FROM STATE TO PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION: AN ANALYSIS OF MANAGERIAL TRAINING IN HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM OF UKRAINE Abstract. One of the current challenges on the Ukrainian agenda is how to improve managerial training system that could implement effective democratic reforms in various spheres of public life, and at the same time provide proper protection of the national interests of state. The research objective is to explore an assumption that active and not properly substantiated implementation of modern concepts and approaches in the field of public administration into the science and practice of state administration in Ukraine does not necessarily lead to positive consequences for democratic transformations of state administration, in particular managerial training in higher education

521 ISSN 2306-4994 (print); ISSN 2310-8770 (online) UDC 35.088.6:378.22(477) Andreiev S. Doctor of Sciences in Public Administration, Professor of the Department of Political Sciences and Law, Kyiv National University of Construction and Architecture, Ukraine; e-mail: andreyev.doc@gmail.com; ORCID ID: 0000-0002-8231-8105 Geraskov S. Ph. D. in Philosophical Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Philosophy, National Technical University of Ukraine «Igor Sikorsky Kyiv Polytechnic Institute», Ukraine; e-mail: sergii.geraskov@gmail.com; ORCID ID: 0000-0003-4355-5631 Dymenko R. Doctor of Economics, Associate Professor, Associate Professor of Department of Management and Public Welfare, Banking University, Lviv, Ukraine; е-mail: drainc@ukr.net; ORCID ID : 0000-0002-6980-8038 Kostrubitska A. Ph. D. in Public Administration, Associate Professor of the Department of Political Sciences and Law, Kyiv National University of Construction and Architecture, Ukraine; e-mail: alina.kostrubickaya@gmail.com; ORCID ID: 0000-0002-7214-4789 Lukianov O. Ph. D. in Historical Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Political Sciences and Law, Kyiv National University of Construction and Architecture, Ukraine; e-mail: znannya.org@gmail.com; ORCID ID: 0000-0003-4220-0791

Introduction. For Ukraine, as well as for some other countries of Eastern Europe, one of challenges on the agenda is how to improve managerial training system that could implement effective democratic reforms in various spheres of public administration, and at the same time provide proper protection of the national interests of state. After collapse of the Soviet Union, Ukraine, which had been declared as an independent democratic state, found itself in situation of ideological, conceptual and institutional vacuum. Previous theoretical and practical approaches to leadership of the country had frequently turned out to be inadequate to a new democratic vector of its development, as well as current challenges and threats of a different nature.
One of significant transformations in higher education system of Ukraine, in part of managerial training, is official introduction of a new specialty «Public Administration» in 2015 and the same name field of study in 2016. In fact, it causes a conceptual and legal replacement of field of study «State Administration», and we find its consequences to be quite ambiguous.
This study is based on assumption that implementation of modern concepts and approaches of public administration into the science of state administration in Ukraine does not necessarily lead to positive consequences for managerial training in higher education system of Ukraine. Furthermore, the future of field of science «State Administration» in Ukraine cannot but cause a justified concern. Our research methodology includes screening and assessment of secondary sources, and analysis of documents related to managerial training in higher education system of Ukraine. Our study consists of the following sections: in the first section, a conceptual transition from state to public administration in Ukraine is observed; the research question and methodology are presented thereafter; in the next section, a process of transformation of managerial training in higher education system of Ukraine is shown on the basis of legal sources; finally, implications and challenges of implementation of public administration conceptual models and practices in case of Ukraine are discussed.
Review of literature sources and formulation of the problem. We regret to note that at the beginning of its independence Ukraine was not able to develop a clear strategy of state administration (despite their declarations, there is still lack of it until present). As a result, turn of the 20 th and 21 st centuries could be regarded as time of both conceptual and practical gaps for proceeding effective state administration system in the Ukrainian state. This gap was quickly filled by the Western scientific ideas, directions and disciplines, and some of them, in our opinion, had somewhat questionable implementation in case of Ukraine.
In this study we distinguish the concept of «State Administration» (SA), which is now applicable for Ukraine, from «Public Administration» (PA), where the latter may be regarded as only partial equivalent if translating the former one. The problem of correlation between the two concepts generates a relevant discourse shift and causes a heated debate by Ukrainian scholars. Hrytsiak [1] notes terminological confusion when two different concepts «PA» and «Public Management» are both commonly translated into Ukrainian as «SA».
Following Bakumenko and Kovbasiuk [2, p. 157], we define SA as activities of state aimed at creating conditions for the most complete realization of functions of state, fundamental rights and freedoms of citizens, coordination of various interest groups in society and between state and society, ensuring social development with appropriate resources. Thus, SA system includes the state and state power as its keystones, whereas PA system refers more to the society and public authorities. Rozputenko [3, p. 23] complains that PA in its modern interpretations by Ukrainian researchers is presented as a mix of SA with state as subject, and 'non-governmental administration' with NGO as subjects.
Kolodiy [4] becomes a trigger of debate within the Ukrainian academic community when tries to implicate concepts of «public governance» and «good governance» to conditions of transitional and hybrid systems. When it comes to developed countries, we consider new public governance as an objective part of social life, and scholars are those who need to explore it for an adequate understanding pros and cons of new approaches to governance. At the same time, in case of the post-Communist societies, we mainly resort to formulating rules and guidelines on approaching some governance standards, and that is a matter of different agents. Thus, practical implementation of public governance and public administration paradigm makes an impact on strength and stability of countries «at the crossroads». Hrytsiak [1], Pukhtetska [5], and Lakhyzha [6] develop theoretical background for import substitution of the post-Soviet Ukrainian conceptual model of SA with a «progressive» concept of PA based on European principles of administrative law as a categorical knowledge. However, PA phenomenon has not yet become so generally understood that explanations about it would be excluded [7, p. 23].
Kovbasiuk [8, р. 3] emphasizes that future of Ukraine as a democratic, legal state presupposes development of field of science «SA» by expanding the boundaries of its studies and reconsidering its subject area. It is difficult to disagree with this thought, but we could hardly imagine that the Founding Fathers of SA science in Ukraine [3; 9-11] would switch so easily the concept «SA» to «PA», as well as make a similar transformation of field of study and specialty «SA». In this regard, there is noteworthy opinion of Surmin and Troshchynskyi [12, p. 13] that losses incurred by state are primarily originated from incorrect transcriptions of concepts characterizing the state and SA, which complicates to make tailor-made decisions. We agree with Kuznetsov [13,p. 16] who states for Ukraine historically deprived of a pan-European civilization path of development, an implementation of concept «PA» into academic discourse and legal vocabulary is somewhat irrelevant, because it does not really reflect the essence of this phenomenon. Thus, «PA» should be considered only as a theoretical concept operated in Anglo-Saxon systems of the Government.
We should acknowledge that due to the efforts of both scholars and practitioners who until recently had been actively involved in shaping the field of science and specialty «SA», theoretical basis of conceptual apparatus in the field of PA has somewhat developed, and processes of making SA «more public» have become dominant in academic environment and managerial practice [14, p. 18]. As one can now see, Vashchenko, Surmin, and Zagainova [15, p. 7] are right when warn of challenge or even danger for SA that self-regulatory approaches be enhanced when postneoclassical principles of knowledge are applied. This will lead to scientific declaration of a weakening role of SA in mechanisms of social development. Thus, in the coming years, a critical attitude towards SA will grow from the position of strengthening postmodern approaches, which will undoubtedly confront real inquiries of society for strengthening the role of state and SA in solving several both national and global threats on the agenda.
Setting objectives, methodology and research methods. Our research objective is to explore an assumption that active and not properly substantiated implementation of modern concepts and approaches in the field of PA into the science and practice of SA in Ukraine does not necessarily lead to positive consequences for democratic transformations of SA, in particular managerial training in higher education system. Opanasiuk [16], Tytarenko [17] report it is common for the post-Soviet countries to take one of managerial training models (usually British, German or French) as a basis, and adapt it to local historical, national, and mental factors. One on hand, this catch-up process implies bringing a legislative framework of the post-Soviet countries into line with European law, but on the other hand there is an obvious discrepancy between the content and spirit of Western PA theories and current state-building practice in Ukraine. Besides, the field of PA has its inherent conceptual ambiguity. Van Dijk and Tornhill [18] indicate that, while PA practices allow us to identify several specific characteristics, they are not enough to create a clear theoretical core. Van der Waldt [19] reveals a significant number (about 350) of relevant theories in public administration. In this regard, Burgon [20] emphasizes that the classical theory of public administration can no longer duly support the diverse nature of public sector practices, while Çolak [21] considers New Public Management replacing classical public administration to be obsolete.
Our research methodology included (1) secondary sources review, (2) process tracing of transformations of managerial training in higher education system of Ukraine, and (3) descriptive analysis of statistical data. We used the method of process tracing based on the analysis of documents to investigate the process of establishing organizational and legal foundations of functioning of the Ukrainian system of professional training of state managerial personnel. This method helped us identify trends and problems in the formation of state institutions that were the structural elements of this system, as well as establish patterns of development of a subject area (and since 2010, a field of study) and specialty «SA» in Ukraine. The subject of our analysis was the laws and regulations of Ukraine: laws, decrees of the President of Ukraine, governmental resolutions, orders by the Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine (hereinafter referred to as the Ministry), etc. Furthermore, a descriptive analysis of statistical data obtained through official letters of the Ministry addressed to authors by their request for information was also used.
Results and discussion. In accordance with a Decree on Establishment [22], the Institute of State Administration and Self-Government was established under the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine on the basis of the Republican Institute for Managerial Training, which had been abolished. The Institute of State Administration and Self-Government was created with the aim of scientific developing of theoretical problems of SA and self-government, training and retraining of personnel for state executive bodies and bodies of local self-government, and managerial training for enterprises in state sector of the economy. When a Law on Civil Service [23] was adopted, it enshrined foundations of civil service in the country and served as legal basis for the formation of state system for training, retraining and advanced training of civil servants. Finally, with a Decree on System for Training [24], on the basis of the Institute of State Administration and Self-Government previously abolished they established the Ukrainian Academy of State Administration under the President of Ukraine 1 (hereinafter referred to as the Academy).
It had been legally established that the Academy was a part of system of managerial training and advanced training of civil servants. The employees of the Academy and its branches, who had occupied leading and other administrative posts, had the status of civil servants. Also, in 1995, Dnipropetrovsk branch of the Academy was established, and later Lviv, Odesa and Kharkiv branches were added.
The functioning of state system of training, retraining and advanced training for civil servants at territorial level had been provided by centers for advanced training of civil servants, and training of employees of state enterprises, institutions and organizations that were created in 1995 in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, the cities of Kyiv and Sevastopol, as well as in each region of Ukraine.
On August 2, 1995, in a Decree on Regulation of the Academy they clearly defined its legal status and role in the system of professional training of civil servants as main educational institution of this system. In accordance with the Regulation, main tasks of the Academy at that time were as following: -implementation of training, retraining, advanced training of personnel of central and local government bodies and local self-government bodies in Ukraine through the full-time, evening and part-time courses; -conducting research on relevant problems of theory and practice of SA and self-government by state orders and self-accounting agreements with enterprises, institutions, organizations; -studying and generalizing of experience of other states in organizing state power, selfgovernment, and training of managerial personnel; -developing basic requirements to educational and professional level of civil servants and heads of state enterprises, institutions, organizations; implementation of scientific and methodological support for verification of their professional training, testing, certification; -elaboration of scientific, methodological, expert recommendations on formation of a personnel pool and its training; -methodological, informational, advisory assistance to centers for advanced training of civil servants and training of employees of state enterprises, institutions, organizations [25].
Thus, we can say that as early as 1995 some institutional foundations of state system for training, retraining and advanced training of civil servants were laid in Ukraine. However, the training content, forms, methods, and means having been used in the Academy remained very conservative for a long time and did not meet the country's needs in training a new generation of managers and implementing effective democratic reforms in state administration system, as well as various spheres of public life.
Staffing of the Academy, its branches and territorial centers for advanced training of civil servants by that time was comprised of former political officers who had been training the party personnel back in the Soviet period, as well as representatives of various spheres, mainly social sciences and humanities. Of course, their worldview, previous work experience under conditions of authoritarian socialist state, determined forms and methods they used in training of civil servants and officials of local self-government bodies at the beginning of modern history of Ukraine.
Both in the Academy and in other components of Ukrainian system for managerial training, there was lack of high-quality educational and methodological support on issues of professional training of civil servants, based on generalization and analysis of progressive experience of developed foreign countries.
An extremely important step towards making effective system of training the Government officials in Ukraine, as well as competent support for further democratic reforms in the country in whole, was appearance of educational specialty «SA» in legislation of the country as of May 1997 [26]. They had been conceived possibility to train specialists in this field by master's educational and qualification level.
In turn, in November 1997, the List of Fields of Science [27] for academic degree awarding was supplemented by a new field of science for Ukraine -«SA», which served as occasion for establishment of system for training of academic and teaching personnel in this interdisciplinary scientific field, in particular formation of specialized academic councils to submit doctoral dissertations on this scientific field in some higher education institutions (HEI) of the country.
We should note that for the period when a subject area (and since 2010 -also field of study) and similar specialty «SA» had been functioning in Ukraine (May 1997 -April 2015), content of this field of study was constantly expanded due to inclusion of new specialties. So, if in May 1997, the List of Fields of Study and Specialties [26] for training of specialists in higher education institutions by relevant educational and qualification levels, contained the section «SA» consisting of only one educational specialty -«8.150000 SA», then, for example, in 2008, the field of study «1501 SA» included 10 educational specialties, including the «PA» one [27]. As of April 2015, field of study «1501 SA» included 12 specialties [28] (Table 1). In parallel with development of educational specialty «SA», a relatively independent field of science 25.00.00 «SA» was formed in Ukraine. Today, this field of science still exists and consists of 5 scientific specialties: 25.00.01 -Theory and History of SA, 25.00.02 -Mechanisms of SA, 25.00.03 -Civil Service, 25.00.04 -Local Self-Government, 25.00. 05 -SA in the Field of State Security and Public Order Protection.
For more than 20 years of its existence, SA science in Ukraine has developed its theoretical and methodological basis, conceptual and terminological system, research toolkit, whereas certain scientific schools, institutional support, etc., have been formed.
Thus, from April 2015 to September 2016, the unique field of study «SA», which included 12 educational specialties, had been abolished in Ukraine, whereas field of study and specialty «PA» were introduced instead. At the same time, unlike field of study «SA», Ukrainian legislation as of 2015 stipulates the right of relevant HEI of the country to train specialists on specialty «PA» at educational level of not only a master's degree, but also a bachelor's one.
As a result, system of managerial training has expanded significantly in Ukraine, due to involvement of many new universities (not only state, but also private ones), which have received the right to train bachelors and masters on specialty «PA» (Fig.). According to data of Integrated State Electronic Database on Education [34], as of April 1, 2020, there were 85 HEI in Ukraine that could carry out educational activities to train bachelors and 109 institutions authorized to train masters on the above-mentioned specialty. Totally, they reported on 129 HEI that could train bachelors and/or masters on specialty «PA». If during the period from 1997 to 2015 the professional training of masters on specialty «SA» (where most of students were civil or municipal servants) had been carried out on the basis of full higher education by a limited number of HEI of the country -central place among those was the Academy and its regional institutes -then from 2016 until present, training for higher education applicants on bachelor's and master's degrees in «PA» became common in Ukraine. This trend is evidenced by data of Integrated State Electronic Database on Education [35], according to which, as of April 1, 2021, total licensed number of bachelors on specialty «PA» in all educational institutions of Ukraine was 6,119 people, and masters -7,106 people.
Despite quite radical democratic structural and ideological changes in Ukrainian system for managerial training, in particular its institutionalization within «PA» specialty, the term of «PA» is still not commonly used in Ukrainian legislation, and definitions of concepts «PA», «Public Management», «Public Policy» are completely absent in it. Even the Standard of Higher Education Current situation may be explained by fact that in East Slavic languages (Belorussian, Russian, Ukrainian) words «public» and «state» are not as same. For an adjective «public» (comes from Latin «publicus»), the most accurate synonym in Ukrainian language is the word «societal» (in original суспільний, публічний), but not the «state» (in original державний) one. Therefore, when terms «PA» and «Public Management» are used within Ukrainian academic discourse, educational activities, practice and legislation, a systemically important subject of managerial process -the state -is lost, and state component represented by system of civil authorities and local self-government bodies is minimized. Substitution of concepts and meanings takes place, and it contributes to formation of simulacre (imitation) idea of dominant role of the public in developing and implementing of the state's policy among scholars, experts, civil and municipal servants, and population. As a result, capacity for a statist mindset, which seems still vital in this global era, is reduced or completely lost through all the above-mentioned subjects.
We claim that, with appearance of terms «PA» and «Public Management» in Ukrainian academic discourse, and, moreover, with their implementation in current legislation and educational process, they start an in-depth conceptual falsification of not only a science of «SA», but also essence of phenomenon of SA as such, since the state is its systemically important element. We assume those processes to take place in a controlled manner, in the light of globalist agenda, conceptual dismantling of state institutions, «privatization» of main functions of state, and integration of Ukraine into a new global world order.
The term of «state», which is major for the formation of entire conceptual and terminological system of science of «SA», is not only eroded, losing its decisive role in theory and methodology of this scientific field, but is completely rejected as outdated and inappropriate to modern democratic Euro-integration trends.
At the same time, it has become relatively common in Ukrainian academic discourse of recent years the terms «state» and «SA» to be interpreted one-sided, exclusively, and in a negative way as authoritarian (or even totalitarian) instruments of coercion and exploitation where the main role in managing public affairs belongs to state through its authorities, which, «does not meet modern progressive European doctrine and practice of PA» [37, p. 21]. Meanwhile, not in any academic paper dedicated to promotion of ideas of public administration and management, good governance, etc., they substantiate provisions on why SA is not able to be public, democratic, transparent and accountable to people.
We are convinced that main task of training civil servants in any country seeking to ensure state sovereignty and achieve well-being for its people is a formation of patriotic corps of thinking statesmen, i.e., a cohort of servants endowed with statist thinking. In modern conditions, characterized by unprecedented number of external and internal challenges to Ukrainian state, primarily its independence, territorial integrity, socio-political and socio-economic stability, it is precisely the achievement of task specified and the only proper way for development of professionalization of personnel for civil service. Looking at the current challenges, the traditional pattern of «muddling through», that, to a large extent, characterized the last decades, does not work anymore.
Recognizing the European values as one of main indicators of development of PA systems in democratic countries and open societies, one cannot but recognize that corresponding values can only be realized within the framework of such a political and territorial organization of society as the state. In turn, in modern global world, strategic development and future may be provided only for states that develop and implement their specific conceptual models of PA.
Conclusion. Until 2015, field of study «SA» had been one of competitive advantages of Ukraine, against some other post-Soviet countries, which made it possible to train patriotic leadership cadres with statist thinking, as well as scientifically substantiate ways and mechanisms of development of the SA system. In contrast, «PA» science in Ukraine does not have a strong theoretical and methodological basis, while overloaded with mythologemes, populist judgments and ideological clichés detached from real Ukrainian managerial practice and public life. Lack of the statist component in training of specialists on specialty «PA» will lead to misunderstanding by future managers of essence of institution in a sovereign state, as well as nature of SA, its social impact, functions and role in regulating social development processes, in particular ensuring safety of population.
Considering the above, we suggest the most viable direction for development of managerial training in Ukraine is restoration, in accordance with procedure established by law, of field of study and specialty «SA». We concede prospective research are the ones underlying in field of substantiating conceptual directions and mechanisms for transforming state managerial systems in the post-Soviet states, including Ukraine, identifying some pros and cons of total implementation of liberal concepts and approaches (e.g., «Service State», «Good Governance», «New Public Management», etc.) into SA practice.