB Aug 2010 – Dec 2011
Project Director, Asian Development Bank, Manila, Philippines
Economic Development Advisor to UNDP in Tajikistan Dec 2009 – Feb 2011
Strategic Adviser to UNDP and Tajikistan Government
Improving Business Environment for GIZ, CIM, in Kyrgyz Republic Nov 2006 – Nov 2009
Strategic Adviser to IBC, prime minister and president of Kyrgyz Republic
Economic Development Advisor to OSCE in Tajikistan Sep 2010 – Feb 2011
Strategic Adviser to FEZ Ishkashim and Tajikistan Government
Restructuring State-Owned Institutions for EU in Bosnia and Herzegovina Apr 2005 – Apr 2010
Project Director, European Commission
Access to Information Project in Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan Mar 2004 – Apr 2005
Regional Project Director for Central Asia, Swiss Media Development Project in Central Asia
Restructuring state-owned RTA for EU in Afghanistan Nov 2004 – Feb 2005
Senior Consultant Economist, restructuring of state-owned companies
ACTED Develpmt Agency, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan Aug 2003– Mar 2004
Project Coordinator, EuropeAid, TACIS, USAID, DFID, ADB projects
American University of Central Asia, AUCA, Kyrgyz Republic 2007 – 2009
Lecturer, Professor
WM Enterprise, UK 2005 – 2006
International Project Director
Mavrovo Construction Macedonia, Sochi, Russia, Germany 1989 – 1994 Project Manager and Head of Planning Department
| Education |
London School of Economics, London, UK 1999 – 2001
M. Sc. Development Management.
Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan, University of Manchester, UK 2019
PhD Governance & Economic and International Development
University of Minnesota,Minneapolis, USA 1994 – 1995
Visiting Scholar in Corporate and Investment Finance, Fulbright Fellowship
St. Cyril and Methodius University, Skopje, Macedonia 1992 – 1994
Master of Business Administration Programme
St. Cyril and Methodius University, Skopje, Macedonia 1982 – 1989
B. Sc. Construction Engineering
| Languages |
Conferences, Presentations, Publications
Published Parts of the Research in Blind or Double-Blind Peer Reviewed Academic Papers – Goran Sumkoski
]]>
Team Leader, Private Sector Development Study for Central Asian countries of Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan
January 2017 – 2018 Central Asia EU – DEVCO
Identifying the private sector features and using latest statistical data on the private sector (e.g. number of SMEs, size and definition of SMEs, employment by SMEs, financial situation of SMEs, trade patterns of SMEs, percentage of GDP, breakdown per sectors in connection with regional and international market, etc.) from all 5 Central Asian countries
Identifying national and regional sectors with high growth and job creation potential.
Assessing private sector development opportunities enhanced by regional cooperation settings such as the Eurasian Economic Union and facilitated by recent GSP+ status, concerning Central Asian countries’ access to EU markets.
Analyzing characteristics, capacity and training needs of Government ministries & agencies and Business Intermediary Organizations in all 5 Central Asian countries and logistic services.
Analyzing State Owned Enterprises in each of the five countries, notably regarding their share in the economy, the sectors they are represented in, and the plans of the Governments to privatize.
Provide recommendations to be taken on board by the national beneficiaries and EU to strengthen the business climate, facilitate private sector development and improve development effectiveness of EU projects.
Analyzing the development effectiveness of the EU programmes, CAI and IFCA, in Central Asia.
May 2016 – January 2017 Turkey UNDP Regional HQ Regional Local Economic Development Adviser Provide strategic advice to country offices on building capacities to improve private sector development and productive capacity enhancement;
Provide strategic advice to country offices on building capacities to improve trade-related projects;
Propose UNDP approach to Sustainable Local Development and propose service lines for the Sustainable Development Cluster and concrete actions products, tools, platforms and instruments within the local economic development context.
Prepare methodology for operationalizing SDGs for ongoing and incoming UNDP programmes and projects;
Develop minimum standards for microfinance loans for trade, private sector development, greening agriculture, micro-insurance, developing capacities in private sector development.
Develop service-lines on building productive capacities, trade and local development for the SD Cluster;
Mapping of potential new partners, including from the private sector for the region for Turkey.
1997 –present UK, Naturex
International Consultant/ Project Director
Implementing, backstopping for Private Sector Development, investment attraction, agriculture, tourism, infrastructure, health, SME, training projects in the following countries: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Macedonia, Moldova, Romania, Serbia, Montenegro, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, Bangladesh, Vietnam.
Working with partners such as OSCE, EC, USAID, UNDP, SDC, SECO, GTZ, DFID, UN, ADB etc.
2006 Vietnam WM Enterprise – Naturex International Consultant/, Director Project director for 2,700,000 EUR Vietnam Private Sector Support Programme.
The overall objective of the project is job creation via the promotion of the private sector and SME development and the integration of Vietnam into the international economy
May 2016 – January 2017 Turkey UNDP
HQ Economic Development Adviser for Eastern Europe, Former Soviet Union and Turkey.
]]>
2016 Kyrgyzstan International Monitory Fund (IMF)
IMF International Economic Expert
2015 – 2016 Kyrgyzstan Asian Development Bank
Team Leader, Project for Improving the Effectiveness of International Development Funds
Provide training to Government and ministries on best practices of Project Management
Produce Development Effectiveness Guidelines and Manual for all Investment Implementation
Producing sets of legal and regulatory acts for improved efficiency of project implementation
Informational campaign for promoting development effectiveness
Improving development effectiveness in Infrastructure, Energy, Education, Health and Social sectors
2016 Kyrgyzstan International Monitory Fund – IMF International Economic Expert Help Kyrgyz Republic evaluate the strength of the public investment management practices through IMF’s Public Investment Management Assessment (PIMA).
The PIMA evaluated Kyrgyz Republic’s institutions that shape public investment decision-making at the three key stages
Planning sustainable investment across the public sector;
Allocating investment to the right sectors and projects;
Implementing projects on time and on budget
2013 – 2014 DC Washington DEC/World Bank
Visiting Expert to World Bank DEC
Dec. 28, 2013 – Goran Sumkoski, Program Manager, Business Regulation Regional Lead for South Asia, IFC Advisory Services, reflects on his visit with the research department from Oct. 28-Dec. 28, 2013, hosted by the Finance and Private Sector Development Team.
]]>
2009 -2011 Tajikistan UNDP
Strategic Advisor, Economic Development Expert
Strategically positioned UNDP interventions for working in Private Sector Development, and Local Economic Development with national & local government
Developing institutional capacity, design regulatory reforms and improved governance initiatives for government ministries, national level agencies as well as regional and local level government outlets.
Provided advisory support on approach to value chain analysis, marketing strategies, economic growth for rural communities
International Strategic Economic Advisor provides coordination, managerial, technical and policy advisory support.
Provided strategic advice on policy dialogue, advocacy, knowledge transfer on rural economic development
Monitored program’s operational plans & external environment and advised timely readjustment of programme activities.
Provision of expert analysis on mobilizing government structures to provide favorable support to the business sector at local level with the view to improve good governance and economic growth, infrastructure, power, water-supply
Investment facilitation in manufacturing, agri-processing, water-supply, export promotion, marketing etc.