Alternative Pathways of Social Evolution.
It has always been peculiar to evolutionists to compare social and biological evolution, the latter as visualized by Charles Darwin.1 But it also seems possible and correct to draw an analogy with another great discovery in the field of evolutionary biology, with the homologous series of Nikolay Vavilov (1921; 1927; 1967). However, there is no complete identity between cultural parallelism and biological homologous series. Vavilov studied the morphological homology, whereas our focus within the realm of social evolution is the functional one. No doubt, the morphological homomorphism also happens in the process of social evolution (e.g. in the Hawaii Islands where a type of the sociocultural organization surprisingly similar with the ones of other highly developed parts of Polynesia had independently formed by the end of the 18th century [Sahlins 1972/1958; Goldman 1970; Earle 1978]). But this topic is beyond the present paper’s problématique.
This issue initiates a series of almanacs with Evolution as its general title; these almanacs are aimed at the consolidation of those researchers who study all the possible types of evolutionary processes. The interdisciplinary studies have demonstrated their effectiveness, whereas the study of evolution is one of the most fruitful areas of interdisciplinary knowledge where representatives of natural, mathematical, and social sciences, as well as the humanities can find a common field for their research. The almanac is designed to present to its readers the widest possible spectrum of subjects and problems: from the approaches of the universal evolutionism to the analysis of particular evolutionary regularities in the development of biological, abiotic, and social systems, culture, cognition, language, etc.
The first section of the almanac presents a general sketch of the universal evolution, its main phases, vectors, and trends. The second section is dedicated to the problems of comparisons of different types of macroevolution, as well as to the possibilities to use achievements of certain fields of evolutionary research in its other fields. The third section deals with major issues of social evolution. The topics of all the sections and articles intertwine rather tightly, that actually transforms the present issue of the almanac into a collective monograph dedicated to the search for contours and instruments of evolutionary megaparadigm. The almanac's articles present a wide panorama of the application of various approaches and concepts in the framework of this emergent general paradigm that will allow to detect in a much more effective way both fundamental similarities and essential differences between different types of evolutionary dynamics.
This almanac will be useful both for those who study interdisciplinary macroproblems and for specialists working in focused directions, as well as for those who are interested up to a certain degree in the evolutionary issues of astrophysics, geology, biology, history, anthropology, linguistics, and so on.
This work explores essential debates on globalization and world-systems analysis. It begins with a review of theoretical insights from world-systems analysis and explains the evolution of its terminology. The book subsequently seeks to answer several important questions: When did globalization begin and what insights into contemporary globalization may be gained from older forms? How does globalization differ in different places, and how can different instances of globalization be compared? Who is affected by globalization, how are they affected, and how do these effects vary, if at all, over time and space?
As world-systems analysis and studies of globalization require interdisciplinary expertise, the contributing authors draw on many fields, including anthropology, economics, geography, philosophy, political science, sociology, and world history. The book’s overall goal is to facilitate the dialogue between approaches that, at times, seem to “talk at cross-purposes,” and to extend an invitation to scholars from many different areas to explore globalization.
The introduction describes the concept in the "hard"and "soft" sciences.
Operational risk management (ORM) is considered as decision-making tool to systematically operational risk identification and determination of the best courses of action for any given situation. Here we made an attempt to analyse ORM from the position of system approach to the enterprise management. In this view, 4 interrelated subsystems were identified: beliefs, constraints, control and monitoring; and ORM is considered as meta-process, which umbellates enterprise business processes and sets requirements to the above subsystems.
Interrelations of the management components are discussed as well. The given research was held in a frame of the contract № 13.G25.31.0096 with the Ministry for Education and Science of Russian Federation «Deployment of hi-tech manufacture of unstructured information processing in cross-platform system on open source software (OSS) basis due to increase management efficiency of innovative activity of the enterprises in modern Russia economy».
The article deals with intercultural communication as a humanitarian discipline based on systems theory and concepts of synergetics.
The book describes the concepts of chaos and order in the "hard" and "soft" sciences.
This article describes the social-psychological aspects of the evolutionary-genetic approach to moral functioning. The author describes the significant theoretical and methodological principles of this area. Perspective and current status of the various domestic and foreign schools are considered here. In conclusion there is a substantiation of the practical significance of this area.
Comparison of biological and social macro-evolution is a very important issue, but it has been studied insufficiently. Yet, analysis suggests new promising possibilities to deepen our understanding of the course, trends, mechanisms and peculiarities of the biological and social phases of Big History. This article analyzes similarities and differences between two phases of Big History at various levels and in various aspects. It compares biological and social organisms, mechanisms of evolutionary selection, transitions to qualitatively new states, processes of key information transmission, and fixation of acquired characteristics. It also considers a number of pre-adaptations that contributed to the transformation of Big History's biological phase into its social phase and analyzes some lines of such a transformation.
We address the external effects on public sector efficiency measures acquired using Data Envelopment Analysis. We use the health care system in Russian regions in 2011 to evaluate modern approaches to accounting for external effects. We propose a promising method of correcting DEA efficiency measures. Despite the multiple advantages DEA offers, the usage of this approach carries with it a number of methodological difficulties. Accounting for multiple factors of efficiency calls for more complex methods, among which the most promising are DMU clustering and calculating local production possibility frontiers. Using regression models for estimate correction requires further study due to possible systematic errors during estimation. A mixture of data correction and DMU clustering together with multi-stage DEA seems most promising at the moment. Analyzing several stages of transforming society’s resources into social welfare will allow for picking out the weak points in a state agency’s work.