Skip Navigation

Croatia

  • Member Since 2011
  • Action Plan 4

ON THE PAGE

Current Action Plan

2022-2024

Action Plan 4

  • Number of Commitments: 16
  • Policy Area Focus: Not specified

Croatia’s fourth action plan contains two promising reforms on improving transparency of media ownership and adopting a lobbying act for the first time. Administrative delays and political limits to the co-creation process negatively affected the ambition of the action plan overall and enthusiasm for the OGP process more generally. Guaranteeing relevant civil society input in drafting the lobbying act would improve implementation and help build civil society trust in government.

Croatia’s fourth OGP action plan contains 16 commitments. Two of these are promising commitments building on previous action plans to improve media transparency and introduce a new anti-corruption strategy and lobbying legislation. (More)

Decade Report_cover

OGP at Ten: Toward Democratic Renewal

When eight governments and nine civil society leaders launched OGP in 2011, no one expected it to reach its current size and scope. Over the last ten years, however, OGP has grown in ways that have exceeded expectations.

Contact

Point of Contact

Darija Marić Advisor, Office for Cooperation with NGOs, Government of Croatia darija.maric@udruge.vlada.hr

Commitments

Resources

  1. Croatia Co-Creation Brief 2023

    2024, Letter, Web page

  2. Croatia Action Plan Review 2022–2023

    2023, IRM Report, Web page

  3. Croatia Action Plan 2022-2024 Review – For Public Comment

    2023, Report Comments, Web page

  4. Croatia Action Plan 2022-2024 (June)

    2022, Action Plan, Web page

  5. Croatia – Contrary to Process Letter (February 2022)

    2022, Letter, Web page

  6. Croatia Transitional Results Report 2018-2020

    2021, IRM Report, Web page

  7. Croatia Transitional Results Report 2018-2020 – For Public Comment

    2021, Report Comments, Web page

  8. Croatia End-of-Term Self-Assessment 2018-2020

    2021, Self Assessment, Web page

  9. Croatia Design Report 2018-2020

    2019, IRM Report, Web page

  10. Croatia Design Report 2018-2020 – For Public Comment

    2019, Report Comments, Web page

  11. Croatia Action Plan 2018-2020

    2018, Action Plan, Web page

  12. Croatia – Cohort Shift Letter – January 2018

    2018, Letter, Web page

  13. OGP Letter – Croatia – November 2017

    2017, Letter, Web page

  14. Croatia Letter of Intent to Join OGP

    2017, Letter, Web page

  15. OGP Letter to Croatia Regarding Shift to ‘Odd Year’ Action Plan Schedule: January 2017

    2017, Letter, Web page

  16. OGP Letter to Croatia Regarding Late Action Plan: November 2016

    2017, Letter, Web page

  17. Croatia End-of-Term Report 2014-2016

    2017, IRM Report, Web page

  18. OGP Letter – Croatia – January 2017

    2017, Letter, Web page

  19. Late Letter – November 2016 – Croatia

    2016, Letter, Web page

  20. Croatia End of Term Self-Assessment Report 2014-16

    2016, Self Assessment, Web page

  21. Croatia Mid-Term Report 2014-2015

    2016, IRM Report, Web page

  22. Croatia IRM Progress Report 2014-2015

    2016, IRM Report, Web page

  23. Open government reforms: The challenge of making public consultations meaningful in Croatia

    2015, Research Product, Web page

  24. Self-Assessment Report – Croatia

    2015, Self Assessment, Web page

  25. Croatia Action Plan 2012-2013

    2015, Action Plan, Web page

  26. Croatia IRM Progress Report 2012-2013

    2015, IRM Report, Web page

  27. Croatia Self-Assessment Report 2013

    2015, Self Assessment, Web page

  28. Croatia SC Application Letter

    2015, Letter, Web page

  29. Case Study (2014): Making election campaign finances public in Croatia

    2014, Research Product, Web page

  30. Case Study (2013): More inclusive and meaningful public engagement on laws in Croatia

    2013, Research Product, Web page

Current Data

The data below is updated periodically, most often after large numbers of new action plans and IRM reports.

Commitment Performance

The following variables answer the question “Did this commitment open government?“, and focus on how government practices have changed as a result of the commitment’s implementation.

Key

No IRM data

Pending IRM Review

Download
Major
Outstanding
Starred Commitments
Action Plan 1
4
Action Plan 2
4
3
4
Action Plan 3
0
Action Plan 4

Global

Most per action plan
4
7

Regional

Most per action plan
4
7

How to Get More Starred Commitments

Starred commitments in OGP are one of the ways the IRM designates promising reforms. The graph below shows where the major areas for improvement in action plan design and implementation should take place based on past action plans.

Key

Stars (Global average 7%)

Focus on implementation

Focus on design

Pending IRM review

No IRM data

Focus on design

Focus on objectives and impact (ambition/potential impact)

Focus on relevance to open government

Focus on verifiability

Download
Action Plan 4

Public Participation

This table shows: 1) the level of public influence during the development and implementation of OGP action plans, 2) whether consultations were open to any member of the public or only to those invited; and 3) whether a forum existed that met regularly.

Key

Participation was closed

Participation was open to any interested party

No IRM data

Forum

Pending IRM review

Definitions

Collaborate: Iterative dialogue and public helped set agenda

 

Involve: Government gave feedback on public inputs

 

Consult: Public gave input

 

Inform: Government provided public with information on plan

Download
Collaborate
Involve
Consult
Inform
No Consultation

Development

Action Plan 1
Action Plan 2
Action Plan 3
Action Plan 4
Collaborate
Involve
Consult
Inform
No Consultation

Implementation

Action Plan 1
Action Plan 2
Action Plan 3
Action Plan 4

OGP Global Report Data

The data below is drawn from the 2019 OGP Global Report. You can view and learn more about the report here.

Selected Dimensions of Open Government

This section captures how each OGP member can play a leadership role, based on IRM-based findings and third-party scores. This list does not cover all of open government and OGP members are not required to take any action.

Action implications

These are recommendations on the role that each OGP member might play in each policy area. The recommendations are derived from a combination of the IRM-based findings and third-party scores.

IRM-based findings

Reflect the performance of commitments in a particular policy area, as assessed by the IRM.

 

(NC) No Commitments
(CA) Commitment(s) in the policy area.
(IR) IRM-Reviewed: At least one IRM-assessed commitment.
(C) Was Complete: At least one commitment was substantially or fully completed.
(A) Was Ambitious: At least one commitment with moderate or transformative potential impact.
(ER) Showed Early Results: At least one commitment opened government in a “Major” or “Outstanding” way.

Third-party scores

Reflect “real-world” performance, i.e., performance outside of the OGP framework. Scores are comprised of various indicators collected by respected organizations.

Download

Anti-Corruption

Beneficial Ownership
Action Implications
Implement for Results
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
1.00 Sources
Open Contracting
Action Implications
Implement for Results
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
1.75 Sources

Civic Space

Freedom of Assembly
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.77 Sources
Freedom of Association
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
3.26 Sources
Defending Journalists and Activists
Action Implications
Implement for Results
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
1.93 Sources

Open Policy Making

Participation in Lawmaking
Action Implications
Implement for Results
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
1.96 Sources
Regulatory Governance
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
4.00 Sources

Access to Information

Right to Information
Action Implications
Implement for Results
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.90 Sources
Open Data (Water / Sanitation)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.60 Sources
Open Data (Health)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.27 Sources
Open Data (Education)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
1.30 Sources

Fiscal Openness

Transparency
Action Implications
Implement for Results
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.56 Sources
Participation
Action Implications
Implement for Results
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
0.68 Sources
Oversight
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
2.60 Sources

Recent Posts

Old ruins of castle in Ohrid, Macedonia
Ukraine · North Macedonia · Republic of Moldova · Serbia · Croatia

Seven OGP Countries Addressing Assembly

Lessons from Reformers: The European Center for Not-for-profit Law (ECNL), an innovative project on freedom of assembly, assessed seven OGP countries in Central and Eastern Europe for relevant law and practices between 2017 and 2019.

Croatia

Promoting Paris in Zagreb

OGP Steering Committee members Sandra Pernar (Croatian government) and Helen Darbishire (Access Info Europe), were in action last week (10-12 July 2017) meeting with government officials in four ministries, as well as independent agencies, and civil society to promote strong…

Show More
Open Government Partnership