Problems of a new scientific trend in political science: is the discussion about state sectoral policies still relevant?

The article attempts to conduct a multidimensional (normative, scientometric and scientific) analysis of the content of the scientific specialty profile 5.5.3 “Public administration and sectoral policies” in order to determine the subject of scientific and educational activities in the framework of political studies and education in relation to the phenomenon of “sectoral policies”. The authors claim that the formation of the specialty in question was accompanied by intensive interdisciplinary scientific discussions and disputes about the correlation of research on the subject in the framework of economic, political and public administration sciences. The consolidation of the specialty for political sciences opens up new opportunities for interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research, which will ensure scientific continuity, since previously this subject area was studied mainly within the framework of economic sciences. It is shown that trends in the regulation of scientific and educational activities in this area, as well as trends in the development of legislation on strategic planning, reflect the results of a certain political struggle, therefore they themselves can be the subject of political analysis. The point of view of individual authors is supported that the subject area of “sectoral policies” allows for the integration of public policy and public administration, providing opportunities for the development of applied scientific research in relation to relevant political and administrative processes and institutions. The authors’ definition of this term and its prospective replacement by the term “subject-oriented directions of state policy” are proposed. A set of features is proposed to identify the subject-oriented directions of state policy for their further study. The interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary nature of scientific research in this field is shown, and directions for the development of scientific research and the implementation of their results in the educational process are proposed.

1. Botalov A.M. A new subject field of Russian political science. Culture, identity, society: actual problems of the development of modern socio-political sciences. Collection of abstracts of the XXVII International Scientific and practical conference in memory of professor L.N. Kogan. Yekaterinburg: Publishing house of Yekaterinburg state pedagogical university, 2024, P. 247–254. (In Russ.)

2. Campbell J.L. Institutional analysis and the role of ideas in political economy. Theory and society. 1998, Vol. 27, N 3, P. 377–409.

3. Carstensen M., Schmidt V. Power through, over and in Ideas: Conceptualizing ideational power in discursive institutionalism. Journal of European public policy. 2016, N 3, P. 318–337. DOI: http://www.doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2015.1115534

4. Dankova Zh.Yu., Zabuzov O.N., Mel’kov S.A. New scientific specialty in political science «Public administration and sectoral policies» as a special subject field of political science. Science. Culture. Society. 2022, Vol. 28, N 4, P. 109–121. DOI: http://www.doi.org/10.19181/nko.2022.28.4.9

5. Glaziev S.Yu. How monetary policy depresses economic growth in Russia and the Eurasian economic union. Russian economic journal. 2022, N 2, P. 4–20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33983/0130-9757-2022-2-4-20 (In Russ.)

6. Glazyev S.Yu. On the incoherence of monetary policy with the task of economic development breakthrough. Scientific works of the free economic society of Russia. 2018, Vol. 214, N 6, P. 71–127.

7. Hall P. A. Policy paradigms, social learning, and the state: the case of economic policymaking in Britain. Comparative politics. 1993, Vol. 25, N 3, P. 275–296.

8. Ilyin M.V. A fundamental challenge. Are the opportunities of political science being wasted? Polis. Political studies. 2024, N 2, P. 8–24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2024.02.02 (In Russ.)

9. Johnson J., Malinova O.Yu. Symbolic politics as a matter of political science and Russian studies: Studies of political uses of the past in post-Soviet Russia. Political science (RU). 2020, N 2, P. 15–41. DOI: http://www.doi.org/10.31249/poln/2020.02.01

10. Maleka Yu.N., Mel’kov S.A., Mikryukov V.O. Why should political scientists now investigate public administration (Clarification of the author’s position in connection with the introduction of a new specialty of higher scientific qualification 5.5.3 “Public administration and sectoral policies”). Humanities and social sciences. Bulletin of the financial university. 2022, Vol. 12, N 5, P. 155–163. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26794/2226-7867-2022-12-5-155-163 (In Russ.)

11. Pomiguev I.A. The leadership of the State Duma: return to the Soviet past? Political Science (RU). 2017, N 3, P. 105–120. (In Russ.)

12. Pomiguev I.A., Alekseev D.V. Resetting bills: discontinuity as a political technology for blocking policy decision. Polis. Political studies. 2021, N 4, P. 176–191. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2021.04.13 (In Russ.)

13. Ryabova E.L., Ternovaya L.O. The subject field of public administration in the system of political sciences. Ethnosocium and interethnic culture. 2023, N 10, P. 10–17.

14. Smirnova O.O., Bocharova L.K., Belyaevskaya-Plotnik L.A., Bogdanova J.N. Conceptual approaches to the formation of architecture of documents of strategic planning in Russia. MIR (Modernization. Innovation. Research). 2019, Vol. 10, N 4, P. 440–456. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18184/2079-4665.2019.10.4.440-456 (In Russ.)

15. Solovyov A.I. Political agenda of the government, or why the state needs the society. Polis. Political studies. 2019, N 4, P. 8–25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2019.04.02 (In Russ.)

16. Solovyev A.I. Latent functionality of public policy. Political science (RU). 2022, N 3, P. 57–79. DOI: http://www.doi.org/10.31249/poln/2022.03.03

17. Solovyev A.I. “State management” and “public administration”: conflicts of concepts and practices. Perm university herald. Political science. 2022, Vol. 16, N 2, P. 39–48.

18. Solovyov A.I. Politics and government. Essays on theory and methodology: A monograph. Moscow: Aspect press publishing house, 2021, 256 p.

19. Sulakshin S.S. (ed.). State economic policy and economic doctrine of Russia. Towards a smart and moral economy. Moscow: Scientific expert, 2008, Vol. 1, 840 p.

20. Korgunyuk Yu.G., Meleshkina E.Y. (eds). The Soviet past in the political rhetoric of modern Russia: a monograph. Moscow: INION RAN, 2024, 236 p. DOI: http://www.doi.org/10.31249/sovietpast/2024

21. Ustinovich E.S. Public sector policy as a problem area for research in political science. Proceedings of Southwest state university. Series: History and law. 2021, Vol. 11, N 2, P. 88–94. (In Russ.)

22. Vilisov M.V. Public policy: project approach. Political science (RU). 2016a, N S, P. 110–126.

23. Vilisov M.V. The role of legislation on strategic planning in public policy formation. Vlast’. 2016b, N 6, P. 5–14.

24. Vilisov M.V. Informal governance. In: Solovyev A.I. (ed.). Political science. New Lexicon. Moscow: Aspect press, 2023a, P. 164–173.

25. Vilisov M.V. “Think tanks” or “forges of ideas”? The value agenda of the EAEU countries’ think tanks in the public policy framework. Political science (RU). 2023b, N 2, P. 203–233. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31249/poln/2023.02.09

26. Yakunin V.I., Sulakshi S.S., Orlov I.B., Stroganova S.M. Quality and success of public policies and public administration. Moscow: Nauchnyi ekspert, 2012, 496 p.

27. Yakunin V.I., Kuznetsov I.I., Vilisov M.V. The Post-Soviet state systems’ resilience: an outline of the theoretical model. Outlines of global transformations: politics, economics, law. 2020, Vol. 13, N 4, P. 6–33. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23932/2542-0240-2020-13-4-1 (In Russ.)

28. Yakunin V.I., Volodenkov S.V., Bagdasaryan V.E., Vilisov M.V. Public policy as an object of contemporary research. Lomonosov political science journal. 2023, N 6, P. 50–94. DOI: https://doi.org/10.55959/MSU0868-4871-12-2024-2-6-50-94 (In Russ.)