CC BY
67Бюллетень науки и практики /Bulletin of Science and Practice Т. 5. №4. 2019
https://www.bulletennauki.com DOI: 10.33619/2414-2948/41
ЭКОНОМИЧЕСКИЕ НАУКИ/ECONOMIC SCIENCES
JEL classification: H10, J58, P35, Z13 https://doi.org/10.33619/2414-2948/41/37
UDC 338.2(476)+316.42(476)
THE ESSENCE AND CONTENT OF SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC SECURITY
©Shvaiba D., ORCID: 0000-0001-6783-9765, Ph.D., Belarusian Trade Union of workers of chemical, mining and oil industries, Belarusian National Technical University,
Minsk, Belarus, shvabia@tut.by
СУЩНОСТЬ И СОДЕРЖАНИЕ СОЦИАЛЬНО-ЭКОНОМИЧЕСКОЙ БЕЗОПАСНОСТИ
©Швайба Д. Н., ORCID: 0000-0001-6783-9765, канд. экон. наук, Белорусский профсоюз работников химической, горной и нефтяной отраслей промышленности, Белорусский национальный технический университет, г. Минск, Беларусь, shvabia@tut.by
Abstract. Security is considered as a phenomenon that characterizes the essence of the state in which the object (its unity, development and existence) is not threatened by anyone and anything. The term 'does not threaten' refers to the inaccessibility of criteria, messages or direct influence that have the probability to destroy, disrupt or otherwise affect the unity of the object (social structure), or to complicate the circumstances of its existence, formation, etc., or to remove these circumstances and messages. In addition, security is implemented in all forms, depending on the types of social entities (individual, family, community, professional community, party, Association, government, country, nation, civilization, interstate associations, etc.), and, in addition, within the framework of those areas of social relations, in which the main interests of society are realized: financial, economic, political, environmental, humanitarian, information, military, etc. When considering the relationship between security in General and state protection in particular with the impact of the country, it is necessary to separate the definitions of 'security' and 'security protection'. Scientists often do not see differences between the concepts of state security and state security. In particular, V. Serebryannikov highlights the definition of security as "the activities of people, companies, country, global community for the identification (study), the prevention, weakening, destruction (dissolution) and the reflection of the threats and dangers that can destroy them to deny basic material and spiritual values, to inflict unacceptable (unacceptable subjectively and objectively) the harm to block the road to modern development". There is not only a substitution of definitions of 'security' and 'security protection', but this approach leads to the following: in the development of a system of criteria of state security or its elements (socioeconomic security, for example) it introduces aspects such as the gross national product, the degree and quality of life, the rate of inflation, the rate of employment, the lack of budgetary funds, etc.so it is about indicators to achieve which is aimed at the financial and economic policy of the country. So, these characteristics depict the effectiveness of the work to ensure protectedness but do not represent a complete picture of the level of protectedness.
Аннотация. Безопасность рассматривается как явление, характеризующее сущность состояния, при котором объекту (его единству, развитию и существованию) не грозит кто-нибудь и что-нибудь. Под термином «не грозит» понимается недоступность критериев,
Бюллетень науки и практики /Bulletin of Science and Practice Т. 5. №4. 2019
https://www.bulletennauki.com DOI: 10.33619/2414-2948/41
посылов или же прямого влияния, которые имеют вероятность истребить, нарушить или же воздействовать другим образом на единство объекта (социальной структуры), или же затруднить обстоятельства его существования, становления и пр., или же убрать эти обстоятельства и посылы. Кроме этого, безопасность реализуется во всевозможных формах, что находится в зависимости от разновидностей общественных образований (личность, семья, община, профессиональное сообщество, партия, объединение, правительство, страна, нация, цивилизация, межгосударственные объединения и пр.), и, кроме этого в рамках тех сфер общественных отношений, в коих реализуются основные интересы социума: финансово-экономической, политической, экологической, гуманитарной, информационной, военной и т. д. Рассматривая вопрос о соотношении безопасности в общем и государственной защищенности в частности с воздействием страны, необходимо размежевать определения «безопасность» и «обеспечение безопасности». Ученые нередко не видят различий между понятиями государственной безопасности и обеспечивания государственной безопасности. В частности, В. Серебрянников выделяет определение безопасности как «деятельности людей, общества, страны, глобального сообщества по выявлению (изучению), предупреждению, ослаблению, уничтожению (ликвидации) и отражению угроз и опасностей, способных уничтожить их, лишить базовых вещественных и духовных ценностей, нанести неприемлемый (недопустимый субъективно и объективно) вред, заблокировать дорога для современного развития». Имеет место не только подмена определений «безопасность» и «обеспечение безопасности», но этот подход приводит к нижеследующему: при разработке системы критериев государственной безопасности или же ее элементов (социально-экономическая безопасность, например) в нее вводятся такие аспекты, как валовый нацпродукт, степень и качество жизни, темпы инфляции, норма трудоустроенности, недостаток бюджетных средств и пр. Т. о. речь идет о показателях, на достижение коих нацелена финансово-экономическая политика страны. Значит эти характеристики обрисовывают эффективность работы по обеспечиванию защищенности, но не представляют целостной картины об уровне защищенности.
Keywords: socio-economic protectedness, government, society, enterprise, employee, threat, protectedness, interests, economics, analysis, system.
Ключевые слова: социально-экономическая защищенность, государство, общество, предприятие, работник; угроза, защищенность, интересы, экономика, анализ, система.
Having begun to study the essence of socio-economic security in the system of protection of the state, it is important to study the concept of 'security'.
Scientists focused their attention on security as one of the most important needs of a person, society and the state in different historical periods. So, for example, Aristotle believed that the main aspect of the management of social Affairs is considered to ensure the protection of people. The Dutch philosopher B. Spinoza was allocated the task of the civil state of society through the protection of the life of society [1, p. 7].
Following the dictionary of Rubber, the concept of 'security' began to be applied with 1190, where it had a sense of rhythm, the equilibrium of the human spirit, considered himself sheltered from any threat [2, p. 9]. This definition shows the initial reference of the definition of 'security' to the interest of the person, his social needs.
Lexically, the term 'security' is used as an antithesis of threat. In the Explanatory dictionary of the Great Russian language V. Dal 'security' is explained as 'no threats, safety, reliability'. A
Бюллетень науки и практики / Bulletin of Science and Practice Т. 5. №4. 2019
https://www.bulletennauki.com DOI: 10.33619/2414-2948/41
number of scientists presented the definition of 'no threats' complement thesis 'a situation in which someone or something is not in danger' [3, p. 81].
During the long period of the study, the interpretation of security has broadened and had a sense of the state of the environment of peace, which is likely the result of unavailability of a real threat (physical or moral), as well as physical, financial, economic, political, and social conditions of the institutions responsible for providing the current situation as favorable [4, p. 33; 5, p. 71].
Almost not so long ago, this definition took place only in the technological sphere to ensure the safety of work, work in the industrial sector, road traffic. But and process the security definition takes the base of the Foundation in which the manufacture in the first position should be to ensure the security of the subject, at the same time revealed to the public the meaning of the definition of 'security'. As a consequence, a more extensive definition of security as the security of the subject of the social system from the situations (threats) that have all the chances to destroy or destroy its unity should be based on the study and forecast of its public data, i.e. from the point of view of human and social activity, the formation of the public sphere that meets human needs.
It is possible to recognize with a sufficient degree of accuracy that the definition as a scientific category, the concept of 'security' acquired in the early XX century, due to the abundance of crisis situations, in which there were national and global economies. In 1904, the President of the United States, T. Roosevelt, formed the Committee on economic security, as he realized the absolute need for state regulation of the economy. He was forced to renounce the then entrenched practice of non-interference in the economy. This precedent was the first step of the traditional capitalist state to the system solution of social and economic problems of people in connection with the need to save the socio-economic security of the country.
With the filing of T. Roosevelt in the scientific lexicon was introduced the term 'national security', which supplemented and expanded the concept of 'security', provided an opportunity to consider the position of the social structure of the state, society and the individual through the prism of their personal interests. Later, the term 'national security' became the subject of close interest of a number of scientists. It is believed that an important theoretical contribution to the study of this definition was made by the American scientist G. Morgenthau. According to his proposal, it is necessary to analyze and investigate this issue taking into account the state interests, which presented an opportunity to combine national security with the interests of society and the country as a whole. In the case, if the source line of research is the issue of national security Zelek were analyzed as a problem of providing military security, the conclusions H. Morgenthau presented the opportunity to complement it the essence of all current interests of the state, of society, of the economic entity and of the person. The socialization of the presented definition was formed, which determined the promises of the origin of socio-economic security.
At the same time, today, most necessary for the decision of tasks of socio-economic security and the choice of directions in the twenty-first century are the ideas of the native of Belarus, Nobel laureate, well-known researcher S. Kuznets, "modern economic growth requires taking steps in dealing with incipient conflicts continuously generated by changes in the economy and social structure" [6, p. 98]. In this thought, as we see it, two things are important: the first conflicts — an immanent share of modern financial, economic and social growth, and secondly, changes in the social structure, where financial and economic changes play such a huge role, are considered the leading socio-economic problem of the international economy today. This position in the modern mainstream adheres to the main mass of researchers. In his own Nobel lecture with. Kuznets forms a significant conclusion: "the Continuity of technological innovation characteristics of modern economic growth and social innovation, facilitating the necessary adaptation, is the most important factor affecting the economic and social structure". Considering the problem of socio-economic
Бюллетень науки и практики / Bulletin of Science and Practice Т. 5. №4. 2019
https://www.bulletennauki.com DOI: 10.33619/2414-2948/41
security, we can rely on the proposals of S. Kuznets in terms of the close connection of economic and social processes that together significantly affect the safety of the object.
Modern scientists, analyzing the definition of 'security', symbolically distinguish 3 main periods [7, p. 22]. In the first period, up to the XVII century, the attention of society was focused in a key way on countering the physiological attack on the protection of the individual, who is the head of the country, while the protection of the individual — the crown Prince was equated to the protection of the state. At the 2nd stage, from the end of the XVII century, the opposite of the crown Prince, his retinue and elite strata of society became more clearly felt, which leads to the separation of the security of the country and society. The danger to the individual from the country itself is becoming more real. There is a need to oppose its totalitarian manifestations, including through the consistent separation of powers. In this case, it was about the struggle of the interests of the ruling elite and society without access to power. So, the security of the country was considered as the security of the elite layers of society. 3rd tier (the twentieth century) is linked to the understanding of the dangers of personality and society caused by the confrontation of the country and market forces. At the theoretical level, we provide the most likely social justice in the allotment of benefits, state regulation of irreconcilable conflicts, the prevention of abuses by certain groups in society, or the infringement by them of the interests of other entities (for example, a monopoly manufacturer), etc. Interests of personality, society and country are opposed. The concepts of national and state interests are being introduced into practice, as previously stated. There is an awareness of universal values and interests. An economist from the U.S., E. Freeman Strategy of social harmony, allowing exposure of the organization, aimed at maintaining or creating public consent in the organization and maintenance of harmony in society [8, p. 188].
In 1984-1985, on the instructions of the UN Secretary-General, an expert group was formed to create the concept of security. According to the results of the presented analysis, the conclusion was formulated: security can be considered as a comprehensive concept, reflecting the increasing interdependence of political, militaristic, financial, economic and social factors [9, p. 3].
The majority of scientists evaluate safety with the help of 2 leading scientific approaches:
1. Safety is the absolute lack of threat, i.e. criteria under which someone or something is no danger from someone or something (the absolute approach) [10, p. 9].
2. Security is the internal state of security of the main interests of the object from external and internal hazards, expressed in the unity of all different forms of its existence [11, p.15].
From the point of view of the scientist A. B. Vozzhennikova, this awareness of safety is based on the selection of the key interests of the individual, society, country as subject to protective activities [12, p. 7]. Following the presented theory, we have the opportunity to realize security, taking into account the social, financial and economic interests of the above groups, in a dense approach to the formation of an extended interpretation of the term 'security'.
The safety of the public and the financial and economic interests, consistent with the claims of researcher A. A. Prokhozhev identical to the security of their carriers only if we look at the question of security on the basis of the researcher's scientific conclusion: vital interests - an array of needs, the implementation of which ensures adequate development of the individual, of society, of the economic entity and of the country [13, p. 79].
Often security is seen as a phenomenon that characterizes the essence of the state in which the object (its unity, development and existence) is not threatened by anyone or anything. The term 'does not threaten' means the inaccessibility of criteria, messages or direct influence that have the probability to destroy, disrupt or otherwise affect the unity of the object (social structure), or complicate the circumstances of its existence, formation, etc., or remove these circumstances and messages.
Бюллетень науки и практики / Bulletin of Science and Practice Т. 5. №4. 2019
https://www.bulletennauki.com DOI: 10.33619/2414-2948/41
In addition, security is implemented in various forms, depending on the types of social entities (individual, family, community, professional community, party, Association, government, country, nation, civilization, interstate associations, etc.), and, in addition, within the framework of those spheres of social relations, in which the main interests of society are realized — financial, economic, political, environmental, humanitarian, information, military, etc.
When considering the relationship between security in General and state protection in particular with the impact of the country, it is necessary to separate the definitions of 'security' and 'security protection'. Scientists often do not see differences between the concepts of state security and ensuring state security. In particular, B. Serebryannikov highlights the definition of security as "the activities of people, companies, country, global community for the identification (study), the prevention, weakening, destruction (dissolution) and the reflection of the threats and dangers that can destroy them to deny basic material and spiritual values, to inflict unacceptable (unacceptable subjectively and objectively) the harm to block the way for modern development" [14, p. 26]. There is not only a substitution of the definitions of 'security' and 'security protection', but this approach leads to the following: when developing a system of criteria for state security or its elements (socioeconomic security, for example), it introduces such aspects as gross national product, the degree and quality of life, the rate of inflation, the rate of employment, the lack of budgetary funds, etc.thus, we are talking about indicators, the achievement of which is aimed at the financial and economic policy of the country. So, these characteristics outline the effectiveness of security but do not represent a complete picture of the level of security.
In other words, safety and security are considered to be different in terms of definitions: safety is in the first place an essential characteristic of the state of the community, and security is a characteristic, i.e. the work of the elements of society to ensure security. From this point of view, security is the basis of policy goal — setting, and security itself is implemented as work to achieve a non-dangerous state of society or a public group.
From the above, the following conclusion is formed: safety has qualitative, abstract features, and the aspects of security or its qualitative properties can and should be said in the analysis of the effectiveness of events to achieve a specific value of a security.
Based on the Concept of national security of the Republic of Belarus, state protection is understood as the position of security of the state interests of the Republic of Belarus from internal and external hazards. At the same time, the Concept applies the concepts of social and economic security. Economic security refers to the situation of the economy in which the security of the state interests of the Republic of Belarus from internal and external hazards is guaranteed. Social security is proposed to understand the state of safety of life, health and well-being, spiritual and moral values of the society from internal and external hazards [15, p. 1; 16].
In addition to the above-mentioned document, the President of the Republic of Belarus, Aleksander Lukashenko, approved the number 1 "on measures to strengthen public security and discipline" on March 11, 2004, to fulfill the tasks of ensuring social and economic security [17]. The adoption of the Directive was due to some adverse developments in the socio-economic sphere. During national sociological research, about 70% of the respondents noted the relevance and timeliness of the adoption of this document [18, p. 437].
All of the above regulations are tools for implementing the National strategy for sustainable development of Belarus up to 2030 in which the socio-economic security should be a fundamental [19, p. 8].
The concept of national security of the Union country, the Russian Federation, says that the main interests of the individual, society, economic entity, the country are considered elements of state interests, which is an array of balanced interests of the individual, society, economic entity and
Бюллетень науки и практики / Bulletin of Science and Practice Т. 5. №4. 2019
https://www.bulletennauki.com DOI: 10.33619/2414-2948/41
the country in the financial, economic, political, public, global, information, military, environmental and other areas. These interests have long change the basis and define the main goals and objectives of internal and external policy of the country [20, p. 2].
In the States of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE), security is understood as the implementation of appropriate financial and economic policies aimed at the gradual achievement of the importance of financial and economic development and the main priorities of Western European States [21, p. 101]. This vector shows that the States connect the concept of security of the country and the possibilities of its development with the resolution of social and economic problems of their own people.
From the array of all scientific definitions that are used in the consideration of socioeconomic security, it makes sense to consider the concept of 'danger'.
Following the definition of researcher A. P. Dmitriev danger is the possibility of influence on the social organism of internal and external forces (factors), as a result of which it may be caused some harm, damage, worsening its position, giving its development a negative dynamics or characteristics (character, pace, shape, etc.).
In accordance with this definition, according to the researcher, the danger is often associated with the presence and influence of forces (factors) that have all chances to harm the object or eliminate it. These forces (factors) are called destructive (destroying) [11, p. 15]. It is necessary to indicate that in reality there is certainly no destructive or constructive forces (factors). These forces act in the presented role only in relation to certain objects, space and time.
The vision of the scientist M. I. Dzliev under the sources of danger are the forces (factors) that are considered likely carriers of the aggressive purposes, of bad qualities, have a destructive nature, which under specific conditions, have all chances to appear by themselves or in different combination, [10, p. 8]. Dzliev in the field of security identifies such primary sources of danger (Figure):
- geobiophysical (natural) — hurricanes, earthquakes, eruptions, floods, droughts, atmospheric electrical discharges, etc.;
- technological (technical) — technological facilities and processes with a significant threat, abnormal emissions and separation of industrial facilities during emergency situations, etc.;
- social — people, group of people, Association, etc [10, p. 9].
social
*
natural technical
Figure. Classification of primary sources of danger in the main areas.
Note: development of M. I. Jeleva.
Geobiophysical protection is associated with the definition of the safety of people and equipment from natural disasters and the impact of destructive forces of nature.
Technological protection — is the safety of people from various adverse effects of technology, equipment and machinery, technology.
Social protection is associated with ensuring the basic interests of people in the criteria of the likely destructive effects of social forces and processes arising in society.
Here it is necessary to indicate that as an object under threat, we consider only people and their associations. Most often, the concept of 'object of danger' is used to something else only when the object is integrated into people's lives [22-23].
Бюллетень науки и практики / Bulletin of Science and Practice Т. 5. №4. 2019
https://www.bulletennauki.com DOI: 10.33619/2414-2948/41
At the same time, following the concept of academician V. K. Senchagov, it is possible to draw the following conclusion: safety is the result of processes, a small fraction of which is associated with natural phenomena. Favorite positions here are processes, in which the subjects are the management structures (public administration, management of economic entities).
References:
1. Vishnevskii, A. A. (2014). Kontseptsiya i formirovanie administrativno-pravovogo mekhanizma obespecheniya ekonomicheskoi bezopasnosti Respubliki Belarus'. Minsk: Akad. M-va vnutr. delResp. Belarus', 235.
2. Ekonomicheskaya bezopasnost': teoriya i praktika. (1999). Moscow, Klassika plyus. 409.
3. Slovar' russkogo yazyka. (1957). Akad. nauk SSSR. Moscow, GIS. 16. 964.
4. Orekhovskii, P. A. (2015). Ekonomicheskii chelovek i neobkhodimost' zla = Economic man and the necessity of evil : nauch. dokl. Moscow, In-t ekonomiki. 47.
5. Tsybikdorzhieva, Zh. D., & Tsybikdorzhieva, B. D. (2015). Analiz sotsial'nykh pokazatelei ekonomicheskoi bezopasnosti regiona. Ulan-Ude. 125.
6. Okrepilov, V. V. (2007). Laureaty Nobelevskoi premii po ekonomike = Nobel laureates in economics. Ros. akad. nauk, S.-Peterb. nauch. tsentr. SPb.: Nauka. 478.
7. Puzikov, V. V. (2013). Osnovy teorii obespecheniya natsional'noi bezopasnosti. Minsk: Gos. in-t upr. i sots. tekhnologii Belorus. gos. un-ta, 512.
8. Blagov, Yu. E. (2011). Korporativnaya sotsial'naya otvetstvennost': evolyutsiya kontseptsii. SPb., Vyssh. shk. Menedzhmenta. 271.
9. Verush, A. I. (2012). Natsional'naya bezopasnost'. Minsk. 112.
10. Dzliev, M. I., Ursul, A. D. (2003). Novaya paradigma bezopasnosti Rossii. Osnovy obespecheniya bezopasnosti Rossii. Moscow, 8-12.
11. Dmitriev, A. P., Sizov, V. Yu., Afinogenov, D. A., Zhukovskii, M. V., Kopylov, A. B., & Pozdnyakov, A. I. (2006). Osnovnye ponyatiya obshchei i spetsial'nykh teorii bezopasnosti. II Natsional'naya bezopasnost'. Moscow. 15.
12. Vozzhenikov, A. V. (2002). Natsional'naya bezopasnost' Rossii: metodologiya kompleksnogo issledovaniya i politika obespecheniya. Moscow. 423.
13. Prokhozhev, A. A. (2006). Zhiznenno vazhnye interesy lichnosti, obshchestva, gosudarstva. Teoriya razvitiya i bezopasnosti cheloveka i obshchestva. Moscow. 77-83.
14. Lektorskii, V. A. (1995). Grazhdanskoe obshchestvo i problemy bezopasnosti Rossii: materialy "kruglogo stola". Voprosy filosofii, (2). 18-36.
15. Kontseptsiya natsional'noi bezopasnosti Respubliki Belarus': utv. (2011). Ukazom Prezidenta Resp. Belarus', 9 noyab. 2010 g. (575). Minsk. 46.
16. Gerasimov, Yu. N. (2012). Kontseptsiya natsional'noi bezopasnosti gosudarstv-uchastnikov Sodruzhestva Nezavisimykh Gosudarstv. Strategiya razvitiya i nats. Bezopasnost, (6). 15-18.
17. O merakh po ukrepleniyu obshchestvennoi bezopasnosti i distsipliny. In Direktiva Prezidenta Resp. Belarus', 11 marta 2004 g., (1): v red. Ukaza Prezidenta Resp. Belarus' ot 12.10.2015 g. Minsk. 2017.
18. Proleskovskii, O. V. (2012). Natsional'naya bezopasnost'. Belorusskii put'. Minsk, 423434.
19. Chervyakov, A. V., & Borovik, L. S. (2014). Prioritety natsional'noi strategii ustoichivogo razvitiya Respubliki Belarus' na period do 2030 goda. Ekon. byul. Nauch.-issled. ekon. in-ta M-va ekonomiki Resp. Belarus', (11). 4-11.
Бюллетень науки и практики /Bulletin of Science and Practice Т. 5. №4. 2019
https://www.bulletennauki.com DOI: 10.33619/2414-2948/41
20. Kontseptsiya natsional'noi bezopasnosti Rossiiskoi Federatsii: utv. (2017). Ukazom Prezidenta Ros. Federatsii, 17 dek. 1997 g., № 1300: v red. Ukaza Prezidenta Ros. Federatsii ot 10.01.2000 g. Moscow.
21. Zas', S. V. (2011). Natsional'naya bezopasnost' Respubliki Belarus'. Minsk, Belarus. Navuka. 557.
22. Shvaiba, D. (2019). Dynamic regression models of forecasting indicators of social and economic security. Bulletin of Science and Practice, 5(1), 249-257.
23. Shvaiba, D. (2018). Structural stability and socio-economic security of the hierarchical system. Bulletin of Science and Practice, 4(6), 233-239.
Список литературы:
1. Вишневский А. А. Концепция и формирование административно-правового механизма обеспечения экономической безопасности Республики Беларусь. Минск: Акад. М-ва внутр. дел Респ. Беларусь, 2014. 235 с.
2. Экономическая безопасность: теория и практика. М.: Классика плюс, 1999. 409 с.
3. Словарь русского языка / Акад. наук СССР. М.: ГИС, 1957. XVI. 964 с.
4. Ореховский П. А. Экономический человек и необходимость зла [Economic man and the necessity of evil] : науч. докл. М.: Ин-т экономики, 2015. 47 c.
5. Цыбикдоржиева Ж. Д., Цыбикдоржиева Б. Д. Анализ социальных показателей экономической безопасности региона. Улан-Удэ, 2015. 125 с.
6. Окрепилов В. В. Лауреаты Нобелевской премии по экономике [Nobel laureates in economics] / Рос. акад. наук, С.-Петерб. науч. центр. СПб.: Наука, 2007. 478 с.
7. Пузиков В. В. Основы теории обеспечения национальной безопасности. Минск: Гос. ин-т упр. и соц. технологий Белорус. гос. ун-та, 2013. 512 с.
8. Благов Ю. Е. Корпоративная социальная ответственность: эволюция концепции. СПб.: Высш. шк. Менеджмента, 2011. 271 с.
9. Веруш А. И. Национальная безопасность. Минск, 2012. 112 с.
10. Дзлиев М. И., Урсул А. Д. Новая парадигма безопасности России // Основы обеспечения безопасности России. М., 2003. С. 8-12.
11. Дмитриев А. П., Сизов В. Ю., Афиногенов Д. А., Жуковский М. В., Копылов A. В., Поздняков А. И. Основные понятия общей и специальных теорий безопасности. II Национальная безопасность. М., 2006. С. 15.
12. Возжеников А. В. Национальная безопасность России: методология комплексного исследования и политика обеспечения. М., 2002. 423 с.
13. Прохожев A. A. Жизненно важные интересы личности, общества, государства // Теория развития и безопасности человека и общества. М., 2006. С. 77-83.
14. Лекторский В. А. Гражданское общество и проблемы безопасности России: материалы «круглого стола» // Вопросы философии. 1995. №2. С. 18-36.
15. Концепция национальной безопасности Республики Беларусь: утв. Указом Президента Респ. Беларусь, 9 нояб. 2010 г. №575. Минск, 2011. 46 с.
16. Герасимов Ю. Н. Концепция национальной безопасности государств-участников Содружества Независимых Государств // Стратегия развития и нац. безопасность. 2012. №6. С. 15-18.
17. О мерах по укреплению общественной безопасности и дисциплины: Директива Президента Респ. Беларусь, 11 марта 2004 г., №1: в ред. Указа Президента Респ. Беларусь от 12.10.2015 г. Минск, 2017.
Бюллетень науки и практики / Bulletin of Science and Practice Т. 5. №4. 2019
https://www.bulletennauki.com DOI: 10.33619/2414-2948/41
18. Пролесковский О. В. Национальная безопасность // Белорусский путь. Минск, 2012. С. 423-434.
19. Червяков А. В., Боровик Л. С. Приоритеты национальной стратегии устойчивого развития Республики Беларусь на период до 2030 года // Экон. бюл. Науч.-исслед. экон. ин-та М-ва экономики Респ. Беларусь. 2014. №11. С. 4-11.
20. Концепция национальной безопасности Российской Федерации: утв. Указом Президента Рос. Федерации, 17 дек. 1997 г., №1300: в ред. Указа Президента Рос. Федерации от 10.01.2000 г. М., 2017.
21. Зась С. В. Национальная безопасность Республики Беларусь. Минск: Беларус. Навука, 2011. 557 с.
22. Shvaiba D. Dynamic regression models of forecasting indicators of social and economic security // Бюллетень науки и практики. 2019. Т. 5. №1. С. 249-257.
23. Shvaiba D. Structural stability and socio-economic security of the hierarchical system // Бюллетень науки и практики. 2018. Т. 4. №6. С. 233-239.
Работа поступила Принята к публикации
в редакцию 17.03.2019 г. 21.03.2019 г.
Ссылка для цитирования:
Shvaiba D. The Essence and Content of Social and Economic Security // Бюллетень науки и практики. 2019. Т. 5. №4. С. 271-279. https://doi.org/10.33619/2414-2948/41/37.
Cite as (APA):
Shvaiba, D. (2019). The Essence and Content of Social and Economic Security. Bulletin of Science and Practice, 5(4), 271-279. https://doi.org/10.33619/2414-2948/41/37.
