Экспертное сообщество и власть: модели взаимодействия и проблемы гражданской ответственности
The main forms of interaction of the power institutes and the representatives of an expert community as well as conditions of civil responsibility are considered in the article. In the process of research fifteen expert semi-structured interview with respondents from Moscow and St. Petersburg, who have experience of activity in government structures and collaboration with international were performed during Spring 2017. Analysis of texts of interviews was made with using of Werner J. Patzelt category scheme of content analysis and program QDA Miner Light. According to criteria of expert’s affiliation to government or non-government organization (or absence of any affiliation) and distance from power’s centers six main expert categories was proposed. This groups of experts participates as in politics process – fight for winning and retention of power, as in policy process – preparation and implementation of policy decisions. Along with previously known models of interaction of experts and governmental structures – linear-autonomic model, model of virtuous reason, and a “model of the prepaid result” the fourth model was proposed. It is model of initiative expertise, where preparation of policy decisions take part without participation of governmental structures. It was shown, that necessary level of citizen responsibility of experts can be achieved owing to corporative ethics of expert community, and professional expert’s association can be support this process.
Introduction of School Composition: Technology of Mobilization of Potential of Public Discussion by Means of Crowdsourcing. Technologies of involvement of citizens to discussion of socially significant questions in the course of preparation of administrative decisions are presented to an education of systems in article.
Policy implementation refers to a phase of the strategic planning process, when actions are taken to realize policy objectives. The implementation stage consists of identifying policy actors who are responsible for policy implementation, allocating funds, developing infrastructure, building strategic support among actors who deliver services, and other actions taken to administer political decisions.
Public Chamber of Chelyabinskaya oblast in situation of regional inter-elite conflict.
The objective of paper is analysis of the role and place of Public Chamber of Chelyabinskaya oblast in the situation of inter-elite conflict in this region. It was a conflict between the team of governor Michael Yurevich, from one side, and coalition of persons from police and other ‘power’ structures with the part of industrial elite of region with non-formal leader chair of regional court Theodor Yiatkin, from other side. The positions of four groups of respondents – from government structures, from NGOs, from Muss-Media, and from academic community – concerning the participation of Public Chamber and it’s chair in regional inter-elite conflict are analyzed by means of materials of sixteen experts interview and focus-group.
Abstract. In the article the history and features of the Russian political science community’s formation are analyzed. Apart from the milestones, the authors consider the main versions of the community’s emergence, as well as the phenomenon of community itself. In the course of the research the authors used various methods and sources: content analysis of information resources and documents of the professional organizations of political scientists of the Russian Federation, surveys and interviews of experts-political scientists and public servants. All this allowed not only to characterize the political science community by its features description, but also to reveal the existing development problems, considering regional political science schools’ development and functioning dynamics, as well as the role of political science community as an expert community in the state policy-making. The wide range of experts having taken part in surveys helped to describe the situation from various sides and to show a picture both from political scientists’ position and from high-ranked decision-makers’ viewpoint. In the conclusion of the article authors form conceptual conclusions which can be used by the professional organizations of the Russian community of political scientists to increase efficiency of their activity, develop regional political schools in the Russian Federation, and also produce constructive dialogue between the authorities and expert communities to improve quality of the decisions made and provide academia’s involvement in the research field. Authors emphasize that the present article is not exhaustive, and express their hope that other researchers will join the discussion on the role of political scientists’ professional community, which will considerably increase the quality of the research.
There is a sharp contradiction between public policies to support SMEs and features of Russian national SMEs. Using western experience in Russia, doing some bright projects to stimulate small businesses was important twenty years ago. Quantitative and qualitative parameters of SMEs in Russia lag behind most countries, largely due to the structure of its economy with the traditional dominance of large enterprises
and the prevailing business climate. Small and medium-sized business in Russia is not innovative, does not perform antitrust function and does not create many
jobs. Small and medium-sized business generates a positive competitive environment. But the importance of SMEs in Russia should not be exaggerated. The scale of subcontracting and franchising with independent small businesses in our country is extremely small. It happened so that the Russian economic policy and the leading part of the national political establishment were in a subordinate position in relation to the interests of a narrow circle of large businesses, mainly engaged in production and export of the most important natural resources. Manufacturing, infrastructural and other facilities of big business, its supply and marketing relations and, most importantly, its long-term economic interests focus on large enterprises and, with few exceptions, show no interest for the SMEs sector. The situation is exacerbated by the fact that the Russian system of economic institutions encourages big business mostly. It also proves an essential specific situation of small and medium-sized businesses in Russia. The development of Russian small and medium-sized business entirely depends on the state of the economy and the business climate in the country. The business climate in Russia does not correspond to the needs of small and medium-sized businesses. Measures to improve the business climate can potentially help Russian small and medium-sized businesses much more than the existing costly system meant to support them. It is obvious that the whole Russian system for SMEs support, fold increase in the federal budget to support Russian SMEs occurred in the recent years, is unable to compensate for a generally unfavorable business environment in Russia. It is necessary to improve the quality of investment, business climate and institutions in Russia. The real growth of the Russian SMEs can be expected only with the modernization, new industrialization of the Russian economy and business climate improvements.
Conference proceeding SGEM 2014
The book of professor of National research University Higher School of Economics A.Yu. Sungurov devoted to the process of expert influence on the policy decision process. The different kinds of expertise and models of expert community and government interaction are analysed in the first chapter of book. The Russian and international scienific discussions on this topics analysed in the forst chapter also. The results of our research of practics of experts and government interactions into process of policy policy decisions in Russia at federal and regional levels are presented in the second chapter of book. The problems of normative expertise and expert accompaniment of policy decisions are analysed also.
The article deals with the processes of building the information society and security in the CIS in accordance with modern conditions. The main objective is to review existing mechanisms for the formation of a common information space in the Eurasian region, regarded as one of the essential aspects of international integration. The theoretical significance of the work is to determine the main controls of the regional information infrastructure, improved by the development of communication features in a rapid process.The practical component consists in determining the future policies of the region under consideration in building the information society. The study authors used historical-descriptive approach and factual analysis of events having to do with drawing the contours of today's global information society in the regional refraction.
The main result is the fact that the development of information and communication technologies, and network resources leads to increased threats of destabilization of the socio-political situation in view of the emergence of multiple centers that generate the ideological and psychological background. Keeping focused information policy can not be conceived without the collective participation of States in the first place, members of the group leaders of integration - Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan. Currently, only produced a comprehensive approach to security in the information field in the Eurasian region, but the events in the world, largely thanks to modern technology, make the search for an exit strategy with a much higher speed. The article contributes to the science of international relations, engaging in interdisciplinary thinking that is associated with a transition period in the development of society. A study of current conditions in their relation to the current socio-political patterns of the authors leads to conclusions about the need for cooperation with the network centers of power in the modern information environment, the formation of alternative models of networking, especially in innovation and scientific and technical areas of information policy, and expanding the integration of the field in this region on the information content.
This special publication for the 2012 New Delhi Summit is a collection of articles by government officials from BRICS countries, representatives of international organizations, businessmen and leading researchers.
The list of Russian contributors includes Sergei Lavrov, Foreign Minister of Russia, Maxim Medvedkov, Director of the Trade Negotiations Department of the Russian Ministry of Economic Development, Vladimir Dmitriev, Vnesheconombank Chairman, Alexander Bedritsky, advisor to the Russian President, VadimLukov, Ambassador-at-large of the Russian Foreign Affairs Ministry, and representatives of the academic community.
The publication also features articles by the President of Kazakhstan NursultanNazarbayev and internationally respected economist Jim O’Neil, who coined the term “BRIC”. In his article Jim O’Neil speculates about the future of the BRICS countries and the institution as a whole.
The publication addresses important issues of the global agenda, the priorities of BRICS and the Indian Presidency, the policies and competitive advantages of the participants, as well as BRICS institutionalization, enhancing efficiency and accountability of the forum.