Рывок или фальстарт? Выход из карантина по коронавирусу весной 2020 года (опыт 30 стран)
The article analyzes the problems in the Russian milk and dairy products market in the context of the global economic crisis. An assessment of new opportunities and threats to the development of the industry was carried out: on the part of consumers – rising food prices, lower incomes; from the perspective of dairy producers – reduction in purchase prices, increased requirements for raw materials for the production of products with extended periods, labor shortages, the likely reduction in state support as a result of lower prices for hydrocarbons, attempts to regulate prices; on the part of processing enterprises – reduction of demand, reduction of prices for finished goods following world prices. The investment priorities in dairy cattle breeding and the main forms of improving state support for the industry, ensuring the effective adaptation of milk producers to new economic conditions, increasing the sustainability of the industry with increasing macroeconomic risks, are substantiated.
The research aims at explicating two discourses that are most important for solving global problems of humanity: biopolitics and human security. The authors, exploring the fundamental points of their conceptual framework, focus on the transformations of modern body politics. The similarity of the studied concepts is revealed. According to the authors, it consists in the sameness of their object, and the differences – in its interpretation. Biopolitics sees its interest in finding ways to control the impersonal "man in General", and human security – in its individuation. The measure of correlation of these concepts and their relation to the philosophical discourse about freedom is revealed. The author traces the dialectics of biopolitics and human security, the moments when the biopolitical discourse of "insured" and "uninsured" life intersects with the "colonizing" discourse of human security. It is concluded that the conflict of interests of the studied discourses is inevitable, none of them is able to "rise above the fray", having the opportunity to answer complex questions of human security. The measure of their effectiveness as an intellectual tool and practical mechanism for solving problems is illustrated in the article by biopolitics and human security policy in "fragile States" (the case of sub-Saharan Africa) and in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.
As a response to the global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, many countries have imposed restrictions on fundamental constitutional rights and freedoms, including freedoms of speech and assembly. The rapid spread of the understudied virus and the rise of the emotional tension within the society compelled the state authorities to adopt prompt measures to contain the virus. Unfortunately, the situation did not allow the decision-makers either to assess the specific aims of the restrictions or to consciously select the most adequate and least restrictive measures to fight the new virus. As a result, the legal systems have been infiltrated not only by the necessary limitations, but also by excessive and ineffective restrictive measures that are not suited to contain the infection and are incompatible with the principles of a pluralistic democracy. The article scrutinizes the latter statement focusing on anti-COVID-19 measures that impose restrictions on freedoms of peaceful assembly and speech. We resort to the criteria of the lawfulness of restrictions that stem from the principle of proportionality (legitimate aim, rational connection, necessity and proportionality stricto sensu). In the chapter devoted to the freedom of assembly, the author looks at different approaches that the states take to addressing the risks that public manifestations pose to public health in times of the pandemic. The comparative study also uncovers the differences in the relative value of freedom of assembly as opposed to that of «epidemiological safety». In the chapter devoted to the new limitations of freedom of speech, the author focuses on provisions that prevent the distribution of misinformation regarding COVID-19 and measures taken against it, adopted by several states, including Russia. The proportionality analysis shows that measures to counter fake news present an example of abuse of extraordinary powers to suppress public debate and limit the citizens’ right to criticize the government. The author comes to a conclusion that a blanket ban on small-scale manifestations and the liability for distribution of false information regarding COVID-19 and measures taken to fight it are disproportionate measures that are by no means justified by the aim of protecting public health in times of the pandemic.
The Center for Business Tendency Studies of the Institute for Statistical Studies and Economics of Knowledge of the Higher School of Economics provides an informational overview of current trends in the global e-commerce market in the context of COVID-19. The most important and emergency solutions in the field of e-commerce, proposed by business, national governments, supranational and international organizations, in response to the problems and challenges of the pandemic shock are reflected.