(review
of a Doctoral
thesis by Amalya Saribekyan)
By CRRC-Armenia International Volunteer Varak Ketsemanian
 |
| Varak Ketsemanian |
The problem of Armenia’s social and economic development has
been on the political agenda of the Armenian ruling elite and the Diaspora,
since the country has regained its independence in 1991. Given the unfavorable
well-known geographical, geopolitical and historical developments of the
Armenian Republic during the past years of independence, the economic and
social progress of the country currently remains a lingering problem for the
Armenian reality. Thus, the local
scientists quite often try to analyze the public policy to suggest models that
will support further development.
One of such works is the Doctorate thesis, written by Amalya
Saribekyan. She argues that the effective usage of the social potential of the
country would account to a new qualitative progress that will enhance the
social and economic structure of Armenia. The study reveals the peculiarities
of economic growth and pre-crisis (2008) developments while analyzing the
trends of economic development in transition countries, including Armenia.
Apart from providing a theoretical basis for her work and reviewing
development theories
by W. Rostow, the author relies on empirical data, arguing for a necessity in the
structural change in Armenian economics, and societal management and dynamics. Moreover,
this study is an attempt to bring into the scene the importance of society when
it comes to modernization and economic development. It provides some new
insights concerning the role of society in a post-crisis Armenia, and calls for
the necessity to find new ways for the further development of the country leading
to economic modernization and progressive development, based on new resources,
new approaches and principles.
Considering
the specifics of the newborn Armenian Republic and the harsh realities of the
transitional period it found itself after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the
research underlines the necessity for revamping the social-economic structure
of the country. In this respect, it tends to merge different scientific and
social approaches urging for the development of new social and political
mechanisms and principles that would shape and enhance the economic structure
of Armenia. Justifying the importance of
modernizing the national ideology under the modern theories of social economic
developments, this work discusses a necessity of transition to mobilized
economics as a safeguard for the maximal realization of the national investment
potential.
With
the introduction of this idea, Saribekyan highlights the necessity for a multilateral
evaluation of the constituent parts of socio-economic potential, and defines
their role in the formation of national investment potential. In other words,
discussing the necessity for harnessing the national investment potential, the
author marks the development of human potential (culture, ideology, and
knowledge), as a priority and necessary condition for the economic growth.
Thus, considering the development of social apparatus as a condition for
economic development, the marking of conceptual characteristics of long-term
national development assumes great importance in Saribekyan’s work,
particularly the priority of individual interest over social interest, consent,
and effective cooperation of political and economic systems on the basis of the
principles of democracy, legitimacy and transparency.
Finally,
this work argues for the necessity of structural changes along the following
lines:
- The creation of a subsystem of cultural and
spiritual development, aimed at shaping national ideology as well as at
acknowledging the role of Armenian nation in human civilization;
- The establishment of a subsystem of provision of
social understanding and society – state cooperation, aimed at promoting
communal involvement in the decision making process and increasing the
effectiveness of these processes; finally, the necessity of revamping the
subsystem of social economic strategic development, aimed at differentiating
between strategic and administrative levels.
Hereby,
throughout this brief introduction to Saribekyan’s work, we would like to
invite economists, sociologists, social scientists and all those concerned with
Armenia’s social-economic development to, not only freely exchange their ideas,
opinions and comments regarding the problems raised in this work, but also to
suggest new ways, methods, mechanisms and principles bringing some new insights
in efforts to address the problems mentioned above.
Comments