sofs.org.ua › About us › Archive › 2024 › №3 (125) › 1.9

1.9

SCIENCE AND POLITICS: PROBLEMS OF MUTUAL UNDERSTANDING AND CRITERIA FOR SUCCESS

V.P. SOLOVIOV 
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5087-9007
Dobrov Institute for Scientific and Technological Potential and Science History Studies of the NAS of Ukraine

Nauka naukozn. 2024, 3(125): 153—169
https://doi.org/10.15407/sofs2024.03.153

Section: Opinions of scientists on issues of vital importance
Language: Ukrainian
Abstract: A task of political power is to shape the culture of society, ensure harmonious interaction between its institutions and thereby promote economic growth and well-being. The effectiveness of implementing political decisions depends on the scientific validity of economic management and the ability to take into account the reaction of society. This means that politicians and scientists must work together to solve socio-economic problems. The purpose of the study is to search for organizational principles of rational interaction between politics and science, to increase the efficiency of making and supporting political decisions during their implementation. The trend towards weakening mutual understanding between science and politics is discussed as they are viewed in policy-making systems as distinct communities with distinct and even mutually exclusive practices. At the same time, there is some experience of joint activities of political and academic institutions within the framework of the so-called industrial science. It is important for politicians to get help from science in overcoming uncertainties, which are an annoying obstacle for politicians and which they try to get rid of with a simple “majority vote”. To overcome socio-economic uncertainty and improve the quality of forecasting, it is proposed to take into account of the presence of economic cycles that have a natural cause; type of information (content, background and nuisance). The possibilities for science to participate in solving the country’s socio-economic problems in cooperation with politicians will be significantly reduced, when the authorities begin to reduce the number of “degrees of freedom” of national science, limiting the freedom of scientists’ activities by legal norms which appropriateness is determined by subjective considerations of politicians. Mutual understanding of science and politics in solving socio-economic problems can be achieved by laying down institutional foundations of scientific-political interaction, which will allow for coordinating the points of view of science and politics, as well as values and ideas about the good, in the process of making government decisions.

Keywords: socio-economic problems, political decisions, institutional frameworks, mutual understanding of science and politics, wicked problems, economic cycles.

References

  1. Merton, R. (2006). Social Theory and Social Structure. Moscow: ACT [in Russian].
  2. Weber, M. (1990). Selected works. Moscow: Progress [in Russian].
  3. Leichik, V.M. (2009). Terminology: subject, methods, structure. Moscow: Book House “LIBROKOM” [in Russian].
  4. Burlatsky, F. (2022). Politics and science. Revue d’histoire des sciences humaines, 40, 209—218. https://doi.org/10.4000/rhsh.7113 [in Russian].
  5. (2020). Science for Policy. Handbook. European Union: Elsevier Limited.
  6. Bernal. J. (1957). Science in the History of Society. Moscow: Nauka [in Russian].
  7. Kugel, S.A. (2013). The human factor of new scientific directions: ways of formation. The role of the scientific elite. Sociology of Science and Technology, 2, 43—53 [in Russian].
  8. Ruggles, A. (2004). Regulatory vs. Academic Science. CIRES Center for Science and Technology Policy Research, 9. URL: http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/ogmius/archives/issue_9/research_highlight.html (last accessed: 12.05.2024).
  9. Avdulov, A.N., & Kulkin, A.M. (2003). Systems of state support for scientific and technical activities in Russia and the USA: processes and main stages of their formation. Moscow: INION [in Russian].
  10. Allakhverdyan, A.G. (2014). Dynamics of scientific personnel in Soviet and Russian science: a comparative historical study. Moscow: Kogito-Center Publishing house [in Russian].
  11. Malitsky, B.A. (2023). Science-centric government policy: a necessary and effective tool for improving living conditions in Ukraine. Science and science, 1 (119), 18—34. https://doi.org/10.15407/sofs2023.01.018 [in Ukrainian].
  12. Kondratyev, N.D., Yakovets, Yu.V., & Abalkin, L.I. (2002). Large cycles of conjuncture and the theory of foresight. Selected works. Moscow: Economika [in Russian].
  13. Grinin, L.E., & Korotayev, A.V. (2012). Cycles, crises, traps of the modern world system. A study of Kondratieff, Juglar and secular cycles, global crises, Malthusian and post-Malthusian traps. Moscow: LKI [in Russian].
  14. Chaldaeva, L.A., & Kilyachkov, A.A. (2012). A unified approach to describing the nature of economic cycles. Finance and Credit, 45 (525), 2—8 [in Russian].
  15. Huntington, S. (2004). Political Order in Changing Societies. Moscow: Progress-Traditsiya [in Russian].
  16. Al-Ammori, A., Dyachenko, P.V., Klochan, A.E., Bakun, E.V., & Kozeletskaya, I.K. (2020). Methods and means of information protection. The scientific heritage, 51. URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/metody-i-sredstva-zaschity-informatsii/pdf (last accessed: 12.05.2024) [in Russian].
  17. West Churchmam, C. (1967). Wicked Problems. Management Science, 14 (4), B-141—B-274. URL: https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/epdf/10.1287/mnsc.14.4.B141 (last accessed: 30.09.2023).
  18. Rittel, H.W.J., & Webber, M.M. (1973). Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning. Policy Sciences, 4 (2), 155—169. URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4531523 (last accessed: 12.05.2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01405730
  19. Ashby, W.R. (1959). An Introduction to Cybernetics. Moscow: Publishing house of foreign literature, 287—310 [in Russian].

 

Full Text (PDF)