Suchergebnisse

As usual during reforms, first of all the reformers are trying to develop a reform strategy and to find the right financial and human resources. However, the social support for reforms and public confidence in reforms and reformers are equally important resources in carrying out reforms. Therefore, public trust is an equally important resource for reform, such as finance or staffing. Instead a lack of public confidence in reform processes can be an invisible barrier, an indicator of their effectiveness or inefficiency. Public trust is not an abstract concept. Public trust is a condition for the integration of society around a number of socially significant problems, the successful reformation of the country.The article analyzes public trust in Ukraine and outlines the consequences of its shortage in the processes of reforming society. For this purpose, the theoretical foundations of the phenomenon of public trust were defined, the notion of «institutionalized trust», «political alienation», «externalization of trust», «social capital» were distinguished; analyzed the state of institutionalized trust in Ukraine; the consequences of a deficit of institutionalized trust for the reform processes in Ukrainian society are analyzed. Such research makes it possible to understand the problems of the development of social capital in Ukraine and, in the light of this knowledge, to adjust the development of social development strategies, that is, the actual processes of reformation.Summing up, the author stated a significant deficit of institutional trust in Ukrainian society. It concerns both the basic organs of state power and the instruments of democracy. The deficit of institutionalized trust in Ukraine is converted into three phenomena: 1) political exclusion (citizens try to distance themselves from the state as much as possible); 2) in the radicalization of society; 3) externalization of trust (hence the popular opinion in the society about the expediency of «external management», faith in the «collective action», in the «collective Saakashvili»). Also, a lack of trust in society exacerbates radical sentiment and radical actions in society.It should be understood that Ukrainian society after EuroMaydan and Ukrainian society during the presidency of L. Kuchma, are qualitatively different societies. This confirms the dynamics of institutionalized trust. That is, EuroMaydan 2014 and Russian military aggression became a kind of «moment of great upheaval», which confirmed the demand for the revitalization of democratic institutions and elementary social justice. This means that in the near future one should expect the growth of civic activity and a surge in the demand for a radical change in the rules of the game - political institutions. Therefore for Ukraine is very important to maintain a balance between intensive political and public participation, but necessarily in a conventional way, and with an adequate response from public authorities to social inquiries. ; As usual during reforms, first of all the reformers are trying to develop a reform strategy and to find the right financial and human resources. However, the social support for reforms and public confidence in reforms and reformers are equally important resources in carrying out reforms. Therefore, public trust is an equally important resource for reform, such as finance or staffing. Instead a lack of public confidence in reform processes can be an invisible barrier, an indicator of their effectiveness or inefficiency. Public trust is not an abstract concept. Public trust is a condition for the integration of society around a number of socially significant problems, the successful reformation of the country.The article analyzes public trust in Ukraine and outlines the consequences of its shortage in the processes of reforming society. For this purpose, the theoretical foundations of the phenomenon of public trust were defined, the notion of «institutionalized trust», «political alienation», «externalization of trust», «social capital» were distinguished; analyzed the state of institutionalized trust in Ukraine; the consequences of a deficit of institutionalized trust for the reform processes in Ukrainian society are analyzed. Such research makes it possible to understand the problems of the development of social capital in Ukraine and, in the light of this knowledge, to adjust the development of social development strategies, that is, the actual processes of reformation.Summing up, the author stated a significant deficit of institutional trust in Ukrainian society. It concerns both the basic organs of state power and the instruments of democracy. The deficit of institutionalized trust in Ukraine is converted into three phenomena: 1) political exclusion (citizens try to distance themselves from the state as much as possible); 2) in the radicalization of society; 3) externalization of trust (hence the popular opinion in the society about the expediency of «external management», faith in the «collective action», in the «collective Saakashvili»). Also, a lack of trust in society exacerbates radical sentiment and radical actions in society.It should be understood that Ukrainian society after EuroMaydan and Ukrainian society during the presidency of L. Kuchma, are qualitatively different societies. This confirms the dynamics of institutionalized trust. That is, EuroMaydan 2014 and Russian military aggression became a kind of «moment of great upheaval», which confirmed the demand for the revitalization of democratic institutions and elementary social justice. This means that in the near future one should expect the growth of civic activity and a surge in the demand for a radical change in the rules of the game - political institutions. Therefore for Ukraine is very important to maintain a balance between intensive political and public participation, but necessarily in a conventional way, and with an adequate response from public authorities to social inquiries.

As usual during reforms, first of all the reformers are trying to develop a reform strategy and to find the right financial and human resources. However, the social support for reforms and public confidence in reforms and reformers are equally important resources in carrying out reforms. Therefore, public trust is an equally important resource for reform, such as finance or staffing. Instead a lack of public confidence in reform processes can be an invisible barrier, an indicator of their effectiveness or inefficiency. Public trust is not an abstract concept. Public trust is a condition for the integration of society around a number of socially significant problems, the successful reformation of the country.The article analyzes public trust in Ukraine and outlines the consequences of its shortage in the processes of reforming society. For this purpose, the theoretical foundations of the phenomenon of public trust were defined, the notion of «institutionalized trust», «political alienation», «externalization of trust», «social capital» were distinguished; analyzed the state of institutionalized trust in Ukraine; the consequences of a deficit of institutionalized trust for the reform processes in Ukrainian society are analyzed. Such research makes it possible to understand the problems of the development of social capital in Ukraine and, in the light of this knowledge, to adjust the development of social development strategies, that is, the actual processes of reformation.Summing up, the author stated a significant deficit of institutional trust in Ukrainian society. It concerns both the basic organs of state power and the instruments of democracy. The deficit of institutionalized trust in Ukraine is converted into three phenomena: 1) political exclusion (citizens try to distance themselves from the state as much as possible); 2) in the radicalization of society; 3) externalization of trust (hence the popular opinion in the society about the expediency of «external management», faith in the «collective action», in the «collective Saakashvili»). Also, a lack of trust in society exacerbates radical sentiment and radical actions in society.It should be understood that Ukrainian society after EuroMaydan and Ukrainian society during the presidency of L. Kuchma, are qualitatively different societies. This confirms the dynamics of institutionalized trust. That is, EuroMaydan 2014 and Russian military aggression became a kind of «moment of great upheaval», which confirmed the demand for the revitalization of democratic institutions and elementary social justice. This means that in the near future one should expect the growth of civic activity and a surge in the demand for a radical change in the rules of the game - political institutions. Therefore for Ukraine is very important to maintain a balance between intensive political and public participation, but necessarily in a conventional way, and with an adequate response from public authorities to social inquiries. ; As usual during reforms, first of all the reformers are trying to develop a reform strategy and to find the right financial and human resources. However, the social support for reforms and public confidence in reforms and reformers are equally important resources in carrying out reforms. Therefore, public trust is an equally important resource for reform, such as finance or staffing. Instead a lack of public confidence in reform processes can be an invisible barrier, an indicator of their effectiveness or inefficiency. Public trust is not an abstract concept. Public trust is a condition for the integration of society around a number of socially significant problems, the successful reformation of the country.The article analyzes public trust in Ukraine and outlines the consequences of its shortage in the processes of reforming society. For this purpose, the theoretical foundations of the phenomenon of public trust were defined, the notion of «institutionalized trust», «political alienation», «externalization of trust», «social capital» were distinguished; analyzed the state of institutionalized trust in Ukraine; the consequences of a deficit of institutionalized trust for the reform processes in Ukrainian society are analyzed. Such research makes it possible to understand the problems of the development of social capital in Ukraine and, in the light of this knowledge, to adjust the development of social development strategies, that is, the actual processes of reformation.Summing up, the author stated a significant deficit of institutional trust in Ukrainian society. It concerns both the basic organs of state power and the instruments of democracy. The deficit of institutionalized trust in Ukraine is converted into three phenomena: 1) political exclusion (citizens try to distance themselves from the state as much as possible); 2) in the radicalization of society; 3) externalization of trust (hence the popular opinion in the society about the expediency of «external management», faith in the «collective action», in the «collective Saakashvili»). Also, a lack of trust in society exacerbates radical sentiment and radical actions in society.It should be understood that Ukrainian society after EuroMaydan and Ukrainian society during the presidency of L. Kuchma, are qualitatively different societies. This confirms the dynamics of institutionalized trust. That is, EuroMaydan 2014 and Russian military aggression became a kind of «moment of great upheaval», which confirmed the demand for the revitalization of democratic institutions and elementary social justice. This means that in the near future one should expect the growth of civic activity and a surge in the demand for a radical change in the rules of the game - political institutions. Therefore for Ukraine is very important to maintain a balance between intensive political and public participation, but necessarily in a conventional way, and with an adequate response from public authorities to social inquiries.

The political processes taking place in Ukraine since the beginning of 2014 are characterized by increased intensity and radicalism that alarms the foreign partners. There are absolutely opposite points of view on socio-political processes taking place in Ukraine. And while comparing Ukraine with the countries of Central and Eastern Europe the results of reforms will seem insignificant. If we compare the present-day Ukraine with the one of even five years ago, the depth of change is obvious. It is, first of all, about the institutional changes in the system for the formation of political decisions. Thus, the return to the parliamentary form of government and the expansion of the parliamentary staff powers allows the launching of political competition processes. Decentralization of finance has strengthened the position of local government. Reform of the government allows to optimize the system of public administration and delimits the responsibilities of local authorities. The lustration and the creation of anti-corruption bodies allow to improve the state authorities. At the same time, the main problem of Ukraine is the monopolization of the economy and politics by the financial and industrial groups. Reducing their influence and role in socio-political processes is a condition for Ukraine's withdrawal from the hybrid state. After the Revolution of Dignity, their influence was significantly reduced due to the deregulation of the economy and changes in the system of principles for the formation of public authorities. But the destruction of the negative impact of informal institutions still has not been completed. The main reason is the conservation of mixed electoral system that was established as an instrument for the reproduction of the interests of financial and industrial groups in the government due to which the effect of the reforms is reduced. ; Procesy polityczne zachodzące w Ukrainie od początku roku 2014 charakteryzują się zwiększoną intensywnością i radykalizmem, co jest postrzegane przez partnerów zagranicznych z zaniepokojeniem. Są zupełnie przeciwne punkty widzenia w stosunku do zachodzących w Ukrainie procesów społeczno-politycznych. Jeśli porównamy Ukrainę z krajami Europy Środkowej i Wschodniej, wyniki reform wydają się nieistotne. Jednakże, jeżeli porównamy dzisiejszą Ukrainę z Ukrainą sprzed pięciu laty, głębokość zmian jest oczywista. Chodzi przede wszystkim o zmiany instytucjonalne systemu formowania decyzji politycznych. Powrót ku parlamentarnej formie zarządzania państwowego oraz poszerzeniu uprawnień personalnych dla parlamentu pozwoliły na wprowadzenie procesów konkurencji politycznej. Decentralizacja finansów wzmocniła pozycję samorządu terytorialnego. Reforma służby cywilnej pozwoliła zoptymalizować system administracji publicznej oraz rozgraniczyć strefy odpowiedzialności władz lokalnych. Lustracja i tworzenie organów antykorupcyjnych pozwoliły na poprawę działania władz państwowych. Jednocześnie głównym problemem Ukrainy pozostaje monopolizacja gospodarki i polityki przez grupy finansowo-przemysłowe. Zmniejszenie ich wpływów i roli w procesach społeczno-politycznych jest warunkiem wyjścia Ukrainy ze stanu hybrydowego. Po Rewolucji Godności te wpływy znacznie się zmniejszyły na skutek deregulacji gospodarki oraz zmian przeprowadzonych w systemie zasad formowania władz publicznych. Jednakże do końca jeszcze nie udało się zwalczyć wciąż istniejących wpływów instytucji nieformalnych. Głównym powodem jest zachowanie mieszanego systemu wyborczego, który został stworzony jako instrument służący odtwarzaniu interesów rządzących grup finansowo-przemysłowych. Właśnie z tego powodu efekt przeprowadzanych reform jest mniejszy. ; Политические процессы, происходящие в Украине с начала 2014 г., характеризуются повышенной интенсивностью и радикальностью, чем настораживают зарубежных партнеров. Есть совершенно противоположные точки зрения на происходящие в Украине социально-политические процессы. И если сравнивать Украину со странами Центральной и Восточной Европы, результаты реформ покажутся незначительными. Если же сравнивать Украину с Украиной еще пятилетней давности, масштабы изменений очевидны. Речь идет, прежде всего, об институциональных изменениях системы формирования политических решений. Так, возвращение к парламентской форме государственного правления и расширение кадровых полномочий парламента позволили запустить процессы политической конкуренции. Децентрализация финансов усилила положение органов местного самоуправления. Реформа государственной службы позволила оптимизировать систему государственного управления и разграничить сферы ответственности местных органов власти. Люстрация и создание антикоррупционных органов позволили оздоровить органы государственной власти. Вместе с тем главная проблема Украины – монополизация экономики и политики финансово-промышленными группами (ФПГ). Уменьшение их влияния и роли в общественно-политических процессах является условием выхода Украины из гибридного состояния. После Революции достоинства влияние существенно уменьшилось благодаря дерегуляции экономики и изменениям системы принципов формирования органов государственной власти. Но окончательно разрушить негативное воздействие неформальных институтов пока не удалось. Главная причина – в сохранении смешанной избирательной системы, которая задумывалась как инструмент воспроизводства интересов финансовопромышленных групп во власти. Именно доминирования ФПГ в процессах формирования политических решений нивелирует эффект от проводимых реформ.

The procedural components of the public authorities has been analyzed. The article contains an estimation of their functionality in the process of the social solidarity supporting. It has been defined that the significance and essence of political institution are formed not only by the existence of clearly defined rules of the game and its functionality, but also by the system of sanctions, which are designated in the case of rule violations, both by the"strong resource groups", who actually take political decisions, and by the social groups, political parties and public organizations whose role comprises protection of the "weak resource groups." ; The procedural components of the public authorities has been analyzed. The article contains an estimation of their functionality in the process of the social solidarity supporting. It has been defined that the significance and essence of political institution are formed not only by the existence of clearly defined rules of the game and its functionality, but also by the system of sanctions, which are designated in the case of rule violations, both by the"strong resource groups", who actually take political decisions, and by the social groups, political parties and public organizations whose role comprises protection of the "weak resource groups."