| Abstract [eng] |
This Master Thesis analyses the process of preparation, modification and endorsement of the Lithuania’s recovery and resilience plan. Previous practices and the theory of Europeanisation shows that implementation of European Union financial assistance in the Member States rarely becomes a highly politicized issue. This study, however, examines a rare case when the use of European Union financial assistance in Lithuania became politicized and Lithuania’s recovery and resilience plan has been rewritten with the change of governments. The aim of this study is to reveal the essential differences between the two economic recovery plans – “Future Economy DNA” prepared by the former PM S. Skvernelis Cabinet and the “New Generation Lithuania” prepared by current PM I. Šimonytė government and to disclose why the new government has decided to reject the plan prepared by S. Skvernelis' government and prepare a new one. To achieve this goal, the following objectives were set: 1) determine the theoretical basis of the research, on the basis of which the analysis of the content and preparation of the “Future Economy DNA” and “New Generation Lithuania” plans will be performed; 2) while analysing the content of the " DNA of the Future Economy" and "New Generation Lithuania" plans, reveal which investment directions were prioritized by the governments of S. Skvernelis and I. Šimonytė in order to effectively invest in the recovery and growth of the Lithuanian economy; 3) examine the process of the development of investment plans and reveal what internal and external factors and their interrelationships have influenced the priorities and decisions of different governments when preparing an economic recovery plan; 4) reveal key factors that led to the decision of the current government to reject “Future Economy DNA” plan prepared by the S. Skvernelis government and to prepare a new investment plan. Based on theories of public choice, political polarization, ideological differences and Europeanisation, the study seeks to reveal the motivation of different governments and to answer the main question of how and why Lithuania’s recovery and resilience plan has changed after 2020 Lithuanian parliamentary election. Two thesis statements were confirmed: 1) Not only decisions made on EU level, changes in the country's economic situation and realities of the time as politicians claimed, but also the intensified political polarization and party competition between the Homeland Union – Lithuanian Christian Democrats and the The Lithuanian Farmers and Greens Union during the 2020 Lithuanian parliamentary election had a significant impact on the priorities of the 17th and 18th governments in preparing a post-pandemic Lithuania’s recovery and resilience plan. As a result, both governments made used of economic recovery plan to maximize their political benefits. 2) Negotiations and joint decisions at the EU level on the NextGenerationEU fund, Recovery and Resilience Facility instrument and the regulation for preparing National recovery and resilience plans had a much more significant impact on the processes of preparing and amending the Lithuania’s economic recovery plan than ideological differences between center-left and center-right governments. The research is characterized by theoretical complexity, analyzing a topic that has not been studied in detail in Lithuania yet, but it is very important for the country's political and economic life, as the implementation of the Lithuania’s recovery and resilience plan began this year. Such study could provide useful insights into the analysis and evaluation of similar policy processes in the future. |
