Nauki Społeczno-Humanistyczne Соціально-Гуманітарні Науки Social and Human Sciences

 

Rzhevska, Nina, 2015. STRATEGIC PROGNOSTICATION IN THE USA POLITICAL TRADITION. Social and Human Sciences. Polish-Ukrainian scientific journal, 01 (05), pp. 75-81.




Rzhevska,  Nina,  2015. STRATEGIC PROGNOSTICATION IN THE USA POLITICAL  TRADITION. Social and Human Sciences. Polish-Ukrainian scientific journal, 01 (05), pp. 75-81.

 

 

СТРАТЕГІЧНЕ ПРОГНОЗУВАННЯ

В ПОЛІТИЧНІЙ ТРАДИЦІЇ США

 

УДК 323(477)

 

Ржевська, Ніна,                                                                              

доктор політичних наук, доцент,

Національний авіаційний університет (Київ, Україна),

кафедра міжнародної інформації,

професор,

rzhevska@ua.fm

 

АНОТАЦІЯ

Стаття присвячена розкриттю особливостей використання системного принципу в стратегічному прогнозуванні. Питання аналізується з теоретичного та прикладного боку. Зроблено короткий аналіз використання системного підходу у прогнозуванні в американській моделі політичного аналізу. Найбільш складним видом прогнозування є політичне, яке стосується процесів і подій у політичній сфері. Стратегічне прогнозування ґрунтується на вмінні моделювати ситуацію, здатність аналізувати тенденції розвитку і на цьому тлі виявляти необхідність змін. Його складовою є політичний аналіз – концентроване зусилля, спрямоване на дослідження і виявлення ключових властивостей саме альтернативних версій політичного курсу. Зміст системності  прогнозування в американській школі політичного аналізу передбачає використання взаємозв’язків  у середині сукупності, а також напрямки зв’язків між об’єктом прогнозування і прогнозним фоном, тобто середовищем. Системний аналіз вимагає побудови прогнозу на основі системи засобів і моделей, що можливо здійснити за допомогою комп’ютерних технологій. Саме цей принцип  є основоположним у роботі аналітичних центрів США, які беруть участь у вирішенні завдання корегування політичної реальності через повний цикл аналітичного виробництва: від аналізу проблеми до реалізації рішень у системі управління.  

Ключові слова: прогнозування, стратегічне прогнозування, політичне прогнозування, політичний аналіз, «мозкові центри», аналітичні центри, системний принцип.

 

 

STRATEGIC PROGNOSTICATION IN 

THE USA  POLITICAL  TRADITION 

 

Rzhevska,  Nina,            

Doctor of Political Science, Associate Professor,

National Aviation University (Kyiv, Ukraine),

Department of  International Information,

Professor,

rzhevska@ua.fm

 

SUMMARY

This article is highlighting the special use of the strategical prognostication strategic prediction process. This problem is analyzed in the theoretical and practical aspects. There is a brief analysis of the systematic approach usage in the prediction of the USA foreign policy. Prognostication, the basis of which grounds in the  person’s cognitive activity is getting an important kind of social prognostication. Startegical prognostication is based on the situation modelling knowlegde, development tendency analyse abilities, and according to this data one gets the abilities to find out the changes necessity, work out the changes strategy, use the save methods and it needs from the subject some abilities to embody the strategy into life. Strategical prognostication gives an opportunity to determine the real state of things, as well as, total possibilities, showed by means of this analysis, dynamics and perspectives of single objects and as well as totality of objects development that are making out the system and factors or grounds that speed up or slow down the movement to the aim. The objective ground for the strategic prognostication according the American analytic centres is a systematic building of the political phenomenon or process that is researched. System approach is a methodology of the object’s analysis in terms of nature and society as well, as a system, and the prognostication objects can be considered as systems, so it can be applied to problems of prognostication.  

Key words: prognostication, strategical prognostication, political prognostication, political analysis, “think tanks”, analytic centers, systematic principle.

 

 

The research of strategical prognostication, in particular the USA, where was its main theoretical and applied formation grounded, is very important, first of all, because of the  political theory development and its adoption in the modern world of political practice. Nowadays, when political systems are making the huge turn to the democratical values, humanitarian priorities, culture of piece and mutual cooperation on the international arena, without the detail professional analysis and making out prognostications, avaliable and historically based possibilities for democratical transformations, making out of which is a pretty risky deal, sometimes an impossible one.

 

The main role in the providing USA foreign policy strategy belongs to the main American “think tanks” (under the term “think tanks” one means a group, institute or centre, organized for the intensive investigation and conceptual providing of the political and secutiry strategies of the USA) that make out the American behaviour scenary in the world, as well as, basic grounds for the international strategy political assessment, give the recomendations for the most problems according to the foreign and domestic policy in general [5, p.2].

 

Prognostication, the basis of which grounds in the  person’s cognitive activity is getting an important kind of social prognostication. First of all, it is connected to the one’s experience, modern phenomenons and processes knowledge. It is based on the scientific data, dynamic and statistic rules. Social process prognostication is an independent prognostication branch that, first of all, is combining the primary data of history, sociology, political science, statistics, demography etc. Moreover, every single prognostication has the veritable character.

 

The most difficult kind of prognostication is a political one because it deales with the processes and events on the political arena. Politics touches the million’s interests and theirs ways of life, and politicians, specially, political elite members have to prognose the results of their actions.

Startegical prognostication is based on the situation modelling knowlegde, development tendency analyse abilities, and according to this data one gets the abilities to find out the changes necessity, work out the changes strategy, use the save methods and it needs from the subject some abilities to embody the strategy into life. Strategical prognostication gives an opportunity to determine the real state of things, as well as, total possibilities, showed by means of this analysis, dynamics and perspectives of single objects and as well as totality of objects development that are making out the system and factors or grounds that speed up or slow down the movement to the aim. According to the knowledge one can make out some variations of decisions for the situations development influence in the certain direction.

 

The principles of strategical prognostication are made out due to the concerete scientifical  prognosticational methods of research. Nowadays there is a great amount of general as well as particular social prognostication methods. Austrian futurist Erich Yatch thinks that there are more than 200 of them and it is not the end.

 

Political analysis is, first of all, the concentrate effort aimed at the research and finding out the key properties, the very alternative versions of the political course.

Political and social purpose analitical centres in the West began to appear starting the beginning of the last century. From the very beginning they represented themselves as university structures which were involved to the  govermental programms making. They were intellectual cooporations that tried to combine the scientific  innovative offers with the political science, grounding social humanitarian modelling.

 

Specialists are determining the “think tanks’’ in a different way. Anaway, they can be determined in general as: 1) institutes, cooporations or groups organized for the interdisciplinary researches; 2) consultative experts committees that provide the researches and give some special tips to the government; 3) independent intellectual structures that embody the players in the political process. Besides this term is used as a general title for the military laboratories, cooporations, academies, organizations that are supporting multidisciplinary theoretics and intellectuals that are orientated towards the analytical or political recommendations working out. [ 2, p.6]

For the systematization and charactiristic step by step development of “think tank” scientists is using the following criteria as the time of forming; oraganizing mission

 (determinant tasks they are solving); the way of acting and its structural organization way; specific way of cooporation with the government [3].

 

Nowadays a lot of transnational non govermental organizations that are based in the USA are aimed towards the researchment of the different ways of the world politics. It is better to determine four basic types of the USA NGO: specific ones with the determinate professional specialization; cosmopolitan based on spiritual development of the person; transnational, they include the transnational cooporation; as well as, analytic cooporations or think trusts. The last ones play a key role in the foreign policy of the USA.

 

Analytical cooporations can be determinated as the basic points of the USA global force. They are taking part in the solving problems of the political reality correction by means of the full cycle of analitical production: from the problem analysis to the decisions implementation in terms of mamagenent system. The part of of them is oriented towards the cooperation with the global insitutions, first of all, UN, part is a link of state mechanizm. Formally, independent intellectual institutions are organized on the model of business cooporations, they have often branches. As, for example, Cernegie foundation has the branch in Russia, RAND – in GB and in Holland [4, p. 2].

 

“Think tanks” are thought as high-principled base of the international political power of the USA. Here the idea of generating process is combinined with the applied pecularity within the simultaneous realization of aim strategy that means the concrete social economic and political results. The last one positon differs them from the exclusively academic structures. Very often analytics are dealing with the high-principled providing of the political cultural expansion of the USA. Such a mission has Carnegie Endowment for the International Peace and Brookings Institution. The leading think tanks are under the influence of state interests, first of all, political economical and security interests. According to the high level of the American society economization level such interests are the same level of importance for transnational cooporations as well.

 

The activity of the think tanks is mostly determined by the influence of the cooporation that provides the research financing, political leaders activity support, periodical and special literature publishment. Analytical structures are the special link of the American political system governance that combines in a functional way cooporation activity with the foreign activity of the state. American analytic cooporation functioning is truly supported the big business, so it is more than just a simple reflection of the social structure society pecularities.

 

The objective ground for the strategic prognostication according the American analytic centres is a systematic building of the political phenomenon or process that is researched. The point is that, orientation to the systematic principle makes up the one from many main pecularities of the modern scientific style of thinking that appeared in the second half of the 20 century in the USA. It was taking the leading places during the long period of time in the world science. At the same time, during this period of time there are a lot discussions because of the aims and tasks of the “general system theory”, system principle content, especially in political researches.

 

Prognostication of the social political processes needs a historical experience from one side and the traditions of the certain society. From another side, logics of the system method application is combined with the civilization experience that means that modernization encloses all the society spheres. Modern theoreticians determin political as well as social, economical, spiritual and other types of modernization. Political modernization with its specificity is a synthesizing according to the given above types because of its main characteristics are providing structural and qualitative changes not only in politics, but in social, economical, cultural and other spheres, creating the terms for stability and consolidation of society.

 “The main point of system analisys and prognostication social and political prosecces demands are next: the research of certain social system in the modern conditions is impossible if it is not crossing its borders. Such an approach can change not only the way of thinking but also practical actions in process of social organizm reformation. Neglecting the principle of the old system borders crossing, unwillingless to refuse stereotype ideas, as a rule, instead of society modernization cause its visibility” [1, p. 47].

 

System approach of the state analytic structures creates a clever alternative during the making out of strategical decisions. Special councils and associations within the think tanks are organizing different researches of the actual problems in foreign affairs. Their advantage in taking of foreign policy decisions is a possibility to use its own structure for the research activity results in the certain political programs. The institute of advicers itself  gives a chance to carry out the task of foreign policy management  by means of more flexible mechanizm. As a rule, the most important influence belongs to the advicers that are closer to the leaders. Disputation in the collegiate circle can be strict but they don’t ruin the general line of the USA behaviour on the international arena. Moreover, the potential of the analysts conformism in team is carried out not in a complete way in favour of security forces. However group or corporative logics of the top-managers about the foreign policy management is mostly based on the general system ideology. The principle of prognostication systematic is combination of all the prognosed indexes of the object, its environment and important factors.

 

System approach is a methodology of the object’s analysis in terms of nature and society as well, as a system, and the prognostication objects can be considered as systems, so it can be applied to problems of prognostication. Such a principle is the main one of the USA analytic centers.

The relationship between the elements in the system has some certain properties that are characterizing connection, interaction or orderliness of the given elements, so they are the certain display of the central principle about integrity of the system. There are two main functions of the system approach: a) formulation of the problems for getting new knowledge and solving new tasks; b) methodological analysis of the certain knowledge is carried out on basis of integrity principle, according to this principle the interconnection and cooperation of the elements are producing new system properties of the object that are not typical for its single elements and for the number of other principles. 

 

In such a way, prognostication of the state or behavior of the system cannot be considered as formal prognostication of the state or the of system elements action, there should be taken into account their interconnection and appearance of the new properties due to the new state and behavior of the components.

 

Systematic in prognostication means that policy is a united object, but from the other hand, it is a complex of the independent blocks of prognostication. Such a principle gives a chance to get a visible model of the researched object in the system of its direct and reverse, hierarchical and coordination relations, determine its main system features – basic structure, content, functioning, ways of realization [1, p. 46].

 

So, the matter of system prognostication in the American school of political analysis needs the usage of cooperation within the system, as well as, the connection ways between the object of prognostication and prognostication background, in other words, evironment. System analysis demands such a  prognosis construction that is based on the models and means system.

 

REFERENCES

1.  Horbatenko, V. (2003),  Pryntsypy, metody i osnovni etapy politychnoho prohnozuvannya // Lyudyna I polityka (5), pp. 46-55.

2. Horbatenko, V.P., Petrenko, I.I. (2009) “Fabryky dumok” I rozvytok sotsialnoi inzhenerii // Stratehichni priorytety (4 ), pp.5-12   

3. Boucher, S. (2005)  Europe and its Think Tanks: a Рromise to be Fulfilled. Report of Notre Europe think tank, online: http://www.notreeurope.eu/

4. Haas, R. (2002) Think Tanks and U.S. Foreign Policy: A Policy -Maker’s Perspective // U.S. Department of States, online:  http://2001-2009.state.gov/s/p/rem/15506.htm

5. Hellebust, L. (2007) Think Tank Explosion: Growth of the Independent Think Tank Industry in the United States; Government Research Service Paper; online: http://www.thinktankdirectory.com/docs/

6. Saint-Germain, M.A. (2007), Public Policy Analysis. Introduction to the theory and approaches to policy and a working knowledge of the skills and techniques involved in its practice online: http://www.csulb.edu/~msaintg/ppa670/670menu.htm

7. Rich, A. (2004) Think Tanks, Public Policy, and the Politics of Expertise, Cambridge University Press, 258 p.

 

СПИСОК ВИКОРИСТАНИХ ДЖЕРЕЛ ТА ЛІТЕРАТУРИ

1.  Гopбaтeнкo В. Пpинципи, мeтoди і ocнoвні eтaпи пoлітичнoгo пpoгнoзувaння  // Людинa і пoлітикa. – 2003. – № 5. – C. 46–55.

2. Горбатенко В.П., Петренко І.І. «Фабрики думок» і розвиток соціальної інженерії//Стратегічні пріоритети. –  2009. - №4  (13). –  c.5-12. 

 3. Boucher, S. Europe and its Think Tanks: a Рromise to be Fulfilled. Report of Notre Europe think tank (2005) [Електронний ресурс]. – Режим доступу: http://www.notreeurope.eu/

 4. Haas R. Think Tanks and U.S. Foreign Policy: A Policy – Makers Perspective // U.S. Department of States (2002) [Електронний ресурс]. – Режим доступу: www. states.gov.s/p/rem/ 15506 htm.

5. Hellebust L. Think Tank Explosion. Growth of the Independent Think Tank Industry in the United States / Lynn Hellebust. (2007) [Електронний ресурс]. – Режим доступу:  http://www.thinktankdirectory.com/docs/

6. Saint-Germain, M.A. Public Policy Analysis. Introduction to the theory and approaches to policy and a working knowledge of the skills and techniques involved in its practice         (2007) [ Електронний ресурс]. – Режим доступу: http://www.csulb.edu/~msaintg/ppa670/670menu.htm

7. Rich, A. Think Tanks, Public Policy, and the Politics of Expertise, Cambridge University Press,2004. - 258 p.

 

 

 

 

 

 



Создан 08 июн 2015