Selection of the optimal model of cooperation between self-organized civil society and modern Ukrainian state
Abstract
The article describes the theory of administrative law on the formation of the relationship of civil society and democratic state under current conditions of the Ukrainian state. Various models of cooperation between civil society and state are analysed. The role of non-governmental institutions in public administration is characterized.
In the presence of advanced and effective mechanisms of social feedback, their priority, ensuring representation and influence on public authorities and private and corporate interests of institutions of civil society, the existence of country-specific democratic political regime may be certified. In contrast, under the condition of domination of the state apparatus an authoritarian regime arise.
The state, as well as civil society, are implementing identical goals, achieving them, but using different means and forms of institutional action. At the same time, because of structural and functional differences between statehood and civil approaches it is necessary to refuse from establishing clear boundaries and areas of activities and encourage the state to respect the authority of institutions of civil society.
Appropriate modern correlation of civil society and state can be characterized as equal interaction. The bodies, which represent the state, carry out regulatory and protective functions with respect to the institutions of civil society. Due to taxes and duties listed in the state budget, there are held state officials that ensure the convergence of interests of the state and society and need social support recognized by society. In the area of economic and financial relations, state and non-state subjects act as free and equal partners who interact on the basis of a free-market economic system.
References
Darendorf R. Ot sotsyalnoho hosudarstva k tsyvylyzovannomu soobshchestvu / R. Darendorf // Polys. – 1993. – № 5. – S. 31–35.
Tokvyl A. Demokratyia v Ameryke / A. de Tokvyl [per. s anhl.]. – M.: «Prohress», 1993. – 560 s.
Denysov S. A. Obshchaia teoryia admynystratyvnoho hosudarstva/ S. A. Denysov. – Ekaterynburh: Humanytarnыi un-t, 2010. – 684 s.
Rykhter Dzh. Upravlenytet, ynostrannaia pomoshch y rossyiskye NPO / Dzh. Rykhter // Zhurnal yssledovanyi sotsyalnoi polytyky. – 2004. – №2 (4). – S. 469–486.
Salmenniemi S. Civic organizations and the state in Putin’s Russia: co-operation, co-optation, confrontation / S. Salmenniemi // Civil Societies and Social Movements: Potentials and problems. – Abingdon: ECPR studies in European political science, 2007. – P. 19–34.
Hemment J. The Riddle of the Third Sector: Civil Society, International Aid, and NGOs in Russia / J. Hemment // Anthropological Quarterly. – 2004. – № 77(2). – P. 215–241.
Kubik J. How to study civil society: The state of the art and what to do next / J. Kubik // East European Politics and Societies. – 2005. – № 19(1). – P. 105–120.
Sampson S. Weak States, Uncivil Societies and Thousands of NGOs. Western Democracy Export as Benevolent Colonialism in the Balkans / S. Sampson // Cultural Boundaries of the Balkans. Lund University Press, June 2002 [Electronic resource]. – Access: http://www.anthrobase.com/Txt/S/ Sampson_S_01.htm.
Ol P. A. Hosudarstvo, obshchestvo, lychnost: problemы sovmestymosty / Ol P. A., Romashov R. A., Tyshchenko A. H., Shukshyna E. H. ; pod obshch. red. R. A. Romashova, N. S. Nyzhnyk. – M.: Yuryst, 2005. – 303 s.
