The paper discusses the formation of the theory of public values, determines its capabilities and limitations in creating a valid tool for the value measurement of decisions made in the public space. The request for such an instrument was formed both by civil society structures, fearful of the substitution of the real interests of citizens by the interests of the elite strata, and by state bodies seeking to estimate the reaction of society to managerial initiatives. The theory of public values arises on a controversial methodological foundation, which is primarily reflected in the ambiguous interpretation of the very concept of «public value». Firstly, as a special type of value of public goods produced in the public space. Secondly, as consensus judgments about the desired ways of organizing public life, thirdly, as the relationship of people to external social objects, which develops in the course of satisfying their basic needs. The pluralism of scientific interpretation creates difficulties in creating a universal way of value measurement of public policy, since each theoretical model involves its own ways of operationalizing the basic concepts and a contradictory set of indicators. Two methods of measuring the public value of decisions are considered: «public value mapping» (PVM) and «public value scorecard» (PVSC). The differences between these methods are due to the initial methodological principles that determine the subject orientation of the research procedures used. In the first case, we are talking about establishing the degree of compliance of decisions made with consensus public values, in the second case, about identifying the subjective attitude of citizens to specific public decisions. It is noted that in the scientific community an active search for criteria for assessing the public value of government decisions is accompanied by restrained optimism. It is recognized that it is easier for specialists to determine the public value of a particular solution but attempts to create a universal toolkit are more than modest.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Г. В. Пушкарева (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: