politscienceПолитическая наукаPolitical science1998-1775ИНИОН РАН10.31249/poln/2022.03.01politscience-759Research ArticleСОСТОЯНИЕ ДИСЦИПЛИНЫЦенностное измерение публичной политикиValue measuring public policyПушкареваГ. В.PushkarevaG. V.

Пушкарева Галина Викторовна, доктор политических наук, профессор факультета государственного управления

Москва

Moscow 

gvpush@mail.ruМосковский государственный университет имени М.В. ЛомоносоваРоссияLomonosov Moscow State UniversityRussian Federation20221305202303Публичная политика1535Copyright © Пушкарева Г.В., 20232023Пушкарева Г.В.Pushkareva G.V.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://www.politnauka.ru/jour/article/view/759

В статье рассматривается становление теории публичных ценностей, определяются ее возможности и ограничения в создании валидного инструмента ценностного измерения решений, принимаемых в публичном пространстве. Запрос на такой инструмент формировался как со стороны структур гражданского общества, опасающихся подмены реальных интересов граждан интересами элитарных слоев, так и со стороны государственных органов, стремящихся просчитать реакцию общества на управленческие инициативы. Теория публичных ценностей возникает на противоречивом методологическом фундаменте, что прежде всего отразилось на неоднозначной интерпретации самого понятия «публичная ценность»: во-первых, как особого вида стоимости производимых в публичном пространстве общественных благ, во-вторых, как консенсусных суждений о желаемых способах организации общественной жизни, в-третьих, как отношения людей к внешним социальным объектам, складывающегося в ходе удовлетворения своих базовых потребностей. Плюрализм научной интерпретации создает трудности в создании универсального способа ценностного измерения публичной политики, поскольку каждая теоретическая модель предполагает свои способы операционализации основных понятий и разноречивый набор индикаторов. Рассматриваются две методики измерения публичной ценности принимаемых решений: «картирование публичных ценностей» (PVM -public value mapping) и «оценочная карта публичной ценности» (PVSC - the public value scorecard). Различия между этими методиками обусловлены исходными методологическими принципами, определяющими предметную направленность применяемых исследовательских процедур. В первом случае речь идет об установлении степени соответствия принимаемых решений консенсусным публичным ценностям, во втором - о выявлении субъективного отношения граждан к конкретным публичным решениям. Отмечается, что в научном сообществе активный поиск критериев оценки публичной ценности государственных решений сопровождается сдержанным оптимизмом. Признается, что специалистам легче дается определение публичной ценности конкретного решения, но попытки создания универсального инструментария являются более чем скромными.

The paper discusses the formation of the theory of public values, determines its capabilities and limitations in creating a valid tool for the value measurement of decisions made in the public space. The request for such an instrument was formed both by civil society structures, fearful of the substitution of the real interests of citizens by the interests of the elite strata, and by state bodies seeking to estimate the reaction of society to managerial initiatives. The theory of public values arises on a controversial methodological foundation, which is primarily reflected in the ambiguous interpretation of the very concept of «public value». Firstly, as a special type of value of public goods produced in the public space. Secondly, as consensus judgments about the desired ways of organizing public life, thirdly, as the relationship of people to external social objects, which develops in the course of satisfying their basic needs. The pluralism of scientific interpretation creates difficulties in creating a universal way of value measurement of public policy, since each theoretical model involves its own ways of operationalizing the basic concepts and a contradictory set of indicators. Two methods of measuring the public value of decisions are considered: «public value mapping» (PVM) and «public value scorecard» (PVSC). The differences between these methods are due to the initial methodological principles that determine the subject orientation of the research procedures used. In the first case, we are talking about establishing the degree of compliance of decisions made with consensus public values, in the second case, about identifying the subjective attitude of citizens to specific public decisions. It is noted that in the scientific community an active search for criteria for assessing the public value of government decisions is accompanied by restrained optimism. It is recognized that it is easier for specialists to determine the public value of a particular solution but attempts to create a universal toolkit are more than modest.

ценностипубличные ценноститеория публичных ценно- стейизмерение публичной ценностипубличная политикапубличные решенияvaluespublic valuestheory of public valuesmeasurement of public valuepublic policypublic decisionsReferencesAlford J., Yates S Mapping public value processes. International journal of public sector management. 2014, Vol. 27, N 4, P. 334–352. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-04-2013-0054Alford J., Yates S Mapping public value processes. International journal of public sector management. 2014, Vol. 27, N 4, P. 334–352. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-04-2013-0054Beck Jørgensen T., Rutgers M. Public values: core or confusion? Introduction to the centrality and puzzlement of public values research. American review of public administration. 2015, Vol. 45, N 1, P. 3–12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074014545781Beck Jørgensen T., Rutgers M. Public values: core or confusion? Introduction to the centrality and puzzlement of public values research. American review of public administration. 2015, Vol. 45, N 1, P. 3–12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074014545781Beck Jørgensen T., Vrangbæk K. Value dynamics: towards a framework for analyzing public value changes. International journal of public administration. 2011, Vol. 34, N 8, P. 486–496. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2011.583776Beck Jørgensen T., Vrangbæk K. Value dynamics: towards a framework for analyzing public value changes. International journal of public administration. 2011, Vol. 34, N 8, P. 486–496. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2011.583776Benington, J. Creating the public in order to create public value? International journal of public administration. 2009, Vol. 32, N 3–4, P. 232–249. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01900690902749578Benington, J. Creating the public in order to create public value? International journal of public administration. 2009, Vol. 32, N 3–4, P. 232–249. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01900690902749578Bojang M. Public value management: an emerging paradigm in public administration. International journal of business, management and economics. 2021, Vol. 2, N 4, P. 225–238. DOI: https://doi.org/10.47747/ijbme.v2i4.395Bojang M. Public value management: an emerging paradigm in public administration. International journal of business, management and economics. 2021, Vol. 2, N 4, P. 225–238. DOI: https://doi.org/10.47747/ijbme.v2i4.395Bozeman B. Public values and public interest. Washington: Georgetown university press, 2007, 224 p.Bozeman B. Public values and public interest. Washington: Georgetown university press, 2007, 224 p.Bozeman B. Public-value failure: when efficient markets may not do. Public administration review. 2002, Vol. 62, N 2, P. 145–161. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/0033-3352.00165Bozeman B. Public-value failure: when efficient markets may not do. Public administration review. 2002, Vol. 62, N 2, P. 145–161. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/0033-3352.00165Bozeman B., Sarewitz D. Public value mapping and science policy evaluation. Minerva. 2011, Vol. 49, N 1, P. 1–23. DOI: http://www.doi.org/10.1007/s11024-011-9161-7Bozeman B., Sarewitz D. Public value mapping and science policy evaluation. Minerva. 2011, Vol. 49, N 1, P. 1–23. DOI: http://www.doi.org/10.1007/s11024-011-9161-7Bryson B.M., Crosby B.C., Bloomberg L. (eds). Public value and public administration. Washington: Georgetown university press, 2015, 360 p.Bryson B.M., Crosby B.C., Bloomberg L. (eds). Public value and public administration. Washington: Georgetown university press, 2015, 360 p.Buchanan J., Tollison R. (eds). Theory of public choice – II. Michigan, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan press, 1984, 452 p. DOI: http://www.doi.org/10.3998/mpub.7229Buchanan J., Tollison R. (eds). Theory of public choice – II. Michigan, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan press, 1984, 452 p. DOI: http://www.doi.org/10.3998/mpub.7229Faulkner N., Kaufman S. Avoiding theoretical stagnation: a systematic review and framework for measuring public value. Australian journal of public administration. 2018, Vol. 77, N 1, P. 69–86. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12251Faulkner N., Kaufman S. Avoiding theoretical stagnation: a systematic review and framework for measuring public value. Australian journal of public administration. 2018, Vol. 77, N 1, P. 69–86. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12251Fukumoto E., Bozeman B. Public values theory: what is missing? American review of public administration. 2019, Vol. 49, N 6, P. 635–648. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074018814244Fukumoto E., Bozeman B. Public values theory: what is missing? American review of public administration. 2019, Vol. 49, N 6, P. 635–648. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074018814244Habermas J. Sociostructural transformation of the public sphere. In: YarskayaSmirnova E.R., Romanov P.V. (eds). Public sphere: theory, methodology, case studies. Moscow: OOO "Variant", TsSPGI, 2013, P. 226–265. (In Russ.)Habermas J. Sociostructural transformation of the public sphere. In: YarskayaSmirnova E.R., Romanov P.V. (eds). Public sphere: theory, methodology, case studies. Moscow: OOO "Variant", TsSPGI, 2013, P. 226–265. (In Russ.)Hartley J., Alford J., Knies E., Scott D. Towards an empirical research agenda for public value theory. Public management review. 2017, Vol. 19, N 5, P. 670–685. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2016.1192166Hartley J., Alford J., Knies E., Scott D. Towards an empirical research agenda for public value theory. Public management review. 2017, Vol. 19, N 5, P. 670–685. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2016.1192166Howlett M, Cashore B. Conceptualizing public policy. In: Engeli I., Allison C.R. (eds). Comparative policy studies. Conceptual and methodological challenges. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014, P. 17–33. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137314154_2Howlett M, Cashore B. Conceptualizing public policy. In: Engeli I., Allison C.R. (eds). Comparative policy studies. Conceptual and methodological challenges. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014, P. 17–33. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137314154_2Huijbregts R, George G, Bekkers B. Public values assessment as a practice: integration of evidence and research agenda. Public management review. 2021, P. 1–20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2020.1867227Huijbregts R, George G, Bekkers B. Public values assessment as a practice: integration of evidence and research agenda. Public management review. 2021, P. 1–20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2020.1867227Kuzmin A.I., O'Sullivan R., Koshelev N.A. (eds). Program evaluation: methodology and practice. Moscow: Presto-RK, 2009, 396 p. (In Russ.)Kuzmin A.I., O'Sullivan R., Koshelev N.A. (eds). Program evaluation: methodology and practice. Moscow: Presto-RK, 2009, 396 p. (In Russ.)Lindgreen A., Koenig-Lewis N., Kitchener M., Brewer J.D., Moore M.H., Meynhardt T. (eds). Public value: deepening, enriching, and broadening the theory and practice. London, New York: Routledge, 2019, 414 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315163437Lindgreen A., Koenig-Lewis N., Kitchener M., Brewer J.D., Moore M.H., Meynhardt T. (eds). Public value: deepening, enriching, and broadening the theory and practice. London, New York: Routledge, 2019, 414 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315163437Meynhardt T. Public value: turning a conceptual framework into a scorecard. In: Bryson B.M., Crosby B.C., Bloomberg L. (eds). Public value and public administration. Washington: Georgetown university press, 2015, P. 147–169.Meynhardt T. Public value: turning a conceptual framework into a scorecard. In: Bryson B.M., Crosby B.C., Bloomberg L. (eds). Public value and public administration. Washington: Georgetown university press, 2015, P. 147–169.Meynhardt T. Public value: value creation in the eyes of society. In: Lindgreen A., Koenig-Lewis N., Kitchener M., Brewer J.D., Moore M.H., Meynhardt T. (eds). Public value: deepening, enriching, and broadening the theory and practice. London, New York: Routledge, 2019, P. 5–22.Meynhardt T. Public value: value creation in the eyes of society. In: Lindgreen A., Koenig-Lewis N., Kitchener M., Brewer J.D., Moore M.H., Meynhardt T. (eds). Public value: deepening, enriching, and broadening the theory and practice. London, New York: Routledge, 2019, P. 5–22.Meynhardt T. Public value inside: what is public value creation? International journal of public administration. 2009, Vol. 32, N 3, P. 192–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900690902732632Meynhardt T. Public value inside: what is public value creation? International journal of public administration. 2009, Vol. 32, N 3, P. 192–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900690902732632Moore M.H. Creating public value: strategic management in government. Cambridge: Harvard university press, 1995, 402 p.Moore M.H. Creating public value: strategic management in government. Cambridge: Harvard university press, 1995, 402 p.Moore M.H. Recognizing public value. Cambridge: Harvard university press, 2013, 496 р.Moore M.H. Recognizing public value. Cambridge: Harvard university press, 2013, 496 р.Moore M. Public value accounting: establishing the philosophical basis. Public administration review. 2014, Vol. 74, N 4, P. 465–477. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12198Moore M. Public value accounting: establishing the philosophical basis. Public administration review. 2014, Vol. 74, N 4, P. 465–477. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12198Nabatchi T. Public values frames in administration and governance. Perspectives on public management and governance. 2018, Vol. 1, N 1, P. 59–72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ppmgov/gvx009Nabatchi T. Public values frames in administration and governance. Perspectives on public management and governance. 2018, Vol. 1, N 1, P. 59–72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ppmgov/gvx009Nailer C., Prior D., Keränen J. A dynamic process theory of public value. In: Lindgreen A., Koenig-Lewis N., Kitchener M., Brewer J.D., Moore M.H., Meynhardt T. (eds). Public value: deepening, enriching, and broadening the theory and practice. London, New York: Routledge, 2019, P. 159–173.Nailer C., Prior D., Keränen J. A dynamic process theory of public value. In: Lindgreen A., Koenig-Lewis N., Kitchener M., Brewer J.D., Moore M.H., Meynhardt T. (eds). Public value: deepening, enriching, and broadening the theory and practice. London, New York: Routledge, 2019, P. 159–173.Nikovskaya L.I., Yakimets V.N. Improving culture of public policy as a challenge for Russia’s democratic development. The authority. 2014, Vol. 22, N 9, P. 5–10. (In Russ.)Nikovskaya L.I., Yakimets V.N. Improving culture of public policy as a challenge for Russia’s democratic development. The authority. 2014, Vol. 22, N 9, P. 5–10. (In Russ.)Nikovskaya L.I., Yakimets V.N. The index approach to the evaluation of public policy. In: Smorgunov L.V. (ed.). Public policy: institutions, digitalization, development. Moscow: Aspect press, 2018, P. 73–102. (In Russ.)Nikovskaya L.I., Yakimets V.N. The index approach to the evaluation of public policy. In: Smorgunov L.V. (ed.). Public policy: institutions, digitalization, development. Moscow: Aspect press, 2018, P. 73–102. (In Russ.)Nureev R.M. Theory of public choice. Moscow: GU HSE, 2005, 531 p. (In Russ.) Overeem P. The concept of regime values: are revitalization and regime change possible?Nureev R.M. Theory of public choice. Moscow: GU HSE, 2005, 531 p. (In Russ.) Overeem P. The concept of regime values: are revitalization and regime change possible?The American review of public administration. 2015, Vol. 45, N 1, P. 46–60. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074013510771The American review of public administration. 2015, Vol. 45, N 1, P. 46–60. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074013510771Podkorytov N.S. Public interest as an element of regulation of public relations connected with the prevention of harm. Science and business: development ways. 2015, N 5(47), P. 73–78. (In Russ.)Podkorytov N.S. Public interest as an element of regulation of public relations connected with the prevention of harm. Science and business: development ways. 2015, N 5(47), P. 73–78. (In Russ.)Prebble M. Is “we” singular? The nature of public value. American review of public administration. 2018, Vol. 48, N 2, P. 103–118 https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074016671427Prebble M. Is “we” singular? The nature of public value. American review of public administration. 2018, Vol. 48, N 2, P. 103–118 https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074016671427Sami A., Jusoh A., Md Nor K., Irfan A., Qureshi M.I. Systematic review of public value. Journal of public value and administrative insight. 2018, Vol. 1, N 1, P. 1–6. Mode of access: https://readersinsight.net/JPVAI/article/view/131 (accessed: 18.05.2022).Sami A., Jusoh A., Md Nor K., Irfan A., Qureshi M.I. Systematic review of public value. Journal of public value and administrative insight. 2018, Vol. 1, N 1, P. 1–6. Mode of access: https://readersinsight.net/JPVAI/article/view/131 (accessed: 18.05.2022).Slade C.P. Public value mapping of equity in emerging nanomedicine. Minerva. 2011, Vol. 49, N 1, P. 71–86. DOI: http://www.doi.org/10.1007/s11024-011-9161-7Slade C.P. Public value mapping of equity in emerging nanomedicine. Minerva. 2011, Vol. 49, N 1, P. 71–86. DOI: http://www.doi.org/10.1007/s11024-011-9161-7Slatinov V.B., Merkulova K.G. Public values in the structure of the ideology of the local community: problems of formation and identification. Central Russian journal of social sciences. 2014, N 4(34), P. 35–38. (In Russ.)Slatinov V.B., Merkulova K.G. Public values in the structure of the ideology of the local community: problems of formation and identification. Central Russian journal of social sciences. 2014, N 4(34), P. 35–38. (In Russ.)Smorgunov L.V., Volkova A.V. (eds). Public values and public administration. Moscow: Aspect press, 2014, 398 p. (In Russ.)Smorgunov L.V., Volkova A.V. (eds). Public values and public administration. Moscow: Aspect press, 2014, 398 p. (In Russ.)Solovyev A.I. Frontier zones of public policy. Political science (RU). 2021, N 3, P. 183–204. DOI: http://www.doi.org/10.31249/poln/2021.03.08 (In Russ.)Solovyev A.I. Frontier zones of public policy. Political science (RU). 2021, N 3, P. 183–204. DOI: http://www.doi.org/10.31249/poln/2021.03.08 (In Russ.)Stoker G. Public value management: a new narrative for networked governance? American review of public administration. 2006, Vol. 36, N 1, P. 41–57. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074005282583Stoker G. Public value management: a new narrative for networked governance? American review of public administration. 2006, Vol. 36, N 1, P. 41–57. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074005282583Sungurov A. Yu. Public policy: basic directions of research (world and Russian experience). Public policy. 2017, N 1, P. 8–28. (In Russ.)Sungurov A. Yu. Public policy: basic directions of research (world and Russian experience). Public policy. 2017, N 1, P. 8–28. (In Russ.)Talbot C. Public value: the next “big thing” in public management? International journal of public administration. 2009, Vol. 32, N 3–4, P. 167–170. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01900690902772059Talbot C. Public value: the next “big thing” in public management? International journal of public administration. 2009, Vol. 32, N 3–4, P. 167–170. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01900690902772059Volkova A.V. Electronic government and the formation of public values in modern Russia. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Series 6. 2013, N 3, P. 84–92. (In Russ.)Volkova A.V. Electronic government and the formation of public values in modern Russia. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Series 6. 2013, N 3, P. 84–92. (In Russ.)Warner S., Brown P.R., Cherney L. Public values in pluralistic and complex settings – are agonistic ideas the answer? International journal of public administration. 2021, Vol. 44, N 10, P. 857–866. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2021.1909620Warner S., Brown P.R., Cherney L. Public values in pluralistic and complex settings – are agonistic ideas the answer? International journal of public administration. 2021, Vol. 44, N 10, P. 857–866. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2021.1909620Welch J., Heather Rimes H., Bozeman B. Public value mapping. In: Bryson B.M., Crosby B.C., Bloomberg L. (eds). Public value and public administration. Washington: Georgetown university press, 2015, P. 131–146.Welch J., Heather Rimes H., Bozeman B. Public value mapping. In: Bryson B.M., Crosby B.C., Bloomberg L. (eds). Public value and public administration. Washington: Georgetown university press, 2015, P. 131–146.

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.