Reflexive Governance in the Contex of Digitalization: Concept and Pratical Implementation | South-Russian Journal of Social Sciences
Reflexive Governance in the Contex of Digitalization: Concept and Pratical Implementation
PDF (Russian)
https://doi.org/10.31429/26190567-22-3-6-18
https://doi.org/10.31429/26190567-22-3-6-18

How to Cite Array

Tropinova E.A. (2021) Reflexive Governance in the Contex of Digitalization: Concept and Pratical Implementation. South-Russian Journal of Social Sciences, 22 (3), pp. 6-18. DOI: 10.31429/26190567-22-3-6-18 (In Russian)
Submission Date 2021-08-22
Accepted Date 2021-09-25
Published Date 2022-03-28

Copyright (c) 2022 Елена Александровна Тропинова

Creative Commons License

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

Abstract

Following recent theoretical studies and practical implications of digitalization of public sector in Russia this article studies the concept of reflexivity and reflexive governance. We conducted a theoretical analysis of the conditions and factors that determine political agents’ reflexivity. We define ‘reflexivity’, as a property of political agents to ‘mirror, to recognize the behavior and communicative strategies on platforms which are provided by three interrelated processes: introspection, deliberation and self-organization. Reflexivity creates prerequisites for “management from within”, when a complex socio-­technical system and its agents become internal elements of the organization, carry out its interpretation and through reflexive coordination, provide co-management and down-top steering and control. The article builds logic of reflexive governance around the concept of governance and the process of policy-­making in a broader multi-­agent approach and taking into consideration a significant trend of changing the paradigm of public administration and the coordination model. From the traditional, regulative, to reflexive coordination, which provides for cooperative activities of state and non-state agents to adapt and de-institutionalize the norms governing the political system in conditions of changing expectations of actors or socio-­political context. Based on the methodology of transitional management and process analysis, we analyze the practical implementation of reflexive governance in Russian Regional Management Centers. We come to the conclusion about the primacy and super functionality of values supported by reflexive algorithms on feedback platforms. At the present stage, these values aim with the optimization and efficiency of public administration and service orientations of the executive branch (the concept of “service state 2.0” implemented by the Russian digital government). In addition, reflexive governance on the feedback platforms has predicative and proactive potential. The key goal is to anticipate and indentify the problem and to change the rules and prevent its occurrence in the future. The proactive potential of the feedback platforms develops, as the study showed, on the basis of full-scale and multi-­channel access of citizens to public deliberation. Finally, the combination of polycentric and hierarchical coordination in the Regional Management Centers ensures the preservation of managerial autonomy of regional administrations, but at the same time brings control and overall coordination of rules and regulations for dealing with “incidents” to the federal level, in order to ensure uniform national standards for responding to problems.

Keywords

reflexivity, reflexive governance, digitalization, regional management centers, feedback platforms

Acknowledgements

The research was carried out through the financial support of the Russian Scienсе Foundation, grant No 19–18–00210 “Political ontology of digitalization: Study of institutional bases for digital forms of governability”.

References

  1. Alekseeva, T. A. (2001). Spravedlivost’ kak politicheskaya kontseptsiya: Ocherk sovremennykh zapadnykh diskussiy [Justice as a Political Concept: An Essay of Modern Western Discussions]. M.: Moskovskiy obshchestvennyy nauchnyy fond.
  2. Bol’shakova, Y. M. (2021) Voprosy tsifrovizatsii v kontekste sovremennogo etapa evolyutsii publichnogo upravleniya [Issues of Digitalization in the Context of the Current Stage of the Evolution of Public Administration]. Vlast’ [Power], 4, 43–48.
  3. Boltanski, L., Thevenot, L. (1999). The Sociology of Critical Capacity. European Journal of Social Theory, 3, 359–377.
  4. Dryzek, J. S. (1990). Discursive Democracy: Politics, Policy, and Political Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  5. Dryzek, J. S. (2013). The deliberative democrat’s Idea of Justice. European Journal of Political Theory, 12(4), 329–346. DOI: 10.1177/1474885112466784
  6. Dryzek, John S., Berejikian, J. (1993). Reconstructive Democratic Theory. American Political Science Review, 87(1), 48–60.
  7. Feindt, P., Weiland, S. (2018). Reflexive Governance: Exploring the Concept and Assessing its Critical Potential for Sustainable Development. Introduction to the Special Issue. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 20(6), 661–674, DOI: 10.1080/1523908X.2018.1532562
  8. Gulledge, T., Sommer, R. (2002). Business Process Management: Public Sector Implications. Business Process Management Journal, 8, 364–376. DOI: 10.1108/14637150210435017
  9. Hofmann, J., Katzenbach, C., Gollatz, K. (2017). Between Coordination and Regulation: Finding the Governance in Internet Governance. New Media & Society, 19(9), 1406–1423. DOI: 10.1177/1461444816639975
  10. Kanarsh, G. Y. (2011). Sotsial’naya spravedlivost’: filosofskiye kontseptsii i rossiyskaya situatsiya [Social Justice: Philosophical Concepts and the Russian Situation]. M.: Izdatel’stvo Moskovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta.
  11. Kemp, R., Loorbach, D. (2006). Transition Management: A Reflexive Governance Approach. In J. Voss, D. Bauknecht & R. Kemp. (Eds) Reflexive Governance for Sustainable Development. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar.
  12. Latour, B. (2010). A Collective of Humans and Nonhumans. In Technology and Values: Essential Readings. Willey-Blackwell.
  13. Lawless, J. S. (2010). Reflexive Governance: Redefining the Public Interest in a Pluralistic World. Hart Publishing.
  14. Lefevr, V. A. (1967). Konfliktuyushchie struktury [Conflicting Structures]. M.: Vysshaya shkola.
  15. Postanovleniya Pravitel’stva Rossiyskoy Federatsii ot 16 noyabrya 2020 goda, № 1829, 1830 [Resolutions of the Government of the Russian Federation dated 16 November 2020, № 1829, 1830]. Retrieved from http://government.ru/news/40861/
  16. Rolz, D. (2010). Teoriya spravedlivosti [Theory of Justice]. M.: LKI.
  17. Shchedrovickiy, G. P. (1967). O metode semioticheskogo issledovaniya znakovykh system. Semiotika i vostochnye yazyki [On the Method of Semiotic Research of Sign Systems. Semiotics and Oriental Languages]. M.: Nauka.
  18. Shveri R. (1996) Teoreticheskaya sotsiologiya Dzheymsa Koulmena: analiticheskiy obzor [Theoretical Conception of James S. Goleman: An Analytical Review]. Sociologicheskij zhurnal [Sociological Journal], 1–2, 62–81.
  19. Situatsionnyye tsentry razvitiya kak integratory gosudarstvennogo upravleniya v samorazvivayushchikhsya polisub’’yektnykh sredakh [Situation Centres for Development as Integrators of Public Administration in Self-developing Multi-entity Environments]. (2019). M.: Kogito-centr.
  20. Smith, A., Stirling, A. & Berkhout, F. (2005). The Governance of Sustainable Socio-Technical Transitions. Research Policy, 1491–1510. DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2005.07.005
  21. Smith, A., Stirling, A. (2007). Moving Outside or Inside? Objectification and Reflexivity in the Governance of Socio-Technical Systems. Journal of Environmental Policy&Planning, 9(3–4), 351–373, DOI: 10.1080/15239080701622873
  22. Smith, A., Stirling, A. (2008). Social–Ecological Resilience and Socio-Technical Transitions: Critical Issues for Sustainability Governance. Brighton: STEPS Centre.
  23. Smorgunov L. V. (2017). Gosudarstvo, sotrudnichestvo i inklyuzivnyy ekonomicheskiy rost [The State, Cooperation and Inclusive Economic Growth]. Vlast’ [Power] 11, 22–30.
  24. Smorgunov L. V. (2020) Instituty dostupnosti tsifrovykh platform i gosudarstvennaya upravlyayemost’ [Institutions for Affordances of Digital Platforms and Public Governability]. Yuzhno-rossiyskiy zhurnal sotsial’nykh nauk [South Russian Journal of Social Sciences], 21(3), 6–19. DOI: 10.31429/26190567-21-3-6-19
  25. Torgerson, D. (2007). Policy Discourse as Dialogue: Emergent Publics and the Reflexive Turn. Critical Policy Studies, 1, 1–17, DOI: 10.1080/19460171.2007.9518506
  26. Tropinova, E. (2020). Institutionalization of Digital Public Administration Design: The Reflexive Potential of Agents of Change. Journal of Economic Regulation, 11, 78–86.
  27. Tsentr upravleniya regionom Gubernatora Moskovskoy oblasti [Regional Management Center of the Governor of the Moscow Region]. Retrieved from http://d-russia.ru/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/rymar.pdf
  28. Usov, V. N. (2008). Refleksivnoye upravleniye: filosofsko-metodologicheskiy aspekt [Reflexive Management: Philosophical and Methodological Aspect] (Abstract of Doctoral Dissertation) Ekaterinburg.
  29. Сhilvers J. (2013). Reflexive Engagement? Actors, Learning, and Reflexivity in Public Dialog on Science and Technology. Science Communication, 35(3), 283–310. DOI: 10.1177/1075547012454598