Development of the Structure of Techno-Political Opportunities as a Factor of the Recursive Nature of Public Policy | South-Russian Journal of Social Sciences
Development of the Structure of Techno-Political Opportunities as a Factor of the Recursive Nature of Public Policy
Vol. 22 (2021) No. 3, Political Institutions and Processes
Vol. 22 (2021) No. 3
Political Institutions and Processes

Development of the Structure of Techno-Political Opportunities as a Factor of the Recursive Nature of Public Policy

Kaplunenko A.M.
St. Petersburg University
ORCID ID 0000-0002-0262-6010
PDF (Russian)
https://doi.org/10.31429/26190567-22-3-61-71
https://doi.org/10.31429/26190567-22-3-61-71

How to Cite Array

Kaplunenko A.M. (2021) Development of the Structure of Techno-Political Opportunities as a Factor of the Recursive Nature of Public Policy. South-Russian Journal of Social Sciences, 22 (3), pp. 61-71. DOI: 10.31429/26190567-22-3-61-71 (In Russian)
Submission Date 2021-08-06
Accepted Date 2021-09-10
Published Date 2022-03-28

Copyright (c) 2022 Алексей Михайлович Каплуненко

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Abstract

The interaction between informational and communicative, as well as political and governance technologies is transforming institutional environment and densifies the structure of contemporary public policy, while the processes of setting the agenda, developing and making decisions are becoming more dependent on the quality of participation and the range of opinions expressed. Such changes highlight the value of public policy as a complex autopoietic system and attract research interest to what ensures the recursiveness of its internal processes and how it is done. The novelty of the study is reflected in the emphasis on the techno-­political aspect of recursion as a principle of complex organization in public policy. The purpose of the study is to identify and substantiate the dependence of the recursive development of public policy on the specificities of its techno-­political environment. The methodology of the research presents systemic, structural-­functional and institutional approaches that characterize contemporary political research. The article discloses the connection between the recursiveness of public policy and the institutes of digital transformation of political and governance processes that form the structure of techno-­political opportunities. This structure is defined through theories of political design and convergence of informational-­communicative technologies and political technologies. In this context, and provided that it is reflexive results-­based and recursive management, recursion can be the key principle of the new public policy model. At the same time, the recursive nature of information interaction does not only create an enabling environment for inclusiveness and transparency in a complex organization, but also reveals multiple hidden effects that, in turn, open up new vulnerabilities in political processes and stimulate new forms of digital politics in society.

Keywords

structure of political opportunities, digital politics, institutes, governance, complex organization, recursiveness, performance

Acknowledgements

The research was carried out through the financial support of the RSF grant № 19-18-00210 “Political ontology of digitalization: study of institutional bases for digital forms of governability”.

References

  1. Begtin, I., Bertyakov, A., Komin, M., Parkhimovich, О., Tsygankov, M. (2020). Otsenka otkrytosti gosudarstvennykh informatsionnykh sistem v Rossii: analiticheskii doklad [Assessment of the Openness of State Information Systems in Russia: Analytical Report]. Retrieved from https://roskazna.gov.ru/upload/iblock/534/otsenka-otkrytosti-gosudarstvennykh-informatsionnykh-sistem-v-rossii.pdf
  2. Chandler, D. (2019). Digital Governance in the Anthropocene: The Rise of the Correlational Machine. In D. Chandler, C. Fuchs (Eds). Digital Objects, Digital Subjects: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Capitalism, Labour and Politics in the Age of Big Data (pp. 23–42). London: University of Westminster Press. DOI:10.16997/book29.b
  3. Chugunov, A. V. (2018). Institutsional’naya model’ elektronnogo upravleniya: osnovnye aktory i mekhanizmy ikh vzaimodeistviya [Institutional Model of Electronic Governance: The Main Actors and Mechanisms of Their Interaction]. Gosudarstvo i grazhdane v elektronnoi srede [State and Citizens in the Electronic Environment], 2, 66–70. DOI:10.17586/2541-979X-2018-2
  4. Colebatch, H. К. Policy. (1998). University of Minnesota Press.
  5. Coleman, S., Freelon, D. (2015). Introduction: conceptualizing digital politics. In S. Coleman, D. Freelon (Eds). Handbook of Digital Politics (pp. 1–13). Cheltenham-Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing. DOI:10.4337/9781782548768
  6. Dobrolyubova, E. I., Yuzhakov, V. N., Yefremov, A. A., et al. (2019). Tsifrovoe budushchee gosudarstvennogo upravleniya po resul’tatam [The Digital Future of the Result-based Governance]. Moscow: Delo.
  7. Foerster, H. (1979). Cybernetics of Cybernetics. In K. Krippendorff (Ed.). Communication and Control in Society (pp. 5–8). New York: Gordon and Breach. DOI: 10.1007/0-387-21722–3_13
  8. Heclo, H. (1974). Modern Social Politics in Britain and Sweden: From Relief to Income Maintenance. New Haven: Yale University Press.
  9. Hofmann, J., Katzenbach, C., Gollatz, K. (2017). Between Coordination and Regulation: Finding the Governance in Internet Governance. New Media and Society, 9, 1406–1423. DOI:10.1177/1461444816639975
  10. Howlett, M. (2014). Policy Design: What, Who, How and Why? In C. Halpern, P. Lascoumes, P. Le Galès (Eds). L’instrumentation et ses effets (pp. 281–315). Paris: Presses de Sciences Po.
  11. Hui, Yu. (2020). Rekusrivnost’ i kontingentnost’ [Recursiveness and Contingency]. Moskva: V-A-C Press.
  12. Innis, H. (1950). Empire and Communications. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  13. Kaplunenko, A. M. (2019). Problema analiza struktury politicheskikh vozmozhnostei tsifrovizatsii publichnogo upravleniya v Rossii: regional’nyi aspect [An Issue on Analysis of Digital Public Governance Political Opportunities Structure in Russia: Regional Aspect]. Evraziiskaya integratsiya: ekonomika, pravo, politika [Eurasian Integration: Economics, Law, Politics], 4, 107–112.
  14. Kaplunenko, A. M. (2021). K voprosu o kontseptual’nykh osnovaniyakh publichnoi politiki kak “epistemicheskogo ob”ekta” [To the Question of the Conceptual Basis of Public Policy as an “Epistemic Object”]. Informatsionnyi byulleten’ granta RNF № 19-18-00210 “Politicheskaya ontologiya tsifrovizatsii: issledovaniye institutsional’nykh osnovanii tsifrovykh formatov gosudarstvennoi upravlyaemosti” [Newsletter of RNF Grant 19-18-00210 “Political Ontology of Digitization: Study of Institutional Bases of Digital Government Formats”], 1(26), 8–12.
  15. Kondratenko, K. S. (2021). Institutsional’naya rekursivnost’ publichnykh sotsiotekhnicheskikh sistem [Institutional Recursiveness of Public Socio-technical Systems]. Informatsionnyi byulleten’ granta RNF № 19-18-00210 “Politicheskaya ontologiya tsifrovizatsii: issledovaniye institutsional’nykh osnovanii tsifrovykh formatov gosudarstvennoi upravlyaemosti” [Newsletter of RNF Grant 19-18-00210 “Political Ontology of Digitization: Study of Institutional Bases of Digital Government Formats”], 1(26), 13–17.
  16. Luhmann, N. (2005). Real’nost’ massmedia [The Reality of Mass Media]. Moscow: Praxis.
  17. McAdam, D., Tarrow, C., Tilly, C. (2001). Dynamics of Contention. New York and Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  18. Neverov, K. A. (2021) Interoperabel’nost’ v gosudarstvennom upravlenii kak rekursivnyi protsess [Interoperability in Public Administration as a Recursive Process]. Informatsionnyi byulleten’ granta RNF № 19-18-00210 “Politicheskaya ontologiya tsifrovizatsii: issledovaniye institutsional’nykh osnovanii tsifrovykh formatov gosudarstvennoi upravlyaemosti” [Newsletter of RNF Grant 19-18-00210 “Political Ontology of Digitization: Study of Institutional Bases of Digital Government Formats”], 1(26), 18–22.
  19. Pravoslavskii, S. S. (2018). Rekursivnye mekhanizmy v sotsial’nykh sistemakh [Recursive Mechanisms in Social Systems]. Nauchnyi al’manakh [Science Almanac], 5–3, 86–91. DOI:10.17117/na.2018.05.03
  20. Ryazanov, A. V., Demidova, M. V. (2015). Modeli discursivnogo i recursivnogo upravleniya simvolicheskim kapitalom v sotsial’no-ekonomicheskikh sistemakh [Discursive and Recursive Models of Symbolic Capital Management in Socio-Economic Systems]. Vestnik Povolzhskogo instituta upravleniya [The Bulletin of The Volga Region Institute of Administration], 4, 96–104.
  21. Sabatier, P. (1998). The Advocacy Coalition Framework: Revisions and Relevance for Europe. Journal of European Public Policy, 1, 98–130. DOI: 10.1080/13501768880000051
  22. Sabel, C., Moore, T. Maurice, Zeitlin, J. (2012). Experimentalist governance. In D. Levi-Faur. The Oxford Handbook of Governance (pp. 169–183). Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199560530.013.0012
  23. Shmatko, N. A. (2001). Phenomen publichnoy politiki [Phenomenon of Public Policy]. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies], 7, 106–112.
  24. Smorgunov, L. V. (Ed). (2018). Publichnaya politika: instituty, tsifrovizatsiya, razvitie [Public Policy: Institutions, Digitalization, Development]. Moscow: Aspect Press.
  25. Tilly, C., Tarrow, S. (2006). Contentious Politics. Boulder: Paradigm Publishers.
  26. Yakimets, V. N. (2017). Novye formaty obshscestvenno-gosudarstvennogo upravleniya v Rossii [New Formats of Public-State Governance in Russia]. Gosudarstvo i grazhdane v elektronnoi srede [State and Citizens in the Electronic Environment], 1, 123–135. DOI:10.17586/2541-979X-2017-1-123-135.