The COVID-19 pandemic: societal crisis and state policy

The article examines the issues related to modern state and its policy in the context of the societal crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, the consequences of which can hardly be overestimated, especially in connection with the economic recovery. The methodological basis of the work is the analysis of current scientific publications and expert assessments on the issues of the current societal crisis caused by the fall in material security of citizens, rising unemployment and the formation of post-COVID reality. The article interprets the concept of a «societal crisis» and considers the conditions generating economic and social crises worldwide. The analysis of epinomic policy of the state to ensure interaction between society, state and individuals is carried out. The authors argue that the pandemic has revealed the actual inability of most of world's states to effectively withstand emergencies that threaten the lives of millions of citizens and at the same time made obvious miscalculations in both the economic and social policies of the state. On this basis, the authors identify the fundamental problem of modern socio-economic systems, which consists in ignoring the need for the state to ensure a dialectical interaction between society and economy. It is substantiated that the problems considered in the work have not only a theoretical basis, but are also of an applied nature, since assessing the behavior of the state was previously impossible due to the absence of situations similar to the COVID-19 pandemic. The findings aim at determining the possibility of changing the functions of the state in socio-economic system as a result of reducing the level of uncertainty in future reality by creating a more inclusive social environment, and contribute to the development of economic theory, the theory of state and public administration.

1. Auzan, A. A. (2020, June 23). Expert: the issue of social justice will come to the fore after the pandemic. TASS. https://tass.ru/obschestvo/8793645

2. Lyubarsky, G. Yu. (2004). Theory of dynamics of a complex social system (I). Polis, 2, 41–50. https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2004.02.05

3. Parsons, T. (1993). The concept of society: components and their interrelations. THESIS, 2, 94–122.

4. Popov, V. B. (2018). Anthroposocietal universe: a multidimensional evolution. Rostov-onDon: Education and Science Foundation.

5. Vaslavskiy, Ya. I. (2022). The functions of the state and missed opportunities for socioeconomic progress during the pandemic. Bulletin of the Altai Academy of Economics and Law, 5–2, 168–175. http://dx.doi.org/10.17513/vaael.2192

6. Vaslavskiy, Ya. I. (2023). Theoretical interpretation of the role and place of private companies in the processes of system formation in the economy. Economic science of modern Russia, 1, 48–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.33293/1609-1442-2023-1(100)-48-62.

7. Bales, R., & Parsons, T. (1956). Family, socialization and interaction process. London: Routledge.

8. BCG. (2020). Beyond the Curve. How Governments Can Galvanize their Nations for the Rebound. https://web-assets.bcg.com/img-src/BCG-How-Governments-Can-GalvanizeTheir-Nations-for-the-Rebound-May-2020_tcm9-246356.pdf

9. BCG. (2020). COVID-19. Facts, scenarios, and actions for business leaders. https://mediapublications.bcg.com/BCG-COVID-19-BCG-Perspectives.pdf

10. BCG. (2020). COVID-19. Facts, scenarios, and actions for leaders. Publication #2 with a focus on: preparing for the restart. https://media-publications.bcg.com/BCG-COVID-19-BCG-Perspectives-Version2.pdf

11. Fairbrother, M. (2020). How Much Do People Value Future Generations? Climate Change, Trust, and Public Support for Future-Oriented Policies — Data from Sweden (Version 1) [Data set]. Gothenburg: Swedish National Data Service. https://doi.org/10.5878/abr0-ba73

12. Gjaja, M., Hutchinson, R., Farber, A., Brimmer, & A., Kahn, D. (2020). Three Paths to the Future. BCG Analysis. https://www.bcg.com/publications/2020/three-paths-to-thefuture-post-covid-19

13. Habermas, J. (1989). The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society (Trans. by Burger T. with the Assistance of Lawrence F.). Cambridge: Polity Press.

14. Jennings, W., Stoker, G., Valgar sson, V., Devine, D., & Gaskell, J. (2021). How trust, mistrust and distrust shape the governance of the COVID-19 crisis. Journal of European Public Policy, 28(8), 1174–1196. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2021.1942151

15. Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security. (2019). Global Health Security Index. Building Collective Action and Accountability. https://www.ghsindex.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/GHS-Index-Report_FINAL_Oct2019.pdf

16. IMF. (2020). How will the world be different after COVID-19? https://www.imf.org/external/Pubs/FT/fandd/2020/06/pdf/how-will-the-world-be-different-after-COVID-19.pdf

17. IMF. (2020). World Economic Outlook, April 2020: The Great Lockdown. https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/Issues/2020/04/14/World-Economic-Outlook-April-2020-TheGreat-Lockdown-49306

18. Keller, A. G. (1920). Societal evolution: a study of evolutionary basis of science of society. New York: The Macmillan company.

19. McKinsey Global Institute. (2020). Prioritizing health: a prescription for prosperity. Executive summary. https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/healthcare/our-insights/prioritizing-health-a-prescription-for-prosperity

20. Musgrave, R. A. (1959). The theory of public finance: a study in public economy. New York: McGraw-Hill.

21. Narsee, A. (2021). Europeans’ Right to Protest Under Threat. Carnegie Europe. https://carnegieeurope.eu/2021/01/27/europeans-right-to-protest-under-threat-pub-83735

22. Nikishina, E., & Korobkova, N. (2022). Social capital as a containment factor of the COVID-19 pandemic. Population and Economics, 6(4), 62–82. https://doi.org/10.3897/popecon.6.e85798

23. OECD. (2017). OECD Guidelines on Measuring Trust. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264278219-en

24. OECD. (2018). Risks that Matter: Main Findings from the 2018 OECD Risks that Matter Survey. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9266e48a-en

25. OECD. (2018). Understanding the Drivers of Trust in Government Institutions in Korea. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264308992-en

26. OECD. (2021). Government at a Glance 2021. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/1c258f55-en

27. OECD. (2021). Understanding the Drivers of Trust in Government Institutions in Finland. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/52600c9e-en

28. Okun, A. M. (2015). Equality and Efficiency: The Big Tradeoff. Washington, D. C. : Brooking Institution Press.

29. Parsons, T. (1993). The concept of society: components and their interrelations. THESIS, 2, 94–122.

30. Pilipenko, O. I., & Pilipenko, A. I. (2020). Mysteries of unsustainable public fi nance and of low economic growth: trap of low effi ciency of the state. In M. Ziolo (Ed.), Social, Economic, and Environmental Impacts Between Sustainable Financial Systems and Financial Markets (Advances in Finance, Accounting, and Economics (AFAE) book series). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-1033-9.ch009

31. Remes, J., Linzer, K., & Singhal, S., et al. (2020). Ten innovations that can improve global health. Mckinsey Global Institute. https://www.mckinsey.de/industries/healthcare/ourinsights/ten-innovations-that-can-improve-global-health

32. Vlasov, S. A., & Deryugina, E. B. (2018). Fiscal multipliers in Russia. Moscow: Bank of Russia. https://cbr.ru/Content/Document/File/87582/wp28_e.pdf