Государственная политика по развитию Сибири и Дальнего Востока: первые ошибки и успехи
With a view to developing civil society and addressing social policy issues, the government has been allocating a considerable amount of funding for NGO support over a number of years. Given the growing support of NGOs by the government and the increasing diversity of the relevant programs at the federal, regional and municipal levels, it is essential to develop a methodology of evaluating the effectiveness of these programs. The article examines the scope, structure and characteristics of NGO support by the government in Russia, among other things, from the point of view of social and political goals pursued by government agencies. Based on the analysis of methodologies for evaluating programs of NGO support, which are applied by public and private donors abroad, and proceeding from the specifics of government support of NGOs in Russia, the article makes a conclusion that it is necessary to develop a universal, flexible and easily applicable methodology for the evaluation of the effectiveness of public and municipal programs for NGO support in Russia.
The article analyzes modern trends of Russian patriotism, which are considered from the point of view of the global context of patriotic education, civic education and nation-building. The author cites the all-Russia polls, as well as the results of the sixth wave of World Value Survey (2010-2014). She also demonstrates the results of the empirical research conducted by the method of content analysis using ATLAS.ti. The research covers eight strategic documents of patriotic education of the United States, Singapore, China and Russia. Key findings from the study are as follows. (1) The abrupt nature of the Russian patriotism shows that external events play a major role in its formation rather than public policy. The consolidation of the Russian society is not realized through the cultivation of positive patriotic values, but on the basis of negative factors. Their influence can only lead to a blind, but not to the constructive patriotism. (2) Russian program documents demonstrate the emphasis on a militarist bias of patriotic education, and this is the evidence of a blurring legal and theoretical basis of formation of patriotism in Russia. Patriotic education cannot exist for its own sake. Also, it cannot only develop the emotional component of state identity. This prevents the formation of constructive patriotism and involves cultivating such qualities as unconditional love for the homeland, convinced devotion to public authorities, unquestioning positive evaluation of the government structures, and the rejection of critical evaluation, readiness to defend the state up to the sacrifice. (3) There is a need to harmonize the “official” definition of patriotism with the concepts of civic education and nation-building. Patriotism can be regarded as love of country, devotion to the state, which is expressed in the knowledge of the historical and contemporary achievements of the country, the free support of spiritual and moral values, the manifestation of citizenship based on the active participation in the activities of civil society, constructive criticism of the government and express their point view. Such definition of patriotism integrates emotional relationship of the citizen to the country, the state, civil and national identity. It emphasizes the importance of the traditions and values, and creates a construct of active and free of social behavior without infringing alternative values, traditions and attitudes that exist in the world.