<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>27</ref-type><contributors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">NATO Initiatives in Support of Defence Management Reform and Integrity Building</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">CSDM Views</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2014</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">June 2014</style></date></pub-dates></dates><number><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">26</style></number><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Centre for Security and Defence Management</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Sofia</style></pub-location><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">In a presentation to the 86th Rose-Roth seminar, organized by the NATO Parliamentary Assembly, 16-18 June 2014 in Baku, Azerbaijan, Dr. Tagarev elaborates on the need to merge efforts to strengthen defence institution, and in particular to introduce advanced approaches to defence management, and initiatives to build integrity and reduce corruption in defence.</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>27</ref-type><contributors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Management Priorities of the Minister of Defence of the Republic of Bulgaria  in the 2013 Caretaker Government</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">CSDM Views</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2013</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">December 2013</style></date></pub-dates></dates><number><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">20</style></number><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Centre for Security and Defence Management</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Sofia</style></pub-location><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Defence governance principles, priorities, and tasks of minister Tagarev as member of Bulgaria’s Caretaker Government, appointed by President Rossen Plevneliev, and his team, aim to provide stability of the defence sector and military operations, open dialogue with the organizations active on defence policy issues, and enhanced cooperation and interaction with our Allies and national security sector organizations. These priorities were publicly announced on 20 March 2013.
</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>27</ref-type><contributors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Report for the activity of the Ministry of Defence in the period of Bulgaria’s Caretaker Government, 13 March – 28 May 2013 (in Bulgarian)</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">CSDM Views</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2013</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">December 2013</style></date></pub-dates></dates><number><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">23</style></number><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Centre for Security and Defence Management</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Sofia</style></pub-location><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The minister, deputy ministers and Chief of Cabinet of the MOD in Bulgaria’s Caretaker Government, 13 March – 28 May 2013, account for the results and implementation of the main priorities and tasks, including the provision of stability of the defence sector and military operations, open dialogue with the organizations active on defence policy issues, and enhanced cooperation and interaction with our Allies and national security sector organizations. This document was presented publicly and published on the MOD website on May 28, 2013.
</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>27</ref-type><contributors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Challenges of Implementation of National Security Strategies in Transition Democracies from a Governance Perspective</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">IT4Sec Reports</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2012</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">September 2012</style></date></pub-dates></dates><number><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">103</style></number><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Institute of Information and Communication Technologies</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Sofia</style></pub-location><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Notes for the report to the conference on “Transforming National Security Concepts as a Response to New Global and Security Challenges and Threats: Experiences from Ukraine and NATO,” Kyiv, 19 September 2012, session “National Security Concepts of NATO and EU countries: Lessons Learned.”</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>27</ref-type><contributors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Countering Corruption in the Defence Sector: Main Risks and Challenges</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">IT4Sec Reports</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2011</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2011</style></date></pub-dates></dates><number><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">83</style></number><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Institute of Information and Communication Technologies</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Sofia</style></pub-location><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Defence is not immune to corruption. Several factors make the defence sector even more susceptible to corruption than other sectors, which sometimes manifests in unexpected forms. Hence, the corruption challenge has to be analysed comprehensively, while integrity initiatives are focused and build on success. Transparency and accountability are the most powerful tools to enhance integrity and reduce corruption in a democratic society. Their implementation in the defence sector along with other, more problem-specific measures, has to be provided in a single good governance framework. This presentation presents examples from the experience of Bulgaria, that could of use to the ongoing anti corruption endeavours of the Ukrainian defence sector.  </style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>27</ref-type><contributors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Phases and Challenges of Security Sector Reform in the Experience of Bulgaria</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">IT4Sec Reports</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2011</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2011</style></date></pub-dates></dates><number><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">85</style></number><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Institute of Information and Communication Technologies</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Sofia</style></pub-location><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">IT4Sec Reports 85 includes the main theses of a presentation at the “Oversight and Accountability of the Defense Sector” panel of the Annual Conference of the Partnership for Peace Consortium of Defense Academies and Security Studies Institutes, Garmisch-Partenkirchen, 22-23 June 2011. The report describes the Bulgarian experience along the three main phases of reform in the post-communist transition of the country: (1) Establishing key mechanisms for civilian control over the armed forces and protection of human rights in the early 1990s; (2) Building democratic defense institutions, starting in the late 1990s and continuing to be in the focus throughout the first decade of the new century; and (3) Transformation of the security sector as a whole – the current focus of reform efforts.</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>6</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Todor Tagarev</style></author></authors><secondary-authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Todor Tagarev</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Philipp Fluri</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Adrian Kendry</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mark Pyman</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Simon Lunn</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ashley Thornton</style></author></secondary-authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Building Integrity and Reducing Corruption in Defence: A Compendium of Best Practices</style></title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">accountability</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">corruption</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Defence governance</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">defence management</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">integrity</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Transparency</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2010</style></year></dates><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces</style></publisher><isbn><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">978-92-9222-114-0 </style></isbn><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Transparency and corruption challenges in the defence sphere often affect not only transition states but also established democracies. This compendium, the product of cooperation between Transparency International UK, the NATO PfP team and DCAF, focuses on concepts and tools which can ensure good practices in defence management and policy through enhancing transparency, increasing accountability and building integrity. Designed primarily as an introduction and reference tool for defence personnel, civilians in the defence sphere, democratic institutions, and civil society will also find materials on integrity building and anti-corruption measures which are relevant to their own security governance activities</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>27</ref-type><contributors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Improving Governance in the Management of Resources in the Security and Defence Sector</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">IT4Sec Reports</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2009</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2009</style></date></pub-dates></dates><number><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">41</style></number><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Institute of Information and Communication Technologies</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Sofia</style></pub-location><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">IT4Sec Reports 41 includes the main theses of a presentation at the NATO-RACVIAC conference on “Better Management of Defence Resources, including Integrity Building in the Armed Forces,” Rakitje, Croatia, 14-16 September 2009. It sees resource management in security and defence as traditionally judged in view of effectiveness and efficiency. However, when the decisions are made by a few insiders and under the veil of secrecy, there is no guarantee that the interests of society will be protected. Further, there are no guarantees that the use of public resources will deliver anticipated effects in an efficient manner. In approaching this general problem, the paper outlines general principles of democratic governance of the security sector. It then focuses on the institutional perspective on democratic governance, underlining ways in which a defence minister can greatly contribute to improving governance in managing resources for security and defence. Finally, the paper lays out ideas on how the cooperation among countries in South Eastern Europe could contribute to strengthening the governance of security and defence sectors, and resource management in particular.</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">A Means of Comparing Military Budgeting Processes in South East Europe</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Information &amp; Security: An International Journal</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2003</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2003</style></date></pub-dates></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">11</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">95-135</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">This paper presents a methodology for comparative assessment of military budgeting systems and practices. It is intended for implementation within the Budget Transparency Initiative (BTI) of the Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe (SEE). The methodology shall allow BTI participants and other beneficiaries to identify promising areas for dissemination of  good local practice among SEE countries, as well as areas where all SEE countries lack necessary expertise or experience and the region as a whole would need outside support to improve the military budgeting practices. In a hierarchy of criteria, the methodology covers military budgets, budgeting process, budget execution, and assessment of budget execution. Special attention is paid to the issues of transparency and assurance of integrity of military budgeting. The paper includes a description of an idealised military budgeting process to serve as a benchmark, a comprehensive questionnaire to compare existing systems and practices to the benchmark, sets of possible answers to the questions, and guidance on how to process respective answers to the questionnaire. 
Potentially, the proposed methodology may be useful in other studies aiming to improve democratic governance, transparency and accountability in the public sector, in particular in the defence and the security sector.</style></abstract></record></records></xml>