| Annotation |
In recent years, the rapid development of the institutions of self-organization of citizens emerging and existing
in various forms actualizes the issues related to their emergence and role in the implementation of social policy.
This type of organization whose task was to provide social assistance and support to social risk groups has
become the subject of scientific discussions and research in recent years. Scientists focus on various aspects
and directions of development of the welfare state, forms of implementation, models of social policy, factors that
determine its evolution, which includes the formation, flourishing and entry into an era of crisis. The purpose of
the study is to consider the evolution of the welfare state as the basis for the emergence of institutions of self-organization
of citizens. The methodological basis of the study is formed by the concepts of post-industrial society,
which made it possible to consider the emergence and evolution of institutions of self-organization of citizens
as a reflection of the processes taking place in society, to determine their place and role in the state of general
welfare. A historical approach was also used, which made it possible to analyze the stages of the emergence
of socially-oriented non-profit organizations (SO NPOs), the forms of their involvement in the social policy of
the state; a method for identifying cause-and-effect relationships, which made it possible to identify factors that
influence the interaction of SO NPOs and the state. This article describes the activities of various forms of the
welfare state in the field of social protection of the population. We highlighted the positions on the problem of the
emergence of institutions of self-organization of citizens in scientific thought and analyzed the reasons for the
emergence of SO NPOs. The conclusion was drawn that it was the evolution of the welfare state that became
the basis for the emergence of institutions of self-organization of citizens. |
| References |
1. Bakaldina, E. S. State social policy of the Russian Federation: choice of priorities. Bulletin of the Kemerovo
State University, no. 4, pp.104–107, 2014. (In Rus.)
2. Bauman, Z. Individualized society. M: Logos, 2005. (In Rus.)
3. Bell, D. The coming post-industrial society. Social forecasting experience. M: Academia, 2004. (In Rus.)
4. Galbraith, J. K. Economic theories and goals of society. M: Progress, 1973. (In Rus.)
5. Inglegart, R. Cultural shift in a mature post-industrial society. A new post-industrial wave in the West. M:
Academia, 1999. (In Rus.)
6. Yakobson, L. I. Institutions of self-organization and the quality of life of the population. Research report.
M: Centr issledovanij grazhdanskogo obshchestva i nekommercheskogo sektora, 2009. (In Rus.)
7. Keynes, D. The general theory of employment, interest and money / transl. from English. M: Progress,
1978. (In Rus.)
8. Liga, M. B., Zakharova, E. Yu., Tomskikh, M. S. Quality of life management. Novosibirsk: Nauka, 2019.
(In Rus.)
9. Rostou, U. Politics and stages of growth. M: Progress, 1973. (In Rus.)
10. Sidorina, T. Yu. “Social market economy” of Germany and the problem of systematization of social
policy models. Social sciences and modernity, no. 2, pp. 21–31, 2006. (In Rus.)
11. Sidorina, T. Yu. Institutions of self-organization of citizens and the development of the theory of the
welfare state. Social sciences and modernity, no. 5, pp. 87–100, 2010. (In Rus.)
12. Sidorina, T. Yu. Partnership between the state and institutions of self-organization of citizens in the
implementation of social policy. Terra Economicus. Economic Bulletin of the Rostov State University, no. 1,
pp. 117–128, 2010. (In Rus.)
13. Silachev, D. A. Social consequences of the transition from industrialism and modernity to postindustrialism.
Questions of philosophy, no. 7, pp. 3–21, 2005. (In Rus.)
14. Todorov, A. S. Quality of life: a critical analysis of bourgeois concepts. M: Progress, 1960. (In Rus.)
15. Tomskikh, M. S. Quality of life management: socio-philosophical analysis. Cand. sci. diss. Chita, 2017.
(In Rus.)
16. Toffler, E. Shock of the future. M: Korporatsiya, 2004. (In Rus.)
17. Uebster, F. Information Society Theories. M: Aspekt-press, 2004. (In Rus.)
18. Ascoli, U., Ranci, C. Dilemmas of the Welfare Mix. The New Structure of Welfare in an Era of Privatization.
New York: Springer Science + Media, 2002. (In Engl.)
19. Bonoli, G. Classifying Welfare States: A Two-dimension Approach/ Journal of Social Policy, no. 3,
pp. 351–372, 1997. (In Engl.)
20. Esping-Andersen, G. The three worlds of welfare capitalism/ Princeton univ. press, Cop., no. 8, pp. 9–54,
1990. (In Engl.)
21. Salamon, L. M., Anheier, H. K. Social Origins of Civil Society: Explaining the Nonprofit Sector Cross-
Nationally. Voluntas, no. 3, pp. 213–248, 1998. (In Engl.)
22. Smith, R. G., Gronbjerg, K. A. Scope and Theory of Government-Nonprofi t Relations. Powell, W. W.,
Steinberg, R. (eds.) The Non-Profit Sector: A Research Handbook. New Haven & London: Yale University Press,
2006: 221–242. (In Engl.) |
