ABSTRACT
This chapter examines the institutional sources of the government sprawl, local debt and the peasant burden that were described in the previous chapter and thereby lays the groundwork for the subsequent chapters. It enables us to contrast the results of the broad scientific enquiry of the phenomenon conducted in this and the previous chapter with the highly subjective political viewpoints and strategies championed by political actors at all levels during the whole reform process described thereafter, this allows us to enquire into the respective roles of institutional constraints and actor-specific strategies in the agenda-setting, formation, implementation and evaluation of the RTFR. With respect to agenda-setting, for example, it will be interesting to see which aspects of the ‘burden problem’ elicited in these chapters were highlighted for what reasons, and which aspects were not addressed at all. The same applies to the other stages of the policy process. Understanding the systemic sources of the problem enables the formulation of hypotheses about why certain deficiencies were remedied, but others not, and it enables us to better understand the role of actors and institutions in the implementation process. Against the background of this prior analysis, finally, the policy can be evaluated, and this scholarly evaluation can be contrasted with the centre’s official assessment of the reform’s impacts and outcomes.
