Home /Archive /2020, Volume 16 /16(5) /Sociological Comprehension of the Preset-Day Ukrainian Society Modernization

Sociological Comprehension of the Preset-Day Ukrainian Society Modernization

TitleSociological Comprehension of the Preset-Day Ukrainian Society Modernization
Publication TypeJournal Article
Year of Publication2020
AuthorsPetrushyna, TO
Short TitleSci. innov.
DOI10.15407/scine16.05.003
Volume16
Issue5
SectionGeneral Problems of the Modern Research and Innovation Policy
Pagination3-19
LanguageEnglish
Abstract
Introduction. Despite its widespread usage, the concept of “modernization” is not clearly defined. Concretization of its meaning depends on the researcher’s worldview position.
Problem Statement. The introduction of neoliberal economic principles did not lead to the improvement of society and the growth of human well-being. It transformed Ukraine into a raw-material appendage of global capitalism and the poorest country in Europe.
Purpose. To analyze public opinion on the modernization of Ukrainian society and identify the prospects for science and innovative development in Ukraine.
Materials and Methods. Analysis of statistical information and scientific publications on the problems of modernization, data of the sociological monitoring of social changes in Ukrainian society and two expert surveys (scientists of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine and specialists on innovative development).
Results. The author has proved that the transformation of Ukrainian society is not, in essence, a modernization. It is a neoliberal experiment under the guise of modernism, which rejected Ukraine from the cohort of the most industrially and scientifically developed countries to the periphery of the modern world, led to impoverishment and total despair of the majority of citizens. The author substantiates that it is impossible to modernize Ukraine and turn to innovative development within the existing neoliberal model and the oligarchic power rooting. As a result of financial genocide and the lack of state support, science in Ukraine is deprived of the opportunity to effectively perform its public functions, in particular, to be one of the decisive agents of modernization of society in the interests of all citizens.
Conclusions. The specific political and ideological interests of a global capital stand behind the theory of modernization as an ideological and theoretical construct of modernity. The theory and practice of neoliberal modernization imposed on Ukraine as the main mean of reaching the path of successful socio-economic development have not lived up to the expectations and led to a chronic crisis state of the society. It requires finding another alternative model of development.
Keywordsinnovative development, modernization of society, neoliberal modernization, polls (sociological surveys), public opinion, science in Ukraine, Ukrainian society
References
1. Dahms, H. F., Barton, K. P. (2011). Modernity. International Encyclopedia of Economic Sociology. Ed. by J. Beckert and M. Zafirovski. Routledge. London and New York.
2. Zarubina, N. N. (2006). The Sociology of Economic Life: A Problematic Analysis from a Global Perspective: A Training Manual. Moscow [in Russian].
3. Zarubina, N. N. (1998). Sociocultural factors of economic development: M. Weber and modern theories of modernization. St. Petersburg  [in Russian].
4. Petrov, A. V. (2008). Theories of economic development of society. Teaching aid. St. Petersburg  [in Russian].
5. Sokolova, G. N. (2013). Economic sociology: a textbook. Minsk [in Russian].
6. Armer, J. M., Katsillis, J. (2000). Modernization Theory. Encyclopedia of Sociology. New York: Macmillan Reference USA. P. 1883–1888.
7. Arseenko, A. G. (2017). Metamorphoses of Western theories and practices of modernization and development. Economics: Theory and Practice, 2(10), 4–12 [in Russian].
8. Yadov, V. A. (2009). Modern theoretical sociology as a conceptual basis for the study of Russian transformations: a course of lectures for graduate students in sociology. St. Petersburg. [in Russian].
9. Reifer, T. (Ed. Bryan S. Turner). (2006). Development Theory. The Cambridge Dictionary of Sociology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. P. 133–135.
10. Petrov, A. V. (2008). Sociology of the trade union movement. Teaching aid. St. Petersburg. [in Russian].
11. Melnik, L. G. (2005). Economics and Information: Economics of Information and Information in Economics: Encyclopedic Dictionary. Sumy. [in Ukrainian]
12. Jary, D., Jary, J. (1991). Modernization. Collins Dictionary of Sociology. Harper Collins Publishers. P. 421–422.
13. Cockerham, W. C. (1995). The global society: an introduction to sociology. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
14. Petrushina, T. O. (2017). The state of science in Ukraine (based on the assessments of Ukrainian and foreign experts). Visnyk NAN Ukrainy, 11, 66–80 [in Ukrainian].
https://doi.org/10.15407/visn2017.11.066
15. Arseenko, A. G., Malyuk, A. N., Tolstykh, N. V. (2011). Challenges of Globalization and Ukraine. Kyiv [in Russian].
16. Arseenko, A. G., Butkalyuk, V. A. (2014). Ukraine on the geopolitical and geo-economic crucifix of history. Economics: Theory and Practice, 2(4), 16–28 [in Russian].
17. Suimenko, Ye. I. (2007). Capitalism in our house. Looking through the prism of theory and social empirics. Kyiv [in Russian].
18. Tarasenko, V. I., Ivanenko, O. O. (2004). The Problem of Social Identification of Ukrainian Society (Sociotechnological Paradigm). Kyiv [in Ukrainian].
19. Tkachenko, K. (Ed.). (2015). 20 years of capitalism in Ukraine. The story of one illusion. Kyiv [in Ukrainian].
20. Shulga, N. A. (2011). Drift on the sidelines: twenty years of social change in Ukraine. Kyiv [in Russian].
21. Shulha, M. (2018). Social Matrix Failure. Kyiv [in Ukrainian].
22. Malitskyy, B. A. (2013). Neoliberalism and the crisis of innovative development of the economy. The formula of the crisis. Kyiv [in Russian].
23. Shnypko, O. S. (2009). Ukraine’s innovation default: economic and technological context. Kyiv  [in Ukrainian].
24. Petrushina, T. (2014). Social potential of innovative development of economy of Ukraine. Sociology: theory, methods, marketing, 4, 66 –93 [in Ukrainian].
25. Malitskyy, B. A. (2013). Social capital of science: assessment and ways of building up. Kyiv [in Russian].
26. Malitskyy, B., Popovich, A. (2016). Ukrainian science: where is the policy of "cutting back" leading to.
URL: http://gazeta.zn.ua/science/ukrainskaya-nauka-kuda-vedet-politika-urezaniya
(Last accessed: 08.03.2017) [in Russian].
27. How much does your country invest in R&D?
URL: http://uis.unesco.org/apps/visualisations/research-and-development-spending
(Last accessed:  09.01.2018). 
28. Popovich, A., Bulkin, I. (2015). So how do we deal with science?
URL: https://commons.com.ua/uk/neveselye-strochki/ (Last accessed:  07.03.2019).  [in Russian].
29. Yatskiv, Ya. (2016). A word about consolation and despair. Academician Yaroslav Yatskiv – about what can stop the degradation of science.
URL: https://day.kyiv.ua/uk/article/tema-dnya-cuspilstvo/slovo-pro-vtihu-ta-r...
(Last accessed: 08.03.2017). [in Ukrainian].
30. Grabovsky, S. (2015). Ukrainian Science: Publicans and Temples.  Day. 9th of December. [in Ukrainian].
31. Senenko, A. (2015). There are other cost items that can be saved. Day. 9th of December. [in Ukrainian].
32. Gingras, Yu. (2017). Sociology of science. Moscow [in Russian].
33. Bourdieu, P. (2004). Science of Science and Reflexivity. The University of Chicago and Polity Press. Printed in Great Britain.
34. Calhoun, K. (2006). Theories of modernization and globalization: who invented them and why.
URL:  http://www.inop.ru/files/calhoun.doc (Last accessed: 07.03.2019). [in Russian].
35. Sztompka, P. (1996). Sociology of social change. Moscow [in Russian].