Suchergebnisse

Актуалізовано увагу на питанні спільної управлінської діяльності громадських інституцій та органів державної влади. Запропоновано власну модель консенсусного громадсько-державного управління, в якій провідну роль відведено громадським організаціям. Конкретизовано стан розвитку взаємин держави і суспільства, означено перспективи участі громадян у прийнятті суспільно значимих рішень, у еволюції громадянського суспільства. ; Problem setting. Despite the attempts of state authorities to emphasize the readiness for constructive cooperation, the current state of relations between the state and society in Ukraine does not improve the situation in this direction. Therefore, the necessity of applying different models and approaches to the coordination of management activities between the institutions of society and the state is precisely within the context of public administration.Recent research and publications analysis. The issue of management activity of government institutions occupies a prominent place in state-management research studies. Some aspects of the interaction between the institutions of society and the state were investigated in the works of T. Andriychuk, S. Teleshun, V. Gelston, O. Kornievsky, E. Kuznetsov, M. Latsybi. The foreign experience in this field has been introduced by I. Belyi.Highlighting previously unsettled parts of the general problem. Taking into account the current interaction between authorities and citizens, it is worthwhile to focus on specific mechanisms for optimizing the coordinated management activities of public and state institutions. In particular, the question of the place and role of civic organizations as the key elements of civil society and their managerial potential in these processes has not been studied yet.Paper main body. In this case, we propose a consensus-based public-government model that can be used as a mobilization-integration tool for organizing citizens in any territorial environment – whether it is a united territorial community, a specific region, or a country as a whole.Government bodies and local self-government bodies, while implementing the process of decentralization of public administration at all levels, create favorable conditions for publicity and openness of communication with civil society institutions and public organizations in particular. Proceeding from the fact that the process of decentralization is aimed at the end-to-end democratization of institutional relations and affirms the admission of certain administrative powers of representatives of civil society, we consider it appropriate to reformat the nature of relations in the direction of promoting civil society organizations, where their role will be tangible and public, not superficial.This concerns the practical involvement of representatives of civil society into the cooperation with authorities, through a synthesis of the distribution of managerial powers and the adoption of consolidated decisions. This, in our understanding, is the introduction of a consensus model.The key category in this research is the term "consensus", which is understood as the fact of the consent of the main socio-political forces (entities) regarding the distribution of power and management values. It can be also understood as the search for mutually acceptable solutions that can satisfy all stakeholders in the management process. In this model, it is important to have an equitable distribution of functions performed by its subjects, as well as a balance of interests and relationships that operate on the principles of consensus-based democracy.The most important incentive for the conscious and systematic adoption of this model is the desire and ability to find a common language and units on the way of realizing socially important tasks. The following principles, such as trust, respect, consistency, persuasion, purposefulness, serve as incentives for using this model in public administration. The experimental platform for such a model is an open discussion platform, which we regard as a modern approach in public administration, indicating the refusal of the monological way of obtaining the true result and the recognition of the dialogue in achieving the results. Consequently, one should speak about the awareness of each participant of the managerial process of the subjectivity of state-public relations.Management procedure that would implement this model should be democratic, since dictates and excessive control over the functioning of the consensus structure overturns the conceptual nature of this form of cooperation. The key role of the state in this context is to give the initiative to public organizations, public leaders, managers, insiders, which we would call agents, to offer the field of activity on parity, stimulating conditions.Conclusions of the research and prospects for further studies. The use of a consensus model in practice will facilitate the establishment of close partnerships between the institutions of society and the state. The stereotypes of the managerial superiority of state authorities over public initiatives and functional inability of civic organizations to influence the implementation of state policy are the real obstacles in this process. Therefore, the model is one of the many opportunities for attracting institutions to the national context, an important content of social communication, the basis of coordination and management activities, which generally has a real and effective impact on the development of democratic governance.

Актуалізовано увагу на питанні спільної управлінської діяльності громадських інституцій та органів державної влади. Запропоновано власну модель консенсусного громадсько-державного управління, в якій провідну роль відведено громадським організаціям. Конкретизовано стан розвитку взаємин держави і суспільства, означено перспективи участі громадян у прийнятті суспільно значимих рішень, у еволюції громадянського суспільства. ; Problem setting. Despite the attempts of state authorities to emphasize the readiness for constructive cooperation, the current state of relations between the state and society in Ukraine does not improve the situation in this direction. Therefore, the necessity of applying different models and approaches to the coordination of management activities between the institutions of society and the state is precisely within the context of public administration.Recent research and publications analysis. The issue of management activity of government institutions occupies a prominent place in state-management research studies. Some aspects of the interaction between the institutions of society and the state were investigated in the works of T. Andriychuk, S. Teleshun, V. Gelston, O. Kornievsky, E. Kuznetsov, M. Latsybi. The foreign experience in this field has been introduced by I. Belyi.Highlighting previously unsettled parts of the general problem. Taking into account the current interaction between authorities and citizens, it is worthwhile to focus on specific mechanisms for optimizing the coordinated management activities of public and state institutions. In particular, the question of the place and role of civic organizations as the key elements of civil society and their managerial potential in these processes has not been studied yet.Paper main body. In this case, we propose a consensus-based public-government model that can be used as a mobilization-integration tool for organizing citizens in any territorial environment – whether it is a united territorial community, a specific region, or a country as a whole.Government bodies and local self-government bodies, while implementing the process of decentralization of public administration at all levels, create favorable conditions for publicity and openness of communication with civil society institutions and public organizations in particular. Proceeding from the fact that the process of decentralization is aimed at the end-to-end democratization of institutional relations and affirms the admission of certain administrative powers of representatives of civil society, we consider it appropriate to reformat the nature of relations in the direction of promoting civil society organizations, where their role will be tangible and public, not superficial.This concerns the practical involvement of representatives of civil society into the cooperation with authorities, through a synthesis of the distribution of managerial powers and the adoption of consolidated decisions. This, in our understanding, is the introduction of a consensus model.The key category in this research is the term "consensus", which is understood as the fact of the consent of the main socio-political forces (entities) regarding the distribution of power and management values. It can be also understood as the search for mutually acceptable solutions that can satisfy all stakeholders in the management process. In this model, it is important to have an equitable distribution of functions performed by its subjects, as well as a balance of interests and relationships that operate on the principles of consensus-based democracy.The most important incentive for the conscious and systematic adoption of this model is the desire and ability to find a common language and units on the way of realizing socially important tasks. The following principles, such as trust, respect, consistency, persuasion, purposefulness, serve as incentives for using this model in public administration. The experimental platform for such a model is an open discussion platform, which we regard as a modern approach in public administration, indicating the refusal of the monological way of obtaining the true result and the recognition of the dialogue in achieving the results. Consequently, one should speak about the awareness of each participant of the managerial process of the subjectivity of state-public relations.Management procedure that would implement this model should be democratic, since dictates and excessive control over the functioning of the consensus structure overturns the conceptual nature of this form of cooperation. The key role of the state in this context is to give the initiative to public organizations, public leaders, managers, insiders, which we would call agents, to offer the field of activity on parity, stimulating conditions.Conclusions of the research and prospects for further studies. The use of a consensus model in practice will facilitate the establishment of close partnerships between the institutions of society and the state. The stereotypes of the managerial superiority of state authorities over public initiatives and functional inability of civic organizations to influence the implementation of state policy are the real obstacles in this process. Therefore, the model is one of the many opportunities for attracting institutions to the national context, an important content of social communication, the basis of coordination and management activities, which generally has a real and effective impact on the development of democratic governance.

For 60 years, scientists from the United States and the Soviet Union participated in state-organized programs of collaboration. From the first scientific exchanges of the Cold War years through the fall of the Soviet Union, Gerson S. Sher, a former manager of these cooperative programs, provides a detailed and critical assessment of what worked, what didn't, and why it matters.

Multilateral cooperation means that states can collectively achieve more than they can through individual and bilateral efforts alone. Multilateral organisations are important instruments for this: they have a greater geographic and thematic reach, operate at a larger scale and stand for multilateral norms and values. Funding provides an important basis for multilateral development cooperation - only with sufficient core funding at their disposal can multilaterals effectively and independently perform the functions member states expect. This includes a problem-driven allocation of resources, strategic orientation, and flexibility in the implementation of and advocacy for internationally agreed values, norms and standards. The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has demonstrated the need for international cooperation to deal with multiple crises that affect all societies. It has also proved the value of multilateral organisations that can combat the spread of COVID-19 worldwide and support countries where health systems are weakest. Over the last three decades, the funding trend for multilateral organisations has been towards ever greater shares of earmarked funding, whereas core funding has grown much more slowly or has even declined for some organisations. A contribution is earmarked when a contributor directs it to a specific pooled fund, programme or - most typically - a project in a specific country. The substantial increase in such earmarked (also 'restricted', 'bi-multi') funding has certainly buoyed organisations and helped to close many funding gaps. However, such atomised funding practices come with the risk of instrumentalising multilateral organisations for project implementation purposes, and by doing so, reducing their programmatic coherence, effectiveness, efficiency and legitimacy. For contributors, earmarking has often been a politically convenient choice. It provides them with control over the use of their resources and visibility for results achieved, all at attractively low implementation costs. However, both the direct implications of earmarking for specific interventions and the more systemic effects on the effectiveness and efficiency of the multilateral organisations tend to be overlooked. At the scale we see it today, earmarking may actually undermine the ability of multilaterals to fulfil the member states' expectations and make full use of their unique assets to advance the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. To fully harness the potential of multilateral development cooperation, both member states and multilateral organisations have to change course. * A larger number of contributors - also beyond the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development/Development Assistance Committee (OECD/DAC) - should contribute additional funds to the multilateral development system. * Contributors should reverse the trend of growing shares of earmarked funding by increasing core funds across organisations. * Contributors should use earmarked funding more prudently to support rather than undermine multilateral functions. Multi-donor pooled funds are a viable alternative. * Multilaterals should invest in transparent institutional mechanisms that provide checks for resource mobilisation.

Analysis of the brief history of the 18-year stay of the United States and NATO in Afghanistan shows that all threats (military- political related to drug trafficking, export of terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism) come from this country. Special attention should be paid to the processes taking place in this country and around it in the near future. Otherwise, the situation in the near future may radically change, unfortunately, first of all, to the disadvantage of the countries of the region and Russia.

.

The aim of the article is to analyze determinants, standards and principles of co-operation between the Polish Financial Supervision Authority and selected stakeholders of the state security system. This is especially important in the context of the dynamic development of the financial market, challenges resulting from the computerization of this market in the era of pandemics and the geopolitical situation related to the war in Ukraine. Authors accepted the hypothesis that the effectiveness of cooperation of entities responsible for state security depends, on the one hand, on the proper legal basis, and on the other hand, on soft factors such as mutual trust, community of goals and competence of employees of public institutions and officers. The article is a review with a theoretical and empirical component. The doctrine and legal acts were analyzed, and also empirical material collected during the research process was analyzed. For the purposes of the considerations, the dogmatic-legal method and the analysis of source materials of the Polish Financial Supervision Authority were used.