The Analysis of Factors of Formation of the Modern System of Political Governance: Global, Regional and Local Levels
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22394/1726-1139-2021-7-107-115Keywords:
political system, system analysis, global level of political governance, regional level of political governance, local level of political governanceAbstract
The relevance of the work is due to the growing influence of the processes of globalization and the need for a systematic and theoretical understanding of the interdependence of different levels of development and adaptation of the political system in the modern world. The situation of the COVID pandemic, which began in 2020 and demonstrated the dominance of global attitudes and rules over regional and local attitudes and rules, gives special relevance to this article. The purpose of the work is to clarify the essence and possibilities of applying system analysis to the process of public administration at the level of global integration, regional and local levels of public administration. At the same time, the essence of system analysis is not reduced to solving problems of management and decision-making on very complex problems, but a complete system and methodology for analyzing the adaptation practices of modern political systems at the global, regional and local levels is built. The author comes to the conclusion that it is the local level that is the basis for the formation of the modern political system, and it is worth focusing on it, and not on the global and regional levels, when carrying out certain political changes and transformations. The regional level is an add-on to the local level, and can include multiple local levels. The task of the regional level is to prevent conflict between multiple localities, to ensure their harmonious coexistence and development. Due to the spread of digitalization, the regional level loses its function as an intermediary between the local and the global. The global level of formation of the political system today, in turn, is an “umbrella” level. It appears as a categorical imperative of the political system, but it is not its mandatory guide or guide of development.Downloads
References
Блауберг И. В. Проблема целостности и системный подход. М., 1997.
Гостев А. Н., Демченко Т. С. Гражданское общество: контроль над деятельностью государства. М., 2011.
Гуторов В. А. Модернизация как фактор устойчивого развития: некоторые проблемы теории // Проблема устойчивости политических систем современного мира: Материалы Международной научной конференции / под ред. С. Г. Еремеева, И. И. Кузнецова. М.: Издательство Московского университета, 2018.
Инглхарт Р., Вельцель К. Модернизация, культурные изменения и демократия: последовательность человеческого развития. М., 2011.
Мангейм Дж., Рич Р. Методы политических исследований. М., 1997.
Садовский В. Н. Системный подход и системный анализ / И. В. Блауберг, Э. М. Мирский, В. Н. Садовский // Системные исследования: ежегодник. 1982. С. 47-64.
Слатинов В. Б. Трансформация приоритетов политического управления государственной гражданской службой России в ситуации режимных изменений: от "реформирования" к "развитию" // Среднерусский вестник общественных наук. 2017. Т. 12. № 3. С. 165-176.
Сморгунова В. Ю. Современный зарубежный социально-правовой и политический дискурс о гражданском обществе // Известия Российского государственного педагогического университета им. А. И. Герцена. 2004. Т. 4. № 7. С. 243-258.
Смотрицкая И. И., Черных С. И. Современные тенденции цифровой трансформации государственного управления // Вестник ИЭ РАН. 2018. № 5. C. 22-36.
Шамахов В. А. Стратегия ресурсосбережения: развитие vs распределение (российская повестка) // Управленческое консультирование. 2016. № 6 (90). С. 7-13.
Шестопал Е. Б. Ценностные характеристики российского политического процесса и стратегия развития страны // Полис. 2014. № 2. С. 61-71.
Agnew J. Hegemony: The new shape of global power. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press, 2005.
Bozeman B. Public values and public interests: Countering economic individualism. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2007.
Coccia M. World-System Theory: A sociopolitical approach to explain World economic development in a capitalistic. Journal of Economics and Political Economy. 2018. 5 (4). P. 459-465.
Cox R. W. Structural Is.s of global governance. In Gill, S. (Ed.), Gramci: Historical materialism, and international relations. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
Denhardt R. Trust as capacity: The role of integrity and responsiveness // Public Organization Review. 2002. N 2. P. 65-76.
Dodgshon R. A. Geography's place in time // Geografska Annaler. 2008. N 90 (1). P. 1-15.
Falk R. Predatory globalization: A critique. Oxford, UK: Blackwell, 1999.
Farazmand A. The Future of Public Administration: Challenges and Opportunities - A Critical Perspective // Administration and society. 2012. Vol. 44. Is. 4. P. 487-517.
Goldfrank W. L. Paradigm regained? The rules of Wallerstein's World-System method // Journal of World-Systems Research. 2000. N 6 (2). P. 150-195.
Goldstein J. Ideas, Interests and American Trade Policy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1993.
Howlett M., Ramesh M., Perl A. Studying public policy: policy cycles and policy subsystems. 3 ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.
Janssen M., Estevez E. Lean Government and Platform-based Governance - Doing more with Less // Government Information Quarterly. 2013. Vol. 30. P. 1-8.
Oberthür S., Stokke O. (eds.). Managing Institutional Complexity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2011.
Public Policy and Public Participation Engaging Citizens and Community in the Development of Public Policy. Bruce L. Smith / Groupwork Inc., Canada, 2003.
Sanina A., Rubtcova M., Satinsky D. M. The Effectiveness of Communication Channels in Government and Business Communication // Information Polity. 2017. Vol. 22. N 4. P. 251-266.
Wallerstein I. The rise and future demise of the World Capitalist System: Concepts for comparative analysis // Comparative Studies in Society and History. 1974. N 16 (4). P. 387-415.
