Multi-subject management in the social protection system of the population
The relevance of the research topic is determined by the need to substantiate the priorities of state policy regarding the development of multi-subject management in the social protection system. The purpose of the article is to study the essence and current trends in the development of multi-subject management, its role in reforming the social protection system, and to identify priority areas for increasing the participation of civil society actors in reforming and functioning of the social protection system in Ukraine. The research methods employed included dialectical and abstract-logical analysis, induction and deduction, analogy and comparison, systemic and complex analysis. It is demonstrated that social protection systems are a critically important tool for a modern democratic state to overcome poverty and reduce income inequality, help stabilise the economy during crises, support consumption, promote social justice, equal participation, strengthen social cohesion in society. They are also important for developing the country’s ability to respond to natural disasters and other shocks. The concept of multi-subject governance involves coordinating of state governance, market self-regulation and taking into account the interests of society through the participation of non-state actors, such as social partners and civil society, in the decision-making processes at all levels of governance. A tool for finding joint solutions and forming responsible multi-subject governance is public (civil) dialogue for discussing issues and making decisions that are of common interest. In Ukraine, mechanisms for social dialogue are legally regulated and operate, which can be considered as part of public (civil) dialogue. In view of this, priority areas for increasing the participation of civil society actors in the formation and implementation of social protection policy in Ukraine have been identified, the main of which are the development of multi-subject governance, the involvement of a wider range of participants in the sphere of social dialogue, the expansion of the use of such forms of social dialogue in public (civil) dialogue as information exchange, consultations and coordination procedures.
Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Razavi, S., Behrendt, C., Nesterenko, V., Orton, I., Peyron Bista, C., Ramos Chaves, A., Schwarzer, H., Stern-Plaza, M., Wodsak, V. (2022). Building universal social protection systems for all: What role for targeting? Global Social Policy, 22 (3), 449-463.
Pouw, N., Bender, K. (2022) The poverty reduction effect of social protection: the pros and cons of a multidisciplinary approach. The European Journal of Development Research, 34 (5), 2204-2223.
Dahl, R.A., Tufte, E. (1973). Size and Democracy. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Broadhurst, K., Gray, N. (2022). Understanding resilient places: Multi-level governance in times of crisis. Local Economy: The Journal of the Local Economy Policy Unit, 37 (1-2), 84-103.
Giraudy, A, Niedzwiecki, S. (2022). Multi-level governance and subnational research: Similarities, differences, and knowledge accumulation in the study of territorial politics. Regional & Federal Studies, 32 (3), 393-411.
Libanova, E. (2024). Resilience of the socio-economic system of Ukraine to the shocks caused by the war: specifics of formation and response. Demohrafiia ta sotsialna ekonomika – Demography and Social Economy, 4 (58), 3-23.
Ratsiuk, A.S. (2013). Analysis of models of social protection of the population in the member states of the European Union. IV International Scientific and Methodological Conference “Economic Modeling: Problems, Trends, Experience” October 24-26, 2013, Ternopil (pp. 146-148). Ternopil: Ternopil Ivan Puluj National Technical University [in Ukrainian]
Agrawal, A., Lemos, M.C. (2007). A Greener Revolution in the Making?: Environmental Governance in the 21st Century. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 49 (5), 36-45.
Okhrimenko, A.G. (2017). Multi-subjectivity of management of the national tourism system. Naukovyi visnyk UzhNU. Seriia: Mizhnarodni ekonomichni vidnosyny ta svitove hospodarstvo – Scientific Bulletin of UzhNU. Series: International Economic Relations and the World Economy, 14 (2), 48-52 [in Ukrainian]
Cairney, P., Heikkila, T., Wood, M. (2019). Making Policy in a Complex World (1 ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Okhrimenko, A.G. (2016). The influence of the communicative paradigm on the management of the national tourism system. Skhidna Yevropa: ekonomika, biznes ta upravlinnia – Eastern Europe: Economics, Business and Management, 4, 88-93 [in Ukrainian]
Making Decentralisation Work: A Handbook for Policy-Makers. OECD Multi-level Governance Studies. (2019). Paris: OECD Publishing.
A Guide to Multi-level Governance. For Local and Regional Public Authorities. (2015). Coopenergy Consortium. URL: https://www.local2030.org/library/210/A-Guide-to-Multi-level-Governance-For-Local-and-Regional-Public-Authorities.pdf
Korzhenko, V., Khashyieva, L. (2011). Formation of the concept of Governance in the process of forming a modern European administrative space. Visnyk Natsionalnoi akademii derzhavnoho upravlinnia pry Prezydentovi Ukrainy – Bulletin of the National Academy of Public Administration under the President of Ukraine, 2, 10-19 [in Ukrainian]
Romaniuk, S. (2024). Governance in the conditions of forming a resilient society. Demohrafiia ta sotsialna ekonomika – Demography and Social Economy, 4 (58), 95-112.