Public Governance in the Context of Global Turbulence: Risk-Reflexive Approach

Andrei V. Aleinikov; Daria A. Maltseva

doi:10.21638/spbu17.2024.208

Authors

Andrei V. Aleinikov St. Petersburg State University, 7–9, Universitetskaya nab., St. Petersburg, 199034, Russian Federation https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2942-5021
Daria A. Maltseva St. Petersburg State University, 7–9, Universitetskaya nab., St. Petersburg, 199034, Russian Federation; RUDN University, 6, ul., Miklukho-Maklaya, Moscow, 117198, Russian Federation https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0213-6919

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu17.2024.208

Abstract

The article examines methodological trends and combinations in the discourse of political strategic management of dangers and threats under the conditions of the new specific type of risk society formation, which is qualitatively different from the classical version of the ‘risk society’. In this study, using a risk-reflexive approach, authors propose a research route to analyze the transformation of public governance and enlighten the main directions of social behaviour strategies modeling, designing tools for prevention and reducing negative effects of emerging risks. Based on the analysis of the ‘Giddens paradox’ and the concept of ‘organized irresponsibility’ by U.Beck, the problems of the efficiency of public governance institutions in ensuring security and preventing threats are considered. The authors’ attention is focused on analyzing the hierarchy of ways to justify the acceptability of risk and the subjects of risk management. Approaches to the classification of types of power used by subjects of public risk management are investigated. In this regard, the article identifies three mechanisms for the formation of risk-reflexivity (forced, imitative, normative). A theoretical perspective is presented for considering informational, strategic, institutional, motivational and simulation risk reflections in public governance process. Special attention is paid to the main forms of public governance competencies in political risk management, especially in the context of digital transformation, which opens up new opportunities for information impact and cognitive programming of risk perception.

Keywords:

public governance, risk, risk reflection, ‘risk society‘, risk-stakeholders

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

References

Prigogin, I. (1991), The Philosophy of Instability, Voprosy filosofii, no. 6, pp. 46–57. (In Russian)

Rozov, N. S. (2019), Epochs of turbulence and ways to overcome them, Politeia, Journal of Political Philosophy and Sociology of Politics, no. 1 (92), pp. 81–96. (In Russian)

Yanitskiy, О.N. (2002), The “critical case”: Social order in the “Risk society”, Russian Sociological Review, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 86–99. (In Russian)

Giddens, A. (2009), The Politics of Climate Change, Cambridge: Polity Press.

Beck, U. (2009), World at Risk, Cambridge: Polity Press.

Gerasimov, V. (2013), The Value of Science is in the Foresight, Military-Industrial Courier, no. 8 (476). Available at: http://www.vpk-news.ru/articles/1463227 (accessed: 22.11.2023). (In Russian)

Taleb, N.N. (2022), The Black Swan: the Impact of the Highly Improbable, Moscow: KoLibri Publ. (In Russian)

Luhmann, N. (1993), Risk: A Sociological Theory, New York: Walter de Gruyter, Inc.

Beck, U. (2000), Risk Society. Towards a New Modernity, Moscow: Progress-Traditsiia Publ. (In Russian)

Bourdieu, P. (1993), Sociology of Politics, Moscow: Socio-Logos Publ. (In Russian)

Aleinikov, A.V., Artemov, G.P. and Pinkevich, A.G. (2020), Risk reflections as a factor for choosing forms of political participation (results of the all-Russian survey), RUDN Journal of Sociology, no. 4, pp. 847–863. (In Russian)

Gurvitch, G. (2004), Philosophy and Sociology of Law: Selected Works, St Petersburg: St Petersburg University Press. (In Russian)

Lotman, Yu. (1998), Exit from the labyrinth, In: Eco, U. The Name of the Rose, Moscow: Knizhnaia palata Publ., pp. 650–669. (In Russian)

Soghomonyan, V. (2016), Transformations of Communication in Public Discourse, Political science, no. 3, рp. 137–151. (In Russian)

Siefkes, M. (2010), Power in society, economy, and mentality: Towards a semiotic theory of power, Semiotica, vol. 181, no. 1/4, pp. 225–261.

March, J.G. and Olsen, J.P. (2006), Elaborating the “New Institutionalism”, in: The Oxford Handbook of Political Institutions, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 3–20.

DiMaggio, P. and Powell, W. (2010), The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields, Economic sociology, no. 1, pp. 35–56. (In Russian)

Smorgunov, L.V. (2016), Knowledge and public administration: From ordered rule to judgment, Political science, no. 2, pp. 181–197. (In Russian)

Rapoport, A. (2002), What is rationality?, Reflexive processes and management, no. 2, 2002, pp. 23–47. (In Russian).

Novikov, D.A. and Chkhartishvili, A.G. (2003), Reflexive games, Moscow: Sinteg Publ. (In Russian)

Kupryashin, G.L. ( 2016), Public administration, Political science, no. 2, pp. 101–131. (In Russian)

Giddens, A. (1991), Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age, Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Novikov, D.A. (2004), The condition and prospects of the theory of active systems, Managing large systems, no. 9, pp. 7–26. (In Russian)

Aleinikov, A.V., Strebkov, A.I. and Miletskiy, V.P. (2023), Risk-reflections’ Conflict Potential: Conceptual Models and Research Problems of the Modern Analytics, Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Philosophy and Conflict Studies, vol. 39, is. 3, pp. 514–530. (In Russian)

Aleksander, J. (2008), Democratic struggle for power: presidency campaign in USA, Vestnik of MGIMO University, no. 3, pp. 71–81. (In Russian)

Kravchenko, S.A. (2017), The coexistence of riskopoly and riskfree — a manifestation of “normal anomie”, Sociological studies, no. 2, pp. 3–13. (In Russian)

Alexander, J. (2003), The Meanings of Social Life: A Cultural Sociology, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Rawls, J.A. (1995), Theory of Justice, Novosibirsk: Novosibirsk State University Publ. (In Russian)

Coser, L. (1956), The Functions of Social Conflict, New York: The Free Press.

Marach, V.G. (2008), Social Change Management: Synthesis of Reflexive and Institutional Approaches, Reflexive Processes and Management Journal, no. 2, pp. 44–65. (In Russian)

Zvonovsky, B.V. and Khodykin, A.V. (2023), Adaptation Strategies of Opponents and Supporters of the Special Military Operation to the Current Situation (Based on Residents of Samara Region), Sociological Journal, no. 1. pp. 8–35. (In Russian)

Razzak, M.R., Al-Riyami, S. and Palalic, R. (2022), Organizational Meta Capabilities in the Digital Transformation Era, Foresight and STI Governance, no. 4, pp. 24–31. (In Russian)

Doz, Y. and Kosonen, M. (2010), Embedding Strategic Agility A Leadership Agendafor Accelerating Business Model Renewal, Long Range Planning, no. 43, pp. 370–382.

Doz, Y. (2020), Fostering strategic agility: How individual executives and human resources practices contribute, Human Resource Management Review, no. 1, pp. 100–122.

O’Reilly, Ch. and Tushman, M. (2013), Organizational Ambidexterity: Past, Present and Future, Rock Center for Corporate Governance at Stanford University Working Paper, no. 142, рp. 1–33.

Smith, W. and Lewis, M. (2011), Toward a theory of pardox: A dynamic equilibrium model of organizing, Academy of Management Review, no. 2, pp. 381–403.

O’Reilly, C.A. and Tushman, M.L. (2004), The Ambidextrous Organization, Harvard Business Review, April. Available at: https://hbr.org/2004/04/theambidextrous-organization (accessed: 22.11.2023).

Ivanov, D.V. (2021), Informatization and digitalization: from exotics of social change to routine of social practices, Research Result. Sociology and management, no. 2, pp. 4–9. (In Russian)

Diev, V. S. (2022), Philosophy of Management in a World of Uncertainty and Risk, Siberian Journal of Philosophy, no. 1, pp. 5–14. (In Russian)

Bernoulli, D. (1993), Experience of a new theory of measuring lots, in: Theory consumer demand, St. Petersburg: Economic School Publ, pp. 11–27 (In Russian)

Taleb, N. (2018), Skin in the Game: Hidden Asymmetries in Daily Life, Moscow: KoLibri Publ. (In Russian)