Political Risks and Barriers of Digitalization
https://doi.org/10.26794/2226-7867-2020-10-4-58-64
Abstract
The article deals with political risks and barriers of digitalisation. Initially, the author identified the factors of political risks and barriers to digitalisation. They include the limited state categorisation and the complexity of the institutional process, lack of investment in human capital and low overall factor productivity, lack of effective and sufficient communication, resistance to bureaucracy. On the base of these factors, the main political risks and barriers to digitalisation include (1) the formal declaration of reforms in the absence of real results, (2) the growth of centralised control and the adverse social reaction, (3) the increasing of social inequality and the formation of the new monopolies, (4) the risks of cybersecurity. Management of these risks is possible through the development of adequate institutional design, the use of new organisational solutions to stimulate the development of human capital, the establishment of the institute of the scientific and technical expertise, support of project finance for ICT projects, support of sufficient political communication.
About the Author
D. R. Mukhametov
Financial University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Daniyar R. Mukhametov — 1st-year master’s student, Faculty of Sociology and Political Sciences
Moscow
References
1. Scott J. Two Cheers for Anarchism: Six Easy Pieces on Autonomy, Dignity, and Meaningful Work and Play. Princeton University Press; 2012.
2. Akhremenko A. S., Lokshin I. M., Yureskul Y. A. Difficulties of transition: the political economy of modernisation barriers. Politeia. 2017;(2):5–31. (In Russ.).
3. Graeber D. The Utopia of Rules: On Technology, Stupidity, and the Secret Joys of Bureaucracy. Melville House; 2015.
4. Caser-Ripilles A., Feenstra R., Tormey S. Old and New Media Logics in an Electoral Campaign: The Case of Podemos and the Two-Way Street Mediatization of Politics. The International Journal of Press/Politics. 2016;21(3):378–397.
5. Safronov A. V. The Gosplan Automated Planning System as a Necessary Step Toward the Nationwide Automated Data Processing and Control System (NACS). Ekonomicheskaya istoriya. 2019;15(4):395–409. (In Russ.).
6. Mukhametov D. R. Problems and prospects of realisation of the concept “Smart city” in Russia (on the example of Moscow). Mir novoi ekonomiki = The world of the new economy. 2019;13(3):81–88. (In Russ.).
7. Flyvbjerg B. What You Should Know About Megaprojects and Why: An Overview. Project Management Journal. 2014;45(2):6–12.
8. Fominaya C., Gillan K. Navigating the technology-media-movements complex. Social Movements Studies. 2017;16(4):383–402.
9. Horst H. A. Free, Social, and Inclusive: Appropriation and Resistance of New Media Technologies in Brazil. International Journal of Communication. 2011;5:437–462.
10. Hindman M. The Internet trap: How the digital economy builds monopolies and undermines democracy. Princeton University Press; 2018.
11. Zuboff S. The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. New York: Public Affairs; 2019.
12. Loertscher S., Marx L. Digital monopolies: Privacy protection or price regulation? International Journal of Industrial Organization. 2020;71:34–67.
13. Mukhametov D. R. Big Data technologies in political processes: risks and opportunities. Gumanitarnye Nauki. Vestnik Finasovogo Universiteta = Humanities and Social Sciences. Bulletin of the Financial University. 2019;9(6):143–149. (In Russ.).
14. Erokhina O. V. Smart technologies and threats to information security. Electrosvyaz Magazine. 2018;6:66–67.
Review
For citations:
Mukhametov D.R. Political Risks and Barriers of Digitalization. Humanities and Social Sciences. Bulletin of the Financial University. 2020;10(4):58-64. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.26794/2226-7867-2020-10-4-58-64
Views:
3359
Email this article 