Институт Омбудсмана: эволюция традиций и современная практика (опыт сравнительного анализа)
This book is the result of three years research project ‘Institutional base of social-political innovation: possible role of institutes with mediator functions’ , supported by grant of RFH in 2012-2014. The actual views concerning innovations at all and possibility of their use for social and policy fields (public policy innovations) are analyzed in the first chapter of book. The actual views concerning of process of arising of new problem resolving in public policy are analyzed in this chapter also, including of conception of advocacy coalitions of Pal Sabatier, conception of boundary structures etc.
The second chapter of monograph devoted to conception of institutes with mediation functions, and to development in different countries of three kinds of such institutes – think tanks, ombudsman institution and public councils including public chambers. The third and fourth chapters are the results of research of discussed institutes in Russia and Russian regions, including three regional cases – Saratovskaya oblast and Krasnodarskiy and Permskiy krays, where analyzed process of interaction of oll three kinds of mediator institutes.
The objective of the study is to reveal the role of the previous work experience of ombudsmen in RF subjects in the character of his/her activities in the region. In accordance with the objective of the study three groups of ombudsmen were identified on the basis of their background: former deputies, former administration representatives, former policemen and Office of Public Prosecutor officers. To achieve the objective of the study and testing of the assumption offered analysis of the Annual reports of ombudsmen Internet representation of his/her activities was made. A number of semiformal interviews with ombudsmen from the three groups were analyzed. On the basis of the analysis of ombudsmen's Annual reports and the Internet representation of their activities it can be assumed that the higher degree of publicity, more pro-active approach are more typical for former administration representatives. As to former Internal affairs ministry and Office of Public Prosecutor officers they are very similar in majority of characteristics