COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF MANAGEMENT PRACTICES AIMED AT PREVENTING POPULISM IN PUBLIC POLICY

Abstract

The article offers a comparative analysis of governance practices aimed at preventing populism in public policy. The starting point of the study is the ideational approach that conceptualizes populism as a «thin-centered» ideology opposing the «pure people» to the «corrupt elite» and appealing to a unified «general will» of the people. It is demonstrated that contemporary research on populism focuses mainly on parties, leaders, and electoral dynamics, whereas institutional and administrative mechanisms for «immunizing» policy-making against populist distortions remain underexplored.

The aim of the article is to systematize and compare governance practices that reduce the vulnerability of public policy to populist radicalization, using the examples of Western European, Latin American, Central and Eastern European countries as well as Ukraine. The methodological framework combines institutional and governance approaches with the policy cycle perspective (agenda setting, policy formulation, decision-making, implementation, and evaluation). Methods of comparative analysis, document analysis, elements of neo-institutionalism, and public administration theory are employed.

The article proposes a typology of anti-populist governance practices along two dimensions: 1) stage of the policy cycle; 2) predominant logic of influence (transparency, participation, professionalization, accountability, strategic communication). On the basis of comparative analysis, it is shown that the most effective in constraining populism are combinations of procedural safeguards (independent fiscal councils, mandatory impact assessments, fiscal rules), inclusive yet structured citizen participation (participatory budgeting, deliberative mini-publics), professionalization of the civil service, and digitalization of decision-making processes.

The Ukrainian case is examined as an example of a partially consolidated democracy with a high level of social demand for justice and a strong tendency toward populist expectations. It is demonstrated that such instruments as e-government, open data, the public procurement system Prozorro, decentralization, and participatory practices at the local level create structural constraints for populism but do not eliminate the need for long-term institutionalization of anti-populist standards in public policy.