Affiliation:
1. Lomonosov Moscow State University
Abstract
External and internalchallenges, risks and crisis phenomena operatingin the world and national states requirethe ruling regimes to flexibly restructurethe configuration of relations betweenpower and society. One of the toolsof such communication is the methods of“evidence-based policy”, which involve addressingthe population on the basis of expertand scientific recommendations whendeveloping goals that allow people not onlyto judge their legality, but also to challengeand correct their content. At the same time,in a number of transitional and authoritarianstates, preference is given to the “policy ofevidence” that demonstrates the priorities ofpolitically expedient actions of the authoritiesaimed not at partnership with society, but at mobilizing the support of the populationfor the implementation of the goalsof government policy. In this context, thearticle shows the objective and subjectivelimitations of the use of scientific andexpert data in the public sphere by a numberof post-Soviet states, the peculiarities ofthe correlation of “evidence-based policy”and “policy of evidence” in the activities ofthe ruling regimes, and assesses their prospectsin the short term in modern Russiansociety.
Publisher
Center for Crisis Society Studies
Reference42 articles.
1. Achkasova G.C., Mel’nik V.A. (eds.) (2016). Communication Technologies in the Processes of Political Mobilization, Moscow: FLINTA-Nauka (in Russian).
2. Baumgartner F., Bryan D., Mortensen B. (2018). Punctuated Equilibrium Theory: Explaning Stability and Change in Public Policymaking. Theories of the Policy Process (eds. Weible C.M., Sabatier P.A., Weible Ch.M., Sabatier P.A.), New York, London: Routledge Taylor, Francis Group, pp. 55–101.
3. Baumgartner F.R., Jones B.D. (1991). Agenda Dinamics and Policy Subsystem. Journal of Politics, vol. 53, no 4, pp. 1044– 1074. Available at: https://people.sc.fsu.edu/~pbeerli/BSC3052/restricted/papers/Baumgartner-Jones-1991-l.pdf, accessed 19.09.2021.
4. Baumgartner F.R., Jones B.D. (eds.) (1993). Agendas and Instability in American Politics, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
5. Borzel T.A. (1998). Organizing Babylon – on the Different Conception of Policy Networks. Public Administration, vol. 76, no 2, pp. 253–273. DOI: 10.1111/1467-9299.00100
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献