Публичная политика в гибридных режимах: обзор исследований
This review systemizes contemporary, mostly foreign, academic literature, devoted to the development of
public policy in hybrid and authoritarian regimes, as well as to the interaction of citizens, civic associations
and authorities within the process of public policy-making. The academic interest in this topic is growing,
mostly due to the development of participatory practices in non-democracies, especially in China, which is
now becoming a popular object of analysis. The researchers emphasize the constant transformation of the
Chinese public policy and a variety of participation channels, open for citizens, non-profit organizations and
expert communities. It gives an opportunity to adapt existing Western theories to the analysis of hybrid regimes,
as well as to develop a new conceptual apparatus. Despite the significant growth of theoretical and
empirical knowledge on that topic, the research agenda still has some avenues for development. Firstly, an
important issue is the analysis of institutional effects of citizen participation, the interrelation of its information,
legitimation and imitation functions in a non-democratic context. Secondly, it is also relevant to study
the success factors of such initiatives, and their potential both as a source of regime stability and public policy
democratization. In the review we attempt to formulate these problems and possible empirical ways to
deal with them. In particular, a promising step could be the application of models and hypotheses, derived
from the Chinese case, to other countries, as well as to cross-national comparative studies.
The term “civil society” in Russia is often taken to refer to civic organisations and movements created during and after the break-up of the Soviet Union, and is sometimes equated narrowly with “NGOs” – registered non-government, non-commercial, or public organisations. This paper attempts to look at civil society more widely. It considers both registered organisations and more spontaneous/informal civic actions; and follows local experts in challenging the idea that Russian civil society began in 1989–91. The paper considers both recent developments on the ground, and analyses by historians, sociologists, and political scientists that go back to soviet and pre-soviet periods.
This book provides unique insights into the role of policy capacity in policymaking and policy change, as it is being uncovered at the research frontier in contemporary policy studies. The book is structured into a series of sections on policy capacity in theory and practice, each focusing on a specific aspect of policy capacity and its influence on policy formulation, decision-making, implementation and evaluation. In addition to making a significant contribution to the body of literature on the theoretical approaches to researching the role of capacity in policymaking, it also provides practical examples of the application of these approaches through a variety of national and sectoral case studies. Including contributions from authors working in a wide variety of disciplines, the book demonstrates, across the various topics investigated, many commonalities and consistencies in relation to the study of policy capacity and policy-making. This work has interdisciplinary appeal and will engage scholars in fields ranging from geography to communications, health, social work and political science, amongst others with an interest in public policy
Russia has recently cracked down on politically active civil society, increasing regulation and undercutting foreign support. However, apolitical, service-oriented parts of civil society have not been subject to these restrictive policies. In contrast, since 2009 Russia has introduced a set of government tools to support socially oriented non-profit organisations. These tools present a framework akin to concepts of ‘third-party government’ and collaborative governance that have come to dominate Western public administration discourse. This article discusses the Russian government’s divergent positions towards civil society, the nature and extent of the supportive tool kit, and its prospects.
To date, China’s deliberative institutions have mainly been seen as small-scale mechanisms for controlling local social unrest. This paper explores how deliberative principles in China work at the national level. The case under scrutiny is China’s new healthcare reform. Drawing on the existing empirical studies, Chinese-language reports and articles, official document analysis, and on several unstructured interviews with Chinese academics, the article attempts to evaluate the extent to which deliberative democratic principles are present in the process of healthcare policy making. To achieve this analytical goal, it develops and applies five criteria of good deliberation. The analysis suggests that the public policy process in China is now more inclusive and pluralistic than it was in the past. This arguably indicates that China’s political system is moving in a new direction.
The book contains selected revised papers from the 21st NISPAcee Annual conference "Regionalization and Inter-regional Cooperation", Belgrade, Serbia, 16-18 May 2013, organized in cooperation with the Faculty of Organizational Sciences, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia.
The paper discusses the factors affecting the activities of civil society institutions such as think tanks. Ways in which they can impact on political decision making process. Attention is paid to "window of opportunity" and the available communication channels to these organizations.
Belarusian Yearbook 2013 presents a comprehensive analysis of the key developments in the main sectors of the state and society. Since its inception a decade ago, the Belarusian Yearbook has evolved as a crucial annual initiative of the Belarusian analytical community to compile, conceptualize and present a chronicle of Belarus contemporary history. Contributing to Belarusian Yearbook 2013 were independent analysts and experts, as well as specialists representing varios think tanks, including the Belarusian Institute for Strategic Studies (BISS, Vilnius, Lithuania), the Research Center of the Institute for Privatization and Managment (Minsk, Belarus), NOVAK Axiometrical Research Laboratory (Warsaw, Poland), the Belarusian Ecomomic Research and Outreach Center (BEROC, Minsk, Belarus), the Center for Eastern Studies (Warsaw, Poland), the expert community of Belarus Nashe Mnenie (Our opinion), the Agency of Humanitarian Technologies, the Independent Institute of Socio-Economic and Political Studies (IISEPS), eBelarus Research Center, Agency for Social and Political Expert Appraisal.
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.