The Formation of a Stable Political Governance: Structural-Functional and Morphological Analysis

The purpose of the article is to implement a systematic analysis of the factors of the formation of a stable system of political governance. To clarify the functions and structure of a stable political system, the characteristics of stability are highlighted, according to which the political system: has signs of legitimacy; is able to cope with the threat of illegitimate violence; supports the constitu-tional system; reproduces a model of behavior based on stability. Methodologically, the article is based on the works of classical and modern scientists (P. M. Khomyakov, M.A. Gaydes, I.B . Rodionov, A. A. Khomiakov). Makarycheva), devoted to the systematic analysis of political systems. The paper also uses morphological analysis, analysis of political efficiency, and in the final part — the method of state-management design. The author comes to the conclusion that the functions and structure of the modern political system should be considered from the point of view of the defini-tions of “political stability”, viewed through the prism of the absence of political threats, adaptive irremovability of political subjects and the balance of political forces. Political stability implies that the distribution of resources in society involves not only the institutional subsystem of the political system, but also the functional, regulatory and ideological subsystems. Morphological analysis demonstrates that a stable political system is characterized by a balanced interaction of subsystems, in which at least the institutional, regulatory and functional subsystems jointly determine the process of functioning and development of the political system. Stability is the basis and guarantee of po-litical development in the modern world, and stability is not contrary to innovative development or development in general. Both stability and development are the basic conditions for the development of a modern political system, methods of avoiding negative adaptation in the global environment. Stability is not synonymous with closeness — on the contrary, it implies horizontal and vertical mobility, a constitutional system, and a focus on maintaining the activity of political actors. At the same time, all these processes cannot be allowed to take their course and develop outside the political control of the vertical structures of power. Integrity as a system-wide property is an integral basis for the stability of the political system.

1. Afonasova A. V . Political functionality as an “idea” of the modern state // Governance issues [Voprosy upravleniya]. 2019. №3 (39). P. 6–15. (In rus).

2. Akhremenko A. S ., Petrov A. P ., Filippov I. B . Democratic survival and stability: from Lipset hypothesis to economic productivity // Politeia: Analysis. Chronicle. Prognosis (Journal of Political Philosophy and Sociology of Politics) [Politiya: Analiz. Khronika. Prognoz (Zhurnal politicheskoi filosofii i sotsiologii politiki)]. 2018. N 3 (90). P. 87–112. (In rus).

3. Baranovsky V. G. New world order: overcoming the old or its transformation? // World economy and international relations [Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya]. 2019. Vol. 63. N 5. P. 7–23. (In rus).

4. Belyaeva N. Y . Development of the concept of public policy: attention to the “driving forces” and governing entities // Political Research [Polis]. 2011. N 3. P. 72–87. (In rus).

5. Borzel T., Heard-Lauriot K. Networks in the system of multilevel management of the European Union: basic concepts and practical result // Democracy and management: Newsletter of the RAPN Research Committee on Comparative Political Science (SP-RAPN) [Demokratiya i uprav-lenie: Informatsionnyi byulleten’ issledovatel’skogo komiteta RAPN po sravnitel’noi politologii (SP-RAPN)]. 2012. N 1 (13). P. 53–64. (In rus).

6. Global Governance in the 21st Century: Innovative Approaches / edited by Al. A. Gromyko. M.: Institute of Europe RAS: Nestor-history, 2013. (In rus).

7. Glukhova A. V. Civil dialogue as a mechanism for the formation of public policy: modern trends and problems of Russia // VSU Bulletin. Series: History. Political science. Sociology [Vestnik VGU. Ser.: Istoriya. Politologiya. Sotsiologiya]. 2015. N 3. P. 11–20. (In rus).

8. Gnedash A. A., Morozova E. V. Constructive potential of network interaction in the field of social policy. Democracy and Governance // Democracy and Governance: Newsletter of the RAPN Research Committee on Comparative Political Science (SP-RAPN) [Demokratiya i upravlenie: Informatsionnyi byulleten’ issledovatel’skogo komiteta RAPN po sravnitel’noi politologii (SP-RAPN)]. 2012. N 1 (13). P. 30–32. (In rus).

9. Zhivitskaya E. N. System analysis and design. Minsk: BSUIR, 2005. (In rus).

10. Makarychev A. S . Stability and instability in democracy: methodological approaches and as-sessments // Political Research [Polis]. 1998. N 1. P. 149–157. (In rus).

11. Maksimova E. N . Stability of the political system in the context of political participation // Politologichny Visnik. 2008. Vol. 31. P. 156–166. (In rus).

12. Rodionov I. B. System theory and system analysis. SPb.: SPbSTU, 2001. (In rus).

13. Sedov E. A . Information and entropy properties of social systems // Social sciences and mo-dernity [Obshchestvennye nauki i sovremennost’]. 1993. N 5. P. 92–101. (In rus).

14. Chemshit A. A . State power and political participation. Kiev: Ukraine center of spirit culture, 2004. (In rus).

15. Shamakhov V. A . Resource saving strategy: development vs distribution (Russian agenda) // Administrative consulting [Upravlencheskoe konsul’tirovanie]. 2016. N 6 (90). P. 7–13. (In rus).

16. Shakhray S. M. Russian Constitution: Stability and Development // Topical Problems of Russian Law [Aktual’nye problemy Rossiiskogo prava]. 2018. N 10 (95) P. 44–54. (In rus).

17. Acemoglu D., Robinson J. Economic Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy. Cambridge Univer-sity Press, 2006.

18. Benhabib J., Rustichini A. Social conflict and growth. Journal of Economic Growth. 1996. N 1. P. 125–142.

19. Hayward J. The Crisis of Representation in Europe, Routledge. Special Issue of West European Politics. 1995.

20. Lagunoff R. Dynamic stability and reform of political institutions. Games and Economic Behavior. Vol. 67. Is. 2. 2009. P. 569–583.

21. McLaverty P., Halpin D. Deliberative Drift: The Emergence of Deliberation in the Policy Process. International Political Science Review. 2008. N 2. P. 198.

22. Mergel I., Desouza K. Implementing Open Innovation in the Public Sector: The Case of Challenge. gov. Public Administration Review. Vol. 73. Is. 6. 2013. P. 882–890.

23. Ostrom E. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions of Collective Action. Tucson : University of Arizona Press. 1990.

24. Owen C., Bindman E. Civic Participation in a Hybrid Regime: Limited Pluralism in Policymaking and Delivery in Contemporary Russia // Government and Opposition. 2017. P. 5–15.

25. Persson T., Tabellini G. Political Economics. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2002.

26. Sanina A., Rubtcova M., Satinsky D. M . The Effectiveness of Communication Channels in Government and Business Communication // Information Polity. 2017. Vol. 22. N 4. P. 251–266.

27. Yu S., Jong-A-Pin R. Rich or alive? Political (in)stability, political leader selection and economic growth. Journal of Comparative Economics. 2020. Vol. 48. Is. 3. P. 561–577.