МІЖНАРОДНІ ПРАКТИКИ ВЗАЄМОДІЇ ОРГАНІВ ПУБЛІЧНОЇ ВЛАДИ У СИСТЕМІ НАЦІОНАЛЬНОЇ БЕЗПЕКИ: КОМПАРАТИВНИЙ АНАЛІЗ
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The urgent need to improve national strategies for ensuring the resilience and adaptability of Ukraine's national security system in the conditions of full-scale Russian aggression and growing global challenges necessitates scientific research into effective foreign experience for its further implementation into domestic practice. In view of the above, the purpose of this article is to carry out a comparative analysis of international practices of interaction between public authorities in the national security system by systematizing the latter into established models, providing a detailed analysis of them, and determining prospects for their implementation in Ukraine. The author has examined three main models of interaction: centralized, decentralized, and mixed, each of which is considered from the perspective of its typological characteristics, functional advantages and disadvantages, as well as its impact on the efficiency of the national security system's functioning. In particular, it has been established that the centralized model is characterized by a rigid hierarchical structure and the dominance of a single power center. The decentralized model is based on the dispersal of powers and responsibilities among a plurality of bodies, which promotes the autonomy of subjects and their broad horizontal interaction. The mixed model synthesizes elements of the centralized and decentralized models, combining strategic coordination with operational flexibility. It is substantiated that in the conditions of hybrid warfare, it is the adaptability of the mixed model that allows for the most effective response to unpredictable threats while maintaining the strategic unity of public administration. Drawing on Canadian experience, emphasis is placed on the expediency of creating a Center of Excellence as a platform for knowledge exchange, professional development, and the joint search by specialized bodies for optimal solutions to counter modern complex threats to the national interests of Ukraine. The article also analyzes the risks of interagency fragmentation and proposes regulatory mechanisms for their minimization based on NATO standards. Additionally, the role of modern digital tools and secure communication channels is highlighted as the technical foundation for operational interaction between different links of the security and defense sector. The author also focuses on the need to strengthen adherence to the principle of publicity during the interaction of public authorities in the national security system by ensuring honest communication with society regarding successes and challenges, which is a guarantee of internal resilience and trust in wartime conditions. It is argued that government openness is a critical tool in the fight against disinformation and manipulations used by the enemy to destabilize the socio-political situation. It is concluded that the modernization of the interaction system is a necessary condition not only for the current resilience of the state but also for the successful post-war reconstruction and Euro-Atlantic integration of Ukraine.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,018 | 0,008 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».