CC BY
17
UDC: 614.841
Andriyenko Nikolay Vasilievich,
Doctor of Sciences in Public Administration, Associate Professor, Head of the Center for Civil Protection, Ukrainian Research Institute of Civil Protection, 01011, Kyiv, Str. Rybal-ska 18, tel: (044) 280 18 01, e-mail: andnv@ ukr.net
ORCID: 0000-0002-3239-8936 Ашренко Микола Васильович,
доктор наук з державного управлтня, доцент, начальник центру заходiв цившьного захисту, Украгнський науково-дотдний тститут цившьного захисту, 01011, Кигв, вул. Рибальська 18, тел: (044) 280 18 01, e-mail: andnv@ukr.net
ORCID: 0000-0002-3239-8936 Андриенко Николай Васильевич, доктор наук по государственному управлению, доцент, начальник центра мероприятий гражданской защиты, Украинский научно-исследовательский институт гражданской защиты, 01011, Киев, ул. Ры-бальская 18, тел: (044) 280 18 01, e-mail: andnv@ukr.net
ORCID: 0000-0002-3239-8936
Hamann Peter Ilyich,
Doctor of Sciences in Public Administration, Associate Professor, Lead Researcher, Ukrainian Research Institute of Civil Protection, 01011, Kyiv, Str. Rybalska, 18, tel: (044) 280 18 01, e-mail:gaman_pi@ukr.net
ORCID: 0000-0002-3239-8936 Гаман Петро Iллiч,
доктор наук з державного управлтня, доцент, провiдний науковий ствробтник, Украгнський науково-дотдний тститут цившьного захисту, 01011, Кигв, вул. Рибальська, 18, тел: (044) 280 18 01, e-mail: gaman_pi@ukr.net
ORCID: 0000-0002-3239-8936
Гаман Петр Ильич,
доктор наук по государственному управлению, доцент, ведущий научный сотрудник, Украинский научно-исследовательский институт гражданской защиты, 01011, Киев, ул. Рыбальская, 18, тел: (044) 280 18 01, e-mail:gaman_pi@ukr.net
ORCID: 0000-0002-3239-8936 DOI https://doi.org/10.31618/vadnd.v1i12.79 54 -
ANALYSIS OF EXISTING METHODS iN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PUBLIC FIRE SECURITY MANAGEMENT
Abstract. The article analyzes the basic principles of the choice of methods for implementation of the mechanisms of state control of the field of fire safety. Considered the necessary factors to consider when choosing the principles. A detailed analysis of the SAST (Strategic Assumption Surfacing and Testing) and MAI (hierarchy analysis method) is carried out.
It is determined that the structural subdivision on the decision of the fire safety issues in the DSNC should choose those methods that should be used to effectively address the problem or solve the problem in the field of fire safety taking into account each stage of the decision-making process. Therefore, this structural unit on fire safety issues must formulate a document (program, plan, etc.), which will reflect the schedule and algorithm for solving the problem or solving the problem, and for each stage of the decision - the results of evaluation of its possible duration and method or set methods for each stage of the solution of the problem (solution of the problem).
It is noted that the methods previously selected for each stage of the solution of the problem in the field of fire safety, can not be considered a dogma. This is due, first of all, to a variety of changes in the external and internal environment of the field of fire safety, which occur or may occur over time. Taking into account such changes may lead to the replacement of the chosen method first for the appropriate stage of the solution of the problem or the solution of the problem to more effective, taking into account the conditions.
It is substantiated that replacing the method with the best in the solution of the problem in the field of fire safety or solving the problem requires the obligatory establishment of feedback, which can be used in a timely manner to identify a less effective method that was not considered to be so before the unforeseen changes or circumstances , for example, of the external environment: political events, military actions, rising energy costs, economic crisis, etc.
Keywords: fire safety, mechanisms and methods of public administration, approximation, antiterrorist operation, dynamic programming, "brainstorming", dogma, State Emergency Service.
АНАЛ1З 1СНУЮЧИХ МЕТОД1В ПРИ ЗД1ЙСНЕНН1 ДЕРЖАВНОГО УПРАВЛ1ННЯ СФЕРОЮ ПОЖЕЖНО1 БЕЗПЕКИ
Анотащя. У статт дослвджено основш принципи вибору методiв для здшснення MexaHi3MiB державного управлшня сферою пожежно! безпеки. Розглянуто необхщш фактори, як слщ враховувати при виборi принцитв. Детально проаналiзовано методи SAST (Strategic Assumption Surfacing and Testing) та МА1 (метод аналiзу ieрархii).
Визначено, що структурний шдроздш з виршення питань пожежно! безпеки у ДСНС мае обирати т методи, якi доцiльно використовувати для ефективного виршення поставленого завдання чи розв'язання проблеми у сферi пожежно! безпеки iз урахуванням кожного етапу формування ршен-ня. Таким чином, цей структурний шдроздш з питань пожежно! безпеки мае сформувати документ (програму, план тощо), в якому будуть вщобра-жеш графш i алгоритм виршення завдання чи розв'язання проблеми, а для кожного етапу виршення - результати оцшки його можливо! тривалосп та метод чи набiр методiв для кожного етапу вирiшення завдання (розв'язання проблеми).
При цьому зазначено, що методи, рашше ввдбраш для кожного етапу виршення завдання у сферi пожежно! безпеки, не можна вважати догмою. Це обумовлено, у першу чергу, рiзноманiтними змшами зовнiшнього й внутршнього середовища сфери пожежно! безпеки, що вщбуваються чи можуть вщбуватися з часом. Врахування таких змш може призвести до замiни обраного спочатку методу для вщповщного етапу виршення завдання чи розв'язання проблеми на ефектившший iз урахуванням умов, що склалися.
Обгрунтовано, що замiна методу на кращий пiд час розв'язання проблеми щодо пожежно! безпеки чи виршення завдання вимагае обов'язкового встановлення зворотного зв'язку, завдяки якому можна своечасно виявляти менш ефективний метод, що не вважався таким до моменту появи неперед-бачених змш чи обставин, наприклад, складових зовшшнього середовища: пол^ичш поди, вiйськовi дп, зростання вартостi енергоресурсiв, економiч-на криза тощо.
K^40Bi слова: пожежна безпека, механiзми та методи державного управ-лiння, апроксимащя, антитерористична операцiя, динамiчне програмуван-ня, "мозковий штурм", догма, Державна служба надзвичайних ситуацш.
АНАЛИЗ СУЩЕСТВУЮЩИХ МЕТОДОВ ПРИ ОСУЩЕСТВЛЕНИИ ГОСУДАРСТВЕННОГО УПРАВЛЕНИЯ В СФЕРЕ ПОЖАРНОЙ БЕЗОПАСНОСТИ
Аннотация. В статье исследованы основные принципы выбора методов для осуществления механизмов государственного управления сферой пожарной безопасности. Рассмотрены необходимые факторы, которые следует учитывать при выборе принципов. Осуществлен подробный анализ методов SAST (Strategic Assumption Surfacing and Testing) и МАИ (метод анализа иерархии).
Определено, что структурное подразделение по решению вопросов пожарной безопасности в ГСЧС должно выбирать те методы, которые целесообразно использовать для эффективного решения поставленной задачи или решения проблемы в сфере пожарной безопасности с учетом каждого этапа формирования решения. Таким образом, это структурное подразделение по вопросам пожарной безопасности должно сформировать документ (программу, план и т. п.), в котором будут отражены график и алгоритм решения
задачи или решения проблемы, а для каждого этапа решения — результаты оценки его возможной продолжительности и метод или набор методов для каждого этапа решения задачи (решение проблемы).
При этом отмечено, что методы, ранее отобранные для каждого этапа решения задачи в сфере пожарной безопасности, нельзя считать догмой. Это обусловлено, в первую очередь, различными изменениями внешней и внутренней среды сферы пожарной безопасности, что происходят или могут происходить со временем. Учет таких изменений может привести к замене выбранного сначала метода для соответствующего этапа решения задачи или решения проблемы на более эффективный с учетом сложившихся.
Обосновано, что замена метода на лучший при решении проблемы в сфере пожарной безопасности или решения задачи требует обязательного установления обратной связи, благодаря которому можно своевременно выявлять менее эффективный метод, который не считался до момента появления непредвиденных изменений или обстоятельств, например, составляющих внешней среды: политические события, военные действия, рост стоимости энергоресурсов, экономический кризис и т. п.
Ключевые слова: пожарная безопасность, механизмы и методы государственного управления, аппроксимация, антитеррористическая операция, динамическое программирование, "мозговой штурм", догма, Государственная служба чрезвычайных ситуаций.
Problem statement. Implementation of organizational and legal forms and mechanisms of public administration in general, including the sphere of fire safety in Ukraine, as a rule, depend not only on the totality of management technologies, but also on the chosen configuration of methods, the use of which allows the state authorities to carry out management activities, realizing measures on regulating, organizing and coordinating influences on all components of the field of fire safety and social relations by developing, adopting and implementing the most effective management solutions.
In our opinion, the scientific approach to the definition of the totality (set) of methods in the implementation of the mechanisms of state control of the field of fire safety and their possible
configuration should be an approach based on the substantiation of a set of principles, the use of which will make such a selection objective and aimed at achieving the set goal.
Analysis of recent researches and publications. The attention of domestic and foreign scientists and specialists was emphasized on this issue: V. B. Averianov, O. S. Anisimov, H. V. Atama-nchuk, O. M. Bandurka, and Yu. P. By-tiak, M. P. Handziuk, V. A. Domanskyi, V. Ts. Zhydetskyi, N. M. Meltiukhova, H. Ponomarenko, H. P. Sytnyk, Yu. H. Uchitiel, T. O. Shcherba and others.
At the same time, the results of a study of the available source base allow to suggest that the question of the choice of methods for the implementation of public administration mecha-
nisms in various spheres of human activity remains rather problematic as a result of the fact that the considerable attention of specialists and scientists of the given theme pay more attention to the issues, related to the conditions for the application of specific management methods, the classification of available management methods and management decision-making methods.
Formulating the goals of the article. The purpose of the article is to analyse the existing methods in the implementation of state control of the field of fire safety.
Presentation of the main material. Formulating a particular set or set of required methods, public administration bodies in this way should choose the best way to solve a problem or solve a problem that arises or may occur at any stage when implementing the mechanisms of state control of the field of fire safety.
Due to the above, we substantiate the composition of the principles, the use of which will ensure the creation of conditions for the formation of the necessary set of methods for the implementation of the mechanisms of public administration in the field of fire safety. The importance of such an approach is also due to the fact that there are a significant number of methods used in both the theory of organizational management and management, and public administration in particular.
In addition, public authorities in the field of fire safety, having a specific problem or a specific issue (task), as well as a set of combinations or sets of possible methods, need to be determined with the combination of methods that can be used for the conditions that have developed (compiled) the best results. The
presence of the existing set of methods for the implementation of public administration mechanisms should be the basis for further selection of them and use in solving existing (set) tasks at the appropriate stages of the management process within the scope of fire safety. At the same time, the need for the most effective solution requires the selection and specification of methodical tools that are best suited for solving a specific problem or solving a problem [5].
The Ukrainian experience of management activity in the field of fire safety shows, there may also be a temporary limitation, the essence of which is that a large number of tasks (problems) can appear at the same time in the system of state control of the field of fire safety, which, in turn, will require prompt solution (solution): forest fire; a fire at a large enterprise; a fire in a residential or administrative building, etc. Such a situation may force the management of the State Emergency Service (SES) to resort to the use of such methods, which require the use of a minimum of time due to the shortage of time available. The best evidence of this can be considered to be the extinguishing of numerous fires that arose simultaneously at various objects in the context of hostilities during the anti-terrorist operation on the territory of the south-eastern region of our country in residential and administrative buildings, factory shops, hospitals, real markets, etc.
Specialists of public administration should also note which methods and solutions to which problems or solutions to which tasks in the field of fire safety have already been used. This will make it possible, on the basis of the data and experience, to assess the quality of the
methods used, as well as to conclude that the applied methods have been effective in solving similar problems or solving problems in the field of fire safety. The application of this approach is aimed at creating a knowledge base in the State Emergency Service (SES), where the necessary information on tasks (problems) and methods of their solution will be accumulated [10]. This, according to our opinion, will allow public authorities in the field of fire safety more effectively to carry out their activities. Summing up, it is necessary to emphasize that it is advisable to pay attention to a set of principles (see Figure 1).
The determination of a set of principles for choosing methods for implementing public security fire safety control mechanisms may be considered
necessary but not a sufficient condition for such a choice. First of all, it is necessary to determine the strategy and mechanism for the selection of methods for the implementation of state control of the field of fire safety.
It is advisable to consider each of the existing methods in more detail. One of these principles should be the well-known principle of 'practical applicability of the method. According to this principle, the methods used to formulate management decisions in the field of fire safety can only be effective if the conditions are created or when conditions are created, and the possibility of their application may naturally be limited by various constraints.
Another principle of the choice of methods for the implementation of
Fig. 1. Principles of the choice of methods for implementation of the mechanisms of state control of the field of fire safety
Source: compiled by the author
state control mechanisms in the field of fire safety is the principle of 'the cost of applying the method'. According to its content, the cost of finding the best solution to a problem or solution to a problem must always be less than the cost of the result (output) resulting from the application of a particular method or a number of methods. Indeed, in order to obtain such a comparative assessment, it is necessary to have a clear idea of how the cost of using the method(s) and its (their) effectiveness. Despite the fact that, probably, a fairly accurate estimate of the date is sometimes quite difficult, and reasonable limits for its possible values can be established at the same time almost always [1].
Another principle that needs to be taken into account is the principle of 'effectiveness of the solution found'. If, due to the choice and application of the selected set of methods for the implementation of public management mechanisms, the final result gives a better solution to the problem or the solution of the problem in the field of fire safety, then this set of methods can be considered as meeting the requirements.
Under conditions, if the decision of the problem or solution of the problem will require the authorities of the sphere of fire safety to carry out significant costs, then, with even a slight increase in the accuracy of the results and obtaining a significant positive effect, this, in our opinion, must be sure to do, especially in conditions where large groups of human masses take place.
As experience shows, in general, we have to be satisfied, as a rule, with rational decisions, since with increasing accuracy of the solution the cost of the necessary for this method can grow
faster than any benefits that we can be expected or foreseen in the field of fire safety. If significant efforts are required to achieve a small increase in the level of efficiency of the decision, then the overall effect of such a method of implementation of the mechanisms of public administration will be rather insignificant. It is clear that under such conditions, it is not necessary to risk higher costs for minor (minor) improvements only [13].
An important principle, which, according to our belief, must be taken into account when choosing methods, is the principle of 'authenticity of the method'. It is known that the level of authenticity of a particular method requires a mandatory answer to the question of what errors are permissible in solving to a problem or solving of a problem. When applying any method, it is necessary not only can to analyse what the expected effect is, nor how reliable this estimation is, and what the limits of its error be predicted. Some methods give a fairly high reliability of the results, and a specialist in the structure of the state control body in the field of fire safety, solving the problem (solving the problem), must be sure that the obtained values of estimates and actual values will almost coincide.
Thus, if a specialist in public administration is to deal with the assessment of potential gains or losses in the field of fire safety, the best approach should be considered to be the selection of a set of methods, the application of which will ensure the most reliable estimate of expected achievements.
Another principle of the choice of methods should be considered the principle of 'stability of the solution'. Stability of the solution in applying one or
another method, as a rule, is characterized by the direct duration of the use of this solution. If it is considered that the management decision will be used regularly in the field of fire safety and for a relatively long time, then, as a rule, it is standardized [8].
When choosing the stability of a solution it is necessary to take into account changes in the structure of interconnections between the factors of the external or internal environment of the fire safety sphere, which may require modification of management decisions over time. In such cases, in our opinion, a thorough try out managerial decision may prove to be unnecessary, because for the time, when will the decision, a situation for which it was intended, could change, and management solutions for the development of which is spent significant human and material resources would not have at that time. Therefore, in the presence of a fairly dynamic situation, satisfactory will be considered and gross approximation.
The following principle, which, according to our belief, requires us to take into account when selecting methods for the implementation of the mechanisms of state control of the field of fire safety, is the principle of 'balance of methods', the application of which makes it compulsory to use mutually compatible methods for each of the stages of the formation of a management decision [11].
The mechanism for forming a managerial decision should always be considered in general, taking into account all interconnections, due to how effectively one or another method can be applied at the appropriate stage of this mechanism. For example, if use primitive
methods for collecting data on changes in factors of its external or internal environment at the stage of detecting a problem in the field of fire safety, then it makes no sense at a later stage to use more complex methods of regression or correlation analysis. It should be borne in mind that the quality of management decisions is conditioned, first of all, the least effective stage in the process of forming such a solution.
One of the important principles of the choice of methods is proposed to consider the well-known principle of 'the necessity of method'. The essence of this principle is that the methods must be chosen in the light of those problems that require the adoption of a management decision, and not only based on the capabilities of leaders or managers. The presence or absence of, for example, leaders: the director of the department, the head of the department, the head of the department, etc., the experience of using managerial methodological tools or management art should not be considered by the leadership of the State Emergency Service (SES) as a determining criterion for choosing the best available techniques or refusing them. Under conditions, if leaders (managers) are not well trained, it is necessary to provide for special professional programs for their training or advanced training [2].
It is also important to consider that the selection of methods requires the adequate completeness of their set for solving problems or solving problems (tasks) in the field of fire safety. Taking into account the well-known principle of 'external additions', we must pay attention to the fact that completeness is relative and depends, as a rule, on the
* 5
The content and significance of the consequences of the existing (existing) problem, the solution of which is carried out in the field of fire safety
The degree of availability of necessary data, possible time costs for leaders (managers) to solve the problem
The degree of automation of management procedures for the development and decision making
Permissible risks
Existing restrictions
Fig. 2. Necessary factors to consider when choosing a principle
Source: compiled by the author
results of various studies carried out both in this direction and in the direction of public administration as a the length of practical experience and the effectiveness of the use of methods, as well as the achievements of scientific and technological progress. In this case, it makes sense to emphasize the possibility of forming a quasi-complete set of methods for implementing mechanisms of public administration in the field of fire safety. This is due to the fact that over time, within the limits of scientific and technological progress, the best known method for the solution of one or another task (issue) may appear [9].
The main idea of the strategy, as such, was rightly pointed out by Yu. H. Uchitiel [12], who believed that it was to develop rules in accordance with which appropriate actions applied. On similar positions are H. Kunz and S. O. Donnel, understanding the strategy of the general program of actions. Thus, the definition of a strategy in our case involves finding a set of rules for the application of the set of above
defined principles of the choice of methods that should be guided by public authorities in the implementation of the mechanisms of state control of the field of fire safety in order to ensure the achievement of goals.
For example, to ensure that the management's decision in the field of fire safety is sufficiently high, one will have to agree with the higher costs of resources (informational, financial, material, etc.) for obtaining such solution. At the same time, the requirements of practical applicability and balance of methods must be fulfilled before other principles are considered. This can be explained by the fact that these requirements are actually limited to other principles. In doing so, you need to take into account many different factors (Figure 2). Thus, ensuring applicability and balance must be considered a prerequisite for the transition to the consideration of the other six principles [6].
Moreover, over time, in the process of developing and adopting a management decision, the relative signifi-
cance (weight) of these factors with the change in the initial conditions may change. For example, initially, a simplified set of methods for the implementation of state control mechanisms for fire safety may be selected by the State Emergency Service (SES) leadership, and as a result of the deterioration of the situation and the aggravation of the problem (for example, the growth of the dynamics of fire spread by increasing the wind speed during the forest fire, the fire in the commodity market, fires at an industrial plant with the possibility of man-made danger), when the importance of obtaining a positive result can increase significantly, the requirement may become super-important ensuring the authenticity of the expected result (dynamics of fire suppression, the rate of release of hazardous premises from people, etc.).
Based on this, we can confidently conclude that there is no universal strategy for choosing methods to implement the mechanisms of state control of the field of fire safety on the basis of a well-founded set of principles. At the same time, it should be emphasized that the use of expert methods can allow finding a pleasant strategy for choosing methods from existing ones based on the proposed set of eight principles.
One such method is, for example, the known Delphi method, the essence of which is to establish expert judgments on the conditions of anonymity of experts and their physical separation, as well as the presence of a controlled feedback. Ensuring the maintenance of anonymity and physical separation is due to the need to avoid some potential 'traps' of group decision-making. In this case, the purpose of the feedback is to enable
each expert to become familiar with the averted opinion of other experts [3].
Along with the positive sides, this method has some disadvantages. The first should be attributed to the fact that the physical separation of experts virtually eliminates the emergence of new approaches to solving a problem or solving a problem that can be developed and tested in the process of possible discussions, for example, by 'brainstorm-ing'. Another disadvantage is related to the method of creating questionnaires, which is used to directly jury of opinion. Under conditions, if the questionnaires are not built up objectively, then the expert opinions based on the results of the answers to the questions will also not meet the requirements of objectivity, because the conclusions are determined only by the questions asked.
One of the best-known expert methods to make choices is the SAST (Strategic Assumption Surfacing and Testing) method, which is based on the previous so-called 'grinding' assumptions (eliminating contradictions) that are used later in solving problems and their ranking. The method is well adapted to the analysis of weakly structured problem tasks, in which the decision-making is based on a sharply conflicting time-and-time assumption. However, it requires the involvement of a professional arbiter who has a good command of the art of interpersonal dialogue, and is also experienced in the theory of group dynamics. Otherwise, the use of the SAST method may be ineffective. Moreover, the use of the method requires the involvement of a large number of experienced experts [7].
An important and most practical, in our opinion, can be considered an ex-
pert method of choice as the hierarchy analysis method, hereinafter referred to as the HAM. The essence of this method is the decomposition of the problem of evaluation and selection on simple components, and then further processing of the matrix algebra of the sequence of judgments of experts, which carry out the evaluation in pairwise comparisons, starting from the original elements and passing to the top from level to level, until it is received final assessment of the decision of the problem of assessment and choice.
Unlike the Delphi method, the HAM creates conditions for maintaining group interaction and discussion. Thus, there are new and important knowledge in the process of studying the assumptions underlying the individual decisions. The rationality of this approach is also confirmed by the experience of conducting business games in the period of the USSR. In case of divergence of judgments, the HAM does not impose an artificial consensus, because it does not exclude it, but takes into account the ideas that fall out of the general channel in calculations (the value of the magnitude of the inconsistency assumed).
A comparison of the HAM with the SAST leads to the conclusion that they are similar at the stage of structuring the problem to be solved. This does not require a well-prepared coordinator, as well as a real manifestation of the possibility of failure to solve the problem due to changes, for example, the psychological environment in the expert environment [4].
Thus, from the analysis we can conclude that the hierarchy analysis method (HAM) should be considered
the most acceptable expert method, the possibilities of which should be used for the selection of methods for the implementation of state control of the field of fire safety on the basis of the eight proposed principles of such choice.
Conclusions. Implementation of the strategy involves the need to specify the mechanism of choosing a method. There are several possibilities for directly organizing a mechanism for selecting methods. This can be done, for example, with the help of a structural subdivision or a subsystem that provides a fire safety issue to the State Emergency Service (SES), the immediate middle manager (director of the department, head of the State Emergency Service (SES), or this leader along with the unit or within the subsystem. Consider an option with a structural subdivision.
The structural subdivision on the issues of fire safety in the State Emergency Service (SES), taking into account the above principles, should choose the methods that should be used to effectively address the problem or solve the problem in the field of fire safety, taking into account each stage of the decision-making process. Therefore, this structural unit on fire safety issues must formulate a document (program, plan, etc.), which will reflect the schedule and algorithm for solving the problem or solving the problem, and for each stage of the decision as the results of evaluation of its possible duration and method or set methods for each stage of the solution of the problem (solution of the problem).
It should be noted that the methods previously selected for each stage of the solution of the problem in the field of fire safety, cannot be considered a dog-
ma. This is due, first of all, to a variety of changes in the external and internal environment of the field of fire safety, which occur or may occur over time. Taking into account such changes may lead to the replacement of the chosen method first for the appropriate stage of the solution of the problem or the solution of the problem to more effective, taking into account the conditions prevailing.
Replacing the method at the best when solving a fire safety problem or solving a problem requires a mandatory feedback, which allows you to identify in a timely manner a less efficient method that was not considered to be so before the unforeseen changes or circumstances, for example, constituent of the environment: political events, military actions, rising energy costs, and economic crisis, etc.
If such an approach to choosing methods to implement public administration mechanisms is not implemented in the system of public administration in the field of fire safety in Ukraine, it is rather doubtful that the leadership of the State Emergency Service (SES) will receive effective results in the field of fire safety and will be able to effectively implement the control function.
Detailing the toolboxes of the mechanisms of state control of the field of fire safety in solving problems or solving problems in the field of fire safety requires the study of procedural aspects of the mechanisms of public administration in this field.
references -
1. Bytiak Yu. P. (2005). Administratyvne pravo Ukrainy: [Administrative Law
of Ukraine], Kyiv: Yurinkom Inter. Retrieved from http://ebk.net.ua/Book/ law/bityak_admpu/zmist.htm [in Ukrainian].
2. Ponomarenko H. (2007). Pozhezhna bezpeka yak element vnutrishnoi bez-peky derzhavy: poniattia ta system za-khodiv zabezpechennia [Fire safety as an element of internal security of the state: concepts and systems of measures of protection]. Visnyk Kyivsko-ho natsionalnoho universytetu imeni Tarasa Shevchenka. Yury-dychni nauky — Bulletin of the Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. Law Sciences, 74-76, 47-50 [in Ukrainian].
3. Averianov V. B. (2003). Derzhavne up-ravlinnia: problemy administratyvno-pravovoi teorii ta praktyky [Public administration: problems of administrative-legal theory and practice]. Kyiv: Fakt [in Ukrainian].
4. Shcherba T. O, Pasynchuk, K. M. (2010). Mistse ta rol derzhavnoho upravlinnia u systemi zabezpechennia pozhezhnoi bezpeky [The place and role of public administration in the fire safety system]. Pozhezhna bezpeka: te-oriia i praktyka — Fire safety: theory and practice, 6, 119-124 [in Ukrainian].
5. Zhydetskyi V. I. (2014). Osnovy okhorony pratsi [Basics of labor protection]. (5th ed.). Kyiv: Znannia [in Ukrainian].
6. Sytnyk H. P. (2004). Derzhavne up-ravlinnia natsionalnoiu bezpekoiu Ukrainy [State Administration of National Security of Ukraine]. Kyiv: Vyd-vo NADU [in Ukrainian].
7. Anisimov O. S. (2006). Vysshie formy professionalizma gosudarstvennogo myshleniya [Higher forms of professionalism in state thinking]. Moscow: IPK Gossluzhby [in Russian].
8. Meltiukhova N. M. (2009). Zakony ta pryntsypy derzhavnoho upravlin-nia [Laws and Principles of Public
Administration]. Aktualni problemy derzhavnoho upravlinnia — Current problems of public administration, 1(35). Retrieved from http:// www.nbuv.gov.ua/portal/Soc_Gum/ Apdu/2009_1/ [in Ukrainian].
9. Uchitel Yu. G., Ternovoy A. I., Ter-novoy K. I. (2007). Razrabotka uprav-lencheskogo resheniya [Development of management decision]. (2nd ed.). Moscow: YuNITI-DANA [in Russian].
10. Handziuk M. P., Zhalibo Ye. P., Khali-movskyi M. O. (2010). Osnovy okhoro-ny pratsi [Basics of labor protection]. M. P. Hanzhziuk (Ed.). (5th ed.). Kyiv: Karavela [in Ukrainian].
11. Atamanchuk G. V. (2005). Teoriya go-sudarstvennogo upravleniya [Theory of public administration]. (3rd ed.). Moscow: OMEGA-L [in Russian].
12. Domanskyi V. A. (2004). Derzhavne upravlinnia pozhezhnoiu bezpekoiu Ukrainy (orhanizatsiino-pravovyi analiz za materialamy diialnosti Derzhavnoho departamentu pozhezh-noi bezpeky) [State management of fire safety of Ukraine (organizational and legal analysis on the materials of the activity of the State Department of Fire Safety)]. Candidate's thesis. Kyiv [in Ukrainian].
13. Bandurka O. M. (1998). Osnovy up-ravlinnia v orhanakh vnutrishnikh sprav Ukrainy: teoriia, dosvid, shlia-khy udoskonalennia [Fundamentals of Management in the Internal Affairs Institutions of Ukraine: Theory, Experience, Ways of Improvement]. Kharkiv: University of Internal Affairs [in Ukrainian].
список використаних джерел -
1. Битяк Ю. П. Aдмiнiстративне право Украши: шдручник [Електронний ресурс] / Ю. П. Битяк. — К.: Юрш-ком 1нтер, 2005. — Режим доступу
до док.: http://ebk.net.ua/Book/law/ bityak_admpu/zmist.htm
2. Пономаренко Г. Пожежна безпека як елемент внутршньо! безпеки дер-жави: поняття та систем заходiв за-безпечення [Електронний ресурс] / Г. Пономаренко. — Режим доступу: http://www.VuzLib.com
3. Авер'яновВ. Б. Державне управлшня: проблеми адмшютративно-правово! теори та практики / В. Б. Авер'янов. — К.: Факт, 2003. — 384 с.
4. Щерба Т. О. Мкце та роль державного управлшня у системi забезпечен-ня пожежно! безпеки / Т. О. Щерба, К. М. Пасинчук // Пожежна безпека: теорiя i практика. — 2010. -№ 6. — С. 119-124.
5. Жидецький В. Ц. Основи охорони пращ: шдручник / В. I. Жидецький. — 5-те вид. допов. — К.: Знання, 2014. — 378 с.
6. Ситник Г. П. Державне управлшня нащональною безпекою Украши: монографiя / Г. П. Ситник. — К.: Вид-во НАДУ, 2004. — 408 с.
7. Анисимов О. С. Высшие формы профессионализма государственного мышления / О. С. Анисимов. — М.: ИПК Госслужбы, 2006. — 774 с.
8. Мельтюхова Н. М. Закони та прин-ципи державного управлшня [Електронний ресурс] / Н. М. Мельтюхова // Актуальш проблеми державного управлшня. — 2009. — № 1 (35). — Режим доступу: http://www. nbuv.gov.ua/portal/Soc_Gum/ Apdu/2009_1/
9. УчительЮ.Г. Разработка управленческого решения / Ю. Г. Учитель, А. И. Терновой, К. И. Терновой. — 2-е изд. — М.: ЮНИТИ-ДАНА, 2007. — 383 с.
10. Гандзюк М. П. Основи охорони пращ: шдручник / М. П. Гандзюк, 6. П. Жалiбо, М. О. Халiмовський; за ред. М. П. Ганжзюка. — 5-те вид. — К.: Каравела, 2010. — 324 с.
11. Атаманчук Г. В. Теория государственного управления: курс лекций / Г. В. Атаманчук. — [3-е изд., доп.]. — М.: Изд-во ОМЕГА-Л, 2005. — 584 с.
12. Доманський В. А. Державне управ-лшня пожежною безпекою Укра!ни (оргашзацшно-правовий аналiз за матерiалами дiяльностi Державного департаменту пожежно! безпе-
ки): дис. ... канд. юрид. наук: спец. 12.00.07 / В. А. Доманський. — К., 2004. — 258 с.
13. Бандурка О. М. Основи управлшня в органах внутршшх справ Укра!-ни: теорiя, досвiд, шляхи удоскона-лення: пiдручник / О. М. Бандурка. — Харюв: Ун-т внутр. справ, 1998. — 480 с.
