The article describes the approaches and tools for evaluation local authorities in the context of developing democracy participation and involving citizens in the management of local development. Analyses the methodology of the following approaches: «The index of public participation», «The index of transparency of communal enterprises», «Urban Democratic Index», «Participle municipal capacity index».For formation civil competencies of territorial communities the capacity of civil society organizations needs to be increased, along with the ability of local authorities to create conditions under which cooperation will be conducted in a transparent and open manner. According to the author, in order to have positive social and political transformations in Ukraine capable civil society at the level of the consolidated communities should be created, that is why tools which are analyzed in the context of the search of problems and opportunities that local authorities have, on the way of democratic transformations of public administration in Ukraine.There is no hesitation that the first step towards solving the problem is a clear and complete definition of its origin (diagnosis of the problem). Correctly identifying a problem means halving it. To receive the input data of the problem, it is necessary to analyze the state of the managed system, to identify trends in its development and the desired future condition.There is a large number of tools for evaluating the effectiveness of public administration and its impact on the development of participatory democracy in the world, among which the author recommends using the «Participle municipal capacity index», which explores consolidated communities in four areas: leadership and governance, financial management and budgeting, provision of services and public participation. The advantages of above mentioned tool are: deep and detailed study of sources of information that forms a good basis for developing a roadmap for the development of the capacity of the local ...
It is need to make comparison of the architectural heritage of European countries and the USSR that in the first half of the twentieth century belonged to states with totalitarian political regimes, to establish the main tendencies in their architecture − the common features and differences − and to find out the reasons for their appearance. This time, beginning in the 1920s, marked the emergence of totalitarian regimes in European life as a reaction on the political turmoil that took place in a number of countries after the First World War. The war led to a major political, economic and cultural crisis, in the background of which there was a change of political regimes. A wave of formation of reactionary parties was sweeping through Europe, and Spain, Italy, Portugal and Germany formed a system of government which was based on a one-party system that led by the leader. For these countries it was characterized by rigorous control from the top of power absolutely in all aspects of life − the economy on the basis of private property and market relations, a policy of categorical non-perception of other political forces and movements, culture, which reflected in various forms the idea of creating a social consciousness on the basis of feeling the exclusivity of the nation, and therefore the priority right to resolve the fate of other peoples. What distinguished the Soviet political system from European political regimes? First, the idea of democracy in the form of local councils of people's deputies (the authorities from below, from the people - upwards) was absorbed by the party system, formed on the principle "on the contrary", as a command system (from the helmsman to the people). Therefore, in the process of perfection, it turned into a conglomerate in which the legislative branch of power became a puppet and completely dependent on the main party component of the system of government [1, 2]. Second, there was no private property in the USSR. Land and other natural resources, all means of production belonged to the state, were at the disposal and under the strict control of the authorities. Thirdly, public consciousness was formed in the spirit of patriotism, love for national culture, faith in the bright future, which would determine the party leadership (which meant the transfer of responsibility for its own fate to the representatives of the authorities) and friendly relations with other peoples. The public consciousness forming the direction of the development of culture was a consequence of the embodiment of the state-ideological essence of social life to thinking of the society, which was programmed by the leadership of the state. The means of architecture that are under the influence of state ideology, the specifics of the economic system, the formed psychology of society and social consciousness, forms an artificial environment of human being, which, on the one hand, reflects socio-political processes, on the other, creates an environment that educates a person in a certain the corresponding direction. Under totalitarian systems, both sides are pushing for a person stronger in the direction desired by the ruling power, limiting its freedom is felt stronger than in a democratic political system. Consequently, the first half of the twentieth century was marked both in Europe and in the Soviet Union by the creation of totalitarian regimes, which were clearly reflected in the formation of the architectural environment. So whether the common features in the political-economic system, political events and the development of the culture of European states and the USSR influenced onto architecture, its form and style? Have any cardinal differences been observed? When were they, what caused their appearance? Where did the causal link between the political-economic system and architecture look? An overview of the architectural and urban heritage has shown that for all European countries, where reactionary regimes were established, the following was typical: giantomania in the size of objects that were prestigious for the authorities and the state; style building based on national, ancient traditions; purism, asceticism, lapidary and, at the same time, simplicity and monumental forms; axial symmetry of city-building ensembles; moderate, but accurate, in the main places of use of state symbols; application of additional decorative symbols emphasizing the connection with the ancient past: figures of a physically strong man, a bull, horses, more often in the form of sculptures, less often − bas-relief; monotonous interpretation of the wall − without cavities or with identical cutouts, which served as a monumental background for a separate sculpture, emphasizing its symbolic meaning. The rationalism of architectural forms was manifested in the purity and concordance of the plan, the architectonics of the building, which brightly and precisely helped to focus the viewer's attention and emphasized the value of a single symbol. The simplicity of the formation of European functionalism, which was combined with the symmetry of the architectural-spatial composition and the neoclassical manifestations of the warrant, the great-power symbols and monumental forms, as well as expensive materials, created a special direction of the open-mindedness of the state-ideological content of architecture. By such means, the architecture articulated outside clearly demonstrative and ideological reference to an absolutely indisputable order in the state, based on conquering the authorities, carrying the order to other peoples and deciding their fate at the discretion of this power. Before the war, the Soviet Union embarked on a path of rebirth and creative rethinking of the classical heritage. Withdrew from the tendencies of the spread of constructivist industrial forms in the urban environment, Soviet architecture moved through the formation of the Russian empire. Thanks to the desire to glorify the existing system of government at that time, the USSR chose the classic principles in architecture: the classical perimeter building of quarters and the symmetrical structure of the facades were revived; the mandatory formation of the main city center on the basis of the axis of symmetry and the main buildings with towers and spikes in completion, with many state symbols, which looked like an explicit selection of decorative forms and details. In the postwar period, state symbols that had to remind of the role of the Soviet state in the life of the people and to demonstrate the differences between Soviet architecture and the architecture of the Russian Empire, began to appear anywhere. The unlimited number of that symbolism simply shouted about the ideological purpose, but at the same time it reduced its value. In addition to such obsessive use of symbolism, the psychological effect was enhanced by other decorative elements that performed an additional auxiliary function. It is a variety of symbols of fertility, labor, a bright future that awaits the people in the form of justice, equality, peaceful life, and well-being. The combination of a heavy order with a richly decorated facade created in the architecture of a fairy tale about a strong, reliable, mighty state, which promised protection and happiness to its people. An unlikely architectural form and style that did not correspond to real situations (repressions in the country and arms race among the states) formed a decorative screen that covered the real state-ideological content of the formed urban environment. Consequently, the architectural and urban heritage frankly reflected the true manifestations of the state-ideological goal of countries with totalitarian political regimes. The architectural legacy of European states significantly differed from that of the USSR by the fact that European states frankly proclaimed the ambition of their own political programs, and the Soviet state with the help of architectural means created an idyll of peacefulness and a bright future.
The article describes the character of Mykola Hankevich in the context of the early parliamentary elections of 1908 in Galicia. The author sets out his task, by shifting the usual historiographical accents, to consider the general election culture in the provincial capital in the early twentieth century, the theory and practice of the international socialist movement in a multinational urban environment. The well-established point of view of K. Jobst and other researchers, who believe that the conflict over Hankevich's face in the 1907 elections, when the executive leadership of the PPSD did not support his candidacy, is the beginning of the path that ultimately led the Polish and Ukrainian Social Democrats parties in the bosom of "their" national camps, and the ephemeral international socialist movement in Galicia disintegrated. The author believes that such a narrative simplifies the processes that took place in the environment of the Galician socialist parties. Cooperation between Ukrainian, Polish, and Jewish socialists did not stop until the outbreak of the First World War. In the USDP, M. Hankevich himself did not cease to cooperate closely with Polish and Jewish socialists. During the snap election of 1908, the PPSD leader agreed with the candidacy of Mykola Hankevich, who, however, lost this election by winning 734 votes against 1011. However, in the anti-Ukrainian hysteria that had not yet subsided after the assassination of Andrzej Potocki, more than 40% of the vote, loyal to the Ukrainian and socialist candidates in the bourgeois Lviv district, looked like a tremendous success for Hankevich. Having identified the main reasons for this success, namely: his impeccable personal reputation, eloquence, popularity among the Lviv workers and intellectuals, genuine internationalism and willingness to represent different ethnic groups and different social strata, the author, referring to the memories of the Polish socialist Yevhen Morachevsky, calls another circumstance that explains the results of the vote quite differently. It is about 450 votes that Morachevsky bought in favour of Gankevich. The author notes that Morachevsky considers his dubious act as a peculiar feat - to pollute his hands to achieve a noble political goal, in which, in his opinion, he manifests the instinct and ability of a politician, thereby opposing himself to "dreamers" and idealists who did not compromise own principles. ; У статті докладно розглянуто постать Миколи Ганкевича в контексті позачергових парламентських виборах 1908 року у Галичині. Розкрито особливості виборчої системи Габсбурзької імперії, представлено кар- тину політичної боротьби на початку ХХ століття, а також визна- чено особисту роль Миколи Ганкевича. Проаналізовано його особисті якості, роль та місце у політичній боротьбі тогочасної Галичини, існу- ючі контакти та значення для різноманітних політичних сил. Розкрито особливості проведення виборів на початку ХХ століття у Галичині
The aggressive policy of Hitler's Germany on the seizure of Polish and Ukrainian lands during the Second World War is analyzed in the article. This policy provided for the elimination of the Polish state, the Soviet Union, and Poles and Ukrainians could be partially destroyed, while others could be assimilated. German colonists could be resettled on the Ukrainian and Polish lands. And even more brutal policy of the Nazis concerned the Jewish population. For the purpose of colonization policy, division of the Polish ones took place and the Polish General Governorship was established, divided into four districts and local authorities subordinated to them. After the beginning of the Soviet-German war on June 22, 1941, the fifth district of Galicia was included into the General Governorship, that included Ukrainian ethnic lands being a part of Lviv, Drohobych, Stanislav (Ivano-Frankivsk) and Ternopil regions of the Ukrainian USSR.In the Galicia district, as in other districts of the Polish General Governorship, a district government was formed, divided into departments (of justice, internal affairs, finance, etc.), which were headed by district chiefs. The districts were divided into rural communities, uniting from 5 to 15 villages, headed by the rural elders. Rural communities were headed by community leaders. Since July 31, 1943, local and rural commissariats were established in the Galicia district. Like other districts of the Polish General Governorship in Galicia, there were urban and rural self-government bodies operating under the control of the occupation authorities.The main tasks of the Galicia district authorities were the control over the occupied territory, exploitation of the resources of the region for the needs of Hitler's Germany as well as recruitment of local population for work on the territory of the Third Reich.Despite certain features of the Nazi occupation regime in the Galicia district, it functioned on the general principles defined by the Third Reich leadership for the occupied eastern territories. German invaders considered Galicia, as well as other Ukrainian lands, as the territories for military economic expansion and the spread of living space, ignoring any interests of the local population. ; Висвітлено процес створення на окупованих Гітлерівським Третім Рейхом українських земель у роки Другої світової війни дистрикту Галичина. Показано жорстоку колоніальну політику німецьких нацистів щодо місцевого українського населення, яке у планах гітлерівців частково мало бути знищене, а інша частина асимільована. На українські землі планували переселити німецьких колоністів, ще більш жорстока нелюдська політика стосувалася європейського населення, яке у планах німецьких нацистів мало бути знищено.Після початку німецько-радянської війни Східна Галичина як дистрикт Галичина була включена до складу Польського Генерального Губернаторства, до якого входили дистрикти Варшава, Краків, Люблін, Радом. У дистрикті Галичина, як і у інших дистриктах Польського губернаторства, було утворено уряд дистрикту, окружні, повітові, органи влади, органи місцевого самоврядування та відновлено діяльність освітніх закладів, пристосованих до потреб окупантів та ін.
The most specific area of business activity, without any exaggeration, is agrarian production, which deserves special attention from the representatives of science, the state and business. In modern conditions, the problem of efficient functioning and development of the agrarian sphere of the economy is becoming more urgent also because the land itself is a rare, quantitatively limited resource that cannot be created, replaced by others or accumulated. It is a unique gift of nature. However, soil erosion occurs, fertile lands are gradually earmarked for the construction of industrial and other facilities, urban development, road construction, pipelines, etc. The attack of cities on villages significantly reduces the stock of land resources for agricultural production. And because, on the one hand, the total supply of land is at all times fixed and absolutely inelastic (it cannot be increased), and on the other, the demand for agricultural products is steadily increasing; and the earth itself. Moreover, the rise in price of land and agricultural products has even accelerated today. In Ukraine, land relations have always been in the spotlight, and land management activities have been one of the main priorities of public policy. The history of domestic land relations dates back several centuries, during which their types, forms, approaches and methods were formed. Analyzing the results of land reforms, we come to the conclusion that this experience is extremely important for the development of conceptual directions for the modern transformation of land relations. Obviously, this experience of their conduct may not be analogous to current conditions, but some important features can be used in approaches to solving the problems of forming a new system of land use and agricultural land market. The article analyzes the Hungarian experience of establishing and developing the land market. It is shown how market mechanisms were introduced in Hungary to create conditions for free competition in agricultural production. First of all, the role of the state in preventing the negative consequences of land privatization is emphasized. Particular attention is paid to this issue after the accession of the country to the European Union, since the Hungarian leadership had to fulfill the requirements of the European Community in this area. It is shown that the Hungarian experience is interesting for Ukraine. ; Найбільш специфічною сферою підприємницької діяльності, без жодного перебільшення, є аграрне виробництво, яке заслуговує окремої уваги з боку представників науки, держави, бізнесу. За сучасних умов проблема ефективного функціонування й розвитку аграрної сфери економіки набуває актуальності ще й тому, що земля сама по собі є рідкісним, кількісно обмеженим ресурсом, який неможливо створити, замістити іншим чи накопичити. Це – унікальний дар природи. Однак відбувається ерозія ґрунтів, родючі землі поступово відводяться під будівництво промислових та інших об'єктів, забудову міст, прокладання доріг, трубопроводів тощо. Наступ міст на села відчутно зменшує запас земельного ресурсу для виробництва аграрної продукції. І через те, що, з одного боку, загальна пропозиція землі є повсякчас величиною фіксованою й абсолютно нееластичною (її неможливо збільшити), а з іншого, попит на сільськогосподарську продукцію невпинно зростає, всезагальною закономірністю стало неухильне зростання вартості аграрної продукції та, як наслідок, і самої землі. Причому подорожчання землі і сільгосппродукції сьогодні навіть прискорилося. В Україні земельні відносини завжди перебували в центрі уваги, а діяльність, пов'язана з управлінням земельними ресурсами була одним з головних пріоритетів державної політики. Історія вітчизняних земельних відносин налічує кілька століть, протягом яких сформувалися їх види, форми, підходи та методи. Аналізуючи результати земельних реформ, приходимо до висновку, що даний досвід має винятково важливе значення для розробки концептуальних напрямів з метою сучасної трансформації земельних відносин. Очевидно, що даний досвід їх проведення не може бути аналогом для сучасних умов, але деякі важливі риси можуть бути використані в підходах до вирішення питань формування нової системи землекористування та ринку земель сільськогосподарського призначення. У статті проаналізовано угорський досвід становлення та розвитку ринку землі. Показано яким чином в Угорщині впроваджувалися ринкові механізми у створення умов для вільної конкуренції у сільськогосподарському виробництві. Насамперед підкреслюється роль держави у запобіганні негативних наслідків приватизації землі. Особлива увага приділяється цьому питанню після набуття країною членства в Європейському Союзі, так як угорському керівництву потрібно було виконувати вимоги Євроспільноти у цій царині. Показано чим угорський досвід цікавий для України.
