On this page
On this page
In general, policy programmes need to comply with the main policy strategies, priorities and tasks of the public policies, action plans and similar strategical policy documents. Usually, there are two ways of synergy. Firstly, there is a programme or activity already ongoing and its continuation or further support is enhanced by adding it to strategical documents. Secondly, there is a political priority of a proven or lobbied need in the field and it is proven within the robust process of strategy creation. Since there is a political priority in a strategic document and a responsible administrative unit, it needs to work on the implementation, which may finish in creating a new programme or initiative and if possible by involving relevant other actors in partnership.
The creation process of certain policy strategy is usually facilitated by meetings of experts and representatives at preparatory roundtables, conferences, expert groups etc., which enhance the synergies. Before the Strategy goes for discussion and approval to the government, it needs to fulfil the inter-sectorial commenting procedures and settlement of the comments in order not to have discrepancies among sectors, actors and state policies.
Usually, there is no publicly available information about the exact processes, unless they are stated in respective documents or its explanatory report or accompanying analysis documents.
In the field of promotion of creativity and cultural entrepreneurship, there is no available public information.
There are no central top-level policy, initiative or guidelines directly promoting young people's creativity and capacity for innovation through partnerships. This does not mean that there are no such partnerships. Many companies, schools and school facilities, public authorities at all levels, youth work providers, NGOs and other actors are joining common or partnership initiatives on an official, non-formal or on project level. Usually, it is a matter of local-level or vertical or horizontal coordination of respective issue or problem.
There is general support of partnerships especially within the Programme LEADR, Local Agenda 21. European Funds (ESIF) are probably the most significant promoters of partnerships. Programme LEADR focuses mainly on new forms of improving the quality of life in rural areas, new forms of strengthening the local economic environment and job creation. It also deals with the evaluation of natural and cultural heritage. There is also strategic vision of Local Agenda 21 development in the Czech Republic until 2020. The goal of the agenda is transparent and efficient public administration.
Example of partnership project with youth cultural element
An example with the involvement of a cultural field, aesthetic education for young people, is the project called 'Úsvit' (dawn). It is a project of partnership on improving the situation in the housing estate 'Chanov', which is one of the most notorious and symbolic socially excluded areas with a very high proportion of Roma population. The project was in a way a pilot for similar activities in the future. Its aims should have improved security and safety in the housing estate, prevent criminality, create conditions for new methods of education of Roma children, social work in the Roma community, sustainability of the public property, and to improve the image of the Roma community in the area and among other citizens of the city.
The specific objectives of the project were:
- Strengthen the responsibility of individual Roma and their surroundings for their lives, for the environment in which they live and raise their children, and for the reputation of the Roma community among other residents of Most
- Engage the Roma themselves to improve the quality of life and security situation in Chanov
- To improve relations between the inhabitants of the Chanov housing estate and the other inhabitants of Most.
- Create a know-how for similar projects
- Quantify financial costs that can be used for orientation to implementers of similar projects
Financial costs were directed to social prevention, educational activities and situational prevention. Other implemented follow-up projects focused on drug prevention, criminal prevention and leisure-time activities, including homework preparation and tutoring, which were implemented in cooperation with non-profit and charitable organizations.