EnglishНа русском

Ефективна економіка № 2, 2015

УДК 338.2


D. Mykhailenko,

Simon Kuznets Kharkiv National University of Economics,

PhD (Economics), Associate Professor Department of Sociology and Psychology of Management

A. Polubiedova,

Simon Kuznets Kharkiv National University of Economics,

PhD (Economics), Associate Professor Department of Sociology and Psychology of Management

M. Prikhodko,

Simon Kuznets Kharkiv National University of Economics,

student of 3th course Faculty of International Economic Relations




Д. Г. Михайленко,

к. е. н., доцент кафедри соціології та психології управління,

Харківський національний економічний університет імені Семена Кузнеця

А. О. Полубєдова,

к. е. н., доцент кафедри соціології та психології управління,

Харківський національний економічний університет імені Семена Кузнеця

М. І. Приходько,

студентка 3-го курсу навчання, факультету міжнародних економічних відносин,

Харківський національний економічний університет імені Семена Кузнеця




In the article presented a generalization of the concepts of «citizenship» and «civil society». The necessity of developing program to bridge the ideological crisis in Ukraine. It must be based on, firstly, the methodological basis, allowing reliable mechanism to justify the building of civil society, and secondly, understanding of how its practical implementation. Empirical studies have confirmed that civil society has not yet become an object of public attention. Found no clear evidence and the hypothesis that the perception of the feasibility establishing civil society is not accompanied by a willingness to take responsibility for the practical implementation of the idea. Identified similarities and differences in the perception of the essence of civil society, allowing establishing the mechanisms of influence on the mastering by the public a new model of society in Ukraine.


В статті представлено узагальнення понять «цивільність» та «цивільне суспільство». Обґрунтовано необхідність розробки програми, яка сприятиме подоланню ідеологічної кризи в Україні. В основі повинні бути, по-перше-методологічний базис, який дозволяє надійно обґрунтовувати механізм будування цивільного суспільства, по-друге, ‑ розуміння засобів практичної реалізації. На основі статистичної вибірки, які запропоновані думками державних працівників та студентів виконана діагностика сприйняття понять «цивільність» та «цивільне суспільство». Результати емпіричних досліджень під твердили, що цивільне суспільство на цей час не перейшло до об’єкту уваги населення. Не знайшла чіткого підтвердження і гіпотеза про те, що сприйняття цілеспрямованості формування цивільного суспільства не супроводжується готовністю взяти на себе відповідальність за практичну реалізацію ідей. Встановлені збіги та відмінності в сприйнятті сутності цивільного суспільства, які дозволяють побудувати механізми впливу на освоєння громадкістю нової моделі суспільства в Україні.


Key words: civil society, peculiarities of perception, survey.


Ключові слова: цивільне суспільство, особливості сприйняття, анкетування.



Introduction. Ukraine has adopted a strategy of building a socially-oriented state, within which developed the documents defining the mechanisms of building a civil society. But the planned activities are carried out very slow, with little effect. To a certain extent this problem is caused by the lack of, on the one hand, the general universal theory of civil society, on the other hand – the accumulated experience of diagnosis of its condition. Although the idea of civil society is not new, trends of intellectualization of all human activity spheres, saturation it with information, require clarification of many theoretical assumptions of its construction, and therefore – practical as well. While the experience of the functioning of civil society in developed countries shows, that each of them created their own national algorithm of its formation [1, 3].

To successfully overcome the ideological crisis in Ukraine it is necessary to develop an appropriate program. It should be based, first, on the methodological basis, allowing reliably ground the mechanism of building a civil society, and secondly, an understanding of the ways of its practical implementation. On this basis it is possible to develop real constructive recommendations to the society and state authorities on the allocation and coordination of obligations and responsibility for the observance of human rights. According to the Constitution of Ukraine, its citizens have the right to participate in governing the state, but its implementation requires for both citizens and government authorities to not only be willing, but also possess the necessary knowledge. Prior than to develop and implement a national strategy of building a civil society it makes sense to diagnose the understanding and perception of it by the citizens.

Objective: to determine the current in Ukraine idea of the essence of new model of society and the degree of its formation using the methods of survey.

The main part. At present it remains an open question to create more or less coherent ideas about the essence of the «civil society» concept. The state of theoretical development of the issue logically requires pre-definition of the phenomenon that will be studied. But for civil society this is not an easy task. This is evidenced, for example, in the professional analysis of building civil society in Russia by Finnish scientists Suvi Salmenniemi. He showed that the use of well-known concepts of civil society theories in the context of this country turned out problematic in many respects. Considering a certain proximity of the development trajectories of Russia and Ukraine, we should not ignore the conclusions of the scientist, who writes: «I tried to match the theory of civil society and the empirical material, but to no avail. The empirical material got shrunk and very abstract when considered through the lens of civil society» [1, p. 440]. The issues of conceptualization and operationalization of civil society were stated by other scholars as well (for example, V. Smirnov [2], I. Mersiyanova [3]). Nevertheless, guidelines for the assessment of the level of civil society development are already available, from both the conceptual approach to the issue [4, 5], and the one that passed the practical test [6, 7]. These developments are certainly credible, they should be considered when analysing the reserves for the civil society development, but the authors do not give enough attention to the analysis of understanding by the citizens of a new society model and their intention to actively participate in building it.

Without claiming to do a deep analysis on the interpretations of the concepts of «citizenship» and «civil society», we take as the source for the article following options, derived from analysis and synthesis of available suggestions:

1. Citizenship is the result of emancipating the mind of the population in the country, turning them into free citizens-owners with a sense of personal dignity, ready to take on the economic and political responsibility for ensuring their live activity.

2. Civil society is the result of self-organization of people, including voluntarily formed non-governmental associations: social, economic, professional, educational, religious and other institutions, organizations, associations, unions. The development of such associations facilitates solidarity of the majority of citizens in the struggle for democracy.

Latest events indicate that in our country is rapidly growing the layer of active, responsible citizens, who are united in various communities, accumulate practice as for the civilized protection of their interests, so as for the organized influence on the actions of the state government. The development of such process requires its research.

The present analytical research is dedicated to the testing of hypotheses:

1. Civil society has not yet become the object of public attention.

2. The perception of the feasibility of civil society formation is not accompanied by a willingness to take on responsibility for the practical implementation of its ideas.

Following are the results of testing of these hypotheses in Simon Kuznets Kharkiv National University of Economics based on the survey of state employees undergoing training on the Master's program, and students of this University. In the first group there were 62 people, in the second – 20 people.

Formation of the information provision to test hypotheses was done by method of a survey. In the questionnaire were listed five questions with the choices of possible answers to them. Respondents were offered to choose from the given list of answers three most important in their opinion. Here are those questions:

1. Which definition of «citizenship» is the closest to your understanding of its essence?

2. What features can the concept called «civil society» be described by?

3. What is included in the system of values of Your community?

4. Define Your attitude towards the participating in the activities of political parties (movements)?

Defining the citizenship, both state employees and students gave major preference to a combination of patriotism, moral integrity and legal culture of a person (43,5 % and 55 % respectively). On the second place (32,3 % of state employees and 15 % of students) is moral position, which is expressed in a sense of duty and responsibility of a person before the civil team. On the third place fourth part of the respondents of the first and second groups put – the feeling of a citizent himself as a full member of society and a willingness to work actively for its prosperity.

Among the definitions of civil society, both the first and the second group of respondents gave preference to the following options:

1. Society in which the rights and freedoms of citizens are observed. This option is most preferable: it was chosen by 80 % of students and 66,1 % of state employees.

2. In civil society the majority of the population takes an active part in providing for its life. This option was chosen by 70 % of students and 56,5 % of state employees.

3. Civil society is characterized by the participation of citizens in governance, political decisions (41,9 % of state employees and 30 % of students).

More or less similar spreading in the groups of study got the opinion that in civil society all the citizens have equal rights, law-abiding (about 30 % of the respondents of the first and second group), and that in such a society there is an opportunity to form organizations that represent and defend the interests of its members and other people (about 25 % of respondents in both groups). A minor part of respondents (1,6 % of the state employees and 5 % of students) consider as a characteristic of civil society the assistance to needy from the side of patrons. The most drastic difference in definitions of the essential characteristics of civil society received a feature of the presence of public associations. It was chosen by only 9,7 % of state employees and 45 % of the students. The same conclusion was drawn on the feature of a high level of responsibility of citizens. It was acknowledged by 22,6 % of state employees and 5 % of students.

With regard to the values that bring people together in communities, on the first place both groups of respondents chose family values (74,2 % of state employees and 65 % of students). Cultural values, patriotism, love to the native land were recognized as consolidating sources by 45 to 50 % of the respondents of the first and second groups. Spiritual and moral values and a healthy lifestyle are more recognized as the system-forming by the state employees: respectively 46,8 % and 51,6 % of respondents. Among the students these options were chosen by 25 % and 35 % respectively. Such a source of consolidation as keeping and developing traditions was chosen by 40 % of students and 33,9 % of state employees. Territory improvement and cleanliness of the city (region) considered as a consolidating factor by about 30 % of members from the first and second studied groups. Such sources of community as environmental protection, citizenship, legal awareness of the population and aesthetic values are more typical for state employees: the percentage of those who chose them ranges from 30-34 %. Among students these values are recognized by 10 to 25 % of the respondents.

Analysis of the responses to the question about the attitude toward the participation in the political process showed the following results. Half of the students and 54,8 % of state employees testified that they did not consider it possible to participate; 20 % of students and 8,1 % of state employees clarified such point: participation in politics is contrary to their moral mindset. While 14,5 per cent of state employees are members of political parties. Only 5 % of students and 12,9 % of state employees would like to participate in the political processes, but only about 5 % of the respondents would like to be involved in politics professionally.

The conclusions. According to the results of empirical studies the first hypothesis is confirmed, that is, civil society has not yet become the object of public attention. The second hypothesis that the perception of the feasibility of formation of civil society is not accompanied by a willingness to take responsibility for the practical implementation of the idea found no clear evidence, additional researches of setting sources for the formation of social responsibility and orderly process of development of mechanisms for building constructive civil society are needed.



1. Suvi Salmenniemi "The Theory of Civil Society and Postsocialism", Journal of social policy studies, vol. 7, no. 4, pp.439-462, [Online], available at: http://www.civisbook.ru/files/File/S.Salmenniemi_Teoriy.pdf

2. Smirnov, V. E. (2009), "To the question of operationalization of the concept of «civil society»", Personality, culture, society, V. X 1. Ed. 1. – pp. 46–47.

3. Mersiyanova, I. V. (2011), Definition of «civil society» : the experience of systematization, Civil society in Russia and abroad, The Lawyer, Moscow, Russia, no. 4, pp. 2–6.

4. User guide for the assessment of civil society, Management Center CR UNO, Oslo, 2010, p.67.

5. Lopuhin A. M. (2008), Empirical studies of civil society: collection of materials of public hearings (24.09.08), The Public chamber of the Russian Federation,  Moscow, Russia, p.152.

6. Report on the state of civil society in the Russian Federation for 2010, The Public chamber of the Russian Federation, 2010, Moscow, Russia, p.124.

7. Dzutsev, H. V. (2011), Actual problems of development of civil society in the North Caucasian Federal district of the Russian Federation, The program of sociological survey of the population of the North Caucasus Federal district of the Russian Federation, conducted in June-August, Academy of Sciences, 2012, Moscow, Russia, p.58.


Стаття надійшла до редакції 16.02.2015 р.