The article gives an overview of the basic concepts of Game Theory, such as zero sum game and non-zero sum game for two players, von Neumann's mini-max theorem, Pareto optimum, simple and iterated Prisoner's dilemma, Evolutionary stable strategy. Game Theory is understood as an analytical tool dealing with situations of conflict and co-operation. One of the main ideas of the theory is that by reducing and simplifying complicated phenomena of our everyday world we can often find a simple game situation with a single or more solutions. The theory helps to search for solutions by constructing ideal types of situations that contain principal elements of rational choice. There is no claim that Game Theory is something completed and not problematic itself and yet it provides elegant logical tools for analysis of social, political and philosophical life.
The article gives an overview of the basic concepts of Game Theory, such as zero sum game and non-zero sum game for two players, von Neumann's mini-max theorem, Pareto optimum, simple and iterated Prisoner's dilemma, Evolutionary stable strategy. Game Theory is understood as an analytical tool dealing with situations of conflict and co-operation. One of the main ideas of the theory is that by reducing and simplifying complicated phenomena of our everyday world we can often find a simple game situation with a single or more solutions. The theory helps to search for solutions by constructing ideal types of situations that contain principal elements of rational choice. There is no claim that Game Theory is something completed and not problematic itself and yet it provides elegant logical tools for analysis of social, political and philosophical life.
The article gives an overview of the basic concepts of Game Theory, such as zero sum game and non-zero sum game for two players, von Neumann's mini-max theorem, Pareto optimum, simple and iterated Prisoner's dilemma, Evolutionary stable strategy. Game Theory is understood as an analytical tool dealing with situations of conflict and co-operation. One of the main ideas of the theory is that by reducing and simplifying complicated phenomena of our everyday world we can often find a simple game situation with a single or more solutions. The theory helps to search for solutions by constructing ideal types of situations that contain principal elements of rational choice. There is no claim that Game Theory is something completed and not problematic itself and yet it provides elegant logical tools for analysis of social, political and philosophical life.
The article gives an overview of the basic concepts of Game Theory, such as zero sum game and non-zero sum game for two players, von Neumann's mini-max theorem, Pareto optimum, simple and iterated Prisoner's dilemma, Evolutionary stable strategy. Game Theory is understood as an analytical tool dealing with situations of conflict and co-operation. One of the main ideas of the theory is that by reducing and simplifying complicated phenomena of our everyday world we can often find a simple game situation with a single or more solutions. The theory helps to search for solutions by constructing ideal types of situations that contain principal elements of rational choice. There is no claim that Game Theory is something completed and not problematic itself and yet it provides elegant logical tools for analysis of social, political and philosophical life.
The article focuses on the specific conception of the governmentalization of the state and its relation to the contemporary risk society. In other words, the theory of governmentality could be used to analize the construction of risk in the governing of contemporary society. In this case, the risk is used as a means of governing people or as a way of self-governing. M. Foucault presented and discussed this conception in his writings. In late modernity, with the ideal of the welfare state receding, neoliberal principles and objectives became ascendant; they prompted many to take an interest in M. Foucault's theory on the history of governmentality and emergence of neoliberalism. According to M. Foucault, the term govermentality deals with the ways people think about governing, different rationalities or mentalities of the government. All various ways of the activities employ different mentalities of the government of conduct entailed in related knowledge. The same activities can be regarded as a different form of practice depending on mentalities that invest it. The conceptions of various risks are a part of such knowledge and social actors interiorize them. The contemporary neoliberal governing or, more precisely, governmentality seeks to find adequate reciprocal communication between governors of risk and interest group. The recognition of risk conception and governing must be visible very clearly as a constructive meaning of the theory of risk governmentality.
The article focuses on the specific conception of the governmentalization of the state and its relation to the contemporary risk society. In other words, the theory of governmentality could be used to analize the construction of risk in the governing of contemporary society. In this case, the risk is used as a means of governing people or as a way of self-governing. M. Foucault presented and discussed this conception in his writings. In late modernity, with the ideal of the welfare state receding, neoliberal principles and objectives became ascendant; they prompted many to take an interest in M. Foucault's theory on the history of governmentality and emergence of neoliberalism. According to M. Foucault, the term govermentality deals with the ways people think about governing, different rationalities or mentalities of the government. All various ways of the activities employ different mentalities of the government of conduct entailed in related knowledge. The same activities can be regarded as a different form of practice depending on mentalities that invest it. The conceptions of various risks are a part of such knowledge and social actors interiorize them. The contemporary neoliberal governing or, more precisely, governmentality seeks to find adequate reciprocal communication between governors of risk and interest group. The recognition of risk conception and governing must be visible very clearly as a constructive meaning of the theory of risk governmentality.
The article focuses on the specific conception of the governmentalization of the state and its relation to the contemporary risk society. In other words, the theory of governmentality could be used to analize the construction of risk in the governing of contemporary society. In this case, the risk is used as a means of governing people or as a way of self-governing. M. Foucault presented and discussed this conception in his writings. In late modernity, with the ideal of the welfare state receding, neoliberal principles and objectives became ascendant; they prompted many to take an interest in M. Foucault's theory on the history of governmentality and emergence of neoliberalism. According to M. Foucault, the term govermentality deals with the ways people think about governing, different rationalities or mentalities of the government. All various ways of the activities employ different mentalities of the government of conduct entailed in related knowledge. The same activities can be regarded as a different form of practice depending on mentalities that invest it. The conceptions of various risks are a part of such knowledge and social actors interiorize them. The contemporary neoliberal governing or, more precisely, governmentality seeks to find adequate reciprocal communication between governors of risk and interest group. The recognition of risk conception and governing must be visible very clearly as a constructive meaning of the theory of risk governmentality.
Research problem In the present doctoral dissertation, the problematic issues of the institute of multiple offences are analysed. Multiple offences as an institute of criminal law is characterised as involving the problems of both the qualification of criminal offences and the individualisation of criminal liability. The problems of the qualification of criminal offences are relevant, when questions of the separation of single criminal acts from multiple offences are dealt with. When the existence of multiple offences is established, it is necessary to move on to the consideration of another problem—the individualisation of criminal liability. The individualisation of criminal liability depends on the form of multiple offences. Therefore, for the formation of a uniform case-law, homogeneous and clear criteria for the differentiation of the forms of multiple offences and their separation form each other are essential. When the forms of multiple offences are defined, it is necessary to evaluate their impact on the criminal liability of the person who committed the criminal act. Of course, the key influence on criminal liability manifests through the rules of the combination of sentences; however, one should not forget other topical issues (such as sentence suspension, release from a custodial sentence on parole and the replacement of the term not served of the custodial sentence with a more lenient penalty, statute of limitations of a judgement of conviction, etc.) the solution of which in one way or another depends on the existence of multiple offences. Moreover, sometimes it is necessary to deal with the problems of the separation of multiple offences from other similar institutes of criminal law (repeat offence, competition between the norms of criminal law). Therefore, a number of such issues constitute the problem of the present research. The implementation of the principle of legal justice depends on appropriate and unvaried solution of these issues. Topicality, originality and significance of the research Multiple offences is a rather frequent phenomenon in the Lithuanian case-law; often persons are judged for several rather than single criminal acts. However, the criminal law jurisprudence still lacks a uniform attitude towards the issues regarding multiple offences. First, there exist different definitions of the notion of multiple offences itself, different forms of multiple offences are distinguished and their interpretations change, the criteria for the separation of single criminal acts from multiple offences vary (they often depend on the type of the criminal act committed). Special attention should be paid to the process of the individualisation of criminal liability in cases of multiple offences. In the case-law, the fact that prosecutors more and more often lodge appeals against the decisions of lower instances about improper combination of sentences is observed. In the case-law, the process of the combination of sentences has become 'forgotten', as often sentences are combined only formally (by adding 3–6 months of imprisonment) without any motivations regarding the choice of the additional sentence imposed. Moreover, after the entering into force of the new Criminal Code on 1 May 2003, due to the changes in case-law and the entrenchment of new ideas in the criminal law jurisprudence, it became crucial to revise the old and well-established provisions regarding multiple offences. Thus, even if the issues of multiple offences have been analysed for a rather long time, in the present dissertation, a new approach of the author as well as of other researchers to the institute of multiple offences is presented together with general considerations (and critical evaluations) on the newly developing case-law. Furthermore, with reference to the fact that the majority of the issues regarding multiple offences (except for the imposition of sentences) are not regulated by the Criminal Code and the decision-making is left for the case-law and the criminal law jurisprudence, the present paper may have great practical significance for the constantly changing and developing Lithuanian case-law in terms of the peculiarities of multiple offences. The aim and the tasks of the research The aim of the present doctoral dissertation is to develop a uniform attitude (corresponding to the needs of the theory of criminal law and the relevant case-law) towards the institute of multiple offences and the solution of problems related to it by generalising the experience and achievements of science and case-law. The tasks of the doctoral dissertation: 1) to define the notion of the institute of multiple offences and its elements by separating it from other similar institutes of criminal law (repeat offence, competition between the norms of criminal law); 2) to develop uniform (by generalising and concretising the existing ones or by suggesting new ones) criteria for the separation of single criminal acts from multiple offences; 3) to review the existing variety of the forms of multiple offences found in the criminal law jurisprudence and distinguish the ones which would correspond to the needs of the Lithuanian case-law as well as define them by distinguishing and describing their characteristics and developing clear and uniform criteria for their separation form each other; 4) to identify the key problems related to the influence of multiple offences on the individualisation of criminal liability as well as to suggest the most appropriate ways of solving these problems; 5) to provide suggestions for the legislator and the courts regarding the development of the institute of multiple offences and the ways of solving the problems related to it. Propositions to be defended 1) Multiple offences must be related not to the fact of committing several criminal acts but to the legal evaluation of this fact—prosecution for committing several criminal acts. 2) Repeat offence should not be considered as an independent form of multiple offences and should be evaluated from the perspective of the perpetrator's personality. 3) In case-law, the separation of single criminal acts from multiple offences is often casuistic (depends on a particular category of cases), having no clear and well-established criteria and thus violating the principle of legal justice. 4) The key attributes of single criminal acts are a violation of a direct value or the whole of values protected under a specific norm of the Criminal Code as well as a united content of guilt. 5) The case-law of the recent years, which broadens the perception of the ideal coincidence of criminal acts, forms an incoherent and exceptions-based case-law. 6) In the cases of multiple offences, the rules for sentence imposition restrict the freedom of courts and disturb the appropriate individualisation of sentences; therefore, it is crucial to improve the laws. 7) In case-law, the process of the combination of sentences is 'forgotten' and often does not properly reflect the gravity of all the criminal acts committed; therefore, changes in laws orienting courts towards the case-law appropriate from the perspective of criminal policy are a must. Research methodology For the present doctoral dissertation, various methods of scientific research were applied: logical, comparative, historical, linguistic, systemic, method of criticism, document analysis, etc. Firstly, the logical method and the method of criticism were rather widely applied in the present dissertation. The logical method was applied for making generalisations and conclusions aiming at the development of the institute of multiple offences. The method of criticism was also applied: the author criticised case-law, opinions of scholars, the lack of argumentation for such opinions, etc. The logical method and the method of criticism allowed making the final conclusions and forming suggestions regarding the changes of law and the development of case-law. A lot of attention was paid to the method of comparative analysis. It was applied for the comparison of scientific conceptions and different opinions of scholars. In order to gain experience, the laws and case-law of different foreign countries were analysed and compared. The application of the historical method allowed revealing the drawbacks of the former laws and case-law (under the Criminal Code of 1961) as well as reviewing the origin of the institute of multiple offences and the history of certain terms. The linguistic method was applied for the analysis of the denominations of the forms of multiple offences (ideal and real coincidence of criminal acts) and the consideration of their ability to convey the actual meaning. A different variant of these terms, which linguistically better corresponds to the meaning of the forms of multiple offences, was suggested. For the present research, the systemic method was applied as well. It allowed revealing the structure of the institute of multiple offences, its elements, their interrelation and the place in the system of the bases for criminal liability. By applying this method, the drawbacks of certain notions as well as the use of excessive elements were identified. The main method applied for the research was the method of document analysis. As even the case-law of the Supreme Court of Lithuania contains rather numerous incongruities and contradictions, namely the rulings, decisions and summary reviews of the case-law of this court passed during the term of the Criminal Codes of 1961 as well as of 2003 being in force were chosen as the key source. However, the scope of analysis was not limited to the case-law of the Supreme Court of Lithuania. The case-law of the European Court of Human Rights, the Court of Appeal of Lithuania, the Vilnius and Panevežys Regional Courts as well as the District Court of Šiauliai Region was analysed. Structure and review of the doctoral dissertation, main conclusions The dissertation is c
Research problem In the present doctoral dissertation, the problematic issues of the institute of multiple offences are analysed. Multiple offences as an institute of criminal law is characterised as involving the problems of both the qualification of criminal offences and the individualisation of criminal liability. The problems of the qualification of criminal offences are relevant, when questions of the separation of single criminal acts from multiple offences are dealt with. When the existence of multiple offences is established, it is necessary to move on to the consideration of another problem—the individualisation of criminal liability. The individualisation of criminal liability depends on the form of multiple offences. Therefore, for the formation of a uniform case-law, homogeneous and clear criteria for the differentiation of the forms of multiple offences and their separation form each other are essential. When the forms of multiple offences are defined, it is necessary to evaluate their impact on the criminal liability of the person who committed the criminal act. Of course, the key influence on criminal liability manifests through the rules of the combination of sentences; however, one should not forget other topical issues (such as sentence suspension, release from a custodial sentence on parole and the replacement of the term not served of the custodial sentence with a more lenient penalty, statute of limitations of a judgement of conviction, etc.) the solution of which in one way or another depends on the existence of multiple offences. Moreover, sometimes it is necessary to deal with the problems of the separation of multiple offences from other similar institutes of criminal law (repeat offence, competition between the norms of criminal law). Therefore, a number of such issues constitute the problem of the present research. The implementation of the principle of legal justice depends on appropriate and unvaried solution of these issues. Topicality, originality and significance of the research Multiple offences is a rather frequent phenomenon in the Lithuanian case-law; often persons are judged for several rather than single criminal acts. However, the criminal law jurisprudence still lacks a uniform attitude towards the issues regarding multiple offences. First, there exist different definitions of the notion of multiple offences itself, different forms of multiple offences are distinguished and their interpretations change, the criteria for the separation of single criminal acts from multiple offences vary (they often depend on the type of the criminal act committed). Special attention should be paid to the process of the individualisation of criminal liability in cases of multiple offences. In the case-law, the fact that prosecutors more and more often lodge appeals against the decisions of lower instances about improper combination of sentences is observed. In the case-law, the process of the combination of sentences has become 'forgotten', as often sentences are combined only formally (by adding 3–6 months of imprisonment) without any motivations regarding the choice of the additional sentence imposed. Moreover, after the entering into force of the new Criminal Code on 1 May 2003, due to the changes in case-law and the entrenchment of new ideas in the criminal law jurisprudence, it became crucial to revise the old and well-established provisions regarding multiple offences. Thus, even if the issues of multiple offences have been analysed for a rather long time, in the present dissertation, a new approach of the author as well as of other researchers to the institute of multiple offences is presented together with general considerations (and critical evaluations) on the newly developing case-law. Furthermore, with reference to the fact that the majority of the issues regarding multiple offences (except for the imposition of sentences) are not regulated by the Criminal Code and the decision-making is left for the case-law and the criminal law jurisprudence, the present paper may have great practical significance for the constantly changing and developing Lithuanian case-law in terms of the peculiarities of multiple offences. The aim and the tasks of the research The aim of the present doctoral dissertation is to develop a uniform attitude (corresponding to the needs of the theory of criminal law and the relevant case-law) towards the institute of multiple offences and the solution of problems related to it by generalising the experience and achievements of science and case-law. The tasks of the doctoral dissertation: 1) to define the notion of the institute of multiple offences and its elements by separating it from other similar institutes of criminal law (repeat offence, competition between the norms of criminal law); 2) to develop uniform (by generalising and concretising the existing ones or by suggesting new ones) criteria for the separation of single criminal acts from multiple offences; 3) to review the existing variety of the forms of multiple offences found in the criminal law jurisprudence and distinguish the ones which would correspond to the needs of the Lithuanian case-law as well as define them by distinguishing and describing their characteristics and developing clear and uniform criteria for their separation form each other; 4) to identify the key problems related to the influence of multiple offences on the individualisation of criminal liability as well as to suggest the most appropriate ways of solving these problems; 5) to provide suggestions for the legislator and the courts regarding the development of the institute of multiple offences and the ways of solving the problems related to it. Propositions to be defended 1) Multiple offences must be related not to the fact of committing several criminal acts but to the legal evaluation of this fact—prosecution for committing several criminal acts. 2) Repeat offence should not be considered as an independent form of multiple offences and should be evaluated from the perspective of the perpetrator's personality. 3) In case-law, the separation of single criminal acts from multiple offences is often casuistic (depends on a particular category of cases), having no clear and well-established criteria and thus violating the principle of legal justice. 4) The key attributes of single criminal acts are a violation of a direct value or the whole of values protected under a specific norm of the Criminal Code as well as a united content of guilt. 5) The case-law of the recent years, which broadens the perception of the ideal coincidence of criminal acts, forms an incoherent and exceptions-based case-law. 6) In the cases of multiple offences, the rules for sentence imposition restrict the freedom of courts and disturb the appropriate individualisation of sentences; therefore, it is crucial to improve the laws. 7) In case-law, the process of the combination of sentences is 'forgotten' and often does not properly reflect the gravity of all the criminal acts committed; therefore, changes in laws orienting courts towards the case-law appropriate from the perspective of criminal policy are a must. Research methodology For the present doctoral dissertation, various methods of scientific research were applied: logical, comparative, historical, linguistic, systemic, method of criticism, document analysis, etc. Firstly, the logical method and the method of criticism were rather widely applied in the present dissertation. The logical method was applied for making generalisations and conclusions aiming at the development of the institute of multiple offences. The method of criticism was also applied: the author criticised case-law, opinions of scholars, the lack of argumentation for such opinions, etc. The logical method and the method of criticism allowed making the final conclusions and forming suggestions regarding the changes of law and the development of case-law. A lot of attention was paid to the method of comparative analysis. It was applied for the comparison of scientific conceptions and different opinions of scholars. In order to gain experience, the laws and case-law of different foreign countries were analysed and compared. The application of the historical method allowed revealing the drawbacks of the former laws and case-law (under the Criminal Code of 1961) as well as reviewing the origin of the institute of multiple offences and the history of certain terms. The linguistic method was applied for the analysis of the denominations of the forms of multiple offences (ideal and real coincidence of criminal acts) and the consideration of their ability to convey the actual meaning. A different variant of these terms, which linguistically better corresponds to the meaning of the forms of multiple offences, was suggested. For the present research, the systemic method was applied as well. It allowed revealing the structure of the institute of multiple offences, its elements, their interrelation and the place in the system of the bases for criminal liability. By applying this method, the drawbacks of certain notions as well as the use of excessive elements were identified. The main method applied for the research was the method of document analysis. As even the case-law of the Supreme Court of Lithuania contains rather numerous incongruities and contradictions, namely the rulings, decisions and summary reviews of the case-law of this court passed during the term of the Criminal Codes of 1961 as well as of 2003 being in force were chosen as the key source. However, the scope of analysis was not limited to the case-law of the Supreme Court of Lithuania. The case-law of the European Court of Human Rights, the Court of Appeal of Lithuania, the Vilnius and Panevežys Regional Courts as well as the District Court of Šiauliai Region was analysed. Structure and review of the doctoral dissertation, main conclusions The dissertation is c
This article focuses on the changes in social care sector which took place in Europe and after the restitution of independence in Lithuania the last decades and are named as privatization. In social care sector privatization is known as a process of services provision by non-profit public agencies (NGOs), informal sector and by profit agencies. These changes can be explained by actor and new-institutionalism theories as well as by the mix of these two theories. This article presents general privatisation concept and potential patterns as well as peculiarities of these in social care (social work services) sector. According to the actor theory, the expansion or decline of welfare state is understood as results of individuals or collectives' rational actions. As rational actors cope with different previous political decisions, institutional frames and other limitations and possibilities it is useful to analyse privatization in the light of new-institutionalism theory as well. According to the new-institutionalism theory, the institutions of welfare state are reflected and formed by choices and strategies of actors. The way and models of privatization depend on welfare state institutions. Two ideal institutional types are separated – pluralist and corporatist institutions. Analysis of these ideal institutional types' differences defining regulation, organization, financing and production helps to explain the extent and models of privatization.
This article focuses on the changes in social care sector which took place in Europe and after the restitution of independence in Lithuania the last decades and are named as privatization. In social care sector privatization is known as a process of services provision by non-profit public agencies (NGOs), informal sector and by profit agencies. These changes can be explained by actor and new-institutionalism theories as well as by the mix of these two theories. This article presents general privatisation concept and potential patterns as well as peculiarities of these in social care (social work services) sector. According to the actor theory, the expansion or decline of welfare state is understood as results of individuals or collectives' rational actions. As rational actors cope with different previous political decisions, institutional frames and other limitations and possibilities it is useful to analyse privatization in the light of new-institutionalism theory as well. According to the new-institutionalism theory, the institutions of welfare state are reflected and formed by choices and strategies of actors. The way and models of privatization depend on welfare state institutions. Two ideal institutional types are separated – pluralist and corporatist institutions. Analysis of these ideal institutional types' differences defining regulation, organization, financing and production helps to explain the extent and models of privatization.
This article focuses on the changes in social care sector which took place in Europe and after the restitution of independence in Lithuania the last decades and are named as privatization. In social care sector privatization is known as a process of services provision by non-profit public agencies (NGOs), informal sector and by profit agencies. These changes can be explained by actor and new-institutionalism theories as well as by the mix of these two theories. This article presents general privatisation concept and potential patterns as well as peculiarities of these in social care (social work services) sector. According to the actor theory, the expansion or decline of welfare state is understood as results of individuals or collectives' rational actions. As rational actors cope with different previous political decisions, institutional frames and other limitations and possibilities it is useful to analyse privatization in the light of new-institutionalism theory as well. According to the new-institutionalism theory, the institutions of welfare state are reflected and formed by choices and strategies of actors. The way and models of privatization depend on welfare state institutions. Two ideal institutional types are separated – pluralist and corporatist institutions. Analysis of these ideal institutional types' differences defining regulation, organization, financing and production helps to explain the extent and models of privatization.
This article focuses on the changes in social care sector which took place in Europe and after the restitution of independence in Lithuania the last decades and are named as privatization. In social care sector privatization is known as a process of services provision by non-profit public agencies (NGOs), informal sector and by profit agencies. These changes can be explained by actor and new-institutionalism theories as well as by the mix of these two theories. This article presents general privatisation concept and potential patterns as well as peculiarities of these in social care (social work services) sector. According to the actor theory, the expansion or decline of welfare state is understood as results of individuals or collectives' rational actions. As rational actors cope with different previous political decisions, institutional frames and other limitations and possibilities it is useful to analyse privatization in the light of new-institutionalism theory as well. According to the new-institutionalism theory, the institutions of welfare state are reflected and formed by choices and strategies of actors. The way and models of privatization depend on welfare state institutions. Two ideal institutional types are separated – pluralist and corporatist institutions. Analysis of these ideal institutional types' differences defining regulation, organization, financing and production helps to explain the extent and models of privatization.
[full article and abstract in Lithuanian; abstract in English] Lithuanian economy, over the last century, has been subject to significant changes and various vicissitudes. After restoring its independence (1918), Lithuania had to start everything from the very beginning, i.e. as soon as possible to commence the development of its own economy under challenging and complex political conditions. Small and medium-sized business, crafts, retail trade were the first significant changes. Unfortunately, Lithuania, at that time, was missing its own independent, entrepreneurial, life-innovation-sensitive entrepreneurs' layer. The foregoing was determined both by objective (the global economic crisis) and subjective (lack of working capital, negligible purchasing power, public institutions' red tape, etc.) reasons. The inter-war period was too short for Lithuania's economy to obtain the best possible results though certain conditions were ensured, and much solid work was done in the field of social policy. Current politicians and economists still have what to learn from that time political insight, economic rationality, legislative technique. Unfortunately, the Second World War and the subsequent authoritarian character of the Soviet Union's economy influenced the nature of Lithuania's economy, irrational attitude towards its changes taking place at that time. For very many, restoration of independence was unexpected. It was necessary to start managing Lithuanian economy in the absence of almost any practical, scientific expertise and input so that to begin objective and significant economic reforms. In order to focus on European management standards, Lithuania should substantially improve its management in all activity fields. Unfortunately, Lithuania's science is still lacking the applied research orientation, natural connection of theory and practice. Becoming a Member State of the European Union, we should manage to realize ourselves. Only universal prosperity, high level of cultural and well educated youth, as well as proper and sufficient understanding of democracy ideals will enable Lithuania to speed up its efforts and to become a full member of the free EU. Marginal efficiency theory, Keynesian view, neoclassical attitude towards economics, Monetarism, Neoliberalism and institutionalists' attitudes, hopefully, will promote the efforts to form a base of uniform researches, favorable for political scientists and economists. Creation of macroeconomics, undoubtedly, is a major achievement of the 20th Century economics. Nobel Prize Laureates: Milton Friedman, James Tobin, Franco Modigliani, Lawrence R. Klein, Robert M. Solow and other famous scientists are the most prominent contributors in this field. Regretfully, the reverse process still often happens on the Lithuanian revival path: fragmentation of social sciences, i.e. theoretical researches are prevailing over the empirical studies in the field of social sciences abroad. Lithuania, however, is still lacking the same. The number of successors of the interwar-period intellectuals (D. Cesevičius, D. Budrys, P. Padalskis and others) is alarmingly low. Current economists do not have enough consistency and are not well prepared from the theoretical point of view. In my opinion, teaching assignments of the mathematized economic theory for the 21st Century's future economists shall be notably reinforced and enhanced. Furthermore, they should be able themselves not only to interpret such theories, but also to create new ones. Full symbiosis of the economic theory and practice is of vital importance.
[full article and abstract in Lithuanian; abstract in English] Lithuanian economy, over the last century, has been subject to significant changes and various vicissitudes. After restoring its independence (1918), Lithuania had to start everything from the very beginning, i.e. as soon as possible to commence the development of its own economy under challenging and complex political conditions. Small and medium-sized business, crafts, retail trade were the first significant changes. Unfortunately, Lithuania, at that time, was missing its own independent, entrepreneurial, life-innovation-sensitive entrepreneurs' layer. The foregoing was determined both by objective (the global economic crisis) and subjective (lack of working capital, negligible purchasing power, public institutions' red tape, etc.) reasons. The inter-war period was too short for Lithuania's economy to obtain the best possible results though certain conditions were ensured, and much solid work was done in the field of social policy. Current politicians and economists still have what to learn from that time political insight, economic rationality, legislative technique. Unfortunately, the Second World War and the subsequent authoritarian character of the Soviet Union's economy influenced the nature of Lithuania's economy, irrational attitude towards its changes taking place at that time. For very many, restoration of independence was unexpected. It was necessary to start managing Lithuanian economy in the absence of almost any practical, scientific expertise and input so that to begin objective and significant economic reforms. In order to focus on European management standards, Lithuania should substantially improve its management in all activity fields. Unfortunately, Lithuania's science is still lacking the applied research orientation, natural connection of theory and practice. Becoming a Member State of the European Union, we should manage to realize ourselves. Only universal prosperity, high level of cultural and well educated youth, as well as proper and sufficient understanding of democracy ideals will enable Lithuania to speed up its efforts and to become a full member of the free EU. Marginal efficiency theory, Keynesian view, neoclassical attitude towards economics, Monetarism, Neoliberalism and institutionalists' attitudes, hopefully, will promote the efforts to form a base of uniform researches, favorable for political scientists and economists. Creation of macroeconomics, undoubtedly, is a major achievement of the 20th Century economics. Nobel Prize Laureates: Milton Friedman, James Tobin, Franco Modigliani, Lawrence R. Klein, Robert M. Solow and other famous scientists are the most prominent contributors in this field. Regretfully, the reverse process still often happens on the Lithuanian revival path: fragmentation of social sciences, i.e. theoretical researches are prevailing over the empirical studies in the field of social sciences abroad. Lithuania, however, is still lacking the same. The number of successors of the interwar-period intellectuals (D. Cesevičius, D. Budrys, P. Padalskis and others) is alarmingly low. Current economists do not have enough consistency and are not well prepared from the theoretical point of view. In my opinion, teaching assignments of the mathematized economic theory for the 21st Century's future economists shall be notably reinforced and enhanced. Furthermore, they should be able themselves not only to interpret such theories, but also to create new ones. Full symbiosis of the economic theory and practice is of vital importance.
