Methodological problems of reforming the agrarian sphere
The article shows that market reforms in Ukraine are based on methodology inappropriate for these purposes. After all, it was this methodology that defined the logic of the construction and operation of the command-administrative system in the past. This is indicated by the fact that the theory and practice of reforms is based on the collectivist system of values of equality and justice, as well as by the directive nature of reforms, in which the pace, scale and forms of changes in the system of economic relations are defined centrally. The teleological vision of social order nature and the interpretation of them as the result of purposeful human activity are at the heart of this methodology. In this case reforms are carried out on the principles of “social engineering”. “Social engineering” cannot be called a scientific method, since it is practically impossible to formulate objective criteria for choosing goals or assessing ways to achieve them. That is, their effects and effectiveness cannot be predicted or substantiated theoretically. Within this approach only those who have an influence on the process of forming decisions, or who owns the right of their practical implementation, has a crucial role. The result of the teleological thinking dominance in the practice of Ukraine's market transformation is that trends and forms of economic development are determined by the ideas and knowledge of a narrow circle of politicians, officials and scholars. According to the theory of dispersed knowledge, market and competition of Friedrich von Hayek, no scholar or official, any collegial body from among them, in fact, is not able to acquire the required amount of knowledge that would allow to determine the optimal ways of development and solving of local and global economic problems. This is only possible if the space is released to realize the knowledge and initiative of millions of people. This requires a change in the paradigm of reforms from teleological to evolutionary. That is, the essence of the reforms is not to be limited to the definition of specific areas and forms of economic development, but to the creation of prerequisites for evolutionary development on the basis of the freedom to realize individual interest and competition. The article offers the main directions of implementation of an alternative evolutionary approach: restriction and decentralization of state power, ensuring freedom of entrepreneurship, demonopolization of the economy and reduction of the level ownership concentration. In particular, it is emphasized that for the development of rural areas, it is especially important to take effective preventive measures to avoid concentration of land tenure.
Haidutskyi, P. (2000). Zemlia maie vlasnyka. Realnoho! Uriadovyi kurier, 90 (in Ukrainian).
Popper, K. (1994). Vidkryte suspilstvo ta yoho vorohy. Tom 1. K.: Osnovy, 36, 37 (in Ukrainian).
Hajek, F. (1989). Konkurencija kak procedura otkrytija. Mirovaja jekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnoshenija, 12, 6–14 (in Russian).